Camden, N.J. had one of the highest crime rates in America in 2013 when it dissolved its police department. Their revised model is on “community-oriented policing” approach, and is one of the prime examples Black Lives Matter leaders in community protests across America are extolling as examples of part of how to reform, or “ defund” or “eliminate” urban police departments with substantive histories of disparate incidents of abusive practices regarding policing involving minority Black and brown people. Since dissolving it’s previous police force, Camden has had a 95% reduction in excessive force complaints regarding police actions, a 70% decline in the murder rate and a 46% reduction on violent crime. The other significant part of the reforms being sought is to rededicate funding to improve community resources in neglected, overlooked and abandoned inner city, minority neighborhoods.
Camden abolished its city police department and replaced it with an intentionally renewed county police department. The change enabled a winnowing process in which bad actor police were not rehired into the new force. This circumvented the problems with proper supervision that previously arose out of the excessive power over discipline and terminations held by the police union. (Police unions have gained this power in many cities, and have used it in many places regarding many incidents to protect misbehaving officers from significant consequences for malfeasant acts. Police unions’ power to control information flows has also kept cities from being able to implement effective citizen oversight boards to review complaints alleging police abuse. The problems relating to police unions’ misuse of power are sufficiently serious and wide-spread that the national AFL-CIO is considering decertifying police unions from its membership.)
In a 2-year process, Camden developed a new, county police department and when ready, dissolved the existing city police department. Officers determined qualified to serve in the new, reformed department were invited to become part of the new. The process of developing the new department was accomplished by a task force of city residents and community leaders appointed by elected officials to set parameters for what the new force should be. Their recommendations became points in the job application questionnaire and were e used in the hiring process. This process did result in a police force that more closely resembled the demographics of the city’s residents than on the previous force.
The Camden police union opposed the process all the way and refused to participate. That union now represents police in the new county police force; however, with new elected leadership. The union’s new leadership sees itself in partnership with county administrators and the community.
Camden abolished its city police department and replaced it with an intentionally renewed county police department. The change enabled a winnowing process in which bad actor police were not rehired into the new force. This circumvented the problems with proper supervision that previously arose out of the excessive power over discipline and terminations held by the police union. (Police unions have gained this power in many cities, and have used it in many places regarding many incidents to protect misbehaving officers from significant consequences for malfeasant acts. Police unions’ power to control information flows has also kept cities from being able to implement effective citizen oversight boards to review complaints alleging police abuse. The problems relating to police unions’ misuse of power are sufficiently serious and wide-spread that the national AFL-CIO is considering decertifying police unions from its membership.)
In a 2-year process, Camden developed a new, county police department and when ready, dissolved the existing city police department. Officers determined qualified to serve in the new, reformed department were invited to become part of the new. The process of developing the new department was accomplished by a task force of city residents and community leaders appointed by elected officials to set parameters for what the new force should be. Their recommendations became points in the job application questionnaire and were e used in the hiring process. This process did result in a police force that more closely resembled the demographics of the city’s residents than on the previous force.
The Camden police union opposed the process all the way and refused to participate. That union now represents police in the new county police force; however, with new elected leadership. The union’s new leadership sees itself in partnership with county administrators and the community.
Last edited:
