Mayor Tom Potter has decided to stand by his May decision to fire Portland Police Lieutenant Jeffrey Kaer over Kaer’s fatal shooting of 28-year-old Dennis Young in January 2006, but police oversight activists say the mayor’s language in firing Kaer is designed to avoid the city being sued, rather than create true accountability for the police.

Potter has accused Kaer of bad performance in the run-up to the shooting, but not in actually pulling the trigger.

“The mayor is saying ‘you shouldn’t have pulled the trigger towards a moving car,’ but he isn’t saying ‘you shouldn’t have shot this human being,’” says Copwatch activist Dan Handelman. “They’re accusing Kaer of poor decision-making in everything leading up to the shooting, but not in the shooting itself. This is the same thing that happened with Officer Scott McCollister over the Kendra James shooting in 2003.”

Legalistic wrangling aside, Potter’s termination of Kaer represents a tougher approach from the city than that taken by Mayor Vera Katz in 2003 over the Kendra James Shooting—McCollister was given five-and-a-half months’ suspension without pay for shooting James, although as a Lieutenant, Kaer is arguably supposed to set a better example, given his experience.NO QUESTIONS: TV cameras await Potter’s 1pm statement outside his office…although he won’t answer press questions on the decision.

Police Chief Rosie Sizer has made public her opposition to Potter’s decision, but is unavailable for comment today.

Kaer shot at Young even though he was driving a moving vehicle, which was against a new Police Bureau policy at the time. The vehicle had been parked in front of the home of Kaer’s sister, whose son had been shot in a road-rage incident six weeks earlier, when Kaer first made contact with Young. In his decision letter to Kaer in May, Potter listed 10 examples of “poor judgement and decision-making” which led to the shooting. But he also wrote that Kaer’s “decision to use force” was not at issue in the disciplinary process.

Kaer held an arbitration meeting with Potter on Monday, July 30, along with his represenative from the Portland Police Commanding Officers’ Association (PPCOA), of which Kaer, as a lieutenant, is a member. A PPCOA representative did not immediately return a call for comment.

The mayor will make a statement to the media outside his office at 1pm, but copies of Kaer’s termination letter from Potter—which essentially repeats the charges Potter made in May—are being made available to the press right now. Potter will not be answering press questions on the decision since Kaer can still appeal, although he is also scheduled to attend his committee on racial profiling in North Portland at 3pm today, and may face questions there. In conclusion to his letter to Kaer, Potter writes:

You are not being disciplined for political or religious reasons, but in good faith, and for the purpose of improving public service.

Update, 1pm: NO QUESTIONS: Potter reads statement to the press, with communications director John Doussard in the background…

The mayor says:

“This has been a difficult decision for me to make, and not one I make lightly. But I believe our community must hold its police officers to the highest standards of behavior, and on the evening of January 4th, 2006, Lt.Kaer failed to meet those standards. Ultimately, that failure contributed to the death of a human being.”

“It is especially troubling to me that an experienced commanding officer who was once charged with training others in patrol tactics would ignore Bureau policies and training protocols.”

“While it is undeniable that the decision by Lt.Kaeer to fire at the car had to be made in a split second, none of the decisions leading up to that moment had to be made under any such pressure. It was Lt.Kaer who escalated the situation by not following Bureau training or policy, and in the end those failures contributed to a death.”

Potter added that while Kaer’s decision to shoot “was not unlawful,” it violated bureau directive 1010.10 about Bureau Members not placing themselves or others in jeopardy by engaging in actions inconsistent with their training.

“There is no denying that this is a tragedy for the families of everyone involved, including Mr.Yound and Lt.Kaer. But I believe Lt.Kaer’s actions on January 4th, 2006 demonstrated serious deficiency in judgment and disregard for established training procedures.”