CLEET Corner (February 2025)

Happy New Year! We wanted to bring to your attention two cases out of the Court of Criminal Appeals from the end of 2024. These brief summaries are only meant to make you aware of the cases and are not offered as complete analyses of them and should not be considered legal advice.

The first is Tulsa v. O’Brien, 2024 OK CR 31. This is another installment in Indian Country jurisprudence post-McGirt. Here, Tulsa asked the Court to approve their exercise of jurisdiction in issuing traffic citations to certain Indians within Indian Country. The case involved a ticket issued by Tulsa PD to an Osage Indian within the part of Tulsa that sits within the Muscogee (Creek) reservation. In a methodical opinion, the Court found the state—and thus municipalities—has concurrent jurisdiction in Indian Country except when (1) that jurisdiction is specifically preempted by federal law or (2) when exercising jurisdiction would unlawfully infringe upon tribal self-government. Finding the General Crimes Act did not preempt state jurisdiction in Indian Country, the Court focused on the self-government aspect. In this case, because the ticketed driver was a “non-member” Indian, meaning he was not an enrolled member of the tribe with jurisdiction, the Court found the exercise of state jurisdiction did not interfere with tribal self-government and upheld Tulsa’s practice.

The other is State v. Velasquez, 2024 OK CR 29, in which the Court of Criminal Appeals overruled previous holdings regarding knock-and-announce violations. As you’re likely aware, Oklahoma law generally requires law enforcement to give notice of their authority and purpose and be refused admittance before they can force entry to execute a warrant. 22 O.S. § 1228. In the past, the Oklahoma court has employed the exclusionary rule in cases in which the knock-and-announce rule was violated. In Velasquez, finding the purpose of the knock-and-announce rule is to protect life, limb, and property, and not to act as a shield for offenders to avoid the government seeing or taking property described in a lawful warrant, the Court overruled the prior cases and adopted the federal approach as described in Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586 (2006).

As always, please make sure to review these cases with appropriate legal counsel prior to implementing any changes of procedure or policy based upon them.

The Crucial Role of Effective Communication Between Police Chiefs and City Management

Effective communication between a police chief and city management is the cornerstone of sound governance, particularly when it comes to developing policies and mitigating risks. These two roles, though distinct in their responsibilities, share a common goal: fostering a safe, well-managed community. Open, consistent, and strategic communication can make the difference between thriving municipal operations and potentially damaging crises. Below are key benefits that highlight the importance of this collaboration.

Enhanced Policy Development

A police chief’s purview often includes law enforcement and community safety, while city management focuses on budgeting, resource allocation, and overall strategic planning. By maintaining a robust communication channel, these leaders can ensure that policies align with both public safety priorities and administrative objectives. For example:

• Resource Allocation: Open dialogue allows the police chief to communicate specific needs, such as personnel or equipment, enabling city management to make informed budget decisions.

• Policy Alignment: Collaborative discussions help avoid policies that inadvertently conflict with policing strategies or community expectations.

• Community Engagement: Jointly developed policies are more likely to reflect a balanced approach that addresses the concerns of both city leadership and residents.

Proactive Risk Mitigation

Public safety and risk management are interdependent. Well-informed city management can better anticipate challenges and allocate resources effectively when they are kept abreast of issues by the police chief. Some ways this dynamic aids risk mitigation include:

• Crisis Preparedness: Regular communication ensures both leaders are aligned on protocols for handling emergencies, from natural disasters to civil unrest.

• Data Sharing: Sharing crime statistics, trends, and community feedback enables city management to understand the broader context and act preemptively.

• Legal and Ethical Compliance: Transparent communication helps ensure that policies adhere to legal standards and ethical considerations, reducing the risk of litigation or public backlash.

Stronger Community Trust

Both the police chief and city management play vital roles in shaping public perception of local government. When these leaders communicate effectively, they set the tone for transparency and accountability, which resonates positively with the community. Benefits include:

• Unified Messaging: Consistent communication ensures that public statements and initiatives from city leadership and law enforcement are cohesive and clear.

• Conflict Resolution: Joint efforts in addressing community grievances demonstrate a commitment to collaboration and responsiveness.

• Increased Morale: A well-coordinated approach signals to both city employees and residents that their leaders are working together to achieve common goals.

Efficient Problem-Solving

Cities face a myriad of challenges, from budget constraints to unexpected crises. A strong communication pipeline between the police chief and city management allows for faster identification and resolution of issues. For example:

• Resource Prioritization: Immediate feedback helps allocate resources to where they are needed most.

• Adaptability: Open communication fosters a culture of flexibility, enabling quick adjustments to policies or strategies as circumstances change.

Strategies for Effective Communication

To fully realize these benefits, police chiefs and city management should adopt specific strategies:

• Regular Meetings: Schedule consistent check-ins to discuss ongoing issues and updates.

• Clear Channels: Establish dedicated communication protocols to ensure information flows smoothly.

• Collaborative Training: Engage in joint training sessions on crisis management, diversity, and community relations.

• Mutual Respect: Cultivate a professional relationship built on trust and respect for each other’s expertise.

Conclusion

Good communication between a police chief and city management is more than a best practice; it is a necessity for effective governance and risk management. By working closely together, these leaders can craft policies that are both pragmatic and visionary, while safeguarding their community against potential risks. The result is a more resilient and harmonious city, where leadership acts as a unified force for progress and safety.

OMAG's Police Liability Update (February 2025)