Austin police union appears ready to comply with voter-approved oversight ordinance

Wednesday's bargaining session between the city and the Austin police union appears to show that the association could be ready to comply with the voter-approved city ordinance to increase police oversight — signifying an about-face from last week when the Austin Police Association said it was "not our intention to be in compliance with Prop A."

The second meeting between the city and the union representing officers with the Austin Police Department ended in less than 10 minutes on Wednesday, as the two parties decided to postpone bargaining on the contract as the union stated it needed more time to work through the city's oversight proposals.

Both sides agreed to come back in about a month to work on the "complex issues," namely those related to oversight and the release of officer personnel information typically withheld from the public.

Back at the table: Austin police union, city differ on police oversight implementation

As was discussed last week during the first day of bargaining — the first time the city and the Austin Police Association came together in more than a year — the current contract talks have a whole new slate of things to be bargained since voters approved the Austin Police Oversight Act, also known as Proposition A, last May.

Among other things, the proposition called for the department to do away with the "G-file," a personnel file held by the Police Department that is not accessible to the public and holds information such as complaints lodged against officers that were determined to be unsubstantiated. Michael Bullock, president of the Austin Police Association, has told the American-Statesman that the union is concerned this would harm officers by making that information available to the public.

Mayor Kirk Watson, who has been pushing to get both sides to the table, has said that a "G-file" cannot be included in the contract.

More: Will the Austin police union and city reach a long-term contract this year? What we know.

A long-term contract is seen as the best way to help alleviate the department's current predicament of not enough officers with 340 vacancies and what has been called a "morale crisis" within the department.

Bullock told the Statesman on Wednesday that neither side is at an "impasse," only that the police union needs time to work through and appropriately respond to what the city has proposed in the current contract in relation to oversight measures.

However, the city's actual proposal is not entirely clear, as a draft of the contract proposal is not being made available to the public as it has in years past. As part of the terms of returning to the table, the police union asked the city not to make those drafts public, and the city agreed. However, interim Assistant City Manager Bruce Mills said a draft will be made available to the public before the contract is ratified by the City Council.

Grumet: Transparency should be non-negotiable at Austin police contract bargaining table

Last week, the city said that a contract would not be ratified unless it was in compliance with the Austin Police Oversight Act.

Additionally, Bullock said they are also waiting to see what comes of a court hearing scheduled for April 9 for parts of the lawsuit filed by Equity Action that will decide the legality of getting rid of the Police Department's "G-file."

Both sides agree that police oversight is a key component to the negotiations, Bullock said, and that it would be difficult for the city and union to talk about anything else if they don't overcome their differences. Because of its importance in these talks, he said, they are trying to address oversight first.

"We're trying to find common ground so we can actually address the issues, and we can be in substantial compliance with Prop A," Bullock said. "We're not trying to stand in the way; we're just trying to make sure that we have a fair system, just like we want across any type of accountability system."

From what little was said during Wednesday's session, this appears to show a different stance than what the Austin Police Association took last week when lead negotiator Ron DeLord said it's “not our objective to be in compliance with Prop A.”

Mills, the interim assistant city manager, said in a written statement that the city's proposal is in "adherence" to the Austin Police Oversight Act.

"I am encouraged by the Association's statement that the parties are 'nowhere near impasse,'" Mills said. "We share their willingness to continue working to reach an agreement."

Kathy Mitchell, senior adviser with police reform advocacy group Equity Action, said she's "heartened" by Wednesday's bargaining session, as it shows the Austin Police Association appears ready to have a conversation about what it means for the department to no longer hold the G-file. Equity Action is "cautiously optimistic" about what this means for the contract's future regarding police oversight, she said.

Activists such as Mitchell worried that the city was trying to reach a contract before the April 9 hearing, but this session alleviated those concerns as both sides agreed to come back in mid-April and the union directly mentioned the court ruling. However, there's still some concern that both sides could agree to an oversight system that's essentially unchanged, just under a different name.

"We're not looking for a G-file under a different name," Mitchell said. "If both sides are prepared to live in a world where we have the oversight system that voters voted for ... we're happy. But we also want to see the words on the page so we can see that written down."

This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Austin police union appears ready to comply with oversight ordinance