In The News
In Milwaukee, a bad sheriff faces a real lawman
By Dominique Paul Noth. Editor
{c}Milwaukee Labor Press
The September 14 primary gives Milwaukee County voters a chance to bring in a real cop as sheriff - and also a real Democrat.
Chris Moews has been doing the doors and preaching to a largely buffaloed public that it's past time for consistent public safety programs, solid administrative ability and actual cooperation with other Milwaukee law enforcement agencies -- all missing in the present sheriff, who embodies the old cowboy definition of "all hat and no cattle."
Milwaukee Police Lt. Chris Moews has been making a powerful case to win the Democratic primary Sept. 14 over David Clarke
The police lieutenant doesn't strut in uniforms or puff up with self-importance, which must confound those who actually voted for that strut, flash and air of promotion.
Moews (pronounced Mays) is actually soft-spoken, direct and detailed about his law enforcement aims. He provides smart answers to voters' questions and has clearly inspired confidence within the Milwaukee Police Department. He's done everything from rescue children to help catch killers to presently leading officers as supervisor of the homicide division late-shift.
He rose through the ranks to prominence (in 10 less years than the current sheriff, who was sidetracked, within the police department, according to the record, by internal fights with his subordinates and fellow officers and accusations of drinking on the job).
In fact, one surprise is this primary race is that the usual code of silence among officers has been punched through when not shattered if you look at the endorsements or talk privately to prosecutors, suburban and Milwaukee officers tired of the sheriff hogging the media spotlight while they do the work or pick up the pieces.
The challenger studied to be a priest before he became a police officer, noting to voters who seem surprised by this that both are professions that "serve the public." But the police career won because he wanted to marry and raise a family while making the community better. Now the Moews family lives in Jackson Park and he's found time to serve as a literacy tutor, retreat leader and "Big Brother" in between fighting bad guys. "I was lucky," he says today. "My wishes came true."
Moews is offering a big test for primary voters: Can they tell the difference between genuine law and order savvy, which Moews has demonstrated over 16 years, and horseback posturing (perfected by the current sheriff over eight years in office)?
They can also correct a disturbing deception -- namely Sheriff David Clarke's pretense to be a Democrat. That's only for one month out of every 48 to win their party's primary (a historic prerequisite to getting elected in Milwaukee County).
Appointed by a Republican governor, Clarke spends the rest of the months expounding his thoughts in email missives to conservative talk admirers, promoting his ideas (and theirs) on their radio air, buddying with the Karl Rove crowd, catering applause at tea party rallies, and demeaning the service of black legislators (most from Milwaukee, of course). The Democratic Party may be a big tent, but Clarke's antics sure have torn a gaping hole in its canvas.
He did fool a lot of supporters eight years ago with his clotheshorse demeanor (guarding visiting dignitaries first gained him political attention) and his pretense to erudition -- but it took only a few years for his Democratic handlers to discover that good posture and secondhand phrases simply masked poor management skills.
Some in the public have yet to catch on. Call them gullible, call them fearful that bad guys lurk around every corner, but they are sincere in their misjudgment. They're not alone in America in confusing swagger, tough talk -- even a cowboy hat worn in public --as competence.
Moews speaks his mind and his plans for a better sheriff's department before a crowded Labor2010 gathering.
Such fans dismiss his detractors as wimps who won't charge up the hill on Clarke's command. They forget that even a soldier who charges up the hill obeying a bad, illegal or criminal command can go to prison.
Intelligent enforcement relies on mutual respect and teamwork among trained professionals and a lot of internal discussion about strategy, rules of engagement and coordinated trust before you take a hill. Leaders who don't think are dangerous and usually ineffective. When they believe their cult of personality is bigger than teamwork, they easily become pawns of wasteful schemes and tilted political ideology.
Clarke knows some find his style artificial and empty, but he's convinced his backers don't. Typical was the moment at a primary election interview when Clarke was jokingly asked by this reporter if the two aides accompanying him were his bodyguards. Clarke grinned and patted his sidearm, suggesting that was all the bodyguard he needed.
Some find such smirking machismo appalling, others appealing. Both reactions miss the real question:
What has Clarke done to the sheriff's department over eight years?
It's pretty clear. He has decimated its ability and reputation, destroyed morale, wreaked havoc with the safety programs that worked, turned smart budgeting into a relic of the past and used his political platform (similar to the County Exec's) to twist his agenda and then hide failures behind a law and order mantra.
His weaknesses emerged in his self-inflicted aborted run for Milwaukee mayor but the proof is his tenure as sheriff He never misses a media opportunity to pontificate about lakefront rowdiness but he has nearly cut the number of deputies in half, confused his corrections officers, assigned too much staff to ineffective pet projects, stepped away from a leading role in area law enforcement unity, forced the DA to save the witness protection program and fraud investigation, reduced county cooperation in region narcotics and metro patrols, and fought against incorporating job training, anger management and drug counseling to halt the revolving door of returning prisoners.
Clarke not only has been called to account numerous times by the civil service adjudicators for mistreatment of his own employees, he also has wasted taxpayer resources through budget overruns, abandoned programs, crime campaigns more about publicity than successes, and topped it all off with the constant scramble to blame others (the “liberal media,” supervisors, the public, even his own deputies).
When trained deputies point out the obvious -- his elevation of sycophants over test-proven pros, his defiant breaking of contract rules to reward "yes men" and punish those who question his methods -- he demeans critics as political enemies who don't know how to obey commands.
Still, Moews insists, his campaign is not "about me or even my opponent." It's about public safety and administrative competence, "a better run department" that knows how to use its crimped resources wisely.
Even in these tough economic times, he suggests, the county should fund safety programs, truancy abatement and drug treatment that Clarke has opposed "because they work." It should pursue intelligent handling of prisoners rather than farming this off to private companies. It should more efficiently patrol the freeways and guard the courtrooms.
"If we address the pocketbook issues and think progressively," says Moews, the county can do a lot more with current resources. "We can use what we have to increase safety, save money, and grow relationships with suburban departments."
A little attention to the sheriff's record and a comparison of their methods and abilities make him confident the "public will see the difference."
Press Moews, though, and he is clearly disgusted with the tatters Clarke has made of his profession -- particularly disturbed by Clarke's treatment of fellow professionals.
If you bluntly ask if Clarke is a poseur, Moews pauses for a moment. He clearly doesn't like the sheriff's message or tactics, but says Clarke should be honest about what he is and believes.
But that, Moews adds, is one of the problems. Clarke runs as a Democrat even though "his policies and philosophies don't align." It's a purely political move that, to Moews, is an issue of integrity.
"I'm the true Democrat in the primary," he points out. "If he can't be honest about who he is," he told one newspaper, "then how can we expect him to be honest with the general public?"
Endorsements
Moews has won a surprising number of endorsements from public safety professionals, far beyond the Milwaukee Deputy Sheriffs Association, which has suffered under Clarke.
Among them: the Milwaukee Police Supervisors Organization and the Milwaukee Professional Fire Fighters Association.
The Democratic Party and US Sen. Russ Feingold (hardly a pushover in giving primary endorsements), key state legislators and county supervisors are also backing him, as is the Milwaukee Area Labor Council.
Chris Moews
Side Note: Clarke’s Departing Temper Tantrum
The latest destructive tirade from Clarke, which he hasn't denied but calls "politically motivated," made for quite a Journal Sentinel column August 8, when Clarke erupted in a f-word-laden tirade against a deputy sheriff who simply wouldn't let him break contract rules right and left.
Clarke called it a "counseling session." The meeting had nothing to do with Rick Graber's duties as a sergeant but, as Graber detailed, his role as a union officer.
Clarke's venom came a day after the sheriff assigned some selected favorites to overtime in the wake of that fatal O'Donnell parking pavilion tragedy. The union didn't complain until it become clear that Clarke was gong to give more OT to his own choices, so Graber reminded the sheriff of the legal requirement to make such pay opportunity accessible to all members.
The sheriff unleashed what the column described as "an expletive-filled, anti-union rant," increasing in volume and hostility, calling the deputy a "terrorist" and the union a "cancer." All for defending a contract.
The newspaper column provided the deputy’s account of one portion of the conversation:
"Why do you keep calling me a (expletive)?" Graber asked. "I'm not a (expletive)."
"You're a (expletive)," Clarke countered, repeating the term.
"Well, you don't know me well then," Graber said.
"I don't want to know you - I want to get rid of you," Clarke said. "I want to rid this agency of waste like you."
The sheriff, of course, hit the ceiling again when read the column’s account -- but read his response and you will see he doesn’t contradict a word.
Graber's account is actually undisputed if you parse Clarke's reply carefully. He tries to discredit the deputy because of his union’s motivation, not the facts. And there is a witness, a sidekick to the sheriff who stonewalled the press about what happened.
But now that the union has filed a formal complaint, that witness will have to testify before civil service judges, who have already agreed several times about the sheriff's attempt to sidestep the rules about promotion. As a result of these rulings, the taxpayers have been forced to pay tens of thousands of dollars in the union's legal fees.
The county has been required, however reluctantly, to defend Clarke and cost the taxpayers much more.
But unlike the union, which had to report its legal costs to gain reimbursement, the county doesn’t provide such details. Another thicket for this sheriff to hide in.
August 2010