CitiStat ? or the police version, COMSTAT ? may effectively monitor city services, including the work of city employees.
But while it can provide the data for the analysis, it can?t analyze policy. Examiner Staff Writer Stephen Janis has reported that evaluations of Baltimore City police officers often rely on an “unofficial quota system” that promotes officers based, at least in part, on the number of arrests they make. That would be easy to track. But Janis? reporting points to innocent people becoming victims of quotas.
The young Virginia couple thrown in jail after getting lost in Cherry Hill is one example of how quota-driven policy can send innocent people through a legal nightmare. Yesterday, Janis reported that the Rev. Charles Neal was arrested on his way to church over Memorial Day weekend for driving with a suspended license. He spent 17 hours in Central Booking; his car was impounded; and his wife, Dana, also a pastor, was left standing on the street. He said his motor vehicle records show the arrest was wrong.
Mayor Martin O?Malley and police spokesman Matt Jablow say that no such arrest quota policy exists.
But the evidence is worrisome enough that Baltimore City Council Member Kenneth Harris called yesterday for an investigative hearing into arrest policies.
Harris said many of the people who have called him to complain do not have police records.
Making the city safer should be a top priority. And holding police officers accountable for their actions is an essential element of doing that. But encouraging frivolous arrests does not make us safer and discourages people from wanting to visit the city.
Mayor O?Malley and police leadership must evaluate police officers for how they help to reduce crime, not by how many people they arrest.
