Just following up on a minor point

Last week, Gambit's Charles Maldonado remarked that City Councilmembers wasted a good deal of time and breath asking for something they should have known would not be possible had they read and understood the terms of the NOPD federal consent decree they were discussing.

Discussion moved to the New Orleans Police Department's consent decree, specifically the process for identifying a federal monitor. The point here: Council members wanted (Independent Police Monitor Susan) Hutson to have a greater part in that process, rather than virtually none, which has been the case. Some even wondered if she might put in a bid on the RFP. 

(Note: There's various reasons that would be unlikely. 1. Perhaps the most important is the consent decree itself identifies the monitor and the IPM as two distinct entities. 2. Hutson also referenced some "legal issues" that she believes would bar IPM from contracting with the city. 3. The consent decree says the monitor is to be identified through the city's purchasing process. 4. The document says the monitor is not a public agency or an agent of one.)

Anyone who watches the budget hearings will tell you that Councilmemebers do this sort of thing all the time. The lack of preparation can be discouraging to those of us concerned that the Council function as a more effective check on the Mayor's power to set priorities through the budgeting process.  On the other hand, it does occasionally make good TV.

Anyway, after reading this last week, I suspected that the next time this subject came up, Councilmemebers still would not have figured this out.  And here we are.

During NOPD budget talks today, council members grilled City Attorney Richard Cortizas about this, practically demanding that IPM Susan Hutson be included in the running for the job. Cortizas told them that the U.S. Department of Justice — which, he said considered the office a part of city government rather than a neutral third-party, was not interested in the idea. If the city were to take her on as monitor, the feds would ask for a second monitor to monitor the IPM, Cortizas said.

Which is perhaps why the language of the consent decree would seem to prevent that from happening. And not only the language of the decree, but also the duties of the Independent Police Monitor — detailed in the city code of ordinances and Hutson's memorandum of understanding with the city — which, for example, include citizen complaint intake and mediation. Those are not duties of the federal monitor. And look here, from page 109 of the consent decree: "The monitor shall only have the duties, responsibilities and authority conferred by this agreement."