Sender:

Sent:
Recipient:
Snbject:

John Cranley <

>
Friday, April 1, 2016 9:55:09 PM
Rahm Emanuel <mayor_re@rahmemail.com>
Re:

Staying at Palmer house with family. Let me know if you can grab drink around 6 or coffee early morning. I
realize it's unlikely with such short notice. Hope you are well and weathering the storms.
On Wednesday, January 20, 2016, Rahm Emanuel <mayor_re@rahmemail.com
<mailto:mayor_re@rahmemail.com> > wrote:
See you there
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 20, 2016, at 9:30 AM, John Cranley <
7D,'cvml'
);> > wrote:

<javascript:_e(%7B%

Hope to catch up at conference. I plan to watch your panel at lunch.

On Friday, December 4, 2015, John Cranley <
7D,'cvml',
);> > wrote:

<javascript:_e(%7B%

I think you have to accept that Feds are coming, esp. with Hillary others calling for it. sounds like you have
"welcomed" them. good.
The people they send can be pains in the ass, workable, or friendly. You obviously want to use your influence to
find the friendliest crew. Most police departments strongly resist the Feds. Ours did. It was a tough relationship,
especially in the few 2 years. However, the fact that we "invited them" (weren't imposed upon us) created a
number of opportunities for our mayor at the time to push back when the feds were getting too intrusive.
Conversely, there were times when we had to order our cops to stop stonewalling the feds. I mentioned that they
were here for 8 years, but that was just an "independent monitor" that lasted 8 years that could on occasion go to
a federal judge if he didn't feel the reforms were being followed. It was a shitty relationship for 2-3 years, then
smooth sailing for 5. Even in years 1-3, we were able to insure that our cops continued to "run the department"
without daily interference.
Boundaries:
I. You don't want the Feds "running your department".
2. You should ask for a "patterns and practices review" that is focused on evaluating procedures and making
recommendations for reformed procedures. this is basically boilerplate now but we have found the policies to be
very good related to use of force, transparency around allegations of police misconduct, investigations thereof,
etc.
3. You establish that Feds are making recommendations about policies, NOT engaging in a witch hunt of the
past. This is key. Inviting them in with open arms will make it a lot more likely that you can limit this scope.
4. The Feds will drive some of your cops nuts so you need to establish times and protocols for their visits.
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 8:41 AM, Rahm Emanuel <mayor_re@rahmemail.com> wrote:
Explain
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 4, 2015, at 7:29 AM, John Cranley <

wrote:

Good to welcome Feds. As I mentioned we "invited" them--they were going to come in regardless--and that
helped set positive tone. In order to preserve police morale you have establish a fed-local relationship or else
Feds will drive your folks nuts. Get ahead ofit and try to establish some boundaries.
On Wednesday, December 2, 2015, John Cranley <

> wrote:

Good chat. Best advice: keep black cop organization close. Follow their lead. They will probably push you left
but will also know when to stop. In cincinnati I inherited a bad chief who happened to be black. He had
enormous vocal black elected and minister support. For 20 months he had the Sentinels (our black cop
organization) support and so we waited. Finally Sentinels realized he was so bad that they agreed to go public if
we fired him. We fired him, immediate black radio and electes went nuts, but sentinels defended us and
controversy died in 48 hours. In my opinion we survived this decision because of reservoir of respect for black
cops by community. If they say certain reforms are needed, not a bad group to stand with.
On Wednesday, December 2, 2015, Rahm Emanuel <mayor_re@rahmemail.com> wrote:
Call me when you have a moment.
312-744-

<tel:312-744

>