Background
Racial tensions taint Cincinnati’s past and present. Though Cincinnati’s location made the city a pivotal point on the Underground Railroad and a hotbed of abolition activity, in many ways Cincinnati has never been a very friendly place for African Americans. Throughout the 1800s African Americans were prohibited from orphanages, schools, hospitals, and other public places. Generally speaking, they were confined to the most menial, low-paying jobs. Unfortunately, the situation has been slow to change. In June of 1944, 15,000 workers walked off their jobs at what is now General Electric because 7 African Americans were hired to operate idle machinery. In 1950 a study indicated that half of Cincinnati’s major companies with at least 1,500 employees didn’t hire African Americans. In the mid 1960’s the Ohio Civil rights Commission issued a similar survey which showed that half of Cincinnati’s building trades unions had no black members. Around that same time, Cincinnatians changed their election system to prevent Theodore M. Berry’s rise to the mayoralty for 15 years, or until 1972. Throughout the 60s and the 70s African Americans continued to be barred from some restaurants and public places. In 1967, after a sketchy conviction of an African American in the famous “strangler case”, and again after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968, protests and riots broke out. In the late 1970s, a federal study examining 40 cities ranked Cincinnati the worst in terms of housing discrimination. At that time 27% of all local rental agencies were found to engage in practices which discriminated against African Americans. Desegregation of the schools came only grudgingly. Segregated neighborhoods, social and economic apartheid continued. During the Ujima/ Jazz festival in 2000 some downtown restaurants closed initiating organized protests and sanctions. Fatal shootings of African Americans by police officers have been an ongoing problem for more than 30 years. Since 1995, 15 African Americans have been killed by the police. The shooting of unarmed Timothy Thomas on April 7, 2001 was in some ways the straw that broke the camel’s back, leading to the rebellion and unrest that took place last April. The trials and acquittals or hung juries of Officer Roach, Jorg, and Caton, has continued to fuel the fire as well as the lack of political will on the part of City Council to make good on the promised money and services they owe to the Empowerment Zone (nine economically depressed, primarily African American communities designated by HUD in 1998 as “economic disaster areas.”) Recently groups calling for sanctions because of racial problems have combined efforts with challengers of Issue 3. (Issue 3 legislated against future civil protection based upon sexual orientation.)

Why Respond with a Boycott?
The racism that has permeated city administration, law enforcement, and city culture has not been effectively addressed by the periodic pressure that has been exerted through individual protests, rallies, petitions, and letters to the editor. Citizen pressure has resulted in the formation of the previous six city commissions, but never in their implementation. Former Ohio Governor John Gilligan explains that no lasting improvements resulted from the reports, because “by the time the commission came out, the community had cooled off and they just kind of got put back on the shelf and the community went back to its old ways, without any discernible change.” Reflecting on his experience as a member of the 1995 commission which focused on racial relations within the police division, Gilligan recounts “Nothing ever happened. We were thanked profusely, and that was the end of that. It’s the old pattern, I’m afraid, in this city.” (“Past Race Reports Gather Dust” ,Cincinnati Post, 5-1-01). Since the previous efforts to create substantive social change have been more or less ignored, it is time to try a different tactic. When people’s pocket books are effected, one begins to take note. As Coalition of a Just Cincinnati member Amanda Mayes writes in a press release dated March 26, 2002, the boycott “ is our only viable, non-violent means of getting the city government’s attention.”

Who are the groups involved?

• Coalition for a Just Cincinnati
• Cincinnati Black United Front
• Coalition of Concerned Citizens for Justice
• Stonewall Cincinnati

What are the areas of demand?

• End Social and Economic Apartheid
• Support and Enforce Civil and Human Rights
• Restore Public Accountability of the Police
• Enact City Government and Election Reform

How have parties attempted to bring about change? What methods are being used?

Here are a few we have witnessed:

1. Educational forums - Open forums to state mission and demands; also a time to hear from public
2. Sanctions/boycott - urges people to refrain from purchasing in downtown business district area south of Central Parkway; and sanctioning tourism and conventions troughout the Cincinnati area as a non-violent means of getting city’s attention
3. Leafleting / Pickets / Active Presence - during downtown events, conventions, sporting events etc.
4. Artists of Conscience - Calling upon artists scheduled to perform in Cincinnati to honor the boycott, those who have honored include but are not limited to Bill Cosby, Whoopi Goldberg, Smokey Robinson, Wynton Marsalis, O Jays, Temptations, Wycliffe Jean …

What has been accomplished? What are some successes?

1. Issue 5 - Which amended the city charter to end the city’s restriction of civil service laws thus allowing for nationwide searches for police and fire chiefs and captains. Before becoming a referendum on the ballot in Nov of 2001, the issue was expanded to include a larger selection of employees.
2. Citizen Complaint Authority (CCA) - Instead of putting teeth in the Citizen Police Review Panel (CPRP) by adding funding and subpoena power, the colloborative agreement dissolved CPRP and OMI [Office of Municipal Investigations] and created CCA which adds investigative power and becomes more timely in nature.
3. Department of Justice Report (DOJ) on racial profiling - In April 2001 Mayor Luken requested a DOJ review of CPD’s use of force. The investigation yielded the following agreement: response to mentally ill including de-escalation strategies; foot pursuit policies; use of force policies which include proportionality, discipline, and choke hold instructions; use of chemical spray policies; use of canine policies and warnings; bean bag and rubber bullet policies; documentation; CCA; reporting and satistics. In April 2002 Mr. Ascroft came to Cincinnati to sign onto the proposal.
4. Collaborative agreement - Mediation process which included ACLU and Black United Front [Alphonse Gerhardstein, Kenneth Lawson, Scott Greenwood; Class Council, Juleana Fierson, chief of staff CBUF, Damon Lynch III pres CBUF], DOJ [Ralph Boyd Jr. asst. Attorney general], CPD [Tom Streicher, chief], the City of Cincinnati [Mayor Luken, Billy Martin, attorney]. Provisions include: strategies for CPOP Community Problem Oritented Policing, police training, policy regarding the drawing of an officer’s weapon, the establishment of CCA, monitoring and dispute resolution.
5. DOJ investigation of Owensby - After being tried for the asphyxiation death of Roger Owensby Jr., Officer Jorg was left with a hung jury. Hamilton County Prosecutor Mike Allen refused to re-try. At the request of Hamilton County Commissioner Todd Portune, DOJ has decided to investigate.

How do we understand the events of the last year, the merit of the boycott effort, and the just response to the city’s issues?
We have heard many concerns regarding our members discernment of this issue. Many people of good will have great concerns about the impact of this effort. Here are a few of our thoughts as we collectively think out this issue ourselves.

• Concern #1
  Are the poor the first ones hurt? Indeed the poor are constantly hurt by economc downturns, those with the least always bear the burden of the economy. We acknowlege that there is pain with change and are called to shield the poor as best we can from any negative impact. It is estimated that sanctioning conventions and artists have been responsible for 11 millions $$ loss to Cincinnati’s downtown. We must also realize the economic situation of our country and the many corporations laying off thousands of employees. Those measures may make ‘good corporate sense’ but do more damage than do any losses from the boycott.
• Concern #2
  What can we really expect from the city? The city government as all governments are mandated to protect the weaker in society. The city is also responsible to all of the neighborhoods in Cincinnati not a just few. Indeed, neighborhood development is necessary for viable and sustainable communities.
• Concerm #3
  Can a boycott effect institutional issues? Yes, economic pressure put upon governmental structures has proved successful in the past.
• Concern #4
  Who are the real victims? We must be very careful not to blame the victim in this situation. For residents or Cincinnati Arts Association to blame the citizen groups is irrational. If blame is to be pointed one must discern who is responsible for the econimic aparthied of our city and/or the racial tensions.

What questions ought we to ask of ourselves?

1. How do I benefit from institutional racism? What does that mean? How can I remove myself from such benefit?
2. How have I kept myself aware of the changing dynamics in the city? What media outlets influence me? Do I search out other voices? Whose voice gets more credence? Do I use my voice to support my convictions?
3. What effect did April 2001 have on me? Do I treat people differently? Do I treat OTR differently? What language do I use to discuss the events of last April?