Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Policing Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and police union clash over proposed $700,000 policing contract; council urged to demand open process
Summary
Public commenters at the Jan. 13 Akron City Council meeting debated police accountability, a proposed $700,000 contract reportedly tied to an out-of-state firm, and the conduct of Akron officers. The Fraternal Order of Police defended officers; other speakers called for transparency and changes to how investigations and contracts are handled.
Brian Lucey, president of Akron FOP 7, and several residents addressed Akron City Council on Jan. 13 about policing, officer conduct and a mayoral contract the speakers say would spend about $700,000 in taxpayer funds.
Lucey, who identified himself as president of Akron FOP 7, defended the union and local officers against criticism that followed a December incident: “It was not our members throwing items like this pig at people standing in line to get inside the building. It was not our members shouting profanities at anyone.” He detailed community activities by FOP members, including donations and participation in Shop With a Cop, and said the union gave more than $30,000 in 2024 to a local safety support center.
The most contested matter raised by multiple speakers was a contract the mayor intends to award, which Dr. Richard Montgomery said would cost roughly $700,000. “Is it $700,000 of taxpayer dollars? Is it the trust of a community already betrayed?” Montgomery asked, urging council to reject what he described as an opaque, noncompetitive process and to insist on local expertise and community input. He criticized the mayor’s selection of a law firm he said is “tied to his alma mater” and argued residents should have a role in choosing contractors for police-review work.
William Reynolds urged changes to how officers under investigation are treated, asking that pay be withheld during active investigations until officers are vindicated. “Make these officers suffer an economic hardship like anybody else,” he said, arguing for parity with civilian due-process consequences.
An online commenter who identified themself as Janos linked calls for accountability to recent police-involved deaths in Akron and criticized council and the mayor for inaction. “My disappointment in Akron City Council, mayor Malik, and the police is immense,” Janos said, naming multiple shootings and urging council to act.
Council did not take formal action on the contract during the meeting. Council members accepted public comments and later moved through consent and calendar items. Item 2 on the agenda — a resolution formally recognizing the tragic loss of Jasmere Tucker — was taken under committee request for time and was not adopted during this meeting.
Why this matters: Several speakers framed their remarks around long-standing concerns of accountability and public trust in the Akron Police Department and asked city council to use its oversight authority over contracts and processes. Speakers offered specific requests including open bidding, local firms with knowledge of Akron, and procedural changes for officers under investigation.
Speakers presented sharply different views: the FOP emphasized community service by officers and rejected accusations of misconduct, while other residents asked the council to slow or reject an apparently noncompetitive contract and to press for more transparent investigatory and contracting processes.
Council action and next steps: Council did not vote on the contract at the meeting. The council accepted public comment and referred or granted time on some items; any future action on contracting or procurement would be taken in a separate legislative item or committee report.
