Disarming PSU Police is a Partial Win

BY DISARM PSU

people wearing face masks at a rally for Disarm PSU in Portland

Disarm PSU rally June 2020

At Portland State University, students, faculty, staff, and our broader community have been engaged in seven years of organizing, protesting, and collaborating under an umbrella coalition called “Disarm PSU” since the 2014 decision by PSU to transform its Campus Public Safety Office (CPSO) into a sworn and armed police force. While many constituents had been involved in this activism, it is important to note that students have been primary drivers. In July 2018, armed CPSO officers killed Mr. Jason Washington, a tragedy that must be viewed in the larger context of the systemic problem of police brutality targeting Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) and other marginalized communities. Meanwhile, the presence of armed security on PSU’s campus creates an ongoing traumatic environment for many of our colleagues and students (especially Black colleagues and students).

The Disarm PSU coalition, in partnership with community members and activists across the city, state, and region, recently won an important victory when the university president Stephen Percy announced that campus police will not carry firearms while on patrol. President Percy also committed for a new Re-Imagine Campus Safety Steering Committee. We appreciate the active listening and the commitment to change demonstrated by President Percy, and members of the board of trustees, and acknowledge the labor of all involved over the past seven years. 

backs of participants at Disarm PSU rally in Portland June 2020 with Black Lives Matter signs

Disarm PSU rally June 2020

However, we only see this as a partial win. For one thing, CPSO are still authorized to carry so-called “less-than-lethal” weapons, including Tasers. As we have seen in the police killing of George Floyd and others, police officers have killed people without using guns. Secondly, CPSO officers retain their status as a sworn police force and may still access firearms in situations that call for them (the nature of those situations and the conditions under which CPSO may access firearms remains unclear). Another reason this is a partial win is that the decision falls short of the Disarm PSU’s broader goals of a more just and safe campus. In summer 2020, we adopted the following more comprehensive three Rs as our demands:

  1. Reverse the 2014 Resolution to employ sworn and armed officers.
  2. Reinvest in existing structures and create new investments to address historic racism and anti-Black violence at PSU.
  3. Reimagine what public safety at PSU looks like and recognize that safety means different things to different people.

We are cautiously optimistic that the newly forming PSU Re-imagine Campus Safety Steering Committee will be an avenue to move our demands forward, but we also are tired by the endless formation of committees and performative announcements, none of which have had much transparent impact on improving racial equity on campus. The steering committee and president have made a commitment to not continuing with “business as usual” in the composition or performance of this committee, and we are hopeful that this commitment will be actualized in real terms.

PSU-AAUP members and leaders have been active in the Disarm PSU campaign. Portland State University is home to a very active AAUP chapter, with over 1000 members (including tenure-track faculty, non-tenure-track, teaching faculty, and academic professionals) and a membership rate around 87 percent.  In 2014, about 70 percent of respondents to a survey of AAUP members indicated their opposition to arming campus security. In October 2018, we sent a public statement acknowledging the killing of Jason Washington and calling for disarming to the PSU president and board of trustees. In November 2019, the PSU-AAUP Executive Council sent an open letter to Interim President Percy expressing disappointment with and requesting answers to serious questions about his Campus Safety Plan.  We kept the pressure on in summer 2020. We also have been engaged in educating ourselves and our fellow members about defunding the police and abolition, not just on campus but more broadly. For example, in our 2020 blog post “Defunding the Police, What Does it Mean, and Why Does PSU AAUP Support It,” shared our support for a campaign led by two local organizations, Portland African American Leadership Forum and Unite Oregon to shift $50 million in Portland Police Bureau funding to other community efforts.

Individual faculty and academic professionals have also been active in the Disarm PSU campaign, and many programs, departments, and whole schools or Colleges have contributed statements of support and ongoing calls for action. For example, faculty planned and contributed to an all-day teach-in in fall 2019. Many have spoken at board of trustees meetings, coordinated and attended marches and vigils, and delivered written and verbal testimony to the board of trustees. 

Disarm PSU plans to continue our work to achieve the three Rs mentioned above, including rolling out an educational campaign, producing material for distribution among our broad community, and informing the work of the steering committee and larger campus efforts to re-envision campus safety while reinvesting resources where they can be better used to serve BIPOC and other marginalized members of our community. We are also trying to collaborate with other universities, and with AAUP chapters, in the Pacific Northwest and nationally. One thing we know: it will take ongoing, collaborative pressure for positive change.

The guest bloggers are members of the Disarm PSU collective, which unites concerned faculty, staff, community partners and alumni of Portland State University in calling for immediate action to disarm campus security on the PSU campus. 

5 thoughts on “Disarming PSU Police is a Partial Win

  1. I am surprised that the guest blogger did not provide any factual information or a link to same regarding the original situation in which “armed CPSO officers killed Mr. Jason Washington, a tragedy that must be viewed in the larger context of the systemic problem of police brutality targeting Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) and other marginalized communities.”

    I for one would like to know the circumstances under which this man ended up dead, what the repercussions were for the CPSO officers (if any), and other details of the incident and its aftermath.

    I know that passion run high after such incidents but please provide the evidence necessary for readers of this site to assess the circumstances on their own merits, without spin.

    • There is now a link to an article about the shooting of Jason Washington, and of course there are many other articles that you can find online.

      • Having now read the accounts in a BlogWatch (student newspaper?), I am still confused about what happened. As in many shooting incidents, eye- and earwitness accounts are varied, often contradictory. Like many student reports, many of the “facts” go unattributed, so their validity is in question.

        In any case, like so many of the recent shooting incidents involving Black victims at the hands of law enforcement, the dead man was not necessarily innocent of wrongdoing. In this case, as with so many others, the victim apparently failed to follow legitimate police orders to put down the gun that was in his possession. Every Black parent that I know has told me about “The Talk” that they give to their children in which they emphasize COOPERATING WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT, even if you feel you’ve done nothing wrong. Usually the matter will be settled in short order; if you are arrested (preferable to being shot!), you can sue if anything untoward happens.

        Again, I am not YET passing judgment on what happened or what should be done. I am suggesting that a third-rate “news” account is not enough to make an informed judgment on this matter.

  2. As Dr. Tomasulo responded, without knowing the circumstances that this group is trying to respond, it is extremely difficult to know if this “solution” is appropriate. For instance, if you do away with a campus police department, then Portland Police and County Law Enforcement personnel will respond to emergency calls or reports of crimes. Is this what you want for people unfamiliar with the campus, staff, faculty, and students? “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” H. L. Mencken

    • Good point, Craig Campbell! If there are going to be guns, brawls, and other serious problems on or near campus, then some form of law enforcement is no doubt needed. And it is probably better to have a campus patrol available than the local city gendarmes, who are not familiar with the campus and the special circumstances of students.

Comments are closed.