Editorial: Pittsburgh should remain confident in Chief McLay

In a guest piece for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette last May, Pittsburgh Police Chief Cameron McLay addressed how to improve police-community relations, a dynamic that has long suffered a severe and sometimes violent disconnect. His solution?

“… restoring the integrity of police leadership systems, rather than solely by ‘fixing’ the brave men and women who do the heavy lifting,” McLay wrote.

With less than two years under his belt, McLay has done a better job of achieving that goal than any Pittsburgh chief in recent memory. The Fraternal Order of Police, though, would beg to differ. According to a report by the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, the union is considering whether to hand McLay a vote of “no confidence” at an upcoming meeting in September.

When asked last week for a comment on the unofficial vote, McLay described it as “background noise.” And he’s right. The vote, which has no effect on his employment, is only the latest in a long series of largely baseless conflicts between McLay and his officers, who have labeled his attempts at reform as detrimental to morale.

Within three months of McLay’s September 2014 hiring, he was already embroiled in undeserved controversy.

During the city’s New Year’s Eve, McLay spoke to activist group Fight Back Pittsburgh about unconscious bias and its effect on law enforcement. When asked to pose for a photo with a sign reading “I resolve to challenge racism @ work #EndWhiteSilence,” McLay agreed. Union leaders immediately began criticizing McLay’s  gesture, accusing him of insulting the entire police force.

“The chief is calling us racists. He believes the Pittsburgh Police Department is racist,” Howard McQuillan, the Pittsburgh police union president, told KDKA at the time, managing to completely misrepresent the sign’s message.

Then came this year’s Pittsburgh Marathon, when understaffing forced some officers to work overtime shifts that were supposed to be voluntary. Later that month, officers threatened to boycott Beyonce’s concert — both in protest of the pop star’s Black Panther-inspired Super Bowl performance and to spite McLay for the marathon incident.

Yet through the strife, McLay has stood firm as an effective leader.

After the sign controversy, McLay apologized to those offended but stood by the message’s true goals, which he did his best to clarify while standing by his beliefs. That’s leadership.

Following the marathon incident, he took full responsibility for the staffing errors and committed to change. That, too, is leadership.

And when officers threatened to boycott Beyonce, McLay forcefully reminded them of their duty to the public and ensured enough officers were present without running into the same mistake. That, in a word, is also leadership.

And after he was criticized for speaking about police reform at the Democratic National Convention in July, he ordered an investigation to determine if he did anything wrong. Again, McLay showed he was a true leader.

The impending “no confidence” vote is entirely symbolic. What does it accomplish that an olive branch would not? Not a thing.

McLay has continually said his focus is on building a better relationship between the Pittsburgh Police Department and communities while making himself accountable when things go wrong.

Hopefully on some level, McLay’s goal and philosophy of accountability is shared by the FoP. If so, a public, petty gesture that only serves to embarrass a leader doesn’t engender trust in police competency — it does precisely the opposite.

Pittsburgh needs unity between its citizens and the police force protecting them. To achieve that, it needs that force to focus on keeping people safe instead of wasting time on internal fighting made public. If this vote is successful, it says more about the FoP’s commitment to progress than McLay’s ability to provide it.

Even if the union claims to have lost confidence in McLay, he can rest assured: Pittsburgh has not.