Temperatures will continue to fall over the next few days

MPR News helps you turn down the noise and build shared understanding. Turn up your support for this public resource and keep trusted journalism accessible to all. 

Turn Up Your Support

Updated Nov. 22, 12:42 p.m. | Posted Nov. 21, 4:13 p.m.

A first-of-its-kind lawsuit in Minnesota challenges a police body camera policy over the way it was drawn up, and police officers are the ones bringing the case.


In the lawsuit filed Friday, the unions for Maplewood police officers argued that parts of the policy should have been devised through collective bargaining instead of being imposed by city and department leaders. 


It could be a test case as cities around Minnesota bring the cameras on board. The Legislature approved a 

 last spring requiring that departments using body-worn cameras adopt written policies governing when the devices must be activated and how the footage is managed.

Dayton sees 'serious defects' in body camera bill

The law angered community groups who said access to the videos was too restrictive and would defeat accountability purposes of the cameras. At the same time, police officer groups worried about having too much exposed about them and the people they encounter, sometimes in private dwellings or during moments of vulnerability.


In the Maplewood lawsuit, the unions raise two points of concern with the policy adopted by their city. 


They objected to a measure allowing random audits of camera footage by supervisors to review officer performance, calling it surveillance that should be subject to mandatory bargaining under federal labor law. 

And they wanted formal input on a provision that prohibits officers from reviewing footage before giving a statement after a critical incident that results in severe harm or death.

Research suggests police body cams have a 'civilizing effect'

"The union has demanded on a couple of occasions to bargain these two specific provisions with the city and the city has refused to do that to date," said Minneapolis attorney Timothy Louris, who is representing unions representing 38 line officers and eight sergeants. 

"The bottom line is that these types of working conditions have to be bargained," he added. "They can't be unilaterally created and implemented by cities."

The city finalized its body camera policy last week and all officers could be wearing them by January. The union lawsuit was filed in Ramsey County District Court.


Maplewood Police Chief Paul Schnell said he doesn't expect the case to delay full deployment of cameras by January to members of his police force.
 

"We have members of our department who are in fact subject to this policy today and we don't anticipate it would stall the launch of our program," he said.


Some officers have been wearing body cameras during a pilot program. Schnell said officers were consulted as part of the development of the policy and there was a managerial right to implement the policy apart from formal labor negotiations.

Crime, Law and Justice

NewsPartners

Brian Bakst

Author

A first-of-its-kind lawsuit filed Friday, the unions for Maplewood police officers argued that parts of the policy should have been devised though collective bargaining instead of being imposed by city and department leaders.

Maplewood police officers challenge body camera policy in lawsuit

Go Deeper.

Like this?