Public Safety Commission, APD reach a detente 

The Public Safety Commission and the Austin Police Department are recovering from a tense meeting earlier this month, at which APD leadership threatened to no longer attend commission meetings and commissioners lamented APD’s unresponsiveness, revealing a widening chasm. 

That’s why APD leadership’s appearance before the Public Safety Commission was noteworthy during a special called meeting May 15, given the last meeting, at which APD Chief Joseph Chacon raised concerns about a lack of decorum.

Past and present commissioners told the Austin Monitor that APD has chafed in recent years – often dodging questions and data requests – as the commission’s membership has evolved from largely deferential to law enforcement to more adversarial.

Rebecca Webber, a local attorney who served on the commission from 2010 to earlier this year, was the first woman appointed. 

“It was a boys’ club, and it was a pro-police boys’ club,” she said. 

Her tenure coincided with the shift to a 10-1 City Council system, which ushered in a more geographically representative local government. It also corresponded to audits revealing APD had misclassified sexual assault cases and botched DNA lab testing, as well as a national reckoning over policing. 

Commissioner Rebecca Bernhardt, who has said she was the subject of Chief Chacon’s comments about decorum, echoes this sentiment.

“I think the use of the word decorum is a bit of a misnomer,” she said. “I think the real frustration has to do with the real shift from being very deferential as a commission to not being deferential and being critical. The culture shift is the thing that’s underneath … the rupture, but hopefully we can grow past it.” 

APD did not respond to a request for comment.

Still, commissioners expressed a desire to maintain a professional relationship with APD, given the stakes. 

New Chair Nelly Paulina Ramirez said she has met with APD leadership and city management in recent weeks to chart a path forward, including sticking to Robert’s Rules of Order. 

“My hope is by doing that we can really sort of do our best to … take away any of the issues APD could potentially be complaining about and/or blaming for their lack of responsiveness,” she said.

But Ramirez, like other commissioners, worries about contingencies. 

“APD not showing up to meetings would be a huge disruption of not just our commission but to all the (city) boards and commissions’ ability to operate,” she said. “If the goal is to build trust and foster transparency and build connections with the community and have a positive policing relationship with the city of Austin, I do not know that choosing to disengage with a City Council-appointed, community-based forum is productive.” 

When asked if APD could abstain from future commission meetings, a city spokesperson responded via email: “If at any time city staff feel like they are being harassed or threatened, they are not required to continue attending the meeting.” 

The spokesperson also provided a statement from Assistant City Manager Bruce Mills, who said his goal is to help commissioners and city departments “work together to do what’s best for the residents of Austin.” He also touted the “very productive, collaborative” session between commissioners and APD on Monday.

Ramirez is eager for this work to continue, citing unanswered questions from commissioners and the importance of transparency in local government. 

“The June (5) meeting will be the true test of how responsive they’ll be,” she said.

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.