Fox Professing
Academic Papers Opinion Columns Personal Essays Course Materials



Police Review Panel

Memo 3
Update, Request, Correction




Dennis Fox


April 28, 1997


Police Review Panel: Update, Request, Correction

Many of you have responded to my recent memo concerning the lack of on-campus police review. Without your strong, visible support, the Campus Senate is unlikely to challenge the Administration. If you don't want the whole issue buried with polite bureaucratic avoidance, please contact your Senators today. Even better, come to Friday's meeting to help the Senate stand up to the Administration (May 2, 10:00, Brookens 333).

1. At last Friday's Senate meeting, the Administration presented its new policy--not for discussion and Senate approval but "for information purposes" only. Chancellor Lynn has already implemented her inadequate policy. Unfortunately, her unilateral action prevents the Police Review Panel from investigating complaints: The panel cannot even ask questions of complainants, police, witnesses, or whatever investigator the Administration selects. This is not what the campus was led to expect when the Chancellor brought the police here over the Senate's objections. (See my critique of Lynn's policy).


2. Please urge the Senate to pass a resolution:

  • disavowing and declaring void the Administration's policy, which the Chancellor adopted without ever receiving a formal proposal from a functioning Police Review Panel
  • directing a new Senate-created Police Review Panel to devise and implement effective on-campus review of complaints and meaningful police supervision and training
  • reiterating past governance calls for all policy matters to be brought to the Senate for substantive deliberation, not merely for notification purposes and the substanceless appearance of collaborative decision making


3. In my earlier memo, I noted that the Administration let 17 months go by without taking action on the proposed policy. At last Friday's Senate meeting, Doug Anderson corrected my erroneous assumption. During those 17 months, the proposed policy did occasionally move from one administrator's desk to another. Sometimes Doug had it, sometimes Carl Long had it, and sometimes Steve Egger had it (Egger was the Administration's appointment to the Police Review Panel and apparently the only member left after everyone else resigned). According to Doug, the paperwork was never ignored for more than five or six months at a time&emdash;for details, see my revised website chronology. I apologize for my memo's implication that the Administration did not take this matter seriously.

Chronology of Events
Memo to UIS Senators April 24, 1997
Letter to editor January 1996
unresolved issues (1995)

up to top

personal/political observations
Academic Papers Opinion Columns Personal Essays Course Materials
some political, most not


Page updated September 30, 2007