METRO ACCESS' CORRUPT DISPATCHER CONTRACTS (IN MD & DC); PRIVATE CONTRACTOR DISPATCHERS vs WMATA UNION DISPATCHERS

METRO ACCESS' CORRUPT DISPATCHER CONTRACTS (MD & DC):

PRIVATE CONTRACTOR DISPATCHERS vs WMATA UNION DISPATCHERS.

UNPROFESSIONAL, POORLY TRAINED, PRIVATE CONTRACTED DISPATCHERS HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO FREQUENT LATE PASSENGER PICK-UPS, SAFETY VIOLATIONS AND WORKPLACE SEXUAL HARASSMENT ISSUES.

REAL METRO SYSTEM REFORM SHOULD INCLUDE INVESTIGATING CORRUPT DISPATCHER CONTRACTOR AGREEMENTS.


Sources: Washington Post, Youtube


****** Suit says MetroAccess diverted dispatching contract in ‘self-dealing’ scheme


A recently unsealed lawsuit alleges that MetroAccess and MetroAccess contractors steered taxpayer-funded paratransit service to favored firms and subcontractors, resulting in longer trips and more expensive rides for the region’s most vulnerable commuters.

In the suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt by the owner of a Maryland cab company, plaintiff Scott Bretner alleges that Metro and three of its contractors broke the law by shifting MetroAccess dispatch responsibilities from one contractor, MV Transportation, to another, Transdev North America.

The suit alleges that this led to a pattern of “self-dealing” in which Transdev would assign taxi trips to a service it owns and in other cases direct passengers to MetroAccess vans unnecessarily for its own financial benefit.

“Transdev is steering riders to use the vans unnecessarily, presumably to inflate its revenues, notwithstanding that vans often must travel from distant points including Virginia to serve riders in Prince George’s County,” the complaint reads.

MetroAccess is the transit agency’s door-to-door service for the elderly and people with disabilities. The contract splits dispatch and service delivery responsibilities to prevent the kind of conflict Bretner alleges. Transdev is responsible for providing 50 percent of MetroAccess service, and the remaining share of trips is to be divided between two other firms not named in the suit, according to the contract.

Further, the suit alleges that a third contractor, Medical Transportation Management, the company contracted to oversee MetroAccess, failed to bring the alleged conflict of interest to light.

“MV has continued to collect funds provided by the Federal Government and the compact jurisdictions despite knowingly and intentionally surrendering its responsibilities to Transdev,” the suit reads. “MTM has utterly failed to provide any meaningful quality assurance safeguards or oversight of Transdev and MV,” the suit says.

Metro did not respond to questions about the lawsuit. A spokesman said the agency could not comment on pending litigation.

Transdev declined to comment on the lawsuit.

MV Transportation and MTM did not respond to several email requests for comment. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland did not respond to an inquiry as to why it declined to intervene in the suit. The United States is named as a co-plaintiff along with the District.

Bretner’s attorney said summonses have yet to be served in the suit, so the defendants have not responded in court.

With about 43,000 registered users, MetroAccess is the transit agency’s fastest-growing and most expensive service. The agency spends more than $100 million annually to provide the service through five contractors.

MetroAccess performance dropped sharply during a stretch beginning last fall — at one point, on-time performance was down nearly 10 percentage points from target — but has recovered in recent months, according to the latest figures. Pressed to explain the performance drop in a recent report, Metro and its contractors blamed the issues on a driver shortage that left the companies 10 percent short of the 1,000 needed to run at full capacity.

It’s unknown, however, whether problems with dispatch factored into the service decline.

Bretner, who owns Transportation Maintenance Services, Blue Bird Cab Co., and Prince George’s Yellow Cab Company, said in the lawsuit that he was thwarted in his attempts to become a MetroAccess subcontractor after months of “obfuscation and delay” as the alleged scheme unfolded. Bretner’s attorney, Ryan S. Spiegel, said the alleged offenses are particularly egregious, given the vulnerable population MetroAccess serves.

Neither Spiegel nor Bretner could immediately provide evidence directly supporting their claims, which were said to be based upon “information and belief,” but they said they planned to present evidence in court.

“In this case, the MetroAccess contract at issue was very clear that there were supposed to be different silos of activity that were supposed to be intentionally separate and independent,” Spiegel said in an interview. “The contract was also clear that the service providers were supposed to use a very specific system to provide a vulnerable population with a necessary service.

“We think the evidence is pretty strong that in this case, these defendants knowingly violated those obligations.”

In addition to the contractors, the lawsuit filed by Bretner names Metro and MetroAccess chief Christian Kent as bearing responsibility in the alleged arrangement. Metro, on behalf of Kent, declined to comment.

Bretner claims that Transdev, Metro, Kent, MTM and MV Transportation violated the federal and state False Claims Acts by “falsely certifying that they would comply with local laws governing taxicab services and then knowingly circumventing those laws.” Further, the lawsuit says, Metro and its paratransit contractors “knowingly presented” or conspired to present “false claims to obtain government money under the . . . MetroAccess program.”

It goes on to claim that Transdev has been directing customers onto vans unnecessarily, despite the fact that many customers in Prince George’s County — the most popular MetroAccess jurisdiction — can walk and don’t require wheelchair-accessible vans.

“Now that Transdev is essentially in control of the [call center], it has every incentive to use MetroAccess vans more often than necessary, because its reimbursement rate from [Metro] for those van trips — approximately $65 per ride — is much higher than the rate for subcontractor taxi trips billed at $3.77 per mile,” the complaint alleges.

“Indeed, [Metro], through Mr. Kent and others, has been knowingly complicit in this unlawful conduct by Transdev,” the lawsuit says.

The suit comes three years after another Maryland cab company, Challenger Transportation, alleged a conflict of interest in the awarding of the MetroAccess contract because then-Metro board chairman Tom Downs also helmed the board of advisers for Veolia Transportation of North America (now Transdev North America) at the time the agreement was reached. That lawsuit, also filed in U.S. District Court, has not been resolved, and Bretner’s suit renews the conflict-of-interest concerns, alleging that Downs’s failure to disclose those ties at the time was a violation of the law.

Downs said that while he knew from internal conversations at Veolia that the company was considering bidding for the MetroAccess contract, he recused himself from discussions of any potential contract.

He said he also recused himself from any action, contact or information about the bid. In addition, he physically left Metro headquarters whenever the contract was discussed, he said.

“I was physically removing myself from the board meeting and to be extra safe, I said I was leaving the building during this discussion,” he said.

A written recusal followed, Downs said.

Asked whether his dual roles as Metro board chairman and chairman of Veolia North America’s board could have contributed in any way to the contract’s award: “If you doubt [former Metro General Manager] Rich Sarles’s integrity,” Downs said. “I asked Rich to make sure that . . . I received no verbal or written information at any time from any staff and that they were not to even accidentally provide me with any information.”

The suit also accuses another cab company, Sun Cab, of benefiting from Transdev’s arrangement. It says Transdev dispatched taxi trips to companies unlicensed for access services in Prince George’s, with the money going back into the parent corporation’s pocket.

“By controlling the [dispatch services], Transdev has directed a vast majority of the taxi trips in the overall MetroAccess service region to Sun Cab, which Transdev also owns,” the suit alleges. “Therefore Transdev is able to engage in self-dealing and to ‘double dip’ and pay itself twice for each such instance of taxi service delivery.”

Reached by phone, a person who identified himself as Sun Cab’s general manager referred any questions about the lawsuit to Transdev.

The amended complaint was filed in June, but the case was under seal until late that month as the jurisdictions named as co-plaintiffs decided whether to intervene. Maryland and Virginia sought to remove themselves from the case, and late last month, a federal judge asked that any claims filed on their behalf be dismissed.

US POSTAL SERVICE ILLEGALLY FAVORED HILLARY DURING 2016 ELECTION & TARGETED GOP VOTERS' MAIL (HATCH ACT)

US POSTAL SERVICE ILLEGALLY FAVORED HILLARY DURING 2016 ELECTION & TARGETED GOP VOTERS' MAIL (HATCH ACT):

I WARNED EVERYONE THAT USPS MAIL CARRIERS WERE SPYING ON GOP VOTERS' MAIL IN 2015 & 2016.

ESPECIALLY IN STATES LIKE GEORGIA AND NORTH CAROLINA.

MANY PEOPLE DID NOT BELIEVE ME BUT NOW YOU KNOW IT'S TRUE.

IT'S TIME TO PRIVATIZE THE US POSTAL SERVICE & HOLD USPS WORKERS ACCOUNTABLE.


Sources: ABC News, Fox News, Washington Post


**** USPS takes hearing heat for 'favoring' pro-Clinton union's campaign work


The United States Postal Service took heat during a congressional hearing Wednesday for allegedly violating federal law by “favoring” a union doing pro-Clinton campaign work.

According to a report released Wednesday morning by the Office of Special Counsel, USPS engaged in “systemic violations” of the Hatch Act, a federal law that limits certain political activities of federal employees.

While employees are allowed to do some political work on leave, the report said the Postal Service showed a “bias” in favor of the National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) campaign operation, letting employees take leave without pay to participate in pro-Clinton campaign efforts.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee heard testimony from OSC and USPS officials on Wednesday, along with the USPS mail carrier who shared complaints with Committee Chairman Ron Johnson, R-Wis., in October 2016.

“’Postal Service leadership ‘took official actions with the intent of enabling’ the campaign activity of its union, and ‘with a clear understanding of what that activity involved,’” Senate Homeland Security Chairman Ron Johnson, R-Wis., said in his prepared opening statement, citing the OSC report.

“Based on these findings, it is legitimate to wonder why no one will be held accountable, how Postal Service leadership allowed this systemic violation of the Hatch Act to go on for twenty years, and is this occurring in other federal agencies?”

Johnson was first notified of the “violations” in October 2016 by Tim Kopp, a letter carrier for the USPS and member of the NALC. Kopp thought the actions were “illegal” and was concerned the Postal Service “incurred unnecessary overtime costs” and “improperly coordinated” with NALC when it released several members for weeks of “union official” leave without pay to participate in partisan campaign work.

“I want things done fairly and I don’t want things done on a partisan issue—the union is always involved in highly political activities and I didn’t want this to be a partisan thing—I wanted this to be a thing where the general public does not lose trust in the postal service,” Kopp told the Senate panel Wednesday. “There are a lot of good employees, but the way this was done—it was a nightmare.”

According to the OSC report, roughly 97 NALC members requested the leave without pay to participate in get-out-the vote efforts in primarily 2016 battleground states: Florida, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

The NALC, which endorsed Clinton last June, compensated those USPS workers using the Letter Carrier Political Fund, the union’s PAC.

Officials at multiple levels apparently were involved.

According to OSC Acting Special Counsel Adam Miles, the NALC provided lists of letter carriers to participate in campaign activity to a senior headquarters USPS labor relations official, who then emailed the lists to other USPS officials across the country.

According to Miles, the local officials “interpreted the communications as directives” from USPS headquarters to release the carriers on union official leave without pay.

“The practice also put non-union employees, or union employees who supported other candidates, at a disadvantage,” Johnson said. “If those employees sought unpaid leave for several weeks for campaign activity, they would not have received the same treatment.”

The OSC found an “institutional bias” in favor of union-endorsed candidates, all of which were Democrats.

“USPS, through its longstanding practice of honoring these kinds of requests, failed to administer its programs in a politically neutral manner in violation of the Hatch Act,” The OSC report said.

Committee Ranking Member Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said that the USPS is “emblematic of a systemic problem not limited to one individual or one election cycle.”

“USPS has failed to implement sufficient controls to ensure compliance with the Hatch Act,” McCaskill said.

But USPS Postmaster General Megan Brennan told lawmakers that “senior postal leadership did not in any way guide union leadership in selecting the candidates for whom NALC employees could campaign” and that USPS “did not approve or choose candidates for the unions to support” or “ask the union to advocate for political candidates on behalf of the Postal Service.”

“I also note that our postal unions do not speak for the Postal Service, and the Postal Service does not speak for our unions,” Brennan wrote in her prepared testimony, insisting USPS did not seek to assist the NALC’s “favored candidates.”

Brennan said the practice to grant leave without pay for NALC political activity had been in place for approximately 20 years, but that all violations of the Hatch Act were “unintentional.”

“We will change our practice in consultation with the OSC and based upon OSC’s guidance.

This will ensure that we do not put our people in harm’s way and they do not unintentionally run afoul of the Hatch Act,” Brennan said.

“As we have previously communicated to both this committee and to the OSC, and as the OSC has acknowledged, the Postal Service has always been ready, willing and able to end or modify our practice as appropriate, consistent with OSC’s recommendation.”

RAY RICE REINSTATED TO PLAY IN NFL; DESERVES 2ND CHANCE; HE IS NOT A DEMON

RAY RICE WINS HIS APPEAL......IS REINSTATED TO THE NFL.

HE DESERVES A SECOND CHANCE BECAUSE HE'S HUMAN.

RAY RICE WAS WRONG BUT HE IS NOT A DEMON.

Article Sources: ESPN; CBS News; Youtube


ARTICLE: "Ray Rice Wins Appeal"

Former Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice has won his appeal of an indefinite suspension and has been reinstated to the NFL.

Rice is now eligible to sign with any NFL team.

"I would like to thank Judge Barbara Jones, the NFL Players Association, my attorneys, agents, advisors, family, friends and fans -- but most importantly, my wife Janay," Rice said in a statement released by the NFLPA on Friday.

"I made an inexcusable mistake and accept full responsibility for my actions.

"I am thankful that there was a proper appeals process in place to address this issue. I will continue working hard to improve myself and be the best husband, father and friend, while giving back to my community and helping others to learn from my mistakes."

Former U.S. District Judge Barbara S. Jones, who heard Rice's appeal earlier this month, concluded in her decision, which was obtained by ESPN, that Rice did not lie to or mislead NFL commissioner Roger Goodell.

"In this arbitration, the NFL argues that Commissioner Goodell was misled when he disciplined Rice the first time. Because, after careful consideration of all of the evidence, I am not persuaded that Rice lied to, or misled, the NFL at his June interview, I find that the indefinite suspension was an abuse of discretion and must be vacated," Jones' decision stated.

"I find that the NFLPA carried its burden of showing that Rice did not mislead the Commissioner at the June 16th meeting, and therefore, that the imposition of a second suspension based on the same incident and the same known facts about the incident, was arbitrary," Jones also wrote.

"The Commissioner needed to be fair and consistent in his imposition of discipline.

"Moreover, any failure on the part of the League to understand the level of violence was not due to Rice's description of the event but to the inadequacy of words to convey the seriousness of domestic violence. That the League did not realize the severity of the conduct without a visual record also speaks to their admitted failure in the past to sanction this type of conduct more severely."

An NFL spokesman, when asked by ESPN's Andrew Brandt if the league would pursue any further action against Rice, said: "We, of course, accept the ruling as binding."

Rice's wife, Janay, told ESPN's Jemele Hill on Friday that they learned of the ruling while at the house of Janay Rice's mother, and were with family and friends at the time.

"It feels unbelievable," Janay Rice said. "It's a relief. We've been telling the same story for months and we always had faith that we'd done the right thing. Everyone deserves a second chance. We're excited about what the future will bring."

Whether Rice is entitled to back pay for game checks he missed during his suspension will be determined in a separate proceeding through the grievance filed against the Ravens by the NFLPA on behalf of Rice.

"This decision is a victory for a disciplinary process that is fair and transparent," the NFLPA said Friday in a statement. "This union will always stand up and fight for the due process rights of our players. We take no pleasure in seeing a decision that confirms what we have been saying about the Commissioner's office acting arbitrarily. The only remaining action is for NFL owners to embrace a fair process with a neutral arbitrator in all cases. The players thank Judge Barbara Jones for her time and thoroughness in this matter."

Rice was suspended indefinitely Sept. 8 for violating the NFL's personal conduct policy after a video of him hitting his then-fiancée was released publicly.

Goodell originally had suspended the running back for two games. The incident occurred in February inside an elevator at an Atlantic City, New Jersey, casino.

Ravens general manager Ozzie Newsome testified under oath Nov. 6 in the appeal hearing that he heard the former Baltimore running back tell Goodell during his June 16 disciplinary hearing that he had hit his then-fiancée in a casino hotel elevator, sources told ESPN's "Outside the Lines."

Rice also testified, as did his wife. Details of what Rice and his wife testified to Nov. 6 and what Goodell said Nov. 5 were not released to "Outside the Lines" because of a gag order that Jones imposed. But sources said Newsome backed Rice's previous accounts of what he told Goodell.

Goodell spent the majority of his time testifying under cross-examination by outside union attorney Jeffrey Kessler, sources said.

Rice's attorney, Peter Ginsberg, said in a statement Friday it was "a huge relief" that Rice can "get back to work."

"That is the fair and legally correct result. The decision, however, certainly does not mean that this incident will be forgotten by anyone involved," Ginsberg said in the statement. "On a personal level, Ray, individually, and Ray and Janay, as a couple, are dealing with these events privately. On a professional level, it is time for Ray to prove himself again.

"Hopefully, the NFL will use this incident to learn and to improve. On the heels of Bountygate, Commissioner Roger Goodell has shown once again that he does not follow the rules in his treatment of players and that his judgment cannot be trusted. Under his leadership, the NFL ignored for years the need to create a stronger and more constructive program to address domestic abuse."

Rice, 27, is a three-time Pro Bowler and helped the Ravens win Super Bowl XLVII. He rushed for 6,180 yards and 37 touchdowns in six seasons with Baltimore.

Ravens receiver Torrey Smith tweeted his support of his former teammate after Rice's reinstatement was announced.

BLACK OMAHA CURSING TODDLER UPDATE: He's In Protective Custody (Civil Rights Were Violated)

#ToddlerTHUG


UPDATE: CURSING BLACK OMAHA TODDLER MOCKED BY POLICE UNION IS NOW IN PROTECTIVE CUSTODY.

I repeat.

Posting a video of this Child's antics on a Police Union website was NOT about "Educating the Public"!

Instead it's about RACISM & perpetuating STEREOTYPES.

This Child's CIVIL RIGHTS were clearly VIOLATED.

#ToddlerTHUG

CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES DOESN'T CARE ABOUT BLACK CHILDREN

The OMAHA, Nebraska CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES claims to have been Monitoring a BLACK Family ("Toddler Thug's") since August of 2013.

So even though the Toddler's 16-year-old Mother was Shot in front of him & he too was Injured.....

CPS still chose to leave this Toddler in the Family home with 3 other Minor Children.

Why??

When it was apparent all Minor Children in this Family were in possible Danger, why didn't Omaha's CPS officials step him to remove these Children before now??

Yet when DON LEMON & the OMAHA Police Union expose what's going on in this Toddler's world and begins to question why CPS hasn't intervened, suddenly CPS steps in and removes all Minor Children from the home.

I've just described CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICE Agencies in EVERY State & County!

CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES DOESN'T CARE ABOUT BLACK CHILDREN





ARTICLE: "Swearing Toddler In 'Thug' Video Taken Into Protective Custody"

A Nebraska toddler who repeated a slew of profanities in an online video has been taken into child protective custody, Omaha police said Wednesday.

While authorities found nothing criminal in the video, officials from the Omaha police's Child Victim Unit and the Nebraska Child Protective Services took the infant and three other children into custody on Wednesday, the police department said on its Facebook page.

The joint investigation found safety concerns, the statement said.

CNN learned of development through Twitter.

In the video, the diapered child is bombarded with obscenities and racial slurs by the adults around him.

The African-American toddler knocks down a chair and gives nearly as good as he gets, responding to some of the comments with an upraised middle finger and telling one of the adults at one point, "Shut up, bitch." The adults laugh and prompt him to repeat other crudities.

Just another day on the Internet -- until the police union in Omaha, Nebraska, posted the clip on its website to highlight what it called the "cycle of violence and thuggery" the community faces.

The Omaha Police Officers Association came under fire from the city's police chief, the ACLU and at least one community leader. They say the move needlessly antagonizes the city's minority communities, who make up about a quarter of Omaha's 409,000 residents.

Sgt. John Wells, the union's president, said the video was "disturbing" and "offensive."

"The focus here isn't on any particular ethnic group. The focus here is on the troubling behavior towards this child," Wells said. "This behavior is going to potentially lead this child down a path that is completely unhealthy."

On the website where the video is hosted, the union said the clip came from "a local thug's public Facebook page."

"We here at OmahaPOA.com viewed the video and we knew that despite the fact that it is sickening, heartbreaking footage, we have an obligation to share it to continue to educate the law abiding public about the terrible cycle of violence and thuggery that some young innocent children find themselves helplessly trapped in," the police union wrote in a post accompanying the video.

"Now while we didn't see anything in this video that is blatantly 'illegal,' we sure did see a lot that is flat out immoral and completely unhealthy for this little child from a healthy upbringing standpoint," it added.

Wells said one of the adults mentions a local street gang in the video.

"That is why when we talk about the culture, the criminal culture, that this is to try to break the cycle and deal with the culture of violence and the culture of gang activity," he said.

But in a city where police officers' treatment of minorities led to lawsuits, criminal charges against two officers and the firings and reassignments of several others in the past year, critics say the video is poking at raw wounds. Willie Hamilton, president of the community activist group Black Men United, said the union "crossed a line by doing this."

"For them to take a video out of context -- a 2-year-old who doesn't have the brain capacity to know what's going on -- and to say that this child, because two adults acted inappropriately, is going to end up in a life of crime is totally inappropriate," Hamilton said.

And the American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska, which filed an excessive-force suit against the Omaha Police Department on behalf of an African-American family on Monday, said the union's use of "racially charged language" was "very disconcerting."

Police Chief Todd Schmaderer tried to distance his agency from the controversy in a statement issued Tuesday, saying that the union's website and Facebook page are separate from those of the Omaha Police Department and that he has little authority over the public statements of union members.

"With that background and understanding, I want to make it explicit and clear that the views expressed on the OPOA Facebook page do not necessarily reflect the official stance of the Omaha Police Department," Schmaderer said. "I strongly disagree with any postings that may cause a divide in our community or an obstacle to police community relations."

Wells said union members have turned the video over to the department's child victim unit, which will work with child-welfare agencies to investigate the circumstances. He said the organization "didn't think we'd get this big of a reaction."

"Hopefully, the impact is, it gives law-abiding citizens what law enforcement deals with on a daily basis, and it sort of throws back the blinders that these type of problems are going on," he said. "And we can have a very frank and open discussion on how to tackle these issues and come up with solutions."





Source: CNN, Daily Mail, Fox News, NY Daily News, Youtube

OMAHA Police Union Post Video Of BLACK Toddler Cursing & Flipping The Bird (It's Plain RACISM!)

#ToddlerTHUG


OMAHA "TODDLER THUG"?? Let's be real!

The ONLY reason why this BLACK Omaha Toddler's Profanity-laced antics were posted online by a POLICE UNION is due to RACISM plain & simple!!

IT'S NOT ABOUT EDUCATING THE PUBLIC......IT'S RACISM.

Posting such a video online is actually a Violation of this Toddler's CIVIL RIGHTS!

FYI: By the way No CHILD ABUSE Charges were filed against the Toddler's Family members.




ARTICLE: "Police Union Draws Fire Over Swearing Toddler 'Thug' Video"

The diapered child is bombarded with obscenities and racial slurs by the adults around him.

The African-American toddler knocks down a chair and gives nearly as good as he gets, responding to some of the comments with an upraised middle finger and telling one of the adults at one point, "Shut up, bitch." The adults laugh and prompt him to repeat other crudities.

Just another day on the Internet -- until the police union in Omaha, Nebraska, posted the clip on its website to highlight what it called the "cycle of violence and thuggery" the community faces.

Now, the Omaha Police Officers' Association is under fire from the city's police chief, the ACLU and at least one community leader. They say the move needlessly antagonizes the city's minority communities, who make up about a quarter of Omaha's 409,000 residents.

Sgt. John Wells, the union's president, said the video was "disturbing" and "offensive."

"The focus here isn't on any particular ethnic group. The focus here is on the troubling behavior towards this child," Wells said. "This behavior is going to potentially lead this child down a path that is completely unhealthy."

On the website where the video is hosted, the union said the clip came from "a local thug's public Facebook page."

"We here at OmahaPOA.com viewed the video and we knew that despite the fact that it is sickening, heartbreaking footage, we have an obligation to share it to continue to educate the law abiding public about the terrible cycle of violence and thuggery that some young innocent children find themselves helplessly trapped in," the police union wrote in a post accompanying the video.

"Now while we didn't see anything in this video that is blatantly 'illegal,' we sure did see a lot that is flat out immoral and completely unhealthy for this little child from a healthy upbringing standpoint," it added.

Wells said one of the adults mentions a local street gang in the video.

"That is why when we talk about the culture, the criminal culture, that this is to try to break the cycle and deal with the culture of violence and the culture of gang activity," he said.

But in a city where police officers' treatment of minorities led to lawsuits, criminal charges against two officers and the firings and reassignments of several others in the past year, critics say the video is poking at raw wounds. Willie Hamilton, president of the community activist group Black Men United, said the union "crossed a line by doing this."

"For them to take a video out of context -- a 2-year-old who doesn't have the brain capacity to know what's going on -- and to say that this child, because two adults acted inappropriately, is going to end up in a life of crime is totally inappropriate," Hamilton said.

And the American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska, which filed an excessive-force suit against the Omaha Police Department on behalf of an African-American family on Monday, said the union's use of "racially charged language" was "very disconcerting."

"Officers should be working to build a culture where anyone feels comfortable calling law enforcement," ACLU of Nebraska Executive Director Becki Brenner said in a written statement. "The manner in which the Officers Association has discussed this incident has done nothing but further erode community trust and reinforce the need for independent oversight, trainings, and other reforms."

Police Chief Todd Schmaderer tried to distance his agency from the controversy in a statement issued Tuesday, saying that the union's website and Facebook page are separate from those of the Omaha Police Department and that he has little authority over the public statements of union members.

"With that background and understanding, I want to make it explicit and clear that the views expressed on the OPOA Facebook page do not necessarily reflect the official stance of the Omaha Police Department," Schmaderer said. "I strongly disagree with any postings that may cause a divide in our community or an obstacle to police community relations."

Hamilton said the statement was too little, too late. Schmaderer was speaking out only "because this thing is on the Internet and went viral," he said.

"What do you think it's going to do about the trust level? You think we're going to call you and tell you anything? No. All this is doing is highlighting that."

Wells said union members have turned the video over to the department's child victim unit, which will work with child-welfare agencies to investigate the circumstances. He said the organization "didn't think we'd get this big of a reaction."

"Hopefully, the impact is, it gives law-abiding citizens what law enforcement deals with on a daily basis, and it sort of throws back the blinders that these type of problems are going on," he said. "And we can have a very frank and open discussion on how to tackle these issues and come up with solutions."


Sources: AP, CNN, OmahaPOA.com, Youtube