WichitaFallsComplete.com
No, I don't think there's any conspiracy at the WFPD to deprive citizens of their rights. But, on the other hand, I have no clue about what is going on within the department on a day-to-day basis. Since the WFPD has decided to encrypt their radio communications, there's no longer a "pulse" on which the community can place a finger. The local media raised a fuss and got access to a few radios for monitoring purposes. I have no idea if they still have the radios or if the WFPD changed its mind.
Not too long ago, "scanning the police department" was a common activity. I can't count the number of houses I made calls to that had a scanner on, listening to police radio traffic. I remember more than one citizen who would drive to the scene of incidents and observe from a distance, never interfering. This is how it was then, and how it should be now.
I realize that the newer system has more "bells & whistles" that enhance the department's ability to carry out their mission. Carrying out their mission, however, does not require hiding their basic communications from the general public. By allowing the WFPD to encrypt their radio communication, you have allowed them to travel further down that road to becoming a completely covert operation. They don't have to answer to what you can't even question!
It's your police department. How many officers are out on patrol right now? What type of calls are they being dispatched to? Where are the hot spots in town this month, and what types of calls are causing the heat? They're being dispatched to those calls using radios that you own. They're driving to those calls in cars that you own. They're wearing uniforms and equipment that you provide. Why have you allowed them to become so distant and foreign? This "us" versus "them" attitude is an age-old problem in law enforcement.
Don't tell me that we can get that information online through the department's CADS system, or whatever they call it now. You can't rely on that if you want to oversee an agency that you fund. There is, or was, a ride-along program. That's not enough.
The WFPD will say that they don't want the bad guys to know they're coming to arrest them. That was never a problem in the past because it wasn't discussed on the radio anyway. Officers met at the corner of Grape & Vine and planned how they were going to serve their warrant and went to that location. The dispatcher knew where they were. If trouble erupted, the information was put out over the radio. Who cares if the cover is blown then? But that type of situation was less than 1% of total activity and is no excuse for encryption of routine radio traffic. Criminal history information is a little different and should be secure. For this, a "citizen monitor", as described below, can assure the rest of us that only criminal history traffic, and not routine traffic is traveling on the encrypted channels. On-the-scene, tactical maneuvering at a critical incident should be encrypted. No problem. Again, these situations are not the "norm".
To this end, I propose that a team of citizens, drafted from a qualified pool sort of like jury selection, be assigned to an official monitoring group. They would be authorized to go to the police station and observe operations. This would include the communications area. Members of this group would sign a "non disclosure" or some similar agreement that they will not disclose confidential information obtained while assigned to their post. Penalties for violating those terms should be strictly enforced. Members would serve on this "commission" for a period of 3 to 6 months.
An alternative is to make it a paid position, with a single, rotating monitor serving a week or a month at a time. These "citizen monitors" would be no different from any other paid employee of the police department. Remember that WFPD personnel are not gods from another world. The police department is not a sovereign nation and the building is not an embassy. The lowest clerk at the WFPD has access to more information than you can imagine. Adding another "citizen monitor" to the mix won't hurt a thing.
As a taxpayer, you have every right to take either side of this issue. If you think that WFPD radio traffic should be encrypted, I fully respect your position. If the majority of citizens believe in encryption, then let it be so. The decision, however, is for you and not the WFPD.
Maynard Hawkins
SGT - WFPD - Retired