File Photo by PHILIP B. POSTON/Sentinel Colorado
AURORA | Nearly three years into state-mandated Aurora police reforms to address abuses against people of color, a Community Advisory Council that is part of the process struggles against internal conflict amid the wait for progress.
“The independent monitor is rubber-stamping the racial biases that persist within the department by not assessing the translation of leadership efforts to reform the department to staff,” former advisory council member Gianina Horton told city council members last August when she resigned from the group.
Some current and former members of the Aurora police reform Community Advisory Council say influence from the city and its hired consultant has diminished the advisory council’s role.
The CAC was created in 2022 as part of a consent decree imposed by state Attorney General Phil Weiser after an investigation into numerous claims and instances of the Aurora Police Department using excessive force, especially against people of color. The decree and the advisory council came after years of city turmoil over the treatment of minorities by Aurora police. Controversy over the 2019 death of Elijah McClain also led directly to the decree.
The attorney general ruled that Aurora had exhibited “patterns and practices” of abusing minorities and must incorporate a wide range of reforms over five years.
The consent decree is implemented jointly by city management, the police department and IntegrAssure, a contracted company of police experts dubbed as an “independent monitor” in the reform process.
IntegrAssure’s Jeff Schlanger, who oversees and coordinates most of the Aurora reform goals, reviews and helps guide projects such as training and developing new police policies. Aurora records show the city has paid IntegrAssure $3,130,021 to date for its services.
One component of reform is the Community Advisory Council, a panel of 14 city residents whose stated role is to review the reform process and police procedures, provide feedback and criticism and relay information to the community at large, according to consent decree documents.
The very role of the council is the source of a large part of consternation among members. Many council members say they see their role as getting feedback from the community on police reform changes and progress and relay that to police and city officials. Most members told the Sentinel they want to focus on their “advisory” role individually and as a group.
Schlanger, aware of the consternation, said he sees the group primarily as a conduit between different Aurora communities and the city. He said CAC members have no role in actually advising police in any authoritative or oversight capacity.
The recent squabbling over mission or semantics belies the fact that at least some current and former CAC members were required to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements with the city, which by their legal nature are intended only for city officials who to review sensitive or confidential materials, including body-worn camera footage and other non-public documents. Schlanger said it is a standard practice in oversight settings to ensure that sensitive information is handled responsibly, protecting public safety, individual privacy and the integrity of ongoing investigations.
But the council doesn’t see confidential materials like that, members said. Meetings are sometimes open to the public. In November, the council was publicly briefed by police officials on progress made in reforms and the consent decree.
Schlanger recently said that the advisory council is “not a deliberative body nor is it an advocacy body.” It is a group of community members with diverse views, and constituencies chosen for their ability to hear from and speak to various segments of the community on matters relevant to public safety reform in Aurora.
“This dual role of gathering and disseminating information is essential to help ensure that the reforms envisioned by the Consent Decree are both effective and reflective of the community’s needs and expectations,” Schanger said in an email. “The CAC’s role is advisory to the monitor.”
Attorney General Phil Weiser’s spokesperson, Lawrence Pacheco said that when Weiser wrote the Aurora Consent Degree, he wanted the advisory council to act in both capacities.
“The Community Advisory Council should be able to do both — be a conduit for sharing information with the city and larger Aurora community, and provide meaningful input into the law enforcement reforms being adopted,” Pacheco said in an email.
A current advisory council member, Pastor Thomas Mayes, told the Sentinel in April that the meaning had changed during his time on the council, and it had gone from an advisory group to more of an advocate for the community.
“(IntegrAssure) kind of fell in line with the police department with the refusal to face up to the hard questions,” Mayes said previously. “As long as you played softball with them, they were good. When we started really playing hardball, really asking the hard questions, that’s when the friction came.”
Selection of new police chief prompted criticism from much of the CAC
At the end of last summer, the advisory council was especially critical of how the city management hired the most recent police chief, Todd Chamberlain. His hiring was announced after the fact, without public notice or consultation with the CAC. Over the past five years, Aurora has had seven police chiefs, and controversy has churned inside the department.
“(The consent decree) did not address how a new police chief would be selected without community input,” William Gondrez, a current CAC member, said in an email. “There was and still is a lack of transparency for the credibility for the public, their feelings, as a whole by the city, the monitor and/or the police department.”
The private appointment process of Chamberlain was listed in Consent Decree’s Monitor Seventh Report as a decision made by city management, Jason Batchelor.
“This limitation, according to the city manager, was necessitated by his desire to hire the best possible candidate and the reluctance of many potential candidates to participate in an open public process in which their identities would be revealed,” the report stated.
Other members were also critical of a process that precluded public comment on a position that could make or break reform progress.
File Photo by PHILIP B. POSTON/Sentinel Colorado
CAC shakeup last year left some members shaken
Some CAC members said recent changes and shake-ups for the group have also left them concerned about its role and the ability of the community to build trust in the police reform process.
Members of the Citizen Advisory Council
The advisory council, the chairperson and the vice chairperson, are all appointed by the independent monitor, as spelled out in the consent decree.
Jeanette Rodriguez (Chairperson) is a South American immigrant who migrated to the United States 30 years ago. Rodriguez is a former educator at Jefferson County Schools, a real estate agent, an auto repair shop owner, a current Arapahoe County Sheriff’s Deputy and a pastor. She is also a wife and mother of two grown children. She serves as a co-chair of the Aurora Immigrant and Refugee Commission and a member of the Community Policing Advisory team.
Cassandra La’Chae Webster (Vice-Chairperson) is a learning and development specialist in the Training and Development section of the City of Aurora’s Human Resources Department. She is a grandmother of seven and moved to Colorado from Oklahoma sometime after 2023. Her work experience includes Learning and Development, project management, content creation and human relations.
Melissa Berglund has been a resident of Aurora since 1979. She has twenty years of local, state and national child welfare experience, including casework for Arapahoe County Child Protection Services. Her experience includes residential treatment from direct practice to training, coaching and prevention.
Ivania Maricela Romero Campos is an entrepreneur and Salvadoran American working to bring a Salvadoran consulate to Aurora. She has been a cosmetologist for 25 years and runs multiple local businesses, including 503 Barber Shop and Salon.
William Gondrez, an Aurora resident since 1992, is a U.S. Army veteran who retired at Fitzsimons Army Medical Center after over 20 years of service. He serves on the city’s Citizen’s Water Advisory Committee, helps with 501(c)(3) grants through Spirit of Aurora, and leads the Northwest Aurora Neighborhood Organization as its president. Gondrez also works as an Early Childhood educator for Aurora Public Schools.
Michael Hancock is married to Aurora City Councilmember Stephanie Hancock. He is a retired high-tech technology and business executive who runs his own technology consulting company and independent record label. Michael’s experience includes extensive business and technology experience.
The Rev. Reid Hettich has been an Aurora resident since 1985. He has been the pastor of two congregations in Aurora and currently serves as lead pastor of Mosaic Church of Aurora. He has been the Chairperson of the Aurora Community of Faith, the Aurora Strong Resilience Center, Aurora Community Connections and the Aurora Economic Opportunity Center. Currently, he is the Chairperson of Aurora’s Key Community Response Team, a member of the Community Policing Advisory Team, and sits on other nonprofit boards. He is a husband, father and grandfather.
Becky Hogan has been an Aurora resident and an active community volunteer for 19 years. She was a small business owner in Aurora with a background in economic development and land development consulting. She is currently serving as a Second Vice Chair of the Aurora Planning Commission. Hogan is the widow of the previous Aurora Mayor Steve Hogan.
Anne Keke is an immigrant from Cote d’Ivoire and has lived in Colorado since 2001. She worked with the District Attorney’s Office in the 18th Judicial District in the Juvenile Probation Department. She is an instructor of Career Readiness with the Colorado Early Colleges, working as the Restorative Justice Coordinator. She serves on the Aurora Public School Board and is an active member of the African Leadership Group.
Muemang Ling, a refugee from Burma, now Myanmar, and a 16-year Aurora resident, is studying Sociology, Political Science and Ethnic Studies at Colorado State University. She works as a School Program Navigator at Lutheran Family Services, supporting refugee youths in education and resettlement. Previously, she served as a senator for The Associated Students of Colorado State University and worked at the Asian Pacific American Cultural Center, advocating for multinational students.
Thomas Mayes is a Colorado native and 38-year Aurora resident. He is a Vietnam veteran with 23 years of government service and 32 years as a senior pastor in Aurora. He has been actively serving the Aurora community since 1990, including serving different roles on the Aurora Branch for the NAACP and many city-related groups involving police reform and racial bias.
Julie Ressalam, a researcher and doctoral candidate at the Colorado School of Public Health, has lived in Aurora for seven years. She served on Aurora’s Immigrant and Refugee Commission from 2017 to 2022, including terms as chair and vice chair, where she developed the Aurora Immigrant Integration Plan and addressed key policy issues such as voting access, healthcare utilization, and resource allocation for immigrant families. Currently, she works to coordinate medical, social, and public health systems to improve health equity and dismantle structural racism.
Ray Washington is a Denver native, coach and teacher. He has worked with multiple organizations to provide opportunities to and for the youth.
Amy Wiles is a 22-year Aurora resident. She serves as the Director of Strategy and Business Development for United HealthCare. She is a mother to two sons and volunteers at a variety of local events and causes, including the Special Olympics and the Human Resources Committee for the city of Aurora.
Some members have been vocal critics of the speed and direction of reform efforts, leading to conflict.
Shortly after the publication of an April 15, 2024, progress report, Schlanger informed members of the Community Advisory Council in an email that all of their appointments were being terminated and that they would have to reapply if they wanted to continue to serve.
Council members said there was no clear understanding of why the mass-firing was rolled out, leading them to speculate that police, city managers, city council members or IntegrAssure were unhappy with a council that was vocal and persistent.
Omar Mongomery, president of the Aurora NAACP and one of the original members of the Community Advisory Council, said he felt discouraged by the blanket dismissal decision since the original advisory council members had worked on a plan they were ready to present. He said that having them reapply resulted in much work being lost.
Montgomery did not reapply.
Instead, Montgomery said he is now working through the NAACP to create a genuinely independent monitor structure to oversee the Aurora Police Department when IntergrAssure’s contract is finished.
He said that when the contract ends, there is an opportunity for a new independent oversight structure to make sure the work is being done and that police abuse of force cases continue to be reviewed. The challenge, he said, will be getting the city council on board. Three years ago, city management actually budgeted and planned for such an oversight project. It was scuttled by city lawmakers. The cost of the undescribed police oversight mechanism would be borne by the city.
Schlanger said the reconstitution of the council was not meant to prevent meaningful oversight and that the firm hopes it will lead to the group evolving to include a greater diversity of viewpoints.
He also said some advisory council members had “been more active than others” and that “the ability to collaborate with fellow council members is an imperative.”
“We have worked extremely well with the Community Advisory Council,” he said in a previous Sentinel report. “I just want to make sure that people who didn’t get a chance have an opportunity to at least reapply with the goal of getting the broadest perspectives but also expanding the membership by a few.”
Meanwhile, some former members like Maisha Fields, daughter of former state Sen. Rhonda Fields, now an Arapahoe County commissioner, said she felt it was a way to push her out.
Schlanger “was not open to receiving our feedback, and if you do speak up, you were penalized publicly,” she said.
Fields said she was rebuked when suggesting letting officers in training have more input to voice their opinions while learning, saying they would participate more earnestly.
“The first training was very punitive, and it didn’t create a culture of learning,” Fields said. “When I brought it up to Jeff, he told me I was causing problems. I was the problem child on the consent degree advisory board.”
She said that when Montgomery was still on the board and asked Schlanger to apologize for the way he talked to Fields, Schlanger said he would “if she wanted him to.”
Montgomery confirmed he did ask Schlanger to apologize to Fields.
Fields said that was when people started leaving or refusing to reapply.
Horton, a former advisory council member and an advocate with the Denver Justice Project, who worked as the project manager for the Denver Office of the Independent Monitor, resigned at an Aurora City Council meeting during public comment Sept. 9.
Horton told city council members. “It is continuously evident that between bad city management and Aurora Police Department, your toxicity will have lasting and devastating consequences for Aurorans.”
Horton called for significant structural change, advocating for establishing a fully funded independent civilian oversight office by 2026.
Ratings matter
Horton and Fields, along with others still on the advisory council, said that the rating system to show progress in the consent decree is not accurate, with Fields calling it “manufactured.”
The consent degree progress gauging system uses a “Harvey Ball,” a round pie graph-looking ideogram that depicts the degree to which a specific item meets requirements. Many advisory council members said the system made it difficult to understand how Schlanger rated different topics.
“The Harvey Balls rating system is not efficient for the public to ascertain or measure effectively,” Gondrez said. “This makes it very difficult to disseminate readable information about what is really going on with the ‘boots on the ground.’”
Some members also suspect that others were chosen for the second round of the advisory council because they more closely aligned with police interests rather than to represent the broader community.
Schlanger disagreed.
“The selection process is meant to ensure the group includes individuals with a variety of perspectives and experiences to foster robust and meaningful discussions,” Schlanger said in an email.
A new controversy arose when Hancock joined the council, with some members saying he has a clear conflict of interest because he is the husband of a member of the city council. Schlanger said he chose Hancock to serve on the council because he had relevant experience.
Hancock did not say in his advisory council biography that he is married to Hancock. No other members detailed their spouses in their bios, but as a council member, only Stephanie Hancock has potential influence over the IntegrAssure contract.
“I want to clarify that there is no conflict of interest related to whom I am married,” Hancock said in an email.
Advisory council concern about conflicts of interests surface about two other new appointees to the group. Rodriguez, who is an Arapahoe County Sheriff’s deputy, and Webster, who is a City of Aurora employee.
Although not every advisory council member listed job titles and employers in their bio, Webster did not have any mention of her employment with the city on her bio until asked by the Sentinel about her employment.
The City of Aurora confirmed that Cassandra Webster is a learning and development specialist in the Training and Development section of the city’s Human Resources Department.
“There was no bad intent as my position was fully disclosed to the monitor during the selection process and addressed directly by him at a CAC meeting,” Webster said. “Having said that, given my desire for full transparency, I will have my bio on the website updated.”
Multiple advisory council members said some new members made them feel they couldn’t be completely honest about their opinions about the consent decree.
“Simply put, the role of the CAC as an advisory body does not lend itself to decisions or actions that would create substantive conflicts,” Schlanger said. “That being said, any perceived conflicts of interest brought to my attention have been carefully evaluated to ensure that each member is able to perform their function as described above.”
File Photo by Gabriel Christus/Aurora Sentinel
Feedback on police training and changes gets bumpy
One instance current and former advisory council members gave they say illustrates ambiguity in their role and mission focused on how police train current and new officers to recognize racial bias and to avoid acting on it.
The Aurora Police Department Consent Decree website describes creating and addressing racial bias through the creation of training and best practices related to officer stops, arrests and uses of force and to engage in critical decision-making by acknowledging the role that bias can play in enforcement decisions and developing strategies to combat bias.
“The department is striving to make officers aware of implicit bias, but moreover, to stress empathy and humanity in all their interactions with all individuals,” Schlanger said in an email.
In the most recent December meeting reviewing the Oct. 15 report for Decree’s Monitor Seventh Report, which spanned from Feb. 16-Aug. 15, Chamberlain said there is still room for improvement in bias training. He said the department had the consent decree monitor team — the police base team that evaluates the monitor — attend the bias training.
“Honestly, I don’t think they were overly thrilled,” he said. “I think there are still some opportunities to improve it and make it more successful, and that’s definitely what we’re moving towards.”
Community Advisory Council members were also invited to attend, and a few members said they were not pleased either.
Multiple advisory council members speaking to the Sentinel said the training was treated as a joke even by trainers and trainees.
Fields said that when she was on the advisory council, an initial bias training targeted issues facing a different city with little in common with Aurora. She said it made much of the training feel unrelatable and laughable, but she did not relay a particular detail that was inappropriate to Aurora. She said there was no training for people with mental health disorders or for people who speak different languages.
Schlanger said the first training was from the Bureau of Justice Assistance, which assists with local criminal justice programs. It was later decided that Aurora would develop its bias training, along with some of the advisory council members from the previous group.
“It has been rolled out in phases with continual improvements,” Webster said in an email. “APD is currently implementing this training in both the academy for new officers as well as one of the required training for all existing officers. They are also working to reinforce anti-bias training throughout all modules and subjects.”
In the most recent bias training, advisory council members said they were given little notice of an invitation to attend. Mayes, still an advisory council member, said he was not allowed into the training, which officials said was an oversight.
During a December meeting, Chamberlain said the department will continue the bias module in the spring and fall to ensure that it is consistent with the ideals intertwined within the consent decree and the areas the law enforcement agency needs to adhere to and be aware of.
Decree’s Monitor Seventh Report presentation
Despite controversy over the advisory council, Chamberlain and IntegrAssure officials in December said Aurora has made considerable progress in creating a police department all residents of Aurora can trust.
The seventh reporting period covered from Feb. 16 – Aug. 15. The focus items in the report covered different events in the reported timeframe, which included Kilyn Lewis’ fatal shooting by an Aurora Police Department officer, the quiet appointment of Chief Todd Chamberlain to the Aurora Police Department and bias training.
“It is clear, and both myself and the Community Advisory Council certainly recognize that there are deep wounds in the community, wounds that clearly aren’t healed and that each of us understands that we need to do all that we can to help in that healing process,” Schlanger said.
In all, IntegrAssure gave the city good marks on progress made in training, reporting and looking ahead at policy changes.
Two places where Schlanger did mark the police department somewhat negatively were in addressing racial bias in policing and documentation of stops.
In the seventh reporting period review, the monitor found two concerning incidents involving officers and a supervisor in District 1, where the rights of Hispanic individuals to gather may have been violated. Although supervisors didn’t initially catch the issue, command staff acted quickly once informed. They launched an Internal Affairs investigation, transferred one officer to another district, and provided training on the constitutional right to gather for all involved officers.
The second area the monitor identified was two key compliance issues within the Aurora Police Department. The first, involved an officer inaccurately marking all individuals stopped as “mixed race,” which was not consistent with body-worn camera footage. The officer said he was uncomfortable assessing race and received counseling and re-instruction.
The second issue highlighted a compliance rate below 50% in one district due to system miscalculations related to form tracking.
Chamberlain reported other areas of progress, including adopting a new transparency portal and implementing operational reviews to ensure accountability. He mentioned the department’s new transparency portal allowing the community to see “basically everything.”
“I believe the transparency does not stop,” He said. “I will give very specific details about what’s occurring within that agency.”
I’m most concerned about one statement in the article. That is the idea that asking tough questions was seen as unruly. If the CAC is to have effective input, tough questions have to be faced if police improvement is the goal. We didn’t get here without a severe problem that needed to be addressed and we won’t make headway if the CAC does not believe they are heard!
The City has long played this game of token participation where they make it look like you have some input. There are so many different agendas in this whole thing and so few people who will address the real issues that little will come from it other than some nice policies and little real improvement. There are initial flaws in the whole logic behind the Consent Decree that can never be addressed. The lack of any ethical leadership and the inadequate training in the use of force, coupled with a broken promotional system that picks more bad supervisors than good dooms most efforts at real improvement. An advisory committee that knows little about policing and speaks to a city management that won’t admit the real problems doesn’t produce much. The City can never allow real transparency. It would disclose how dishonest, incompetent, and insecure they really are. They cannot have any real open dialog where they have to defend their positions. When I was on the Department, I knew that my bosses would never allow me to talk honestly with the public. There has been a climate of fear within the Department for a long time fostered by unethical supervision that would not address real issues. What little racial bias there was and those responsible were ignored and even favored by the administration as long as they were “yes men”. The Attorney General and the legislature jumped on the whole racial bandwagon and overreacted to issues that were never race based. The activists don’t want to face that truth. You cannot make policing racially proportionate in today’s culture. As long as you continue with that goal, you will either be unhappy or you will have made the police completely ineffective. The Consent Decree and the police monitor have given us nice overregulation of the police. The monitor deals from an expensive purely academic viewpoint that has little to do with reality. The truths about the training issues involved in the Kylin Lewis shooting, for instance, are beyond the knowledge and experience of an academic like the monitor. Rhonda Fields and the rest of the legislature will not address the disastrous SB217 bill that drove thousands of police officers out of law enforcement. The governor and all of them talk like they support public safety, but they will not admit that they caused the shortage of police officers and have hindered law enforcement in the future. The dance will continue in a political environment that favors optics more than results. They count on the fact that no honest discussion will be allowed in any real depth. As for the police, they continually reinvent the wheel. They learn few lessons and pass on almost no institutional knowledge. There are rookie mistakes in the Kylin Lewis shooting. Rookie mistakes are to be expected from rookies, not SWAT officers. You can’t judge police officers legally at the higher standard of professionalism. There are too many variables. But, you can train to the standard of professional conduct instead of just legal conduct. You cannot say that everything was within policy and training unless your training and supervision is poor. If you simply endorse the rookie mistakes as within training, then you will repeat those same deadly mistakes. Of course, the standard answer is always that we are reviewing our policies. As my Kit Carson former NVA used to say in Vietnam, “beaucoup BS”.
Let’s see. You put a dozen community active Aurora citizens together that has very little knowledge about successful policing but with very different, forceful ideas about what a police department should be in their perceived minority community and you don’t expect maximum discourse?
Silly You!
At some point in the future there will be closure on the Consent Decree and Integra Assure will no longer be involved as the independent monitor to ensure compliance with its provisions. What I would like to see happen is an objective assessment of whether the CAC members worked in unison on key issues and provided any meaningful contributions to the this long drawn out and expensive process. From what I am seeing thus far it’s a bunch of people who can’t get it together because of their individual biases and outsize egos.
A Bridge, Not a Battlefield
Reinforcing Aurora’s Consent Decree Monitor’s Mandate for True Change
By Michael A. Hancock
In the ongoing debate over police reform in Aurora, it appears that confusion has overshadowed clarity. At the heart of this misunderstanding is the Aurora Consent Decree Monitor’s Community Advisory Council (CAC), created by the Independent Monitor to serve as a conduit for community sentiment, not a platform for activism. Far from a powerless or symbolic body, the CAC was deliberately designed with a single mission: to communicate the genuine concerns and insights of everyday Aurora residents back to the Monitor, and to faithfully report the Monitor’s progress to the community. Unfortunately, some have sought to enlarge that role far beyond its intended scope.
The misinterpretation begins when factions within the CAC step beyond their rightful boundaries. These factions contend the CAC should morph into a powerful agent of reform, wielding influence over police policies and city governance. Yet that vision was never part of the original blueprint. Rather than embodying a consensus-based perspective for all citizens, these activist voices demand radical changes and use the CAC’s platform to champion personal agendas. In the process, the singular reason for the CAC’s existence—serving as a neutral channel of communication—has been compromised.
When activist fervor supplants measured dialogue, everyone suffers. The Monitor’s task, essential to Aurora’s future, is reliant on trust—trust that recommendations arise from careful assessment of the city’s needs, not from the loudest or most extreme proposals. The CAC, if it remains true to its foundational purpose, can strengthen that trust by providing community-based feedback that reflects daily life in Aurora. But when individuals use the CAC as a springboard for sweeping demands, the conduit is jammed with ideas having little to do with the Council’s formal charge.
At its inception, the CAC’s role was never vague: it would inform the Monitor of honest reactions to reform efforts and keep citizens updated on noteworthy developments. This arrangement acknowledged that lasting reform emerges from reliable information and mutual respect. The Monitor, in turn, is charged with collecting perspectives, evaluating them through an independent lens, and then offering viable recommendations to improve policing under the Consent Decree. None of these mandates called for the CAC to become a central power broker or ideological pressure group.
Some might argue that activism is necessary to spur change. In many cases, that claim holds water—our nation’s history is punctuated by beneficial reforms initiated by outspoken activists. Yet activism must operate in the proper venue. The CAC was carefully constructed for a narrower, though no less vital, task: to relay factual insight and local sentiment to the Monitor, who retains the authority to recommend remedial measures. By design, the Council is not a direct instrument of policy creation. Those who desire wide-ranging policy influence would do better to engage or become elected officials, organize within the community, or propose changes through recognized political channels.
Regrettably, the Aurora Sentinel’s article suggests that the CAC stands torn between the “institutional needs” of the police and the “community needs” of Aurora. In reality, the CAC’s formal purpose is less about mediating conflict than about offering a faithful barometer of citizens’ views. The mischaracterization emerges when activists presume to speak for all residents and transform the CAC into a platform for their cause. The result is a false narrative that pits an imaginary, monolithic community agenda against institutional prerogatives.
Ultimately, the CAC can thrive if it refrains from drifting into battles it was never designed to fight. Returning to its foundational role allows the Monitor to receive credible, balanced input, which it can mold into pragmatic recommendations. By resisting attempts to co-opt the CAC as a tool for political agitation, Aurora’s residents will benefit from a calmer, clearer discussion of police reform—one based on trust, objectivity, and an unwavering commitment to the public good.