Committee tables 90-day extension for acting police chief after weeks of debate over confirmation process

Pittsburgh City Council's Public Safety and Wellness Committee on March 5 voted to table a resolution (Bill 15-59) that would have extended the acting chief of police's term for 90 days. The tabling motion passed by roll call, 9-0.

Committee members spent more than an hour debating the process by which the council and community would consider a permanent police chief, and several council members urged a formal, multi-zone public engagement process before any confirmation vote.

Councilmember Kale Smith opened the policy portion of the discussion by saying the confirmation process should be structured and nonpolitical: "I have said from the very beginning of this process that the public safety department and public health should never be part of politics." Smith said meetings with community groups and officers had shown deep morale and trust issues that should be addressed by a public process and training rather than a rapid confirmation.

Several members, including Councilmember Warwick, praised Acting Chief Chris Ragland's work during his four months in the role: "He was a champion of our Vision 0 initiative to eliminate traffic deaths in the city," Warwick said, and noted Ragland's engagement with community meetings and a neighborhood policing pilot. But multiple council members said public hearings and zone meetings were needed to give residents and rank-and-file officers a chance to weigh in.

Councilmember Charland said he supported a multi-zone process and said, "If the mayor wants to claim that there was an, you know, an ethical dilemma in what happened here, I encourage him, put your money where your mouth is and put an ethics complaint in." Councilman Coghill, chairing parts of the discussion, said he had stressed to Ragland the importance of knowing who the chief would appoint as assistant chiefs and commanders, calling those staffing decisions a necessary part of earning the committee's support.

Ragland announced he would not proceed with confirmation amid what he described publicly as a politicized process and an "ethical dilemma," comments that several council members said they wished to understand directly from him. Council members said he was welcome to return to the committee to answer questions.

Action taken: Councilmember Kale Smith moved to table Bill 15-59; the motion carried on a roll-call vote recorded in the transcript as nine ayes and zero noes. The clerk read the roll call with the following recorded ayes: (named in transcript) Mr. Charland; Mr. Cargill; Ms. Gross; Mr. Lavelle; Mr. Mosley; Ms. Kale Smith; Ms. Warwick; Mr. Wilson; Chair Strasburger. The committee announced the bill was tabled.

Why it matters: Council members framed their request for a multi-zone process as an attempt to avoid a repeat of a previous, costly search and to increase transparency and community trust. Several members said the city risks additional officer departures this summer as large numbers of officers become eligible for retirement without a clear and stable leadership plan.

Next steps: Councilmember Kale Smith said she would draft new legislation next week to formalize a public confirmation process and bring it back to the committee. Several members invited Ragland to appear before the committee under oath if he wished to answer questions about his public statements about the confirmation process.