In 2009, I interviewed Sgt. Mike Koval for an Isthmus article on police temperament. It ran under the headline “Madison Police Are Taught Restraint, Even When Disrespected.”
Koval had by then logged 18 years as the cop in charge of training MPD recruits. He remained in that role until 2014, when he was named chief of police.
My inquiry was prompted by an issue in the national news: Henry Gates, a famed professor at Harvard who happens to be black, had been arrested at his home after he angrily accused an officer who questioned him of racial bias.
Koval was unequivocal about his expectation that Madison police, in a similar situation, should keep their cool. Being subjected to “disrespect and incivility,” he said, was part of the job, which is why cops here are trained to tolerate verbal abuse: “We have to have a thicker skin.”
As chief of police, Koval has fallen short of this standard. Instead, he has shown himself to be a petulant bully who lacks self-control — a hothead with a gun and a badge. He is just as temperamentally unfit to lead the MPD as Donald Trump is to be president.
Moreover, Koval’s conduct has violated his own department’s rules, for which he should pay a price.
On the evening of June 5, a Sunday, Koval released a splenetic blog post over an impending Common Council vote. At issue was a proposal to allocate an additional $350,000 for a consultant to examine MPD policies and culture, perhaps identifying ways to reduce the number of unarmed people that Koval’s officers kill.
While claiming he wasn’t opposed to the study, Koval unleashed a torrential rant over it, attacking those citizens who dare to criticize his department, as well as council members. “You are being watched,” he warned the alderpersons, who make $12,692 a year compared to Koval’s $147,444. “And be on notice: this is a preemptive first strike from me to you. I am going to push back hard when MPD is constantly used as a political punching bag and you are nowhere to be found.”
The allocation was approved on a 19-1 vote after a four-hour council discussion that began June 7 and dragged on past midnight. Koval was combative, sarcastic and belligerent. He regarded the alders with open disdain, rolling his eyes and striking a table. He threatened to walk out. Several alders, who as a group showed far more character and restraint than Koval, actually cried.
In an interview last week with Isthmus, Koval expressed regret over some of his rhetoric but put primary blame on a changing local culture: “The newest sort of strategy is rather than agree to disagree, you go on the attack, create polarity and you marginalize....”
This is actually an apt description for Koval’s own conduct, for which he offered a tepid apology in his blog this week. But he added that he “cannot be expected to remain silent with matters affecting our department and officer morale.” In other words, it will happen again. No thanks, Chief.
Getting rid of a chief of police is a heavy lift. State law lets chiefs, once appointed, serve indefinitely. They are subject to removal only for misconduct that draws a complaint.
Richard Williams, one of Koval’s predecessors, was a lousy chief. But he never treated the city’s residents or elected representatives with contempt. Nor did he seriously breach his department’s own rules. Koval has.
Section 204 of the Madison Police Policy Manual holds that members of the MPD must refrain from “overbearing, oppressive or tyrannical conduct” in their dealings with the public. Koval’s behavior during his public meltdown fits any reasonable definition of these terms. And among the possible sanctions, according to the policy manual, at 4-1400, is termination.
Of course, it’s probably a waste of time to complain to the Madison Police and Fire Commission, which is in charge of meting out discipline to department members, including chiefs. The body, which is purposely ineffectual as an instrument of police accountability, is not going to fire Koval for anything less than the discovery of severed heads in his fridge.
But Koval’s blatant disregard of his department’s rules should cost him the consent of the governed. It should mark an end to the tremendous amount of deference he has received during his first two years. It should prompt the public to demand a new chief.
Koval has, through his actions, set a bad example. He has conveyed to every cop on the street that it’s okay to be thin-skinned, to bully people, to respond hostilely to perceived slights, to pound the table and roll your eyes and push back against anyone you consider difficult.
As Mike Koval once knew, this is not how police are supposed to act. And that is why, one way or another, he has to go.
Former Isthmus news editor Bill Lueders is associate editor of The Progressive.
