The Denver police union has filed a lawsuit against the police department over its new body camera program, saying it was illegally developed because the administration ignored collective bargaining rules. 
 
 The Denver Police Protective Association said in a news release it does not oppose officers wearing body cameras. But the union said the policy that was put in place in September is ill-conceived, and the union’s lawsuit questions multiple aspects of the program, including how it will affect officers’ workloads when wearing them on off-duty security jobs. 
 
 “An ill-conceived body camera program breeds distrust amongst community members and the officers expected to operate this important policing tool,” the news release said. “Unfortunately, an ill-conceived body camera program is exactly what we face in the City of Denver.” 
 
 The department plans to deploy the first cameras to officers later this month, Chief Robert White said Monday at the city’s annual public-safety luncheon. 
 
 Officers in District 6, which covers downtown, and the gang unit will be among the first to wear them. 
 
 The department has been forming its plan for body cameras since District 6 officers participated in a pilot program in 2014. The policy continues to evolve as the public weighs in with its expectations for officers who wear them. 
 
 This fall, White announced that he was working on a plan for officers to wear the cameras while working off-duty assignments, something that had been recommended by Nick Mitchell, Denver’s independent monitor. 
 
 In off-duty assignments, officers are paid by private organizations to work security but they wear their uniforms, use department-issued equipment and are bound by department regulations. 
 
 In its lawsuit, the union questioned a proposal for officers to upload footage from their homes after completing an off-duty assignment. That plan could impact chain-of-custody requirements for evidence in crimes and it could affect labor laws. 
 
 The union in July demanded that the administration bargain over the cameras’ use, and the demand was denied in October, the lawsuit said. 
 
 Nick Rogers, president of the union, which represents 1,310 officers, said the city charter specifies that matters of personal safety and health equipment for officers are mandatory bargaining points. The cameras fall under those categories, Rogers said. 
 
 “I am the bargaining agent for the Denver Police Department and they did not contact me,” he said. 
 
 The police union’s lawsuit, filed in Denver District Court, also expressed concern over other aspects of the department’s new policy, including protecting people’s privacy; using the cameras around confidential informants; vagueness on where the cameras should be mounted; and vagueness over when an officer is allowed to use discretion in turning the cameras off. 
 
 Deputy Police Chief Matt Murray on Wednesday said the department could not comment on specifics of the lawsuit, but it will move forward with its plans to begin deploying the cameras to officers in the field. 
 
 “What we’re going to say is we understand the PPA has a position and they have every right to litigate that position through the courts and that’s the choice they are making,” Murray said. 
 
 The department also involved officers as well as the general public in testing cameras and developing the policy, Murray said. 
 
 “We’ve really tried hard for everybody to have an opportunity to express their opinion about the policy,” he said. 
 
 Denver will be one of the first large metropolitan departments in the country to field body cameras. The city signed a $6.1 million, five-year contract with Taser International to provide the cameras and store data. 
 
 Noelle Phillips: 303-954-1661, nphillips@denverpost.com or @Noelle_Phillips ||||| The man shot and killed Sunday morning in downtown Cincinnati was the third person shot and killed by on-duty Cincinnati Police officers in 2016. 
 
 
 
 Robert Tenbrink 
 
 
 
 Robert Tenbrink, 45, was shot and killed Jan. 11 in West Price Hill after he pointed what police thought was a gun at officers, Cincinnati police said. The gun turned out to be a BB gun. 
 
 
 
 Police were responding to two reports of armed robbery when they encountered Tenbrink. They demanded that he put his hands up, and he reached for the BB gun instead, Cincinnati police said. Two officers, Andrea Harmon and Kevin Manz, shot him. 
 
 
 
 Cincinnati Police released dash cam video of the shooting within 24 hours of the incident. Mayor John Cranley said that the shooting was justified. 
 
 Paul Gaston 
 
 
 
 Paul Gaston, 37, was shot and killed by officers in Westwood in February. 
 
 
 
 Gaston crashed his pickup into a pole on Harrison Avenue, police said. He got out of the car, stumbled, dropped a gun, picked it up and took off, police said. Officers ordered Gaston to lie on the ground and said that he disobeyed and pulled the gun from his waistband. 
 
 
 
 Officers Scott McManus, Paul Kohler and Zachary Sterbling fired nine shots at Gaston, police said. Gaston was killed. 
 
 The gun turned out to be a pellet gun. 
 
 
 
 Cranley called the shooting justified. 
 
 
 
 NOTE: An off-duty Cincinnati police officer shot and killed a bank robbery suspect in Madisonville in May. Only on-duty shootings are included in this list. ||||| CLOSE Cincinnati police rolled out their first body cameras during an August 10 presentation and news conference Downtown. The Enquirer/Pat Brennan 
 
 Buy Photo A body camera (Photo: Enquirer file)Buy Photo 
 
 Cincinnati's police union told city officials last week if they want officers to wear body cameras they'll have to pay them extra. 
 
 City leaders announced at a press conference last Wednesday that the first group of police would start wearing the body cameras a move that itself came just days after the city's latest police-involved shooting. 
 
 A lawyer for Fraternal Order of Police Lodge #69, Stephen Lazarus, sent the city a "cease and desist" letter, saying until pay for wearing the equipment has been decided, officers shouldn't wear them. He asked that the city cease the program by Wednesday at the latest, pending the bargaining process. 
 
 "Requiring employees to wear BWCs will change several aspects of their job and regularly assigned duties," Lazarus wrote in a letter dated Aug. 11. "The adoption of of new BWC policies will also have a significant impact on the employees' wages, hours, or other terms and conditions of employment. Accordingly such changes are mandatory subjects that must be bargained to impasse with the union before they are implemented." 
 
 City Manager Harry Black fired back Monday, writing in a memo to council that as the manager of the police department he can order cameras be worn without a contract change, though he added he's hopeful the FOP will wear the cameras. 
 
 "Having a body camera program fosters transparency, allows the city to better protect the public and protects officers from frivolous and fraudulent claims," Black wrote. 
 
 In a letter to Lazarus, shared with the media, Black makes the same point and adds the union was given advance notice that cameras were coming. 
 
 “The FOP had ample opportunity to bargain over its proposal at various bargaining sessions and during mediation,” Black wrote. “The FOP did not focus bargaining towards its BWC proposal. Considering that this is the FOP’s proposal – not management’s – the burden is on the FOP to raise this issue during bargaining.” 
 
 Then, in closing, Black offered to continue discussions. 
 
 The Cincinnati union isn't alone with concerns. Unions around the country are insisting they have a say in the process of wearing cameras. Last year The Denver Post reported Denver's largest police union filed a lawsuit saying the Denver body camera program was illegally developed because it ignored collective bargaining. 
 
 Fraternal Order of Police Lodge #69 President Dan Hils said it's simple: "You want us to wear something new, it needs to be collectively bargained. The responsibility should increase our compensation." 
 
 At the moment, there's no planned negotiations. The two sides are at war over a pay raise. 
 
 Black has suggested the city can afford a 3 percent raise for police officers, but Mayor John Cranley, in a surprise move, has called for 5 percent raises for four unions, including the police union. 
 
 Some members of council have publicly questioned and criticized giving raises outside the bargaining process, but Hils said it's' the only way officers will be fairly compensated. 
 
 The cease and desist letter makes a different argument -- some issues related to the contract are better handled at the bargaining table, the FOP contends. 
 
 Body camera pay would come in addition to any raise officers would get. 
 
 Two complaints have been made to the state employment relations board over the raises, one made by Councilman Wendell Young against Cranley the other filed by Black against the police union. 
 
 City leaders have worked for more than a year to put body cameras on all patrol officers, calling them best practice. There's been countless meetings inside city hall and the in the community. 
 
 Last week officers at The Banks downtown began wearing cameras. The city bought 700 cameras, signing a seven-year agreement with TASER to support the equipment. Over that time, the equipment could cost taxpayers up to $6 million. By the end of this year 700 officers are expected to be wearing cameras. 
 
 Experts say body cameras offer officers added protection because they're proof in situations where they are alone with suspects. But Hils said not many officers want to be monitored and while cameras may show some of what happened, they typically don't show everything an officer is seeing and reacting to. 
 
 "It's more stress," Hils said. "They brought us in for a couple of meetings about procedure. We offered feedback. Less than 25 percent we offered was included." 
 
 Lodge #69 executive committee members directed the letter be written. 
 
 We’re putting the city on notice, saying, 'Hey, you forgot something,' " Hils said. 
 
 Councilman Christopher Smitherman, chairman of Council's Law and Public Safety Committee, said body cameras are meant to protect the officers. 
 
 "This is to support our officers at a time when transparency and more information is better," Smitherman said. "Tying compensation to public safety and tying it to body cameras specifically is a bad idea." 
 
 Smitherman said it's not an accident the letter comes now in the midst of the raise battle. 
 
 "This is ratcheting this up to next level," Smitherman said. "I hope calmer heads prevail." 
 
 Read or Share this story: http://cin.ci/2bv9p0B
– Cincinnati cops are fighting a move by city officials to outfit them with body cameras—unless their salaries change, that is. The Cincinnati Enquirer reports that some city cops began wearing cameras last week, and the police union reacted by saying it and the city need to sit down at the bargaining table; the union argues the cameras shouldn't be worn until that happens and sent the city a "cease and desist" letter to that effect. A union lawyer argued in the letter written last week that a body-camera mandate "will change several aspects of their job and regularly assigned duties." But City Manager Harry Black on Monday said he has the right to order cops to wear them and said their presence protects cops "from frivolous and fraudulent claims." Cameras are a flashpoint in the city, which WLWT reports has seen three fatal shootings this year involving police and where a white cop last year shot an unarmed black motorist after a traffic stop. University of Cincinnati Police Officer Raymond Tensing said he had no choice but to open fire after Sam DuBose, 43, tried to run him over and dragged him with his car. A body cam video of the incident revealed that story to be a lie, prosecutors said. But lawyers for Tensing insist it backs up the officer’s version. He'll stand trial in October. The push to outfit all of the city's cops with cameras has been a year-long effort. Some 700 cameras have been purchased as part of a seven-year contract. In Denver, the police union also has qualms with how the body camera program has taken shape, the Denver Post reports.