As the Indianapolis community reacts to a series of horrific crimes this week, a major debate is taking shape over control of the city’s police department.
Members of the Indianapolis City-County Council are currently reviewing a proposal presented by Mayor Greg Ballard, which would transfer control of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department from the Marion County sheriff to the mayor’s office.
“The citizens of Indianapolis deserve accountability, and all public safety agencies such as the police and fire departments should be under the mayor’s chain of command to have that accountability,” said Ballard.
Ballard presented the proposal to the council recently in order to fulfill a campaign pledge of implementing what he views as a clear structure of authority in the area of public safety needed to fight crime more effectively.
Before 2006 the streets of Indianapolis were patrolled by the Indianapolis Police Department, led by Chief Michael Spears, a mayoral appointee; and the Marion County Sheriff’s Department, led by Sheriff Frank Anderson, an elected official.
The two departments of over 1,600 officers have been merged under Anderson’s leadership for two years.
Anderson said he respectfully disagrees with the mayor and argues that IMPD has functioned well under his leadership, and said that his position as chief law enforcement officer was approved by citizens when they re-elected him after the merger in 2006.
“I’ve been consistent with my position that the issue of control of IMPD should now be put up for a vote to the people,” said Anderson. “In 2006 people knew that I would be in charge of a consolidated police department and nearly 120,000 voters expressed confidence in me to lead police functions in this country.”
Supporters of the sheriff’s viewpoint say it doesn’t make any sense to take control of IMPD from an experienced law enforcement officer. They note that the sheriff is already directly accountable to citizens through elections every four years. How much more accountability, they ask, can citizens have than that?
Julio Fernandez, a spokesman for Anderson, said the sheriff has already exhibited strong and accountable leadership several times, most recently this week when he immediately fired and suspended deputies who allegedly left an inmate in a cell at the county jail without food for two days.
Depending on who ends up with control of IMPD, citizens will be able to make a statement on the issue at the polls either in 2010, when the next sheriff’s race occurs, or 2011, when Ballard is up for re-election.
Some of Anderson supporters have wondered privately if Ballard’s team would be pursuing its plan if Anderson, a Black Democrat, happened to be a white man or a Republican.
Ballard’s camp says it is unfair to make such accusations. They maintain that the issue is not about politics or race, but about ensuring that citizens have a police department that is held to the highest standards.
“For us, it’s simply a matter of public safety,” said Ballard press secretary Marcus Barlow, who is African-American. “The mayor believes people elect a mayor to be in charge of public safety so it’s important to him, for the City of Indianapolis, to make sure the police have a chain of command that ends at the mayor’s desk.
The proposal is currently under consideration by the council’s Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee. Its chairman, Councilor Ryan Vaughn, said public hearings will be held on the proposal within the next two weeks before the full council votes on it.
Many council Republicans, led by President Bob Cockrum, have already pledged to support Ballard’s plan. Republicans currently have a 16-13 majority.
Most council Democrats are likely to vote against the proposal, with many agreeing with Anderson that it is not a good idea to suddenly change IMPD leadership at this time.
