A8 The BulleTin • Thursday, May 6, 2021
EDITORIALS & OPINIONS
AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER
Heidi Wright
Gerry O’Brien
Richard Coe
Publisher
Editor
Editorial Page Editor
Fund county’s adult
treatment court
D
eschutes County’s Family Drug Court was special for a
number of reasons.
It just felt different than most
courtrooms. One difference: Stand-
ing ovations. You don’t see that often
in court. The court has helped so
many families succeed in reunifying,
finding drug treatment, employment
and housing. It likely also reduced
crime.
It began in 2006 in the county as a
focused effort to help parents from
losing custody of their children due
to substance abuse. Now in a way
that’s gone. But is replaced by some-
thing better.
It’s now called the Adult Treatment
Court. It still prioritizes handling
cases that involve parents that may
lose custody of their children due to
substance abuse. It now also works
with individuals who don’t have chil-
dren to get their lives on track.
It’s a single-judge court. That en-
ables the judge to gain specialization
and the kind of understanding of a
situation to make excellent decisions.
And the judge is backed up by su-
pervised treatment for individuals
with substance abuse problems and
resources to help with housing, train-
ing and employment.
The family drug court has been a
county success story. And the Adult
Treatment Court should be able to
bring that success to more people.
It’s submitting a $515,299 grant pro-
posal for two years of funding to the
state. Let’s hope the state sees fit to
fund it again.
State should change
drunken driving law Vote for transparency and commitment
GUEST COLUMN
A
drunken driving conviction
for John Hedgpeth seemed a
cinch.
An Oregon state trooper pulled
Hedgpeth over in 2014 for riding his
motorcycle without a helmet. The
trooper took him into custody for
DUII and brought him to the North
Bend Police Department for an in-
toxilyzer test. It was one hour and 45
minutes after Hedgpeth had been
stopped before the test began. The
test showed his blood alcohol con-
tent was .09%. The legal limit in Or-
egon is .08%.
Charged. Convicted. Case closed?
Nope. Hedgpeth appealed and
the case ended up before the Ore-
gon Supreme Court. The defendant
claimed the state’s evidence did not
show he was intoxicated at the time
he was riding the motorcycle. The
court ruled in his favor.
In many cases, more police work
would have prevented that outcome.
The prosecution could have pre-
sented evidence of a roadside sobri-
ety test. There could have been tes-
timony from experts showing that a
.09 blood alcohol content about two
hours after he was stopped indicated
he was impaired at the time of the
stop. That evidence, though, was not
presented at his trial.
Most states allow a two-hour win-
dow if .08 is established. Not Ore-
gon. Some states allow a three-hour
window. So this legislative session
Senate Bill 201 would change Ore-
gon law. It creates a two-hour win-
dow. And the bill seems on track
to pass. The bill also would make
a second change in the law regard-
In 2019 in Oregon, 34% of the
driving-related fatalities were
related to alcohol-impaired
driving.
ing DUII. It relates to the Supreme
Court’s decision in what is called the
Guzman case.
In Oregon, a person cannot be
held accountable for DUIIs in other
states unless the laws are essentially
identical — the Oregon law’s “statu-
tory counterpart.”
Ricky Guzman was indicted for
felony DUII and other crimes. The
indictment for the felony DUII al-
leged that Guzman had two prior
convictions for DUII from other
jurisdictions, including one from
Kansas.
Guzman challenged that the
Kansas conviction was not a statu-
tory counterpart and so his Oregon
charge could not be a felony.
The Kansas statute is broader than
Oregon’s statute in that it applied to
operating any vehicle and allowed
conviction based on a blood alcohol
content of .08% within three hours
of operating a vehicle. The court
found for Guzman.
The impact could be that Oregon
would be the only state in the coun-
try that did not allow out-of-state
DUII charges to count toward a fel-
ony. SB 201 puts a stop to that.
In 2019 in Oregon, 34% of the
driving-related fatalities were related
to alcohol-impaired driving. That’s
more than 160 deaths. The law
needs to be changed. Pass SB 201.
Editorials reflect the views of The Bulletin’s editorial board, Publisher Heidi Wright, Editor
Gerry O’Brien and Editorial Page Editor Richard Coe. They are written by Richard Coe.
Learning Hub of Central Oregon and
erving on a school board is hard
Better Together — a combination of
work. It is a volunteer position.
financial knowledge and educational
You are charged with every fam- expertise that will further hone the
ily’s most cherished gift — their chil-
focus on early childhood and the pri-
dren. To rise to that challenge, our
oritization of funding. As a volunteer,
community deserves future
she founded Mecca Bend — a
board members who have a
nonprofit that responded to
demonstrated commitment
the needs of the Latinx com-
to our students, families, and
munity during this pandemic,
schools — and are commit-
through cash assistance for
ted to the transparency and
those disqualified from fed-
integrity required to do the
eral stimulus aid, distribution
job well once in office.
of food boxes in partnership
Dholakia
That is why I am advo-
with local food banks, and bi-
cating for Marcus LeGrand,
lingual counseling and coach-
Janet Sarai Llerandi, Shirley Olson,
ing.
and Carrie McPherson Douglass for
Shirley has a 50+ year career in
the Bend-La Pine School Board in the education as a teacher and adminis-
May 18th special election.
trator — a depth of experience that
Demonstrated commitment.
will provide an important perspective
These four are parents and have
and grounding during these uncer-
actively worked professionally and as
tain times. As a volunteer, she serves
volunteers to improve our communi-
on the district budget committee, as a
ty’s educational system. In a campaign SMART Reader at Rosland Elemen-
cycle, it is easy to make critiques and
tary in La Pine, and directing philan-
promises. But I find the best indicator thropy for the Sunriver Women’s Club
of future work is past performance.
to address needs in south county.
These four have it in spades.
Carrie is a small business owner
Marcus is the college and career
who currently runs a national non-
success coach and an instructor at
profit supporting school boards
Central Oregon Community College
around the country, as well as a for-
— a true asset as the district contin-
mer educator — from finance, to
ues to develop its career and college
governance, to innovation in educa-
pathways ensuring all students have
tion, these are critical perspectives she
a plan for their future. As a volunteer,
brings to our board. As a volunteer,
he sits on the district budget commit- she currently serves on the Bend-La
tee, helps to facilitate student town
Pine School Board (and will be the
halls, and is a core founding member
longest serving member if re-elected),
of the Black led nonprofit The Father’s serves on the boards of several non-
Group, which is piloting a mentoring
profits, and actively works to support
program in our high schools.
diverse candidates in seeking public
Janet is the administrative and fi-
office.
nance Coordinator for The Early
Transparency and Integrity.
BY MELISSA BARNES DHOLAKIA
S
To rise to that challenge, our
community deserves future
board members who have a
demonstrated commitment to our
students, families, and schools.
Marcus, Janet, Shirley and Carrie
are actively and transparently en-
gaging with the public, helping them
know who they are and what they
stand for. Their four opponents didn’t
even participate in the basics — not
during the endorsement process with
The Bulletin or The Source, not in
the nonpartisan forum sponsored by
the City Club of Central Oregon and
the League of Women Voters. They
were, however, slated to attend a $32
per person paid event on April 28th
held at the Bend Golf Club. And one
candidate, Maria Lopez-Dauenhauer
has already self-funded over $27K of
attack ads and mailers. Public forums
and open conversations cost noth-
ing; attack ads with no opportunity
to respond require wealth. Our com-
munity deserved an honest conversa-
tion between candidates about issues
— again, I find past performance a
strong indicator of future work.
If you want candidates that will
show up, be transparent, model integ-
rity and do the work, please join me in
voting for Marcus LeGrand, Janet Sa-
rai Llerandi, Shirley Olson, and Carrie
McPherson Douglass. They are will-
ing to share their deep experience and
demonstrated track record — that is a
gift our students, families, and schools
deserve.
e e
Melissa Barnes Dholakia is the vice chair of the
Bend-La Pine School Board
Letters policy: Letters should be limited to one issue, contain no more than 250 words and include the writer’s signature, phone
number and address for verification. We edit letters for brevity, grammar, taste and legal reasons. Email: letters@bendbulletin.com
Why reforming qualified immunity will never resolve police violence
BY CEDRIC ALEXANDER
Special to The Washington Post
A
s lawmakers in Congress ne-
gotiate their long-awaited po-
lice reform bill, Democrats
are sticking firm to their conviction
that the legislation must include some
type of reform of qualified immunity
— the legal protections that make su-
ing individual police officers for mis-
conduct nearly impossible. For many
on the left, that raises an important
question: To what extent should they
be willing to compromise on reform-
ing the law?
It’s the wrong question to ask. As a
40-year veteran of law enforcement,
from sheriff’s deputy to chief and di-
rector of public safety, I firmly believe
that nothing federal, state or local
governments do about qualified im-
munity will significantly reduce or
increase the incidence of unjustified
deadly force by police. Real reform
requires us to go much deeper than
tweaking tort rules.
I do not wish to dismiss the debate
about qualified immunity. Indeed,
the arguments against it are com-
pelling. Some say it puts the officer
above the law, at least civil law, by de-
nying the families of those unjustly
killed by the police their constitu-
tional right to seek redress of griev-
ance.
This is a legitimate point, but so,
too, are arguments that immunity
should be available when officers are
called to account for split-second life-
or-death decisions. Concern over fi-
nancial liability should not be permit-
ted to cloud an officer’s judgment at a
critical moment.
And financial liability is a real con-
cern. I am certain that the most com-
mitted supporters of the doctrine re-
main the majority of cities and other
local governments that see the qual-
ified immunity defense as an urgent
budgetary matter. A report published
early this year revealed that, over 10
years, New York City, Chicago and
Los Angeles spent a combined to-
tal of $2.5 billion to settle lawsuits
against police.
Put it this way: Taxpayers cannot
afford the mounting direct monetary
costs of the abuse of policing author-
ity. Realizing this, city and other local
governments have embraced quali-
A far better strategy would be to eliminate the risk of ending up in court.
Just imagine what local and state governments could accomplish if they
were to invest the money they spend on misconduct lawsuits on making
policing more humane and more effective.
fied immunity not only as a means of
defeating liability lawsuits, but also to
manage liability itself.
A far better strategy would be to
eliminate the risk of ending up in
court. Just imagine what local and
state governments could accomplish
if they were to invest the money they
spend on misconduct lawsuits on
making policing more humane and
more effective. They could better
train officers in de-escalation tactics
to reduce the likelihood of lethal vi-
olence. And they could train officers
to use effective alternatives to lethal
force and to deal with mentally dis-
turbed people safely. Doing so would
improve the public perception that
the police have earned their author-
ity from the community and that
they use it to serve and protect, not
to punish. Officers and agencies need
to learn and embrace procedural jus-
tice — the idea that the processes by
which police officers resolve disputes
and police agencies allocate resources
are fundamentally fair.
As important as training is, even
more critical is instituting more se-
lective recruitment standards. Police
agencies must ensure that they attract
the best, the brightest and only those
whose values are aligned with the val-
ues of our democracy. To attract such
applicants, they need to make polic-
ing a genuinely viable long-term pro-
fessional career, with salaries, benefits
and working conditions competitive
with the most coveted careers in the
private sector.
Finally, we must think beyond
mere “reform” and instead tackle
bold redesign. This can begin by fo-
cusing the role of the police more
narrowly. Today, officers are called
upon to be everything to everyone
— not only to fight violent crime but
also to care for the socially dispos-
sessed, the mentally ill and people
with addiction disorders. They are
called on to direct traffic and to ticket
those who have done nothing more
than commit traffic offenses. It makes
no sense to send armed men and
women into situations that require
social workers, paramedics, or traffic
and parking enforcement profession-
als. Policing should be regarded as
only one dimension of public safety.
We need reforms that work to
eliminate police abuse, not change
how police agencies fight it in court.
That’s why debates in Washington,
D.C., feel so hollow: With or with-
out qualified immunity reform, our
nation can no longer afford — finan-
cially or morally — police miscon-
duct.
e e
Cedric Alexander served as a member of President
Barack Obama’s Task Force on 21st Century
Policing and is former director of public safety for
DeKalb County, Georgia.