The agreement to reform Cincinnati's police department started to come together almost nine months ago.

        It was talked about in phone calls, strategy meetings and casual conversations from Cincinnati to Washington, D.C. Everyone was asking the same thing:

Police chief Tom Streicher (right) and former acting city safety director Greg Baker chat after the presentation. (Glenn Hartong photos) | ZOOM |

        Why not link negotiations in a racial profiling dispute to a separate federal investigation of the police department?

        The two cases had some obvious similarities. The citizens who sued over racial profiling complained about police misconduct. And many of the same complaints were part of last year's investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice.

        But bringing the two groups together would be tricky. At times, the only thing they seemed to have in common was a desire to get a deal done.

        In the end, that would be enough.

        Interviews with key negotiators reveal how the two groups finally came together late last week to reach an agreement that will change Cincinnati's police department.

        “It was very challenging,” said Jay Rothman, the Greene County mediator who helped lead negotiations. “We never really knew how it was going to happen.”

A two-front process

        The deal-making process began almost a year ago when the city was confronted with two major legal problems.

        One was the racial profiling lawsuit, which accused police of singling out African-Americans for traffic stops because of the color of their skin.

        The other was the Justice Department investigation, an extensive review of police procedures that began after April's riots.

        City officials hoped to resolve both cases with settlements that would avoid long, expensive court battles. As early as last summer, some City Council members began talking about linking the two cases in a common settlement.

        They asked the city's lawyer, William “Billy” Martin, to find out if such a deal might be possible.

        Mr. Martin would not comment on the discussions. But sources close to the negotiations say the Washington, D.C., lawyer soon discovered that both sides were receptive to the idea of a joint settlement.

Activist Nate Livingston reads over the proposed settlement. | ZOOM |

        But it was far too early for the Justice Department to commit to anything. The investigation had just begun, and Justice officials were not sure what they would find.

        For the time being, Justice would go it alone.

        “We sensed there might be a move to join the two cases,” said a Justice Department official, who asked not to be identified. “But we didn't get involved until the end. We wanted to see how it played out.”

        The citizens who filed the racial profiling lawsuit were eager to get Justice involved.

        They worried that separate agreements would divide the issues and make it easier for the city to avoid meaningful change.

        They also feared the city would reach an out-of-court settlement with Justice that would lack the oversight of a federal judge. Without that oversight, they thought the agreement would have no teeth.

        “We believed any agreement should be enforceable in court,” said Ken Lawson, a lawyer who represents citizens in the profiling suit. “So instead of broken promises we'll have an enforceable agreement.”

        But when Mr. Lawson approached Justice about getting involved, the city's lawyers told him to back off. The city wanted to negotiate separately, at least for awhile.

        So for the next several months, the two groups continued to work on their own.

        Lawyers for Justice and the city exchanged settlement proposals, while lawyers for the racial profiling plaintiffs and the city negotiated in a collaborative process with Mr. Rothman.

        For awhile, it looked as if the two groups might never get together.

        But late last week, negotiations in the profiling case nearly collapsed over several key issues, including how a final agreement would be monitored and enforced.
       

Justice joins in

        That's when talk once again turned to the Justice Department. If the two groups came together, then all of the reforms could be monitored by one person.

        And if disputes arose, a federal judge could step in to settle them.

        Mr. Martin, the city's lawyer, called the Justice Department on Thursday. He told the lawyers at Justice the time was right to join forces.

        The Justice lawyers were on a plane from Washington, D.C., that night. They arrived in time for negotiations Friday morning.

        “Their presence — and the ability to talk about coordination — was invaluable,” Mr. Rothman said.

        Once Justice joined the negotiations, a final agreement began to take shape.

        Although each group ultimately signed a separate deal, they agreed on the most important point: They would share a monitor and enforce the agreements in the same way.
       

Both side accountable

        Those involved in the profiling case liked the deal because it gave them more confidence the city would stick to the terms of the agreement.

        The city and Justice liked the deal because it had the stamp of approval of community activists who had complained for years about police conduct.

        If those activists were involved in the deal, they were a lot less likely to vilify it after it took effect.

        “Police-community issues need community involvement for a long-term solution,” said the Justice Department official.

        Mr. Martin said merging the two agreements will make both sides accountable by requiring everyone to follow the same rules. If there is a problem, he said, everyone will be involved in solving it.

        “The real work starts now,” Mr. Lawson said. “This is not going to work unless we make it work.”

Deals provide 'turning point'
Leaders scramble to show progress
Linking cases greased deal's final resolution
Over-the-Rhine waits for reality
Plaintiffs greet agreement with hope
Plan may alter policy more than beat
Police monitor called crucial to enforcing settlement
Suburbs take news with passing interest
Text of Collaborative Agreement
Text of Justice Dept. Agreement
Agencies' members embrace change
Cincinnati may set a precedent
Business responds to call for change
CAN has plan for safe streets
Neighbor arraigned in 2 deaths
Winter won't wither
Cardinal pays visit to area
County gives away ballpark plaza bricks
IT high school's success draws governor's praise
Peace hopes, prayers
Tristate A.M. Report
Wyoming group slows down on land-use plan
HOWARD: Some Good News
PULFER: Death row tale
RADEL: The settlement
Guilty verdict in death case
Hospital would add 3,200 jobs
Subdivisions may be allowed to pick schools
Cooper'stown serves 'em up in Cleveland
Judge to Traficant: Quit 'dillydallying' on defense
Ohio court expands search power
Ohio man accused of fraud
Panel to study officials' ties to party
Campbell OKs social services budgets
Lawmakers leave bills in limbo
NKU sculpture's destruction called an accident
Officers to be honored for bravery