The all-too predictable acrimony emanating from Pine Bluff City Council chambers yet again reared its ugly head this past Monday night. In related sparring matches, Mayor Carl Redus, Jr. and Police Chief Brenda Davis-Jones were obliged to answer council members’ pointed inquiries. With equal familiarity, Redus and Davis-Jones provided few satisfactory answers.
For their part, council members Thelma Walker, Bill Brumett and Wayne Easterly expounded upon a number of well-worn themes. Although some of the topics have been explored over the course of other public safety and city council meetings, little in the way of exculpatory or even sufficiently explanatory information has emerged.
Of greatest note at Monday’s meeting were questions posed by Walker regarding the purchase of uniform hats for the officer corps. As Davis-Jones has now acknowledged, the purchase of said hats should have received council approval prior to being ordered.
While Davis-Jones’ post facto admission is laudable, the situation was avoidable. None know this better than recently transferred police Lt. Bob Rawlinson. As previously reported, Rawlinson played a role in clarifying uniform policy requirements for Davis-Jones. In what has the outward appearance of killing the messenger, Rawlinson was removed from the position of day shift detective lieutenant and as department spokesman. This suspect coincidence occurred April 7, five days after Walker initially questioned Davis-Jones about the hats at the April 2 council meeting.
The police administration should have learned by now that it is insufficient for public officials to merely refrain from impropriety. They must also refrain from the appearance of impropriety. For Davis-Jones, who has been accused of vindictive management practices, this lesson should not be new.
Independent reporting for Pine Bluff & Jefferson County since 1879.
As if that were not enough, the conversation moved to Davis-Jones’ newly purchased iPhone and accessories thereto. Apparently, $747 is the going rate to keep the chief informed of departmental operations. Having made such a handsome investment in her communication equipment, Davis-Jones can no longer offer her familiar, “I don’t know because I was out of town” response to vexing questions. And perhaps she could answer said phone occasionally when a reporter calls.
Redus derided this line of inquiry as “playing politics with the public’s time.” Having a department head explain that which seems to be an extravagant expense is hardly “playing politics.” It is sound fiscal management. It ensures that the taxpayers are not footing the bill for needless excess.
Moving to putatively less controversial matters, Walker inquired as to why Davis-Jones had made changes to the departmental vacation policy (proximate to the Christmas holiday season). Again, Walker’s question was rebuked by Redus with the admonition that Davis-Jones runs the day-to-day operations of the department and simple directives like that do not require council approval.
While these actions may not require approval in a strict sense, any administrative decision is fair game for council oversight. Absent an intermediary panel such as the now defunct civil service commission, the council is — for better or worse — the last line of defense for public interests. In a last throw of inquiry, Brumett reiterated his long-unanswered questions regarding the dismissal, investigation and reinstatement of Assistant Chief Ivan Whitfield. Redus responded that he would not comment further on the matter because the topic is part of a State Police investigation into the circumstances surrounding Whitfield’s firing.
“There’s an easy answer [to whether the allegations against the chief are true]: yes or no,” Brumett said. “I’m not going to give up on this.”
“I don’t think you should waste this city’s time,” Redus said, later adding that he thought it was a waste of the public’s time as well.
If allegations and opacity of this magnitude are a waste of the people’s time, one wonders what would pass muster for the mayor. One thing is clear: Davis-Jones has a mounting body of questions surrounding her managerial practices and executive decisions. Sooner or later, they will be answered. Time will not change the facts, only how charitably they are received.