One year ago, Congress defunded public media. Now that we're 100% community funded, please become a sustaining member or increase your existing membership today.
This archival content was originally written for and published on KPCC.org. Keep in mind that links and images may no longer work — and references may be outdated.
Pasadena NAACP sues over changes to city's police body camera policy
File: Police body cameras are seen on a mannequin at an exhibit booth by manufacturer Wolfcom at the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference in Chicago.
The Pasadena branch of the NAACP is filing suit against Pasadena over changes the city made to its police body camera policy. The NAACP chapter says those changes contradict what it submitted to the Department of Justice when it applied for funding.
The suit asserts that Pasadena applied for and received a $250,000 grant from the DOJ fraudulently, Pasadena NAACP attorney Dale Gronemeier told KPCC. The organization is calling for the policy to be withdrawn.
"This was not something minor. This was one policy that was black, and another policy that was white," Gronemeier said.
The policy Pasadena submitted was "quite progressive," Gronemeier said, but changed after the city negotiated with the police union. Gronemeier described the policy that Pasadena ultimately decided on was "radically more reactionary," resulting in a "bait-and-switch."
One of the changes made to the policy: allowing officers to view body camera footage before giving criminal investigation statements. Gronemeier argues that would allow officers to tailor their statements to the evidence they view in the video. He said the updated policy would also allow police to withhold portions of video from the public, which he says would allow officers to "cherry-pick" segments of footage to show the public — releasing footage that is favorable to the officers and unfavorable toward the other side.
Pasadena is defining body camera video and audio as "investigative materials," which are exempted the California Public Records Act. Gronemeier said that an appeals court decision means you can't make something an investigative document before the investigation exists, which he argues is the case with the body camera footage police collect.
"It's a patent attempt to put a square peg in a round hole. It won't work, and we're in a lawsuit attacking it as facially invalid," Gronemeier said.
Sponsored message
The suit asserts that Pasadena "erroneously and intentionally misled" the DOJ when it applied for a federal grant, knowing that the policy would change. That, it says, is what makes the city's application to the DOJ fraudulent.
As part of its application, the city also solicited and received support from community activists, including Pasadena NAACP President Gary Moody. Gronemeier said that support was based on the initial policy the city submitted.
"The Department of Justice doesn't ask for a draft policy — they ask for the policy for the body cameras," Gronemeier said.
The suit also asserts that Pasadena's city attorney has been misleading the Pasadena City Council about their powers in this matter, Gronemeier said. At issue: whether the police chief can enact policy before the City Council is able to review it and whether the Council itself can set policy.
"The city manager and the city attorney are refusing to communicate to the City Council that they have that power [to create policy], and they are snookering them," Gronemeier said.
The Pasadena Police Department declined to comment for this story.
Read the policy, how it changed and a letter submitted by the Pasadena NAACP's lawyer calling for the policy to be withdrawn below:
Sponsored message
Read the full suit here:
One year ago, Congress voted to defund public media, eliminating a critical $1.7 million from our budget every year going forward. But they couldn’t silence us, and we’re not going anywhere. LAist is now 100% community funded and that means we’re taking our future into our own hands and turning to you to keep local reporting strong.
You come to LAist because you want independent reporting and trustworthy local information. Our nonprofit newsroom doesn’t answer to shareholders looking to turn a profit. Instead, we answer to you and our communities. We are free to follow facts wherever they lead and to hold power to account without fear or favor. Our only loyalty is to our readers and listeners and our mission: to inform, engage, and strengthen Southern California’s communities.
If this story helped you, please become a monthly member today to help sustain this mission. It just takes 1 minute to donate below.
You come to LAist because you want independent reporting and trustworthy local information. Our nonprofit newsroom doesn’t answer to shareholders looking to turn a profit. Instead, we answer to you and our communities. We are free to follow facts wherever they lead and to hold power to account without fear or favor. Our only loyalty is to our readers and listeners and our mission: to inform, engage, and strengthen Southern California’s communities.
If this story helped you, please become a monthly member today to help sustain this mission. It just takes 1 minute to donate below.
Senior Vice President News, Editor in Chief
