1.

NEWS TRIBUNE REWRITES HISTORY IN REVISITING PORT PROTESTS
By Mark Jensen

** To the News Tribune a militarized occupation of the Port of Tacoma was just a few extra "police patrols" **

United for Peace of Pierce County (WA)
October 3, 2007

On Wednesday, the News Tribune (Tacoma, WA) published on its front page a misleading piece relating to the port militarization resistance (PMR) protests at the Port of Tacoma in March 2007.[1]

Once again Tacoma's hometown newspaper has denied its readership an accurate account of what happened at the Port. Mobilizing a force that often outnumbered protesters by ratios of 20 to 1 or more and occupied vast areas of the Port is described by reporters Melissa Santos and Jason Hagey as Tacoma "ramping up its police patrols." If the News Tribune is to believed, police were merely "patrolling the series of anti-war protests."

In fact, what appeared at the Port of Tacoma in March can be no means be described as "police patrols." "Patrols" are small groups that "make a regular and repeated circuit (of an area, town, camp, etc.) in guarding or inspecting," to quote Webster's New World Dictionary.

What observers saw in March was not a series of "police patrols" or "protest patrols" but rather an occupation of a large part of the Port of Tacoma by a militarized and ludicrously overequipped force that acted as a law unto itself, barred citizens from public places and refused to respond to requests for information, engaged in arbitrary arrests that are still being contested in court, and employed riot-control measures such as deploying rooftop snipers and firing rubber bullets and tear gas canisters at peaceful protesters in situations that never presented any danger to public safety, then lying to the media about what happened, all the while flagrantly violating the civil rights of American citizens who believed they were not only exercising their constitutional rights but also responding to their moral obligation under the Nuremberg Principles to oppose government activities forbidden under U.S. and international law.

The notion that were it not for the extraordinary deployment of force the situation would have, in the words of Tacoma Police Chief Don Ramsdell, "quickly spun out of control," is ridiculous. Except for the behavior of the police, there was no danger to public safety.

As United for Peace of Pierce County said in a Mar. 15, 2007, statement, the PMR protests were a "legitimate protest [that] has occasioned lamentable and disturbing behavior on the part of the Tacoma Police Department. Excessive force has been used against peaceful, nonviolent protesters presenting no threat whatsoever to public safety. The police made many unjustified and, we believe, illegal arrests. They endangered, rather than protected, public safety. Officers of the law have been employed in what appears to be a campaign to frighten, discourage, intimidate, and harass protesters who were only exercising their legal and constitutional rights."

It is regrettable that Mayor Bill Baarsma now characterizes as "provid[ing] extra security for [the Army's] operation" what was, in reality, a response worthy of a police state.

In early April the City of Seattle agreed to pay $1,000,000 to settle claims stemming from abuse of protesters' rights at the 1999 WTO protests, bringing total payments compensating victims of official misconduct there to $1.8 million. The bill that Tacoma owes for the Port protests of March 2007 is likely to swell as lawsuits against the city go forward. Perhaps the City of Tacoma should begin now to set aside funds for the possibility of a similar outcome.

As for "plans for handling future security problems," let's hope that they include discussions of the Bill of Rights and the potential costs to the city of civil rights violations by city officials.

--Mark Jensen is a member of United for Peace of Pierce County and of the faculty of Pacific Lutheran University.  He was an eyewitness to much of what transpired in March 2007 at the Port of Tacoma; his descriptions of what happened are available on the UFPPC web site.

***

2.

Local news

TACOMA STILL HOLDING BILL FOR PROTESTS
By Melissa Santos and Jason Hagey

News Tribune (Tacoma, WA)
October 3, 2007
Page A1

http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/tacoma/story/170040.html

The City of Tacoma is trying to collect for ramping up its police patrols during the Port of Tacoma protests in March, but so far isn’t having much luck.

The Army has denied the city’s request for more than $600,000 to cover its expenses for patrolling the series of anti-war protests, and the Port of Tacoma has yet to respond to a similar reimbursement request.

During the 12-day span of the Port of Tacoma protests, which focused on a shipment of Stryker vehicles en route to Iraq, Tacoma police arrested 37 people and had between 100 and 150 officers working every 12 hours.

Overtime police pay and staffing for the protests between March 3 and March 14 totaled $621,489, according to a City of Tacoma invoice. Fire Department costs totaled an additional $26,227.

“We had more people working the protests than we normally do the entire city,” said Tacoma police spokesman Mark Fulghum. “That’s not something you can budget for.”

Tara Hazarian, public affairs manager for the Port of Tacoma, said Monday that port officials still are working on a response to the city’s bill. They are setting up a meeting between members of the military and representatives from the Port of Tacoma and the Port of Olympia to discuss the matter.

The entities also will discuss plans for handling future security problems, Hazarian said.

City Manager Eric Anderson said the city will likely take its request to the Department of Defense, but officials are waiting for a response from the port before doing anything more. When city officials were in Washington, D.C., earlier this year, they alerted staff members from Washington’s congressional delegation that this was an issue and that the city could end up asking for assistance, Anderson said.

Tacoma Mayor Bill Baarsma said that the costs of the protest patrols are one reason why Tacoma Police Department expenditures are $1.4 million over budget this year. He said he doesn’t think it’s unfair for the city to ask for reimbursement from the Army and from the port.

“I think it’s a reasonable request,” Baarsma said. “It’s an added expense in which we provided extra security for their operation.”

In an August letter to the Port of Tacoma requesting reimbursement, Tacoma Police Chief Don Ramsdell said that without the help of local law enforcement during the protests, “the situation would have quickly spun out of control.”

A similar request for reimbursement was sent to Fort Lewis in May. In July, an Army official for resource management wrote the city saying the Army had no legal obligation to foot the bill.

“I am aware this reply will be disappointing, but it is the only possible response that can be made in the circumstances present here,” wrote Linda Wilson, a deputy chief of staff for Army resource management in Alexandria, Va. “This command greatly appreciates the professional services provided by the police and fire department.”

Officers from 10 other law enforcement agencies, including the Seattle Police Department and the Pierce County Sheriff’s Department, contributed a total of $424,797 in aid during the protests. Those agencies aren’t asking the City of Tacoma for reimbursement, Baarsma said.

Anderson said the city doesn’t care whether the military or the port pays the bill, or how the two entities might divide it, but only that Tacoma is reimbursed.

“The action was taken on behalf of both the military and the port,” he said, adding that he was struck by the military’s response, which seems to indicate that it has no budget for security.

Melissa Santos: 253-552-7058

melissa.santos@thenewstribune.com

Jason Hagey: 253-597-8542

jason.hagey@thenewstribune.com