Is accountability so sparse in the Chicago Police Department that even a recommendation by the superintendent isn't enough to get an officer fired by the Chicago Police Board? Based on the latest research (PDF) by the non-profit Chicago Justice Project (CJP), it seems so. Here's what the organization examined in their report:

[T]he Chicago Justice Project (CJP) examined ten years of the Board’s decisions in cases for which the Superintendent of the Chicago Police Department sought the termination of either sworn officers or civilian employees. We included the cases involving civilian employees for comparison purposes. Our study covered 310 cases over the course of a ten-year period starting in January 1999 and ending in December 2008.

Over this period, CJP identified 248 instances in which the superintendent recommended that a particular officer get the ax.  The mayoral-appointed board, however, only fired only a fraction (37 percent) of these cops. In most of the remaining 63 percent of cases, the board didn't retain the officer in question on the grounds that they were unfairly accused. Rather, they agreed with the superintendent's conclusion, but chose to handed out less severe punishments, such as suspension.

The big mystery is exactly how the ten-member board arrived at those decisions. "They're the last link in the chain for police accountability and they're overturning decisions about officers who are violent," CJP executive director Tracy Siska tells us. "They're putting them back on the streets without an explanation."

Take the case of Officer Gerald Callahan, who former Superintendent Phil Cline recommended for termination (PDF) in 2006 after several altercations with his fellow officers.  The board chose not to fire him and the two years later CPD found itself having to answer for his actions after he attacked a 61 year-old man at a Niles bar.

CJP says that by letting Callahan and other abusive officers off the hook, the board is putting the public in jeopardy. Indeed, these types of incidents routinely open the door to costly lawsuits; between 2000 and 2007 alone, taxpayers spent $172 million settling litigation related to police misconduct, some of which could have been avoided with proper oversight.  Meanwhile, when it comes to civilian employees recommended for termination, the board hasn't flinched (73 percent were fired during the same ten-year period).

Encouragingly, some city officials -- including Ald. Toni Preckwinkle (4th Ward) -- pushed back at a hearing last Friday, as WBEZ reports:

PRECKWINKLE: It seems like an explanation, not just facts, of the decisions that they reach would be extraordinarily useful to the citizenry.

It appears that the lax police board (nearly half of the members missed between 20 and 34 percent of the monthly meetings) is about to get a wake-up call. Later this month, a handful of aldermen -- including Preckwinkle, Joe Moore (49th Ward), and Bob Fioretti (2nd Ward) -- will introduce an ordinance setting attendance standards and requiring the members to put their decisions in writing.

"We think if they have to provide a public rationale, they might be less likely to put violent offenders back on the beat," Siska says. "This is just one of dozens and dozens of boards that is not scrutinized. That needs to change."

Image used under a Creative Commons license by Flickr user caribb.