Ferguson Vs The DOJ

I did my research, at least some of it, and now have at least a couple half assed thoughts about the recent lack of agreement between the US Department of Justice and the city of Ferguson.

The Ferguson city council are cowardly pieces of shit who don't deserve their positions.

A  short recap: After Michael Brown was murdered by a police officer who then escaped indictment in one of the most widely broadcasted travesties of justice we have seen in modern times, there was a fair amount of unrest in the town, one could even call it a hotbed,  protests and so on, the place became pretty militarized for a while and some property was damaged and destroyed. The DOJ released the results of their investigation of the Ferguson police department and city government and found, to the surprise of no rational person, that the whole system was corrupt from the top down, and that corruption was almost exclusively leveraged against the minority population. This necessitated a change and for the last seven months, city negotiators worked with the DOJ to come to an agreement, which they did just recently. It then went to the city council for approval, who promptly decided to decline, unanimously.

Now, to be fair to the council, it wasn't exactly a rejection, it was more they had about a half dozen or so amendments they wanted added in, the problem is that after seven months and having come to a finalized agreement, the federal government was not interested in any more amendments and have moved to other legal options.

Here are the exact amendments the city council is holding their black population hostage over:

• That it contains no mandate for the payment of additional salary to police or other city employees.

• That it contains no mandate for staffing at the city's jail.

• That the deadlines set forth are extended.

• That the terms do not apply to other agencies that take over services currently provided by the city.

• That a provision for local preference in contractors and consultants is included.

• That goals for minority and women participation in consulting, oversight and third-party services are included.

• That monitoring fee caps are changed to $1 million over the first five years and no more than $250,000 in any single year. 

Of them all, the goal for minorities and women participating in consulting, etc. is actually not a terrible request, and perhaps one that should have been brought up during negotiations, the rest are pretty much exclusively about money.

Money is a pretty dumb reason to screw your city, one objection was that they might have to add, or raise, a tax to help pay for it, so what? Is it not worth spending money to make your citizens safer? Isn't that the point of a government? If you aren't willing to do your job then why are you even in your position? 

Let's look at another amendment: That the terms do not apply to other agencies that take over services currently provided by the city.

To me that is the most dangerous on, why? Well one of the major terms of the agreement as written is that the policed department stop using various laws, particularly traffic stops, as a means of funding rather than a means of revenue generation, in this situation, "services provided by the city" include the police department, if the city chose to they could dissolve the police department and bring in another agency to provide law and order to the city, and that agency wouldn't be bound by those pesky rules that keep them from targeting the black population in an effort to raise funds. They could operate at will, not answering to any body of oversight, and not responsible to the terms of the agreement.

I could see a major advantage to the city in this, they could claim they are working to make the changes required while having to do basically nothing at all legally, and if I can see it, I am pretty sure a US prosecutor can too.

I get that there is a knee jerk reaction against spending money, especially on something that doesn't seem to show a financial reward, or indeed, will result in even less income, as the current agreement would mandate with the removal or reduction in revenue from tickets and fines, but the city council is showing an amazing lack of anything resembling courage when they reject an agreement on those grounds, and make no mistake, this is a rejection, they were informed by all parties before going in to vote that if they didn't accept it as is, there would be a lawsuit. But no, they instead chose to fight for terms that would strip the agreement of the power to make the changes their own government has said they would make, and while doing so the system continues to grind on, broken.

They know it's broken, they know it's hurting people, they refuse to change it, a government that won't protect its people doesn't deserve to exist.