Wisconsin State Journal, Madison, Oct. 2

Mike Koval got a lot right as Madison’s top cop

Mike Koval introduced himself as “Kumbaya Koval” when he became Madison’s police chief nearly five-and-a-half years ago, pledging to respect civil liberties and promote community policing _ two goals he mostly achieved.

But his tenure won’t be remembered as harmonious.

A controversial police shooting that led to street protests, his sometimes fiery statements, and Madison’s hotbed of anti-police activism often overshadowed his department’s commitment to diversity, transparency and professionalism.

It’s also important to note that Madison’s crime rate is low for a city of its size, and it has been trending down.

Koval, 61, abruptly announced his retirement Sunday, citing his frustration with city politics, a shortage of staff, and the “new normal” of fierce criticism of law enforcement.

Koval’s experience should inform Madison’s search for a new chief. This is a very tough job, with intense scrutiny of police actions often conflicting with high expectations for public safety.

Koval faced considerable turmoil during his first year as chief after an officer shot and killed Tony Robinson, an unarmed but intoxicated and combative black 19-year-old. Though an exhaustive and independent investigation convinced Ismael Ozanne, the state’s first black district attorney, that no charges were warranted against the white officer, the city’s insurer eventually paid Robinson’s family a $3.3 million settlement, with the city admitting no fault. Robinson’s grandmother later filed a complaint against Koval after she followed him out of an emotional city meeting, and he insulted her.

Koval apologized for that. And he met with the Robinson family shortly after they lost their son to express his condolences.

The guy brought his heart to difficult situations, not just his badge. Having grown up in the city and having served it as a cop for three decades, his energy and commitment to being a “guardian to the community” seemed boundless.

Despite his critics on the left, Koval shared Madison’s progressive values. Nationally syndicated columnist Leonard Pitts called Koval’s thoughtful and open response to the Robinson shooting “an antidote to distrust.”

“Impressively,” Pitts wrote of Koval three months after the 2015 shooting, “he acknowledged the systemic bias plaguing people of color and the fact that police have been part of the problem.”

Yet Koval strongly objected to the City Council’s $400,000 study of the police department he deemed unnecessary and wasteful. He sometimes targeted city officials in his outspoken blog, which didn’t help his cause.

We wish he would have advocated for putting body cameras on patrol officers to promote greater transparency, rather than deferring to the council, which has resisted the helpful technology.

Yet we credit Koval for using his powerful voice to help keep a single police officer in each of Madison’s four main high schools. The officers, all of them black or Latina, are a fine example of the community policing Koval pledged to promote when hired. The officers serve as role models, de-escalate conflict and guard against gun violence in an era of school shootings.

So much has happened during Koval’s time as chief _ a heroin scourge, startling gun play, a federal immigration raid he criticized, and a School Board member comparing local police to Nazis _ that it’s hard to believe he was chief for only five years.

Koval deserves a lot of credit and thanks, despite his flaws. The city should seek a new chief who can build on the strongest parts of Koval’s legacy while deftly navigating Madison’s difficult political environment to keep people safe.

___

The Journal Times of Racine, Oct. 1

Put down your phone and watch the road

Every day, it seems, you can drive alongside or past another driver who clearly thinks using their phone is, at that moment, as important or more important than paying attention to the road.

No one doing so intends to cause an accident or to injure anybody else, but it happens all the same.

Wisconsin could join the growing number of states going “hands-free.” State Rep. John Spiros, R-Marshfield, said he’s drafting legislation that would expand the state’s hands-free law _ which currently only applies to work zones _ to include all roadways. He said the bill could be finalized yet this month.

If passed, the law would be a considerable step up from the state’s current ban on texting while driving, the Wisconsin State Journal reported Sept. 22. Legislation would only allow a driver to touch their phone once for hands-free use. Holding the phone to talk, text, send emails or for any other use would be prohibited.

“Really what it comes back to is you should be attentive all the time,” Spiros said.

State law has prohibited texting while driving since 2010. As a primary offense, officers can stop someone if they suspect them of texting, messaging or emailing while behind the wheel. An inattentive driving citation can cost a driver about $188. In 2016, state law expanded to prohibit the use of any hand-held mobile device within a road work zone. Citations are doubled for work zone violations.

All told, there were close to 8,500 inattentive driving convictions last year, down from about 9,000 in 2017, according to Wisconsin Department of Transportation data. Eighty-seven of last year’s 426 roadway fatalities in Wisconsin listed inattentive driving as a possible circumstance.

Nationwide, 3,166 people died in 2017 as a result of distracted driving, according to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s most recent data.

As of 2017, 15 states and the District of Columbia had statewide hands-free laws, according to NHTSA data compiled by the Georgia House of Representatives Study Committee on Distracted Driving.

Twelve of those states saw a decrease in fatalities within two years after the passage of hands-free legislation. Six of those states saw a more than 20% decrease in fatalities. New Hampshire and Oregon did not have sufficient data.

Last year, Spiros and former Rep. Peter Barca, D-Kenosha, who is now secretary of the Department of Revenue, drafted similar hands-free legislation. Offered up later in the session, the bill failed to gain much traction, Spiros said. Now he’s drafting a bill with Sen. Van Wanggaard, R-Racine.

Spiros said penalties still are being considered, but the rule likely would include escalating fines for subsequent violations. “The importance is making sure that there’s a deterrent there,” Spiros said. “We want to prohibit and change behaviors.”

Working with Spiros on the bill is Tom Goeltz, who advocated for close to three years on Minnesota’s hands-free bill. Goeltz, a 30-year safety consultant and resident of Hudson, Wisconsin, hopes to be a catalyst in the push for a hands-free law in Wisconsin.

Three years ago in February, Goeltz’s 22-year-old daughter Megan, pregnant with her son, was killed when a vehicle struck her car near Stillwater, Minnesota. The driver was believed to have been distracted by his phone.

“I’m trying to advocate for Megan and her baby, who can’t speak anymore, and for all the other victims’ families and victims out there that have been impacted by distracted driving,” Goeltz, 53, said. “We need to get this done because it’s going to save some lives here in Wisconsin. We’ll never know who they are, but we’ll see it in the statistics at the end of the year.”

In Hudson, the city council last month passed its own hands-free ordinance.

Police Chief Geoff Willems, who worked with the council in drafting the ordinance, acknowledged it’s a difficult rule to enforce. Cellphones are a part of many peoples’ daily lives, he said.

“It’s become such a habitual problem that I think it really is time for the state to step in and say it’s not acceptable anymore,” Willems said. “These types of things _ that get us closer to zero deaths in Wisconsin _ should be a priority.

“If it’s so dangerous that you don’t want people on their phones in work zones, how is it any different if they’re driving 70 mph on a freeway or through a school zone with kids around or any other time?” Willems asked.

Such legislation would make things safer for Wisconsin’s pedestrians and bicyclists, who are obviously even more vulnerable if drivers distracted by cellphones cross their paths.

Wisconsin should follow Minnesota’s example and pass hands-free legislation.

___

Kenosha News, Sept. 30

Police body cameras help get to the truth

The contentious issue of police use of body cameras and the release of video footage was center stage recently in Madison.

The Senate Judiciary Committee heard testimony on compromise legislation created and endorsed by both state law enforcement agencies and media representatives that _ while not requiring police departments in the state to use body cameras _ would set statewide guidelines on how long video footage of a police-citizen encounter would have to be stored and generally give the public access to most police body cam footage under the state Open Records law.

Under the proposed law, in instances where footage showed minors, victims of sensitive or violent crimes or people in places where they would ordinarily expect privacy _ such as a home or other dwelling, police agencies would have to determine if the public interest in making the material available outweighed the privacy concerns of those depicted in the video. If footage was released in those cases, police agencies could blur the faces of minors, victims and those who had an expectation of privacy.

It’s a good bill which balances the rights of privacy with the need for public accountability and transparency in both monitoring the actions of police officers in often difficult encounters with citizens in very bad situations and at the same time protecting them from false accusations of misconduct.

The bill has the backing of state Sen. Van Wanggaard, R-Racine, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and is expected to get a Senate vote in October. We would urge Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, who has thus far not indicated his position on it, to get behind the legislation and shepherd it through the Assembly.

The proposed bill is important legislation that would give Wisconsin consistency in how police body cameras are used instead of the current patchwork quilt of varying regulations from one municipality and police agency to the next.

Currently, it is not known how many police agencies in the state have their officers equipped with body cameras, but some estimates say that about 60 police departments out of about 500 in the state use them in one form or another.

It is not a perfect piece of legislation, but it is a vast improvement on previous tries by the Legislature and can be tweaked as time goes along. Nor does the bill address the financial costs for municipalities and police agencies. The body cams themselves have gone down in costs, but the storage of police video footage can be expensive.

We would urge the Legislature and the governor to consider helping municipalities and police agencies develop their police body cam capabilities with support in future budgets.

Police body cams are not a cure-all in every police-citizen encounter, but they can and do shed light on difficult _ even fatal _ encounters and help get to the truth.

Sign up for Daily Newsletters Manage Newsletters

Copyright © 2020 The Washington Times, LLC.