To Preserve Civilian Oversight in Madison, Interim Monitor Glass Must Go

TLDR: I strongly support civilian oversight of the Madison Police Department. I do not believe Interim Monitor Glass is the person to ensure this oversight is performed objectively. 

Last Tuesday, Alder Ochowicz introduced a resolution to end Interim Independent Monitor (IM) Aeiramique Glass' employment with the City. I have signed on as a sponsor of this resolution, and this blog post, while long, explains why. You may agree or disagree with my and the other sponsors' reasoning, but my goal with this post is to clearly explain my thought process in taking this action.

Work rule violations

Every major employer has work rules. In my day job with the State of Wisconsin, I comply with a number of work rules, and I understand that violating those rules could lead to disciplinary action and potentially termination. The City of Madison also has work rules. These are called Administrative Procedural Memos (APMs). 

The City's APMs include such things as contracting and purchasing processes, workplace accommodations, workplace violence prevention and response, teleworking policies, meeting notices, paid leave policies, etc. The APMs are mostly procedural and non-controversial implementations of state laws and City ordinance. Some of these work rules detail processes to protect the rights of City employees, including those supervised by the IM. IM Glass has continued to discount the necessity of following these work rules, even though they are applicable to every other employee of the City of Madison. Further, she has openly flouted them stating “we do not have to comply with APMs other than what we do in good faith when I feel comfortable doing so". As a result, IM Glass has no valid contracts with any external investigator or attorney, as none of those contracts have been submitted through the normal City process. 

Why is it important that contracting rules be followed? Because any contract executed by the City is paid for by taxpayers and thus requires “sunshine", meaning the public must have access to the information. These rules are in place to ensure there is no nepotism or unfair labor or procurement processes that occurred in the selection of the vendor, and that the contractor is not in any way debarred or suspended from doing business with the City. 

IM Glass contends that engaging in standard City processes is not required of her, yet the ordinance overseeing her office (Madison Municode 5.19(7)(h)) plainly states: “…It is also anticipated that from time-to-time the Monitor may need to engage independent contractors, such as an investigator, to assist in fulfilling the duties of the OIM. In doing so, the Monitor shall follow all City of Madison contracting requirements…" (emphasis added). Thus, it is unclear why IM Glass believes she does not have to follow these procedures.

There have also been multiple HR issues within the office, including lack of adherence to telework and Family & Medical Leave policies, as well as filed complaints alleging stalking and coercive behavior by one of her employees, and harassment complaints filed against IM Glass herself, the most recent of which resulted in a restraining order against her being granted to a member of the Madison Police Department (MPD) stemming from her actions on August 4. The Green Bay Police Department, which was hired to conduct an external review of that interaction, has referred two counts of felony battery to police, and two counts of misdemeanor resisting or obstruction police against IM Glass. 

Failure to begin the hiring process for the permanent Monitor

The primary purpose of hiring IM Glass in an interim capacity was for her to serve as the hiring manager for a permanent Monitor. Because that was the primary purpose of the interim position, Ms. Glass was never eligible to apply for the permanent position, which was clearly indicated on the posting for the interim position. Ms. Glass accepted that condition of employment on her job application. 

When Ms. Glass joined the Office of Independent Monitor (OIM), there was a lot of clean-up to do to put things in order after the prior IM resigned. She has had several successes, including a thorough Annual Report (the original AI-generated cover image notwithstanding), and implementing an effective case intake and management software system. These are laudable achievements, particularly given the office's modest budget level and small staff. I am hopeful that with new leadership in our state legislature, the City will be given more room in future budgets such that additional investment in the important action of civilian oversight can occur. But, for now, the City budget is extremely limited, and there are many needs and wishes that we just can't accommodate. This budgetary situation makes it all the more important that the OIM prioritize their work, such that they can achieve as much as possible with the resources they have at their disposal. 

Because Ms. Glass was hired with the express purpose of finding her replacement, it was her responsibility to serve as the primary staff member to the Police Civilian Oversight Board (PCOB) and help guide them through this process. The PCOB has met four times this year, with an additional meeting on the books for December. The first agenda for this year that included the hiring plan for the new IM was held on June 18. At that meeting, the PCOB reviewed a plan that would include community listening sessions to be held between June-August, a job announcement posting in September, with the selection process completion by December, and final Council action on the recommended hire concluding in January of 2027. However, during that meeting, the PCOB also openly discussed the possibility of directly hiring IM Glass. Members appeared to be confused about whether this was an option, even though the job posting was clear about the Interim IM's ineligibility to apply for the permanent position. At any point in this discussion, IM Glass could have spoken up to dissuade the members from thinking they could consider her as a permanent hire, yet she did not.

Then, Corey Ruiz was killed by MPD on July 22. The OIM attempted to access information, including dash cam video of the killing, but was not granted the information due to the outside independent investigation being conducted by the Wisconsin Department of Justice Division of Criminal Investigation (DCI). The City of Madison Attorney's office has provided a legal opinion supporting the decision not to provide the OIM with information on this topic. Whether or not the OIM should have been given legal access to the investigative materials will eventually be decided by a court. The IM sent notice of a lawsuit against the MPD to force release of the documents to the IM in August. However, the formal serving of the papers to MPD was not actually completed until just this week. I, and many others, look forward to this issue being decided in court, as there is no case law here, since Madison is the only city in the state with an OIM. 

One could argue that, based on the situation with the killing of Mr. Ruiz, the hiring action for the permanent IM was reasonable to delay; indeed, the PCOB described just that in their September 16 meeting. The PCOB has released a survey to ask the public what they wish to see in the next IM. Nonetheless, the fact that the process is only now starting, 11 months after Ms. Glass was hired, is a substantial departure from the original expectation of the position, which was to complete the hire within the first 9 months of her employment.

Lack of discernment

In the field of civilian oversight, the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE) states in its core principles: “Effective civilian oversight must function with the same integrity, professionalism, and ethical standards it expects from and promotes for law enforcement." When IM Glass yelled from a bullhorn during a protest, that did not engender confidence in her objectivity. She has performed multiple, hours-long Facebook Live posts, in which she has denounced or denigrated City staff and fellow Alders. This does not show professionalism. Much has been made of her statement that “I will burn this city down" during the interaction with MPD in which the officer she primarily engaged with was granted the restraining order against her. Many have defended this statement as metaphorical, indicating a need to disrupt systems of oppression. As I am not a scholar of metaphorical and historical statements like this, I cannot comment as to the veracity of the claim that the comment was meant to be more than the words at face value. However, since there were literally people setting fires in the city that night, some may also surmise that IM Glass' statement was a call to violence. Regardless, these actions show a lack of discernment and objectivity in how Ms. Glass chooses to engage with the public in her role as a taxpayer-funded employee. 

Why now?

The PCOB has only begun to seek input on the hiring of the next IM, nearly one year after Ms. Glass' hire. The PCOB has openly opined about the possibility of hiring Ms. Glass to the permanent position. One member of the PCOB has as his public Facebook profile a photo of him in a t-shirt that reads “I stand with my Monitor Glass". Also in a public Facebook post announcing the survey to solicit input on the next IM, he states “…I'm one of Meeka's biggest advocates, and I have been fighting for her. I want Meeka to stay. Period." Again, this does not engender a sense of objectivity of this Board, which is supposed to be performing employment oversight over the IM. Ms. Glass' lack of progress in moving the hiring process forward combined with her failure to advise the PCOB that she is ineligible for the permanent position has encouraged similar sentiments to be expressed by PCOB members in recent months and distracted from efforts to recruit and hire a permanent Independent Police Monitor. This hiring action is a primary goal for the Common Council so we can ensure effective, trusted civilian oversight is able to be successful in Madison.

We have also received questions about the legality of the Council taking up a resolution to end Ms. Glass' employment. Because Ms. Glass was hired on an interim basis and does not have the standard employment contract that applies to permanent agency heads, normal provisions and procedures related to her appointment or the term of her extension do not apply. This blog post is designed to contribute to the “why" behind this resolution. 

Some will certainly criticize this resolution. Some may argue that we are exhibiting racism, or refusing to stand up for people who have been disenfranchised. For those who choose to believe that, I'm certain none of my words will dissuade them. I therefore want to clearly express my firm belief in the power of civilian oversight, and that keeping Ms. Glass in the position of Interim Independent Monitor actually undermines the potential for effective civilian oversight in our city; this is why the Council President is working directly with NACOLE to help guide us through our next actions. What exactly those actions will be, we don't yet know, because as we're working through a standard contracting process with NACOLE, we need to understand the scope of services they can offer, and the terms of a potential contract. Once we have worked that out, we will be introducing an appropriate resolution to engage their services and help guide us towards a better future of strong, respected, objective, and effective civilian oversight over MPD.