Pittsburgh City Council this week took steps to resolve a long-standing legal dispute involving its police bureau — and to invest in technology that could provide evidence in similar disputes going forward.
Without discussion Wednesday, council approved a settlement worth $275,000 to conclude a lawsuit filed after a 2020 protest in East Liberty resulted in nearly two dozen arrests and conflicting accounts of the conduct of police and protesters alike.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of six adults and one child weeks after the June 1, 2020 protest, one of countless demonstrations nationwide that followed the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police. The lawsuit accused city police of “escalating a peaceful protest into a scene of pandemonium, panic, violence and bloodshed,” and said police arrested demonstrators even as they were trying to leave.
The city countered by saying officials “take precautions to ensure the safety of those involved in organized demonstrations and protests.” But it said after “there was destruction, property damage and violent behavior” among protesters, officers “used their discretion when force could be used.”
Under the terms of the settlement, each of the plaintiffs is set to receive $19,533.54 from the $275,000 settlement, with the balance of the money dedicated to legal fees.
Some attorneys for the plaintiffs did not respond to calls, while others declined comment until the settlement is official.
Council is due to take a final vote on the deal next week. But Wednesday’s move came as no surprise.
Court records first disclosed a resolution was in the offing this spring, and council discussed it Monday during a closed-door executive session, a routine procedure when legal action is pending.
The deal arguably represents a comparative bargain for the city.
By one recent estimate, such settlements have cost some $80 million nationwide to date. Philadelphia alone announced a settlement in March for more than $9 million in legal action stemming from the police response to protests there.
Still, the case underscores the financial stakes for distrust between police and the community. And one day before the settlement vote, council approved a plan to spend $39.9 million on new technology, including body cameras and vehicle cameras for use by police which could figure in future litigation.
The contract’s original price tag was north of $45 million, a sum that last week gave council members pause. The manufacturer of the equipment, Arizona-based Axon Enterprise, enjoys almost total dominance in the field.
And the new cameras offer several advantages over those currently being used by police: most importantly, they switch on automatically rather than requiring action by the officer — a change proponents say will provide a more thorough record of police and civilian behavior.
Still, when the contract came before council last week, “we were all a little bit sticker shocked” said Councilor Anthony Coghill. “It’s a lot of money.”
In response, Coghill and Public Safety Director Lee Schmidt hashed out somewhat different terms for the deal before Tuesday’s meeting, reducing the total number of cameras in the contract from 950 to 900. The city’s police force currently stands at roughly 800 officers out of 900 budgeted, meaning the city could scale back the purchase without affecting access to the technology.
Coghill praised Schmidt for having “got[ten] on the phone last night … work[ing] out a new deal [and] sav[ing] us roughly $6 million.”
It’s unclear the savings will amount to that much. Last week, police chief Larry Scirotto said the city would not pay for cameras it didn’t end up using anyway, meaning the cost might never have reached $45 million in the first place.
But the new version of the contract presented to council this past Tuesday had a cap that was $5 million lower than the original. The lower cost ceiling clearly assuaged some councilors, and others said the cameras could pay for themselves in the event of future lawsuits like the one it is settling.
“We need to be able to… prove a solidly recorded chain of evidence that will be supported in a court of law to justify the kinds of actions that we take,” said Councilor Bruce Kraus shortly before the vote. ”Especially in a post-George Floyd world where we have all been challenged to rethink policing and what protecting and serving really looks like.”
Even with more footage, however, continued controversies over policing seem inevitable. The plaintiffs in the June 2020 protest included numerous video clips in their complaint, only to have the city question whether the footage accurately reflected the broader context of the day’s events.
Cameras, themselves, can also be instruments of control, said Councilor Deb Gross, who feared the new generation of Axon equipment would enhance the ability of city officials to surveil citizens.
“It’s important for us to have this chain of evidence [and] the public demanded body cameras to protect their rights,” Gross said. But she said she would be speaking to outside experts about the new technology’s privacy implications.
“We need to continue this conversation,” she said, about “where we’re crossing the line between protecting our residents’ rights and infringing upon our residents’ rights.”
