Durango residents concerned with the conduct of federal immigration officers are taking matters into their own hands through a democratic process called a citizen’s initiative.
Proponents of a No Secret Police movement that aims to prohibit law enforcement officers from concealing their identities within city limits say the city has been too slow to respond to residents’ requests for action.
The No Secret Police citizen’s initiative is a movement to force the city to address residents’ concerns.
Councilors approved an immigration task force in November charged with identifying ways the city can legally support its immigrant community. The volunteer committee gave itself six months to issue its recommendations. But No Secret Police advocates say action is needed sooner.
Residents have collected about 1,600 signatures supporting an ordinance that would ban mask use by law enforcement – including federal agencies such as U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement – and require officers to wear identification within city limits.
Residents have until March 6 to collect 1,047 valid signatures from registered electors within city limits. Why such a precise figure? According to the city clerk’s office, initiatives require signatures totaling no less than 15% of the total number of voters in the last municipal election.
Assuming residents collect the needed number of signatures by the Friday deadline, Durango City Council could pass the ordinance as written or place it on a ballot to be decided by voters within 30 to 90 days of the petition being certified, according to the city charter.
Mick Souder, one No Secret Police organizer, said residents petitioning for a mask ban don’t feel they are being represented by their government. The citizen’s initiative is a way to channel their frustration into action.
“The citizens are signing this and trying to use this because they’re fairly frustrated with how local governments are reacting,” he said.
The proposed ordinance was written by Durango resident and No Secret Police organizer Ted Wright, who based the ordinance on a Los Angeles County ordinance prohibiting law enforcement officers from using masks to conceal their identities, he said.
“In January, after the Renée Good shooting, we articulated this is just outrageous,” he said, explaining how the citizen’s initiative originated.
The LA County ordinance took effect Jan. 8. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, however, is not enforcing the law while the constitutionality of two California mask and identification bills are challenged in court, according to Los Angeles County Press.
Some critics of the LA County ordinance are calling it political theater.
In January, Wright said of the ordinance proposed in Durango: “Is it enforceable? Well, if there’s no law, then it’s certainly not enforceable.”
Fifty-seven residents volunteered to be petition circulators at an interest meeting held Jan. 22 at the Durango Public Library, although some volunteers dropped off for one reason or another, he said.
Fellow petitioner Kristin Smith said 43 petitioners were active as of Tuesday.
Souder said support for the citizen’s initiative appears to be divided based on party lines. Democrats are quick to provide their signatures. He hadn’t spoken with many Republicans, although he believes Libertarian-minded residents might be open to supporting the movement.
Smith said the citizen’s initiative is about holding law enforcement officers accountable.
“We have innocent children in our community who have been confronted by those masked officers – and we have documentation and photos of this – who had no identification and who had weapons on them, and I just can’t imagine how scared these children were when encountered with this type of officer,” she said. “That's not a typical police officer. We have wonderful city of Durango police officers, wonderful sheriff’s officers, who are here to serve and protect our community, and they all have clear, visible identification.”
She said an arrest made by federal officers in the Crestview neighborhood near Needham Elementary School was conducted during a holiday break when children weren’t in school. But she worries about the trauma children might experience if they were to see masked officers forcibly arresting a community member.
She said the misconduct of masked federal officers hurts the reputation of local police. It’s important that children trust local police officers because they might encounter a situation in which they need to call for help. When kids witness misconduct – be it firsthand or through abundant examples on the internet and social media – they are seeing “villains,” she said.
She fears individuals might impersonate federal officers, taking advantage of how officers are concealing their identities and not providing identification.
“People who are supposed to be coming to serve and protect are coming in with force and with no visible way of identifying them to even determine if they are an enforcement officer of any kind,” Smith said. “It's a huge detriment to our children and to our community.”
According to Article VII of the city charter, registered electors of the city have the power to propose ordinances to City Council. City Council may vote to adopt an ordinance brought forth by voters. If it fails to do so, voters can adopt or reject an ordinance in a city election.
The charter clarifies that ordinances proposed via citizen initiative do not apply to the city’s “budget or capital program, or to any ordinance relating to the appropriation of money, authorizing the issuance of bonds, the levy of special assessments, or salaries of city officers and employees.”
Any group of five or more registered voters within city limits may pursue an initiative by filing an affidavit declaring their petitioner’s committee with the city clerk, according to the charter. The petitioners are responsible for circulating and filing petitions.
The petitions are required to include the full text of the ordinance pursued.
The No Secret Police’s proposed ordinance is available at nosecretpoliceindurango.org. The ordinance in its simplest form prohibits law enforcement officers from concealing their identities and requires law enforcement officers to wear visible identification within the city of Durango.
The ordinance cites seven reasons for prohibiting mask use, including:
- Facial coverings and disguises affect the public’s perception of law enforcement, officer interactions with the community and accountability of law enforcement, causing fear of secret police or criminal activity.
- People will reasonably be fearful or intimidated when approached by people who are purposefully obscuring their identity, including anonymous officers claiming federal government authority when violating people’s constitutional rights.
- Fear of secret police increases “defensive behaviors” that unnecessarily escalate tension already present in interactions between police and members of the public.
- Facial coverings like masks hinder nonverbal communication and increase the likelihood of misinterpreting a law enforcement officer’s intentions, heightening the risk of conflict.
- Allowing law enforcement officers to operate anonymously increases the risk of bad actors impersonating law enforcement, which could result in individuals being less likely to comply with legitimate law enforcement. “Kidnapping, robbery and rape” are listed as fears that stem from the risk of bad actors impersonating law enforcement.
- Certain circumstances justify the use of face coverings or masks by law enforcement for an officer’s health and safety; but in such cases officers’ identities should not be obscured in a way that conceals unlawful or discriminatory behavior and limits review and accountability.
- The final finding credits Durango police officers with adhering to the city’s code of ethics and conduct and Colorado's Law Enforcement Code of Ethics. It adds that adhering to a code of ethics “does not impair policing unless the policing is intended to be unethical” and adhering to the U.S. Constitution “does not impair policing unless the policing is intended to be unconstitutional.”
Another group of residents are planning a separate citizen’s initiative to regulate how Durango police use Flock Safety data.
Resident and organizer Ben Peters said an ordinance the group has drafted would require police to obtain warrants in order to access data collected from vehicles by the cameras. The citizen’s initiative hasn’t formally launched, although he hopes to get it off the ground this month.
Smith, who is president of the Durango School District Board of Education, said it would be easier if government officials were determined to pursue an ordinance prohibiting mask use by law enforcement officers on behalf of their constituents without an initiative. But there are many legal considerations officials must take into account, and leading local governments can be challenging.
“We have great community leaders – great city manager, amazing City Council members who donate their time to leading our community,” she said. “But the community was ready for some type of action, and that hasn’t happened yet. That’s how this campaign transpired.”
Mick and Souder said they feel optimistic about collecting enough signatures to put the initiative in front of City Council. Souder said he is hoping to collect at least 1,700 signatures to account for non-city residents who might have signed a petition.
The grassroots group made only minimal purchases to bolster its campaign, she said. No real money was spent on advertising; individual committee members made out-of-pocket donations to buy banners, set up petition tables and the like.
“We did this because it seemed to us an urgent matter that we just needed to hit the streets with. And so that’s what we’ve done,” she said.
cburney@durangoherald.com
