The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09-10-2012 Ad Hoc Diversity Committeer ._�, ®i CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: September 5, 2012 To: Ad Hoc Diversity Committee Members From: Marian K. Karr Re: Committee Packet for meeting on September 10, 2012 The following documents are for your review and comment at the next Committee meeting: 1. Agenda for 09/10/12 2. Minutes of the meeting on 08/29/12 3. Res. 12 -320 — Establishing the Committee 4. Police Citizens Review Board Minutes of June 12 with transcription and summary of May 9 forum 5. Human Rights Commission minutes of March 20, 2012 with recommendation re Police Citizens Review Board 6. Letter from Executive Committee of the Consultation of Religious Communities (Sanctuary City Committee) 7. Letter from Coalition for Racial Justice 8. Annual Report of Police Citizens Review Board LZ THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND ALL MEETINGS AD HOC DIVERSITY COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA Monday, September 10, 2012 Harvat Hall in City Hall 410 East Washington Street 4:00 PM 1. Introductions 2. Approve August 29 minutes 3. Discussion by Members of issues a. Review materials provided by Council b. Possible Presentation • Police / Police Citizens Review Board — September 17 • Transportation — September 24 c. Public Input process 4. Adjournment zx Ad Hoc Diversity Committee, August 29, 2012 1 MINUTES DRAFT CITY COUNCIL AD HOC DIVERSITY COMMITTEE AUGUST 29, 2012 HELLING CONFERENCE ROOM, 4:00 P.M. Members Present: Bakhit Bakhit, Cindy Roberts, Joe Dan Coulter, Orville Townsend, Sr., Kingsley Botchway II, Joan Vanden Berg Members Absent: Donna Henry Staff Present: Eleanor Dilkes, Marian Karr, Tom Markus Others Present: Charlie Eastham WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS: The meeting began with those present introducing themselves. FUTURE MEETING SCHEDULE: Chairperson Botchway began the discussion by noting that the Committee should first decide when their meetings will take place. Members gave their opinions on what days and times work best for them. After some discussion, the Members agreed to meet at 4:00 P.M. on Mondays. Coulter moved to set the Ad Hoc Diversity Committee meetings for Mondays at 4:00 P.M.; seconded by Vanden Berg. Motion carried 6- 0; Henry absent. The discussion then turned to the regularity of meetings for the Ad Hoc Diversity Committee. Chairperson Botchway noted that they would like to have presentations made by the Chief of Police and the Transportation Director somewhere in the middle of September. He continued, stating that his preference would be to meet at least two times per month, but he asked for others' opinions on this. Townsend stated that he believes they should meet more frequently at first, until they get a better handle on how they will proceed. This led to some discussion among the Members, with meetings being set in September for the 10th, 17th, and 24th. Townsend moved to set the Ad Hoc Diversity Committee meetings in September for the 10th, 17th, and 24"; seconded by Coulter. Motion carried 6 -0; Henry absent. As for meeting content, Members noted their charge from the Council and what the background issues are surrounding their charge. It was also suggested that the Committee receive public input on the issues, as well. Karr noted that the Council has requested staff provide Members with background information from the Human Rights Commission, several pieces of correspondence that have been received regarding the issues, as well as transcriptions of the PCRB forum; and that information would be provided prior to the first meeting. City Manager Markus responded to Members' questions and concerns, further explaining the presentations by the Chief of Police and Transportation Director would provide background to current operations of the departments and provide an opportunity to expose members to the departments. Meeting length was also discussed, with Members agreeing that an hour meeting would be optimal and that meetings be kept to less than two hours in length, when possible. The meeting on September 10th will be geared toward sharing of opinions and viewpoints of Members, as well as reviewing Ad Hoc Diversity Committee, August 29, 2012 correspondence from Council on these issues. The meetings of September 17th and 24th will be scheduled for presentations by Transportation and Police /PCRB staff involved in these issues. Roberts noted that she would like to have more background information on the PCRB and their role in these issues. Staff will provide the PCRB's Annual Report in the September 10th information packet so that Members can gain further knowledge on this particular board, its role, and how the Ad Hoc Diversity Committee fits in. Members also agreed that discussion with the School Board may also provide much needed input. Karr then brought up the issue of which meeting room would work best for the Committee. After some discussion, it was decided that Harvat Hall would work better for the Committee. Also agreed as important is public input, with Chairperson Botchway stating that advertising of this will be key to educating the public. It was agreed that agendas and notifications of the Committee meetings should state that the public is invited to attend all meetings, and that they will be held at City Hall in Harvat Hall. MINUTES FORMAT: Karr explained that the Committee can decide what type of minute format they prefer. She explained how the Council and various other boards and commissions handle this. After a brief discussion, Members agreed that action minutes will be essential to have, but that there may be instances where a full transcript will be warranted. Coulter moved to have minutes of the Ad Hoc Diversity Committee be action driven; seconded by Roberts. Motion carried 6 -0; Henry absent. AGENDA DISTRIBUTION ELECTRONICALLY: Next discussed was the issue of how Members would like to receive their meeting agendas and packets. After a brief discussion, all Members but Townsend agreed to receive this information electronically. Townsend will pick up his packet in person. Dilkes and Karr spoke to Members about open meeting and open record laws. Dilkes gave Members a rundown of issues they need to be aware of with these laws. Public records are a major concern, especially with emails between Members. Dilkes then responded to questions from Members regarding such issues as conflict of interest and closed meetings. STRUCTURE: Karr noted that a timeline of March 10, 2013, has already been established for the Diversity Committee. She then asked if the Members would like to add public input to each agenda, or to hold these meetings in a separate manner. Members discussed this, agreeing that having public input as an ongoing agenda item may work; however, several wanted more time to consider this issue. Botchway moved to table the issue of having public input as part of each agenda; seconded by Bakhit. Motion carried 6 -0; Henry absent. ADJOURNMENT: Botchway moved to adjourn the meeting at 5:35 P.M.; seconded by Vanden Berg. Motion carried 6 -0; Henry absent. Ad Hoc Diversity Committee, August 29, 2012 Ad Hoc Diversity Committee ATTENDANCE RECORD 2012 Key. X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused TERM o 0 0 0 NAME EXP. co m m N co 0 --I IN Donna 03/10/13 O/E Henry Cindy 03/10/13 X Roberts Joan 03110/13 X Vanden Berg Bakhit 03/10/13 X Bakhit Kingsley 03/10/13 X Botchway Orville 03/10/13 X Townsend Joe Dan 03/10/13 X Coulter Key. X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused AM Prepared by: Susan Dulek, Asst. City Atty., 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356 -5030 RESOLUTION NO. 12 -320 RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN AD HOC DIVERSITYCOMMITTEE TO STUDY CITY OPERATIONS AS THEY RELATE TO MINORITY POPULATIONS WHEREAS, the population of Iowa City is becoming increasingly racially diverse; and WHEREAS, on May 15, 2012, City Council passed a resolution of intent to establish an ad hoc committee to study City operations as they relate to minority populations with a view toward promoting just and harmonious interaction between local government and minority segments of the community (Resolution No. 12 -260). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The Ad Hoc Diversity Committee is established. 2. The Diversity Committee shall consist of seven (7) members to be appointed by the City Council. Members of other City boards and commissions may serve on the Diversity Committee. Members must be residents of Iowa City. 3. Applications for membership on the Diversity Committee shall be announced, advertised, and available in the same manner as those for all City boards and commissions. 4. City Council shall select the Chair, who when present will preside over all meetings, and the Vice - Chair, who will serve as chair in absence of the Chair. 5. The City Manager, City Attorney, and City Clerk, or their designees, shall staff the Diversity Committee. 6. The Diversity Committee shall determine the frequency and conduct of its meetings. The meetings will be open to the public in accordance with Chapter 21 of the Iowa Code. 7. The Diversity Committee shall have an organizational meeting no later than September 10, 2012. 8. The charges of the Diversity Committee are as follows: A. To study the operation of the City's transit system, including but not limited to the downtown interchange, as it relates to minority populations with a view toward promoting just and harmonious interaction between City government and minority segments of the community. B. To study the operations of City law enforcement, including but not limited to the Police Citizen Review Board (PCRB), as it relates to minority populations with a view toward promoting just and harmonious interaction between City government and minority segments of the community. Resolution No. 12 -320 Page 2 9. The Diversity Committee shall submit a written report to the City Council by March 10, 2013, that responds to each of the charges listed above and that contains recommendations, if any, with respect to each of the charges. 10. Absent further action by the City Council, the Diversity Committee will dissolve on March 10, 2013. Passed and approved this 19th day of . June , 2012. CITY '. MAYOR- Ap ove `�l C�I�/l ` 6 ,/3 -/ � City Attorney's Office CALL TO ORDER: MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: STAFF ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: F9 rk 1 •.-Mo POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES — June 12, 2012 Vice Chair Joseph Treloar called the meeting to order at 5:32 P.M. Kingsley Botchway, Melissa Jensen, Donald King (5:45 P.M.), Royceann Porter (5:44 P.M.) None Staff Kellie Tuttle and Catherine Pugh None Captain Jim Steffen of the ICPD. LZ RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 1) Accept PCRB Report on Complaint #12 -02 2) Accept PCRB Community Forum Summary 3) To change the name to Citizens Police Review Board 4) To remove the language regarding Formal Mediation within the City Code and from the Standard Operating Procedures 5) To offer as an option, the ability for a Board member to accompany the complainant during the police investigation interview process for a PCRB complaint, at the complainant's request CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Jensen and seconded by Botchway to adopt the consent calendar as presented or amended. • Minutes of the meeting on 04/30/12 • Minutes of the meeting on 05109/12 • ICPD Use of Force Report —November 2011 • ICPD Use of Force Report— December 2011 • ICPD Department Memo #12 -16 (Nov -Dec 2011 Use of Force Review) Motion carried, 3/0, King and Porter absent. OLD BUSINESS Community Forum — The Board reviewed the forum summary draft and made revisions and also confirmed the motion made during the community forum regarding the proposed name change to the Citizens Police Review Board. Motion by Jensen, seconded by Treloar to approve the amended summary draft and forward to Council. Motion carried, 5/0. The Board then discussed the following other recommendations: It was moved by Treloar, seconded by Jensen to remove the language regarding Formal Mediation within the City Code and from the Standard Operating Procedures. PCRB REPORT OF SUMMARY DISMISSAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL Re Investigation of Complaint PCRB #12 -02 Complaint PCRB #12 -02, filed May 7, 2012, was summarily dismissed as required by the city Code, Section 8 -8 -3 E, requiring that only those complaints which do not involve the conduct of an Iowa City sworn police officer may be subject to summary dismissal by the board. DATED: June 12, 2012 LAW 1? 1"q5 JUN 112012 City Clerk lon City, lotya OUR June 12, 2012 Page 2 In order for mediation to take place both the complainant and the officer must agree to it. The Board feels that it's misleading to offer mediation to a complainant when the officer is being advised by the Union /Association to not participate in the mediation process. Therefore, offering false hope to the complainant. Motion carried, 510 Based on public concern it was moved by Treloar, seconded by King that all complaints go to both the Police Department and the PCRB. The Board discussed what a complaint was and concluded that they were talking only about the written formal complaints. They then talked about what the advantages /disadvantages would be for all complaints to be reviewed by the Board, especially if the complainant is satisfied by the outcome of response they receive from the ICPD and that the option of filing with both the Board and the ICPD are offered when they speak with someone from the ICPD. The Board also receives a quarterly report from ICPD, which lists the formal written complaints that are filed at the ICPD and issued IAIR # and also the complaints that are filed with the PCRB, which are also issued an IAIR #, and lists a date, location, type of investigation, and resolution. The Board also agreed that more education needs to be done regarding the PCRB so that the public is aware of their options. The Board is open to ideas and suggestions on the different ways to educate and get the word out to the public. Motion defeated, 0/5. (Break 6:54 -6:56) Motion by Botchway, seconded by Porter, to offer as an option, the ability for a Board member to accompany the complainant during the police investigation interview process for a PCRB complaint, at the complainant's request. The Board felt that if a complainant was uneasy about meeting with the ICPD they could offer the option of a member going with them and possibly making them feel more at ease; therefore more complainants would participate in the interview process giving more information to the investigation process than just the written form. Motion carried, 510. The Board discussed the additional changes concerning the ordinance, by -laws, or standard operating procedures that they had previously been looking into when former member Braverman was on the Board. It was agreed that many of those changes were addressed in the recommendations or at the forum, such as the name change, making the process more welcoming and less intimidating, more education regarding the Board and the complaint process, hiring an independent investigator, and keeping statistics for the complaints filed. The Board agreed that they would add an item regarding keeping statistics on the next meeting agenda to discuss further. • -e June 12, 2012 Page 3 The Board agreed these are the current recommendations. No other recommendations will be made at this time. NEW BUSINESS King welcomed new member Kingsley Botchway to the Board. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None. BOARD INFORMATION None. STAFF INFORMATION Tuttle stated that she would work on a draft of the annual report for the next meeting. Ax*i1A1W SESSION Motion by Porter and seconded by Jensen to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22 -7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 510. Open session adjourned at 7:34 P.M. REGULAR SESSION Returned to open session at 7:37 P.M. Motion by Jensen, seconded by Botchway to forward the Summary Dismissal for PCRB Complaint #12 -02 to City Council. Motion carried, 5/0. TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change) • July 10, 2012 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm • August 14, 2012, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm • September 11, 2012, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm • October 9, 2012, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Porter, seconded by Treloar. Motion carried, 5/0. Meeting adjourned at 7:40 P.M. II II II II II A C ti 7 fD p � Q n K � R. 1 D s• a 7 �o t7' w y y Cr1 H rp N C (• 1 IC -L-71 tiror��by�yti d�� yyy t1l 0 k j k k k k N I k k k k N 0 I k k k k k I k k k k k N I i i i I C F t I I i 1 D s• a 7 �o t7' w y y Cr1 H rp N C (• 1 IC -L-71 POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 -1826 (319) 356 -5041 June 12, 2012 Iowa City City Council City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Re: Police Citizen Review Board's Amoral Community Forum Conducted 9 May 2012 To Whom It May Concern: The Police Citizens Review Board held its amoral forum at the Iowa City Public Library in Room A at 7:OOpm. Board members present were Donald King, Chairperson, Joseph Treloar, Melissa Jensen, and Roycearm Porter. New member Kingsley Botchway was present but not on the panel due to just being appointed. The Board's Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh was also present. The Chairperson called the forum to order and the agenda was presented. Legal Counsel Pugh started the presentation with a quick outline of the responsibilities and procedures that the board must follow (See Attached). She highlighted some of the questions that have been posed about what the board can and cannot do. She pointed out that the primary federal law that governs these issues is the Fifth Amendment, to avoid incriminating oneself. Chapter 400 of the Civil Service is the limitation that the PCRB has no ability to discipline any police officer. Ms. Pugh went on to explain the procedure for filing a complaint with the PCRB. The PCRB gives the complaint to the Police Chief to investigate. The Chief and the City Manager are the only individuals who have the ability to compel the testimony of police officers. This power is particular to a public employee. Private employers cannot compel their employees to testify. This is why the Chief investigates the complaints. If complaints were investigated by the PCRB alone or by a private investigator, there would be no accused officer's testimony. The standard of review that the PCRB uses is one of reasonable basis that is outlined in our ordinance and is described very specifically. Since the Chief makes a decision and he has the expertise in police matters, the PCRB's review of his decision is a reasonable basis review. The only reason the PCRB cannot sustain a decision of the Chief is if it is "unsupported by substantial evidence', "unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious" or "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice, or any Federal, State or local law ", according to Section 8 -8 -7 B (2) a, b, c of the Iowa City City Code. This is the standard of review that was chosen at the time the ordinance was created. It can be changed but that's what we have to work with right now. Member Treloar and Member Jensen answered several of the questions that had been submitted by the public to the City Clerk's Office. Questions regarding Police Department procedures were directed to the Iowa City Police Department. Chair King shared the statistics. Since 1997, eighty complaints were filed with 177 allegations. Six allegations were sustained during those complaints. King explained that the recommendations to the City Council were on the web site along with all of the complaints since 1997. Chair King advised the attending group of the meetings being open to the public and held on the second Tuesday of the month. The forum was then opened to the public for questions. The Board was asked if they had gone to the City Council to have the name changed and Chair King advised that it had not been taken to the City Council. A former Board member asked that her letter to the PCRB be read into the record. Member Jensen read the letter into the record. The former member stated that most of the changes had been discussed at length and that they were ready to go to the City Council with recommmendations. She said we had been looking at the procedures, bylaws, and ordinances. She felt that those issues were abandoned. Member Treloar explained that he had received information from four other citizen review boards. When comparing their laws with our laws, their laws being quite different, there were a lot of things we couldn't apply. Some had powers to discipline officers. That's not in our Charter. Treloar then asked if he could make a motion to recommend to the City Council that we change the name. Treloar motioned and Member Jensen seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council that the name be changed to Citizens Police Review Board. Motion carried 4 -0. A question from the public was presented about training to deal with active mental illness. A member from the police department, in attendance, explained training procedures and stated training was given to cover mental illness this year. The four members present were asked to give their thoughts on the structure of the board. All members responded. The consensus was that the feeling from the public about openness could not be helped since the privacy and confidentiality of the complainant did not allow as to discuss our procedures during Executive Sessions. One concern expressed was about spending too much time on officer misconduct and not enough time in dealing with the disproportionate arrest and citations rates for black youth in the community. A community member suggested the PCRB should make more recommendations to the City Council about police policies, practices and procedures. Another conuinmity member asked if the City Council had asked the Human Rights Commission to take a look at the PCRB process. Iowa City Mayor Matt Hayek, in attendance, responded that it was on their pending work session. Some members of the public spoke on the transparency of the complaint process. It was again pointed out that we are limited on the information we can share with the public about our process in keeping the identity of the individuals involved private. Treloar pointed out that our police department strives hard to keep their officers' actions transparent by wearing microphones and having videos in the patrol cars. Policy requires the officers to use both on all calls. One person questioned the process of knowing the officers involved and keeping the number of complaints filed against him. The board wants to remain blind to the identity of the officers involved so their decisions wouldn't be tainted by that knowledge. PCRB again has no authority to discipline officers. The process of where the complaint is filed was brought up. Complaint can be filed at the Police Department or the PCRB. Thought was that maybe all complaints should go to the PCRB. This again would require the current practice to be changed. PCRB currently gets the statistics from the department but does not review the internal complaints. A motion for adjournment was raised by Jensen and seconded by Treloar and voted 4 -0 to adjourn. Adjournment 8:30pm Donald King Chairperson Police Citizen Review Board Transcriptions attached per Council request. Forum agenda, minutes, transcriptions, correspondence, and handouts are all available on the City website. (wevw.icgov.ore) Police Citizens Review Board May 9th, 2012 Community Forum History of Police Citizens Review Board (PCRB) The PCRB was created under Iowa home rule authority on July 15, 1997 to assure external accountability of the Iowa City Police Department. In response to a community referendum and following an Iowa Supreme Court decision upholding the amendment, on December 12, 2007, the PCRB was made a permanent entity by amendment to the Iowa City Charter. Additionally, the PCRB was granted the power to subpoena evidence and was required to hold one public forum per year. The PCRB is comprised of five citizens who are appointed by the City Council for four year terms. II. Laws Governing the PCRB Although Iowa home rule law allows the City of Iowa City to create a police citizens review board, the board's authority is limited by Federal and State Law. A. 5ih Amendment to the U.S. Constitution No person may be compelled to testify against himself. The PCRB cannot force the testimony of any police officer accused of misconduct. B. Iowa Code Ch. 400 CIVIL SERVICE The state of Iowa has established a Civil Service Commission to oversee civil service operations in the cities of our state. Under this law, only the police chief and city manager have the power to discipline a police officer. (Iowa Code 400.19) Iowa City Code section 8 -8 -2 (E) reiterates that limitation upon the PCRB. III. Investigations of PCRB Complaints A. Investigations by Chief of Police Complaints made to the PCRB are investigated by the ICPD. The reason investigations are structured in this way is to allow the most comprehensive investigation into alleged police misconduct. The Command staff has the power to compel police officers to cooperate with all internal investigations. This right of the public employer was established in Uniformed Sanitation Men Association v. Commissioner of Sanitation of City of New York (392 US 280). This power is particular to the public employer and cannot be transferred to another entity. Under Iowa's Civil Service law, this power to compel is held only by the City Manager and the Police Chief. B. Investigations by PCRB If cases were not investigated within the Police Department, the PCRB would have no other access to the officer's side of the story. Even with subpoena power, the 5th amendment right to avoid self- incrimination prevents anyone, other than the public employer from compelling an officer's testimony. The PCRB ordinance allows the PCRB Police Citizens Review Board May 9th, 2012 Community Forum to do its own further investigation after reviewing the Police Chiefs findings. The current system allows the PCRB the benefit of information it would have no way of obtaining unless investigations were conducted internally. The PCRB is committed to making the complaint procedure more comfortable and less intimidating for complainants and is interested in ideas to promote complainant participation in the investigation. IV. Standard of Review: Reasonable Basis Standard The Iowa City Police Citizen's Board is the first and only such review board in the state of Iowa. In determining a manner for this board to review the findings of the Chief of Police, the drafters looked to the Administrative Procedure Act, Ch. 17A of the Code of Iowa. The Administrative Procedures Act requires a reviewing agency to use a reasonable basis test to review decisions made by the entity with expertise in the subject at hand. Since internal investigation by the Police Department was believed to be the most effective method of fact finding, it followed that a reasonable basis standard would apply to the Police Chiefs conclusions. The PCRB cannot substitute its own judgment in cases before it. The PCRB is required to review the Chiefs decisions with deference to his expertise and sustain those decisions unless they are "unreasonable ". V. Changing Name of PCRB The citizens of Iowa City went through a fair amount of effort to accomplish the referendum which survived a challenge to the Supreme Court of Iowa to make the Police Citizens Review Board a permanent entity in our city. The Iowa City Charter was amended to require the existence of the Police Citizens Review Board. Given that the name was specifically included in the Charter amendment in 2007, it should remain the formal name of the board with any other version of the name being designated "a.k.a ". May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Members Present: Melissa Jensen, Royceami Porter, Joseph Treloar (Vice - Chair), Donald King (Chair) Non- Participating Member: Kingsley Botchway II (new) Members Absent: None Staff Present: Catherine Pugh Call to Order/Roll Call: King: I'd like to call the quorum to order, and roll call. Roycealm Porter. Porter: Here. King: Joseph Treloar. Treloar: Here. King: Melissa Jensen. Jensen: Here. King: Catherine Pugh Pugh: Here. King: Don King is here. Introduction of Board /Overview of Complaint Review Process and Purview of Board: Page 1 King: Good evening. Uh, on tonight's agenda, uh, what we'd like to do is we have a presentation from our legal counsel. After the ... her presentation, then we will have, uh ... the Board Members have questions that were sent in to us that, uh, we've reviewed and we'll answer those questions. Then we'll open it up to the public. Um, when we do open up to the public we ask that you keep your comments to five minutes or less. If there's time towards the end, you can always come up. Um, we ask that you turn pagers and cell phones off so there's not any interruptions. Are you ready, Catherine? Pugh: Yes, thank you. King: All right! Pugh: Good evening. Um, if you have had ... haven't had an opportunity, I have prepared a, uh, summary, an outline, um, concerning several of the questions that This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual conmmnity forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 2 have been raised and posed to the PCRB, and those are available on the back table. Ulr, it may be a little easier to follow along on that and uh, there's a lot of information that I want to cover rather quickly. So that might be...helpfal to have that to...to glance at. Some of the questions that have been posed, uh, to the PCRB concern, uh, what we can and cannot do. Uh, in my preparation for answering some of those questions, I had the opportunity to go through the ancient archives of the, uh, PCRB legal counsel. Um, my predecessor, uh, who is now a district court jud ... judge, Dough Russell, kept copious notes about how the PCRB came into being and ... why we do things the way we do. Some of the things that I want to share with you are, uh, the laws that govern the PCRB, and the limitations. A lot of times, uh, people have said, well, why can't you do things the way they do in another jurisdiction. Um, we have certain laws that we need to follow here in Iowa, and I wanted to outline a couple of those for you. The PCRB was created under Iowa Horne Rule Law, and that basically means that a city can create entities to carry out duties if they're not otherwise accounted under a state, federal law. So in July 15 of 1997 the, all, City Council created the PCRB. A citizen referendum, uh, in 2006 requested that the PCRB be made a permanent entity. Uh, and requested that PCRB have additional powers, including sub ... the power to subpoena evidence, uh, the responsibility to hold one public forum per year, uh, yeah, and ... after a supreme court challenge to several other items that had been passed as part of that referendum. The changes to the PCRB were the... were the only ones that were held up. So as a ro ... result of that, on December 12, 2007, uh, the PCRB was created as a permanent entity and part of the City ... Iowa City Charter. Although Home Rule allows the City of Iowa City to create a Police Citizens Review Board, the Police Citizens Review Board still has to operate under federal and state law. The primary federal law that makes our job interesting is the Fifth Amendment, and that is the right of any person ... to avoid incrimination, um, by testifying against themselves. The second is a state code, uh, which is Chapter 400 Civil Service, and this is something that has been talked about a lot, and that is the limitation that the PCRB has no ability to discipline any police officer. Uh, and that is because that privilege is specifically limited to the Police Chief and uh, in Iowa City the City Manager. The second area that has been, um, had a lot of questions... concerning... is the way in which PCRB complaints are investigated. When a PCRB complaint is made, we receive a copy of it and the Police Department receives a copy of it. Then for a period of 90 days the PCRB doesn't do much with that complaint, until they receive a report from the Chief. Now, the Chief and his staff, uh, the command staff, investigate the complaint. The Chief has the ability to compel the testimony of police officers, and he is the only one, the Police Chief and the City Manager are the only individuals who have the ability compel the testimony of police officers, and I've reiterated the case in which, urn ... that right is created. It's Uniform Sanitation Men Association vs. the Commissioner of Sanitation of the City of New York. Uh, this power is particular to a public employer. It doesn't go to private employers. Private employers can't compel their employees to testify, or to ... uh, to give evidence, but the Chief can. This is why the PCRB complaints are investigated by the Chief. Unless they were, they were... if they This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 3 were investigated by the PCRB alone or by a private investigator, there would be no access to the accused officer's testimony. And, the drafters of the ordinance felt that this would be the best way to get a... a balanced accounting of what happened. That the investigators would have access to the complainants and to the officers. Uh, something that ... with the subpoena power that the PCRB would have access to that, but again, the officers, uh, Fifth Amendment rights prevent the PCRB from compelling that testimony. The standard of review that the PCRB uses is one of reasonable basis, and ... and that is outlined in our ordinance, uh, and described rather specifically. Since the Chief makes a decision and he has expertise in ... in police matters, the PCRB's review of his decisions is a reasonable basis review, and that means that the only reason that the PCRB can, uh, not sustain a decision of the Chief is if it is unreasonable. The PCRB does not get to take a brand new look at the evidence and insert their own judgnient in the case. They're limited to ... that ... difference, given to the Chief's... Chief's decisions, and this is a common standard of review when a reviewing body is looking at a decision made by an entity with expertise in an area. This is the standard of review that was chosen at the time the ordinance was created. Uh, it can be changed, but that's what we have to work with right now. The last thing I wanted to continent on is changing the name of the PCRB, and I guess the only thing that we need to keep in mind ... I .... the board has no objection to whatever name, uh, people feel would be ... would better describe what the PCRB does, but keep in mind that the Charter specifically states that we are the Police Citizens Review Board. So in order to make a change to that, there would have to be a change to the Charter. Okay. I think I've covered my duties here. I'll be happy to answer additional questions as they come up, and hopefully the outline will clear up any, uh, ambiguity I ... I left in my presentation. King: (mumbled) Treloar: Sure. Um, one of the questions we received, um, do you think it is possible that the fact that the police chief investigates the complaint is a deterrent to people who have a complaint? That may be. I... and may not be, but as is specified by the guidelines on which we have to operate ... we ... there's really no choice in the matter. That's the way the system is set up. Um... do the records of the PCRB include information on the race, socioeconomic status of the person who filed the complaint? If yes, do you notice a pattern of any kind and what is it? Um, on the back table there there's the complaint forms, and... on the very back page of the complaint form is the complainant statistical information. We ask if this ... be filled out. If they don't want to fill it out, that's fine too. But that'd be the information that we have to go off of for this (mumbled) indicate your age, color and national origin, gender identity, sexual orientation, marital status, mental disability, physical disability, and religion. Urn... often times that's not filled out and I, you know, we have not compiled a study to see if there's a pattern because there's not a whole lot of information to develop a study from. Un ... do the police persomrel /officers get any training on cultural competency, racial profiling, and/or training on systemic racial disparity and law enforcement? If so, what This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 4 specifically does the training cover and how often do they receive update training? I contacted the Police Department on this, um ... the Iowa City Police Department subscribes to the Police Legal Sciences, uh, Inc., and it's a corporation dedicated to helping police officers and dispatchers strengthen their decision - making skills, professionalism, customer service. Um, once a year the training focuses on racial profiling. This year they've also been training month... have a training month on dealing with... immigrants and this year Iowa City PD received four hours of diversity training on a countywide, uh, in countywide sessions. The four -hour diversity training doesn't occur every year, but usually happens about every other or every third year. Um, and the Police Department also tracks all traffic stops by race, reason for stop, vehicle searches, and outcome of stop. And...and ... what type of training on racial disparities and how to review complaints for racial profiling do the members of the PCRB receive? Actually, there's no formal training for us in that regards. Um ... I personally have been through cultural competency training with my other ... with my regular employment in racial profiling but as a board member ... we don't have training that we receive to be board members. We're just volunteers so ... and uh ... has the PCRB ever watched a video, listened to an audio from a police car of a specific situation related to a complaint? Why or why not? And if you have listened, who selects what you listen to and watch? Yes we do that regularly. Um, the officers have monitors on them. They have cameras in the cars. It's very common for us to request to see the tapes. When we see the tapes, the officer's specific face is blocked out because that's a safeguard to keep us from ... um ... developing a pattern on a particular officer or just to protect the identity of the officer. But um, all it takes for us to request that is just any one board member can request to listen to the tapes or see the audios, and ... we do that with regularity. I mean, we've even just to make sure we're thorough on cases that seemed pretty cut and dried right up front, um, requested to hear the audios and see the tapes, just to make sure we weren't missing something. So that's... that's a common practice of the board. Melissa (mumbled) Jensen: Okay. Um, one of the... one of the next questions is... one of the next questions is do you know that sometimes the Police Chief has shown or played a police recording of a situation to a complainant filer? If you are aware of this and the PCRB members sometimes see or hear a recording related to a case, do you know whether the filer and the PCRB board members actually see or hear the same footage, or different footage? Is that reported to you as part of the investigative process? Um, as Joe mentioned, um, we are aware that a complainant may sometimes view or listen to an audio recording, and that is part of typically the investigative report that we get if a complainant has viewed or has watched that. Um, and we do occasionally, um, request that information. It's provided for us to view that ... to view that information whether it's ... it's video or audio recording. Often times that information'll be stated in the police ... in the police report. That's typically where we would find that information, that, uh, someone who has filed a complaint has viewed or listened to an audio recording. That would be included in the report that we would receive. The next question, is the PCRB This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board —Annual Community Forum Page S provided with a complete record of the steps in each investigation? Do the investigation records let you know whether the Chief or another investigating officer has had a conversation with the filer and the content of that conversation? Yes, that again is part of the report, uh, that we receive. So, regarding conversations involved with that ... that the Chief or the investigating officers may have had with the person that filed the complaint. Next one, there is ... there is, excuse me, there's always communication between the PCRB and the Chief regarding every case. Does the PCRB always have direct face -to -face communication with every complaint filer? Why or why not? That particular face -to -face conversation with the complaint filer, um, may or may not occur. It depends in part on the review level that is set for the complaint itself. Um, and also the wishes of the complaint filer. In some cases the complaint filer chooses to not ... to not do that. Um, the complaint filer is also... always welcome to come to the open portion of the meeting, um, if they choose to do that, as well. So, that depends on each individual case. Again, it depends on the case itself, on the wishes of the person filing the complaint. Next question, has anyone who made a complaint withdrawn it during the investigation process? Do you know the reasons given for that? Um, I can't speak for what has happened prior to my being on the board. I've been on the board about a year, but my understanding is is if someone does choose to withdraw their complaint, they're welcome to do that. That's their prerogative, and as far as reasons given, they're not required to provide a reason to us. If someone changes their mind or for whatever reason chooses to withdraw that, that is totally within that individual's prerogative. And then the last one, um, who reviewed the questions submitted by the public, and who created the answers? Uh, the PCRB board itself reviewed the questions and discussed the responses to the questions. King: One of the, uh, other questions was, uh, the number of complaints filed since the board, uh, was certified in 97. Uh, there's been 80 total complaints. Out of those complaints there was 177 allegations. Out of those 177 allegations, six of `ern were sustained. Um... one of the questions, has the board ever made any recommendations to the City Council regarding changes to pol ... police practice, procedures, and policies? Under the complaint resolution in the annual report, uh, from 1998 to 2011, um, they're online. There's instructions back there on the yellow sheet, um, how to get online to the Police Citizens Review Board and you can review our annual reports. Uh, what is the process for citizens to make a request that the board review a police practice, procedure, or policy? Urn, please describe exactly how the board would respond to such a request. Um, every month, it's the ... second Tuesday? Of the month ... um, when we have our meetings. They're open to the public. The public can come in. Uh, if there's a particular thing that they want to look at, um, let us know, um, and then we can research it and get back to, um, that person. Um ... we did just receive ... lam, a letter tonight, um ... from a citizen who was once on the board. Um, some of the things that we had discussed prior was, uh, some of the procedures and changing them. Um ... they were put, urn ... I don't want to say they were put on the back burner, but ... we had, uh, a lot of complaints to review and our ... forum, we This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 6 wanted to get ready, unr, and we've moved those back. Um ... we, I think they're on the ... May or June's agenda. Um, the other thing was... was... how we have tc change `em. One of `em was if you change one policy or procedure, that makes you change another policy or procedure, and that may have to go to the City Council to be changed. Um, one of `em was the ... was the name. Um, the City Council, um, I think there's three options that they can do, uh, for our name change. Um, they can initiate it, um, a citizen can initiate it to them, and ... they, the Council can turn it over for a, uh, vote. Is that correct? To have the public... vote on whether they want to change the name? Pugh: Two of those options would involve a public vote. The Council can change it within its own internal vote, uh, a... a citizen can, urn, create a referendum, sort of like what was done, uni, previously for the PCRB, and then it goes to a vote that way; or the ...the Council can request that it be ... that it be up for a vote. (several talking) May I just make one clarification? Um, in one of the previous questions about, um, face -to -face contact with complainants. Um, aside from the fact that the complainant can, you know, request an opportunity to speak to the PCRB, the PCRB ... on occasional also requests the opportunity to interview the complainant, and that decision is made after the PCRB receives the Chief's report. Then they can determine, uh, they make a determination as to what level of review they want to apply to that report. Um, and they can ... feel that the report was sufficient on its face and that they don't need to do any additional investigation. They can request an opportunity to meet with the complainant; um, they can ... request the opportunity to meet with other witnesses; and they can, uh, request additional investigation by the Chief or the City Manager, unu, subpoena witnesses, hire independent investigators. So there's a ... a whole array of things that the board can do, including requesting a meeting with the .... with the complainant. Public Discussion With Police Citizens Review Board: King: I'd like to open it to the public. Um, when you come up if you'd sign your name, um, fill in the ... I think it's your name and address on there and we'll take your questions. Dieterle: Um, I'm Caroline Dieterle and I just wanted to ask whether the, um, review board has requested the name change that the... requested the... sent a request to the Council requesting, um, the name change, because I'm aware that, and have been aware for a long time, that the procedure would involve the Council doing it. It's not something that you can do, and it is my understanding that the Council can vote and just do it. Um, it would seem to me that it would be in their best interest to change the name and get it done, and um, rather than, uh, you know, messing around about with it anymore, simply you know make that part of your recommendation to the City Council to please change that, I mean it's... doesn't, you know, it doesn't really change anything about what you're doing. It just is making a better name that I think would be more acceptable to the public. Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 7 King: To answer that, currently we have not, um, taken that to the City Council. (several talking) Braverman: I-Ii, I know most of you. I'm Janie Braverman. I'm a, uh, former member of the board, and it, Don, I have a couple questions. I'm assuming that that was my letter that you referred to, but did not read? King: Yes. Braverman: Um, I would like to have you read that into the record tonight, if you would, and I'm also just a little bit concerned because, um ... one of the questions you answered... your response was that the board's been busy because there have been a lot of complaints. You know, the process that we were going through was when I was on the board. That's been two years ago. I just wanted to make that clear, that it's been two years ago since the board was actually looking at those things. When you answered it sounded like that that was a very recent thing. So, but anyway, I would like you to read... since you did read other people's in, because my question really was much broader than are you looking, have you looked, and what you're doing. So if you would do that, I'd appreciate that. Jensen: Um, okay, I'll go ahead and read it. It was actually, um, addressed to the City of Iowa City, um, to the person that the question were to be submitted to. Here's a question for tomorrow night's public forum. When I resigned from the PCRB in the summer of 2010, the board had been engaged in a review of its policies, standard operating procedures, bylaws, and ordinance, with the intent that the board would make one or more recormmendations to the City Council for changes. One recommendation that the board had agreed on was to change the name of the board to make its purpose more clear. As I recall, the suggestion was the name be changed to Citizens Police Review Board. The board members had had preliminary discussions about various matters, including one, the name of the board; two, whether the process was intimidating or less than welcoming to the community; three, whether there were barriers to community participation; four, whether the procedure of the board reviewing the Police Chief's report was the best procedure; five, what if anything it meant that so few complaints against the police were sustained; six, whether the current policy of not keeping statistics about individual officers limited the board's ability to look at the Police Department as a whole, and whether keeping various statistics might be usefal for other purposes; and seven, whether the board should be looking at the department as a whole rather than just on a complaint -by- complaint basis. When I left the board, the only remaining preparatory work to be done was the review of the citizens boards of other jurisdictions. I believe Joe ... board member Joe Treloar was tasked with that. Following that the board would have been ready to discuss what recommendations it would make to the City Council, and then make the recommendations. As I look at the subsequent agendas, it appears that the effort to review and make recommendations was abandoned. Is that correct? If so, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board —Animal Community Forum Page 8 why? If not, what was the result of the review? Were there any recommendations ever made? Janie Braverman. Treloar: Urn ... I did receive information about other police citizen review boards. One of `em I think was Portland, Oregon, and there are three or four other states. Uh ... in looking at the confines under which we operate, it ... under our law, and their laws being quite different, there area lot of things that just—we couldn't apply. Um... other citizens review boards had powers to recommend disciplinary procedures, things like that. That's just not in our abilities, our Charter. Um, I'm hying to think of what other changes we were looking at at that time, and it escapes me, but ... yeah, it was looked into at that time. Urn ... is there any reason we can't just take a motion to... King: To what? Treloar: To ... recommend to the City Council we change the name? Can I make ... making motion (mumbled) change the name? We recommend to the City Council that they change the name of our board to the Citizens Police Review Board. (several talking) King: (several talking) seconded by Melissa. All in favor say aye. All opposed same sign. Motion carries 4 -0. We will be making a recommendation to the, um, City Council that we change the name. Actually kind of like that name better. We found the other name a little bit confusing ourselves. But, uh, it's not within our power to change, but we can certainly recommend, so we will definitely do that. Braverman: (mumbled) Let me just speak to one thing you said. I just wanted to be really clear that what I was talking about was recommendations to come from the PCRB to go to the City Council. I think Catherine did an excellent job of summarizing what the current ordinance is. But what we were doing is we were looking at the procedures. We were looking at the bylaws. We were looking at the ordinance, with an eye to looking at what we had and thinking about whether or not we wanted to say to the City Council, we don't think we have the best that we can offer the City of Iowa City. We don't think we have the best that we can offer to the Police Department or to the community. You know, I think that what you said is true, and as you know, I'm a lawyer by training. Uli, and what Catherine said is true. This is what the current ordinance is. But, what we were doing two years ago, what we were looking at is, is it the best that we can offer this community or should we be looking to our charge to report to the City Council as an opportunity to say to the City Council, the PCRB has been here this period of years. This has been our experience. These are our concerns. These are the things that we need to look at. You know, I think it's clear to everyone that the PCRB itself has no ability to change, um, its bylaws and its ordinance. So I just wanted to make that clear. Thank you and I also want to say thank you for coming to the Library. That is something we talked about quite a bit when I was on the board was the inaccessibility of the board, barriers between the community and the board, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 9 whether or not the board needed to get out of City Hall, away from the Police Department's front doorstep, and I just want to say I'm very pleased to see that you did that. So, thank you. Davidson: My name is Barbara Davidson and I'd like to know, I don't have a formal question, but I'd like to know what ongoing training the police force receives in dealing with ... courmunity members who have active mental illness, and may present in a variety of ways to the force? Treloar: Um, in my response I received from Sergeant Steffan, it says I also attend a number of meetings concerning, uh, disparate juvenile minority contacts. These meetings have members of the school system, juvenile court system, DHS, and others concerned with this issue. This allows us to find out and respond to local issues in a more timely manner. Urn ... I'm not aware of specific, uh, trainings the Police Department receives with mental illness, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. I'm just not personally aware of them. If... there was a member of the Police Department that was aware of those that could address that, I'd sure appreciate it, but I'm not aware o£ ..we don't get a list of all the training the police officers go through. So ... I'm not aware of that. King: But we...we can check into it (both talking) Treloar: I know that's typically common, um, I work for the Department of Correctional Services. We go through extensive training on such things but ... (unable to hear person away from mic) Treloar: If you would please! Sure. We'll wait until after her question and... fortunately we do have a member of the Police Department that's volunteered to answer that question cause lie's more aware of the training that they receive than I am. Smithey: Um, my name is Mike Smithey. I am, uh, the Vice President of our union, the Police Union. To answer your question, um, we do, uh, and I don't intend to respond to all the questions tonight, but uh, I want to make ... I think it's important that the public know that we do receive regular training, uh, with regards to, uh, persons with disabilities. Um ... uh, usually at the same in- service trainings that we receive, uh, the ... the profiling training or um ... there's a wide variety of issues that we go through. We have a couple of days worth of training that, um, as a department each year, uh, some in a row; some ... we call it MATS, which is Multi - Agency Training Session, I think, where we get together with the other... with other members of other departments in the area and we, uh, I know this year we had, urn ... we had people come in, uh, that provided training, um ... regarding suicidal persons and other persons with, uh, with disabilities, um, that were both apparent and un- apparent upon immediate contact and how to deal with those people and what the proper protocol was to, uh, get people help when help was what we needed to do. So, it...it...it's also contained within the, uh, police legal sciences training that we receive every month, that is usually... well, that's always This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 10 on a single topic or maybe two topics that we go through, um, it's a computer training that each individual officer has to take and then, uh ... uh, there's a test at the end that we have to pass or we have to take it again. Um, so—that topic may be, uh, mental illness on one month and it may be racial profiling in another month, um ... I think one of the board members mentioned it was... it had to do with immigration status this month, uh, and immigrants and how to... uh, how to deal with, uh, immigration issues that come up during the job. So, uh, the...the variety of training is ... is quite vast. Um, but we do receive training, um, sometimes four hours at a time; sometimes two hours at a time; sometimes from an outside, um, organization, uh, social workers at the University of Iowa Hospitals may come in and assist in the training, as they did this year during MATS. So, there's quite a bit that ... that goes on. Uh, I think probably most of all the training we ... we receive is certainly limited by the amount of time that we, uh, are given each year for training, but uh, there ... there are certain things that are required every year or every other year, such as CPR and so on, that are simply required by law to keep us up to date on certain things, um, and then there's other training, and I'm not sure which one that falls into, but, um, we do receive training on it. (several talking) Carrie Norton: Um, I understand that if you're not pleased with your name that you can discuss it among yourselves and then ask the City Council, and similarly, if you're not pleased or satisfied with your structure, what you can do, what you can't do. You could as a group go to the City Council and say, you know, we've been doing this for a while and... and we're finding that this structure isn't working for us. And I ...and I'm sensing that that was the nature of...of your letter, Janie. Braverman: Yes. Norton: So, what would be helpful for me is to maybe hear each of you speak to that issue. Are you frustrated with the structure? Do you think the structure is ... is serving the purpose that the ... the review board was established for? Is it working? And I guess it would be interesting to hear from each of you, and... and I'm ... I'm sorry, I came a little late so I don't know. Are you a member of the board or... Pugh: I'm not a member of the board. I'm counsel to the board. Norton: So they can ask you questions when they review? Okay. And this is the complete board? There are four of you. King: There's five. Norton: There's five. Okay. King: (mumbled) Um, he was just appointed at the last City Council meeting, um, and he (mumbled) (several talking and laughing) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 11 Norton: So... so my question is, are you frustrated with the structure, or is the structure working for you as a board, and /or do you wish it could be changed and ... and if so, how? Treloar: There are very frustrating things about the structure, um ... I don't know if I would change them or not. A lot of our investigations have high levels of confidentiality and there are times that we all wish that we could discuss in more detail what we, um, looked into, what we thought when we conducted our investigations and make the public more aware of that, but we can't. And so (laughter) sometimes that's frustrating! And uh ... um ... at first when I was a member of the board, I thought, gee this board has very limited power. But, I've come to realize even though our power is limited, um, we the citizens of Iowa City have more power than anybody else in the entire state of Iowa with their police department... cause we're the only ones that have such a board, and part of our power is having the annual public forum. I've come to believe that's probably why they mandated we have an amoral forum in the original Charter. It gives the citizens a chance to come on ... to the forum; it's televised; this'll probably be repeated numerous times over the public access television; and it gives the citizens a ... citizens a voice. Urn ... I think as Iowans, we're all aware of how powerfal just small voices can be. I mean, think about our voices at the national caucuses. Now, as a voting bloc, we don't have that much of a block, but with our status (mumbled) we have a huge impact on the nation, and that's just from ... exercising our voice! This gives, um, the citizens of Iowa City similar power. If they're displeased with the Police Department, it's a quick and easy way to make Council know about it. And, although that's not the part of the discipline, and it's limited... that's still a lot of power! And I think City of Iowa City citizens have used that well! I've been very happy to see them participate to the level they do at our forums, and our meetings. I hope that answers your question! King: Um, yeah the name change, um, I think that's a big thing. Urn ... and it wouldn't even necessarily have to be citizens. It could be community, um, to make it more community friendly. I...I think, ..not so much that the procedures and stuff have to change, um, some of the perception of the public on what we can and can't do, um, might be ... I don't know, more of a problem or more of a ... cloud on it than actually changing the policies and procedures. Um, so ... if...if you change the name and we... and you change one thing and it has to change a whole bunch, um; then maybe we have to look at all that, but um ... I think the way that it was set up, um, is working, urn ... like I said, I think a lot of the problems could be the perception of what we can and can't do, and why we can't do that, um ... when we do have our... our meetings and we go into executive session, that's more for the privacy of the individuals involved in it than it is to be secretive about it. Um... I don't think anybody here that made a complaint would want their name out, um, for everybody to see if they're making complaints. Um ... I think that the... the police department that we have here is a very good police department. Um, I don't thirds that there's, um... any problems with the administration of the Police Department. Um, again, it might be some people's perception because the ... the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 12 Chief has an investigation, or an investigator, do the investigation that is slanted towards the police. Um, I've been on the board ... uh, probably close to five years, and ... when you see the reports and you see what goes on, and then you listen to the audio, it... it falls right in line. Um, and I think maybe because it's so secretive that the public may get the perception that there's something going on when there really isn't. Urn ... I think Chief Hargadine, um, Chief Hargadine in all his dealings with the public is very fair with `em. Um, when we've asked, run, complainants, um, they either refuse to talk to us, um, sometimes when they're doing it, it's in the heat of the moment. They're, I don't want to say they're all drunk, but ... alcohol has a big factor to it. Um, the college kids, um, they complain that they got hurt by the police, uh, excessive use of force. Um, and then when you talk to `em, they barely remember the (coughing, unable to hear). Um ... there are other cases that, um, like I said, we've looked at it and ... and I think that the Chief does a fair job. Ub, so I don't know of anything that I would change right off. Jensen: Yeah, I've been on the board ... a year. I think I came on last year, um, to fulfill a term of someone who has resigned and I'm not sure who that ... who that individual was. Um... so I don't have some of the history that I think some of the other board members have. Um, one of the things that ... one of my ... my objectives in being here and, um, asking to be on the board was that ... it was a way for me, I felt like to give back to the community, and to get involved. So that was important to me to do that. And, I ... it's been a learning process. Um, but one of the things that has really stood out to me is that how ... unr, important the City and the members of this board take each and every item that comes before them. And how I think the board ... takes a really, um, strong look at trying to be objective, trying to be fair, looking at all the facts, considering all the information that they have, and I would agree with Joe. I think the frustrating thing if I had a frustration is that... there are times that if we were able to share more information, then we could share about a particular situation, that would perhaps explain some of the misconceptions that some individuals may have. But on the other hand, um, that is totally to respect the confidentiality of the people involved, and the circumstances. So I think that's very important to maintain that confidentiality. But as far as the board itself, um, I think it's a tremendous board. And I think the board takes each and every, um, situation seriously. And, situation that we address, um, the board does everything it can to be very thorough. Um, as far as things like the name change, I don't think any of us have any objection to things like that, or to looking at other issues, and those things that we can do that are within our power. So, I ... I would agree, I mean, that would be my one frustration is the same that Joe has ... has talked about, and that's just ... that's part ... that's part of doing what we do is we need to maintain that confidentiality and um, that's very, very important. If it was me in that position, I would want that for myself, um, and I think it's important to maintain that for the individuals involves in potentially filing those complaints. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual conumurity forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 13 Porter: Me personally I'm very frustrated at, um ... the way that this board is set up, cause personally I feel like we can't do anything. Personally, I'm going to tell the truth, um, I personally filed a complaint myself. Um, I had a situation; I don't want to go into it cause I'm trying to put it behind me. Um, I decided to stay on this board because I want to make a difference so that others, if they ever fall into the shoes or had to walk through my shoes of what I went through and filed a complaint, I wouldn't want anyone to feel the way that I felt, but the way that it's governed, um, yes, in 1997 rules were made because of something this board came together, because of something that happened, and me personally, I saw shuttin' up the community they came up with this board. So, this board, uh, was put together so that ... um ... it can look at some policies and procedures of the Police Department... which is good. I have no objections to them. I've been on this board. Um, we've had many cases and out of 177 cases, six sustained. Um, I just think that it really needs to be looked into because to me personally it's like the fox watching the hen. Honestly, name change or no name change it's not about the name change. There's more need to be done than just the name change. Um, when I carne on this board, Janie, you had this paper. Everything you stated in here. These were the things we were working on, back then. These were the things we talked about and it was about community. It wasn't about just one or two people. It's not about me. It's about just doing the right thing, and ... when we met last week, we talked about what is it that we as a board can do and personally, we can't do nothing! Personally, we can send, give a recommendation to the City Council, but nobody up here has any recommendations to give because they're okay with what's going on. So, to me, this is what it is and it's not about a name change. You know, I have no problems with ... I'm trying to move on. I have no problems with the Iowa City Police. I ... I try to speak to `em when I see `em ... everybody on the Police didn't do anything to me. I had some issues with several of the police. Some things happened to me. So, therefore, that should have been looked at. That's all I wanted. Not the whole police force because I love what the Iowa City Police is doing here, as far as drugs in our community, far as the safety. They are doing things that I'm pleased with. I live here because I choose to live here because I feel it's safe for me and my family ... than from where I come from. So when we're talking about what is it and frustrations, yes. The policy and procedures of the Police need to be looked into. That's my personal opinion. Not just the name change. It's more than a name change. But, we need to just make sure that the community, we as a community, feel safe as a whole. So ... that's my concerns. When you file a complaint, in that complaint you get a call, which I did too, from ... you get a call from somebody in the Police Department who wants you to come in and talk to `em. Personally, a lot of people feel like if I'm filing a complaint with the Police, why do I have to go talk to the Police? So therefore... um, my question was why couldn't there be an outside agency to handle this? Why couldn't somebody else handle this? But then an officer explained to me last week that he is the president of the union and he recommends that no police officer do a mediation, because he let me know that the person that comes in for a mediation cannot discipline a police officer if he This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 14 needs to be disciplined, you know, and follow the procedures that they have to go through. So, that's my concerns. Eastham: (mumbled) My name is Charlie Eastham, um ... and I actually sent one of the letters to the board about, uh, making recommendations about police procedures and practices, not the board's composition and duties and, uh, structure. But police procedures and practices. Uh, I just want to say that it...it seems very apparent to me that, um, moving policing in any direction from where it is right now is not something that can be done by continuing to spend effort looking into officer misconduct. It's a very good idea for a citizens' board to be able to review officer misconduct. I think that's a fine idea. But I think the—the community that I'm in contact with is looking for this board to do things other than looking at officer misconduct. Um, if you take a look at the disproportionate, uh ... uh, arrest and citation rates for black youth in the community, which are much, much higher than (mumbled) should be. None of those rates can actually change if we continue to use all of our effort looking at individual officer misconduct. To change something like that, we have to look at police practices, you know, in a much more, um, generally as well as, uh, specifically, and not ... not at the (mumbled) officer level, but at, uh, the way the police department is going about, uh, providing policing services for the comnunity. So I hope the board will in the future will, uh, realize that it has two major sets of powers. One is investiga... investigating officer misconduct, but the other is the general power to actually make recommendations to the police, uh, I mean to the Council about police policies, practices, and procedures, and ... and use more time to, uh, to do the latter, and I think that's in part what I understand, uh, Janie was trying ... was getting at in her letter. King: Thank you. Anyone else? Dieterle: Well I heartily agree with, um, Charlie Eastham and his remarks because um ... you know, within the scope of the Police Department there... there's just so much they can do with the number of officers they have and the amount of time that they have. That has to be decided I ... presumably by the Chief, you know, where the emphasis is going to be placed. Um, and you know, in the ... in the years that I've been watching this and I was one of the people who helped pass the petition to get the ... the whole, uh, thing onto the, uh, onto the... ballot, um, and was one of the people who pressed for the, uh, police review board in 1997 because of the Eric Shaw disaster. And, um, it... it seems to me that all of the people that I've talked to, pretty much, have been much more interested in the police having their resources placed, um, on ... on victimed- crime. Crimes that have a victim. People who have actually robbed, beaten, assaulted, um, in some way or another, uh, victimized by somebody. And I've had people complain that they've had, you know, what they suspected was burglaries and ... and things going on, where they called the police but the amount of time it took for someone to get there was insufficient, that... it was less than useful, and I, you know, I appreciate that you can't just direct them away from what they ... what they're This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 15 doing, but you ... it would seem to me that the whole business about their discretionary power and how to prioritize, you know, what is the most important thing to be done is something that could be looked into. Um, you know, of course we have traffic laws and we have laws against drinking and all those kinds of things, and you know, you can't just ignore those things, but you also don't need to make that the priority when there are people who are actually being assaulted, beaten, chased, you know, stalked, and ... and whatever. Thanks. King: Anyone else? Um, our next meeting.... Tucker: Hi ... Annie ... Annie Tucker. Unr ... sorry, writing my address. I appreciate that ... that you're required to have this review and that you're open to all the questions and that you're here doing it. And I appreciate you giving the background, and I appreciate you ... urn ... in this room considering what you would like changed, and I really urge you to go back to the point where you were when Janie was on the board. And, look beyond the constraints that you see, or like just step way back from it and look at what would be a good process. I believe ... I believe, Matt, did you ask the Human Rights Commission to take a look at the PCRB process? Where is that? Hayek: It's... it's, well, I can't talk because the Councils here but it's on our pending work session, uh, so we're going ... we're going ... we scheduled it for after, uh, this forum. So, we're going to have a conversation. Tucker: And ... and did the, can I just ask a procedural thing? Did the ... did the ... maybe I can ask Orville—did the Human Rights Commission approach the Council about the PCRB process? Townsend: I think we made a recorunendation (mumbled) Tucker: Okay. (male): (mumbled) Tucker: Okay. So I just wanted to (several talking) Orville Townsend: I just shared that the Human Rights Commission, uh, requested that the, uh, City Council make it an agenda item and uh, you know, take a look at it. We expressed some concerns. Tucker: Okay. And I guess I just want to raise, or I want to reiterate support for Charlie Eastham's encouragement to look at not just individual officer's behaviors but... but practices and policies and procedures. That makes all the sense in the world. I'm also concerned about one thing that I've heard from someone is that the officers are ... it's a 24/7 crew, and how often can you get... any percentage of officers focused or able to attend any given topic. I ... I just, that's a question. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board amoral community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 16 That's a question. Um, I also just want to, um, say if...if we had a business... and we had an accountant that was doing our books, and a—we had a question about how the accountant was doing the books. Would we go to that accountant's co- worker to ask them to double check it? I don't think we would. I think we want a process that is above suspicion or doubt. As ... as we back up and look at what could that look at, I want something ... I encourage us to find a process that is above suspicion or doubt of people saying, ooh, is there a conflict of interest here? Ooh, is there a, you know ... and the, um, the part of the process where someone who makes a complaint has to come in to the Police department and speak to an officer seeing intimidating to me, but it's inherent because the police department is doing the ... the investigation. So given the structure, it's an inherent part of it, but I think it could be a deterrent or a real ... it could be intimidating. Separate from the people involved. Just structurally intimidating. And then I guess, I guess I want to go to ... I think Mr. King, I think you were the one who said, or one of the people who said the secrecy piece creates suspicion. You know, so it's like, it's too bad you have things that you would want to say, but nobody can hear them because your part of the process is confidential, at least. King: Correct. Yes. Tucker: So, I just wonder, are there times when different... different people or entities benefit from that confidentiality. What if someone who made a complaint is fine about the world knowing it? You know? I just ... I just think that's something to consider. That there may be people who make a complaint... that are fine with anyone knowing. They would want people to know. That's a possibility. That as you're looking at the process I'd want you to look at. So ... that's all. Thank you. Thank you for this opportunity, and thanks for a really rigorous look at the process. And thanks to the Human Rights Commission for raising the concern. Finnerty: Good evening. My name is Diane Finnerty and I'm with the, uh, Iowa City Human Rights Commission and I apologize for coming in late. We just had a wonderful event at the Englert. Um, giving Human Rights Awards to youth in our community doing great stuff. So ... um, got here when we could, but several of us commissioners just showed up after... about 60 awards. It was really great. Um, so I just want to offer also, um, my own individual support too for just looking at the model. Um, part of our conversation at the commission was, um, hearing concerns in the community, both ones that were given to its directly as a commission, as well as anecdotal ones as we work on issues of immigration, of people feeling, uh, whether they can or can't come forth, even to file concerns, um, to the Police Department, but then also concerns about treatment and the... it's not a look at whether the Police Department is doing their job well. It's whether there is transparency in our community for citizens, for residents, to be able to believe there's a transparent process. I ... I think the current model really doesn't benefit anyone. Um, we'd want a model that supports the Police Department in doing their incredibly important work in the community, at the same time engenders trust in the ... the actual community members that there's This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 17 response and that there's... it's not an insular, circular investigation process that's going on. So, um, our recommendation for looking at the model is to look at both the strengths, but also the challenges, um, and our understanding and our commitment particularly as the commission is to ... as we continue to diversify in our community that we call feel like we have access to our, um, city government at all realms, not, and uh, our concerns this past year has been particularly on issues of immigration, on issues of racial profiling in terms of some of the national issues, as well as local ones, and unr, we ... we just believe that a look -see at this current process would benefit us ail, um, so I ... I thank you for your service to the community, and uh, we look forward to working as partners in the future as we go forward. King: Thank you. Treloar: Um, there seems to be quite a bit of concern about transparency and I understand that, and urn, I appreciate that actually. One thing I would like to point out though is, I ... this is Iowa City. We expect a lot from our police, and that's good. We should also look at what we get from our police in response to our expectations. Um, as far as transparency, our officers do have microphones on them when they get out at calls. They're required to turn them on. Unr ... I think 1 can say this because it's not a particular case. There was one instance where one of the officers did not have his microphone turned on. The Chief s response was that he received training with the Chief on the importance of that. Now, I've been in law enforcement since 1975. I've been a police chief. I've been a police officer. When you read something like that you know that that was not a good day for that officer (laughter). That the training ... was not a good day for that officer. The Chief obviously took keeping that microphone turned on extremely seriously. They have the cameras in the cars. Our Police Department is nationally accredited. There are very few police departments in the nation that achieve national accreditation status. What that involves is having a ... an enormous, um, amount of policies that are scrutinized by a national review board on all the practices of the police department, and they come in and they go over those, about every three years. It's lengthy. It's expensive! It's thorough, but that is one of the steps that our city has seen fit to do to make sure that we have a top -flight police department, and that things are transparent and above - board. The microphones, the cameras, most police departments in the state do not have those. They're going above and beyond what is expected throughout the rest of the state to be transparent. Another thing that our Police Department in conjunction with the Sheriff's Department and the University Police Department, um, and the Coralville Police Department does is they annually have a police... a citizen's police academy. I was fortunate enough to attend that last year. Like I said, I've been in law enforcement since 75. Things change a lot, and in that 12- week session I learned a lot of new things, and... there are a lot of things that the police do that I'm going to use the words "don't make common sense," because common sense implies that understanding that we all have about something. Well, some of the things in the police world, we don't have a common This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board amoral community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board— Annual Community Forma Page 18 understanding about how that all works. There are very many legal ramifications to why they do what they do, and... often times I've caught myself doing that too. I thought, well, why do they do that, that doesn't make sense? But then when I researched further and found the details of wbat was actually involved, then it made sense. It wasn't common sense because your common person doesn't know all the details involved, but it does make sense. Um, so I'll just ... the reason we have these ... we also have a new crime prevention officer in the last few years. That's another effort on the Police Department's part to be proactive. It's extremely important for law enforcement to be proactive, and by proactive that means getting citizens involved, citizens' trust, citizen participation. If we had to depend on the officers to do all the crime fighting for us, we'd really be behind the ball. The officers depend on the citizens to call them to report things, to let `ear know what's going on, and that involves developing good public relations. That again is another reason why they developed the Police Citizens Review Board is to help foster those public relations. These things all again happened because you the citizens expect a lot of your police department. And, they're not perfect, and we're not perfect, but... you're doing a lot of good things and don't ...don't soft -sell that. There's a lot of good going on here in Iowa City and law enforcement. So ... thank you for your input (mumbled). (male): (mumbled) (several talking) Yes. Hanson: My name is Peter Hanson. I'm a resident of, uh, Iowa City since 1999. I know a few years ago if one individual repeatedly filed complaints, say ten complaints over a period of three years, on the tenth complaint you knew this individual was kind of a repeat complainer and it's difficult for that knowledge not to color your treatment of that person's complaint. On the other hand, at least a few years ago, if many complaints were made against the same officer, the way the system worked you did ... the Police Citizens Review Board, did not know that repeated complaints of the same nature had been made against the same officer. Is that still the case in your operation or has that been changed? King: Do we know the identity? No we do not. Treloar: We don't know the identity of the officers (mumbled) of the complaint. Hanson: But you do know the identity of the complainant? Treloar: Yes. Hanson: Is that fair? Treloar: Well... since I've been on the board, I ... I don't know of any case where we've had a repeat complaint from, uh, a citizen. But um, in fairness to the officer... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 19 Hanson: See, if there's a pattern, I mean, if one officer has ten similar complaints filed against him or her over a period of five years, I would think that would pert up a red flag. King: Well that would ... that would be to the Chief, because we couldn't do anything ... we don't have ... we can't discipline him. We can't discipline that officer, even if we knew that officer had ten. That would be up to the Chief. Hanson: No, I'm not talking about discipline but just the, uh ... I would think it would have an effect on ]low you viewed the complaint. King: (mumbled) Pugh: And I think that's the very effect that they're trying to avoid, um... since the officer's the one being accused of the wrongdoing, they ... PCRB wants to remain blind to the identity of that officer so there wouldn't—their judgment wouldn't be tainted by that knowledge. If it was (mumbled) the same person doing the same thing again. Hanson: But that same blindness isn't necessary with respect to the complainant? Pugh: Well, the complainant's not the one being accused of anything. So I ... I guess (both talking) Hanson: Well, in a sense ... in a sense often they are, uh ... if they're very young maybe or if they're from a particular ethnic group and so forth...uh ... I would ... I would suggest that ... that can color, uh, a normal human being's opinion (mumbled). But, there's no change in that practice (mumbled) Treloar: No. I mean ... I'm sure an officer that receives a complaint comes to the attention of the Chief (mumbled). And that's the one who has the (mumbled) and looking at the situation and ... with ultimate responsibility for the department. I'm confident the Chief takes those complaints seriously. Hanson: Yeah, but see I would think that for the same reason that the Chief would—you know, his ears would perk up that yours would also if you knew it. But you're not ... you don't have that information available, see and ... so... Townsend: Good evening, my name is Orville Townsend. A couple questions. If there are ten complaints made ... who decides, I mean, whether or not they come to you? (mumbled) to the board. King: Who decides what comes to us? Townsend: Yeah, I mean, you know, do you get all... get to see all that information or what's the process? If there are ten complaints made, you may end up ... do you get all This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual conummity forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 20 ten of `em or do you get five of `em? Who decides, you know, what you guys get to deal with? King: (mumbled) ...if there's like, um, a complaint and there's like ten allegations in that complaint, or ten different people complaining? Jensen: Do I ... do I understand your question correctly, is how do ... how does a ... complaint come to the Police Citizens Review Board itself? Townsend: Right, you're the review board so I guess what I'm trying to find out is, who decides what you get to review? Treloar: When the citizens file a complaint with us, we review it. Townsend: Okay. King: It goes to the Chief and then (several talking) Townsend: Okay. Why does it have to go to the Chief? It looks like it would come to the review board. King: The Chief ... the Chief is the one that does the reviews. Townsend: Okay. King: The Chief does the reviews. Pugh: Although the board does receive a copy of the complaint. King: Right (several talking) Townsend: Okay. But doesn't that seem, um, you know, perception is 90 ... perception is just as damaging as reality, and doesn't it seem that, you know, people would be a little suspicious, especially if they don't get... if they feel they don't get a positive result, that they feel a little suspicious with the Police Department being... determining what you guys get to deal with? Smithey: I don't think you guys are understanding the question. (unable to hear; away from mic) Jensen: Yeah. Yeah, I... Smithey: The complainant decides if they get the complaint. Nobody else. It's entirely based on where the complainant files the complaint. Do they file it with the Police Department, in which case only the Police Department does the internal. If they file with the PCRB, in which case the PCRB gets the complaint but the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 21 Police Department still does the internal investigation. (unable to hear; away from mic) Townsend: Okay. Pugh: There are complaint filed with the Police Department that the PCRB may never see. (unable to hear; away from mic) (several talking) Jensen: Because the person filing the complaint doesn't file it with the PCRB. They... it goes straight to the Police Department. Townsend: Okay. So in order to improve perception, it would probably be better if the Police Department, even if...when it's filed with you, it would probably be better if the Police Department weren't involved in it then. King: Well, again, it goes back to if we have our own investigator, the police officer's not compelled to ... to talk to us at all. Townsend: Okay. King: To get that side of the story. Then you go... take it from the police aspect to the citizen's aspect. You're only going to hear one side, no matter how you do it. So the... the Police Chief can compel his officers to, uh ... uh, to testify to ... to complete, uh, with the investigation, or as if it was our investigator to talk to the police, the police don't have to talk to us. That's why the ... that's why it's to the Police Department. Townsend: So ... what power do you have? King: Well, we have the power to ... to, uh, send it back to the Chief if we feel it wasn't, um, investigated thoroughly or properly. Um... we can do our own investigation, um, as to ... interviewing the complainant. We can subpoena the complainant to come in, urn ... so we can ... we're limited to what we can do, but we ... there' s things that we can do if...it'll have to go back to the Chief. Would have to go back to the Chief. Townsend: Okay. Treloar: And another example of a complaint that might go to the Police Department, might not come to us. Say I have a patrol car parked in front of my house. It's there several days that week. And I'm worried ... why is he watching me or something like that. So I go to the Chief, and the Chief explains we've had numerous complaints about people speeding in that neighborhood and we're stepping up the radar traffic enforcement there. That's why he's there. Well, that might be all I need. Oh, okay! So ... that wouldn't necessarily go on farther. That's why a lot of complaints get resolved by the police department, is they're This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board— Annual Community Forum Page 22 able to explain what they're doing and why they're doing it to ... to the complainant's satisfaction. Townsend: Okay. Thank you. Dieterle: I have a quick questions that's kind of a follow up to ... to his. Um, there was some discussion about changing the, uh, complaint form. So that it would say on the bottom, you know, that you can also file a complaint directly with the Police Review Board, as well as filing it with the Police. And, I wondered whether that might be a procedure that you might want to talk about having changed. Maybe via the Council, that all complaints go both to you and to the Police, so that there isn't anything that is ... that you're left out of essentially. And the other thing is is that some of the times that I've attended the board meetings, uh, there's been quite a long discussion about, um, identification of...of the, uh, officer and the whole question, because you don't get a name. You get a number or ... or a letter or something. Um, and this is to preserve confidentiality for the police. But, um, it seems to me that, you know, if you're going to keep some statistics it would be a good idea to do that, so that if you had a statistic showing up that the same number, you know, turned up over and over again, technically the person may not have done anything, uh, that would cause the complaint to be sustained, but it would be a case where you could say, well, uh, in the case of five or six complaints involving the same numbered, um, officer, maybe we should ask the Chief to ... to, whether he's talked to this person, to do anything about this, to modify his behavior somehow cause maybe he's provoking sonic of the problems that he's involved in. Um, even though technically he's within the law. So, I ... it just seems to me that part of this transparency is having all of the complaints go to both board members, and that you keep some sort of statistics... about what you're doing too. Pugh: And I would make the comment that the board does receive a summary of all complaints internal or PCRB, although we don't review the internal complaints. We do receive like a summary of what those complaints were. Yeah. King: And the City Council does too. Pugh: Uh -huh. King: Anyone else? Motion for adjournment. Adjournment: (male): (several talking) Hansen: A couple years ago, uh, I attended one of these meetings and the question carne up about your annual report and uh ... we were told that, well, you just go to the web site and ... you know, you can download our annual report that we make to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board armual community forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Foram Page 23 the, uh, City Council each year. Well I, you know, I've got, I don't know, 60 years of computer experience and I spent about an hour hying to find it! And ... and I couldn't, and I haven't visited your web site, uh, recently, but I'm wondering have you, uh... King: The yellow sheet tells you how to get there, cause (both talking) all the complaints, or all the annual reports are on the ... on the computer. Hansen: They're more access ... but it's—and they're more accessible (both talking) King: Yeah, you can .... you can read each one of `em and they have a section, unn... Hansen: Cause you gotta find it before you can read it! I mean, they're easy to find... King: Yeah, yeah, they're easy to find. Hansen: Cause I remember ... I ended up calling the City Clerk's office and someone kind of stepped me through it and it took her a long time to ... to find it. King: Yeah! I think if you went to the City web site and go to A to Z, and go to P for the Police Citizens Review Board; click on that and it lists in ... in red all our annual reports. Hansen: Right on that... King: Right on that page. Hansen: That wasn't the case a few years ago. King: There's three pages of it, um, I know they're on there now because I just reviewed it in the last few clays. Thank you! King: Uh, again, our next public meeting is June 12t11 at, uh, City Hall in the small conference room they have there in the lobby, um... (several talking) (female): What time? Jensen: 5:30 (several responding) King: Motion for adjournment? Jensen: Motion to adjourn. King: Motion by Melissa. Treloar: Second. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual conmmnity forum of May 9, 2012. May 9, 2012 Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board — Annual Community Forum Page 24 King: Second by Joe. All in favor say aye. All opposed same sign. Motion carries 4 -0. Thank you very much. (several talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board annual community forum of May 9, 2012. Minutes APPROVED Human Rights Commission March 20, 2012 Helling Conference Room Members Present: Harry Olmstead, Connie Goeb, Diane Finnerty, Orville Townsend, Kim Hanrahan, Shams Ghoneint Members Excused: David Brown, Howard Cowen, Henri Harper Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers Others Present: Chad Simmons This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Human Rights Commission trmeeting of March 20, 2012. !I a (� Recommendations to Council: Yes. The Hunan Rights Commission recommends to the Iowa City City Council ntyV that a committee be established to review the Police Citizen Review Board. That committee can be compromised of y city staff, councilors or community members, but must contain at least one human rights commissioner. The review e�le board would investigate the strengths and challenges of the current Police Citizen Review Board model and consider whether it is the right model for the city. In reviewing the strengths and the challenges of the current Police Citizen Review Board, the review committee would determine whether the current structure best serves the city Call to Order Chair Olmstead called the meeting to order at 18:00, followed by roll call. Consideration of the Minutes of the February 21, 2012 Meeting: Finnerty moved to approve minutes, second by Townsend. Motion passed 6.0. N Business- Amen lent to the Ordinance. SB: his is some that has been discussed since I started in 2006. It's in the packet and it would be}tef t 4a, am ' has to do with who makes the probable cause determinations. What it would be is curr �y the city attorney es the probable cause determination. We investigate a complaint and the estigator gives the investigatt summary to me, and then I either go along with that, or I can_cJourge, the recommendation that they've given, d then I send the file downstairs to the city attorney. us change would allow me to make the final decision td it would remove the city attorney from decision making process. It's something that has been dis sed since 2006. I think prior t1 was case law that made the city attorney feel that they needed to be a par the decision, but over ' to it's become kind of an inefficient way of processing complaints. Sothis won make it more tcien[ and also allow if there is a disagreement, excuse me, since 2006 I think there's be two ' ies where I sent down a probable cause and they disagreed We don't differ too often, but ice aid stake those types of complaints where there is disagreement. It would make my decisi6n the I decision. OT: If staking such a change, is [h any way that that mig tit you at a disadvantage? SB: Not that I'm aware of would be no different as far as liabilit tan if the city attorney made the decision SG: Wto recourse for the individual who is doing the complat ' if say you don't think there is prDoes he or she have another avenue? SB: Yt change. If It ruled a no probable cause a person has ten days to app a) that decision. If // tive closure a person has twenty days to appeal that decision. So their appeal rights would t change. I[ would just be who is staking the decision. SB: Do you think we should keep things the way they are? OT: I don't have a problem with it. HO: How do the rest of you feel? CG: I would agree with Orville, but I also think it wouldn't hurt to have a bit of an outline to go by so there is consistency. Nothing that would be overwhelming for people to prepare, but tine one question I would have is you know by the second Tuesday of each month whether there is progress made in that three week period between the last meeting and the next meeting. I guess a report could say there is no particular progress and we're meeting on this date to discuss this or something. An update rather than particular progress. OT: I remember on the Immigration Committee when we were doing that, and what I liked about that when giving our reports Nye seemed to lead into it by you know what were the problems we discussed the last time. This is what we did to improve that and then get feedback, and sharing what we perceive to be future problems and what our next steps would be. SG: This is a consideration for all, some organizations for example _ we have many committees. So each committee will just have a paragraph written and left for us when we come to the meetings. We'lljust read it, and if there's anything to add or ask questions we do, and sometimes either the chair or president will say if there's no reason to discuss a specific issue or no progress, then we just skip it for that meeting. This is just one thought. HO: Is everyone willing to try it? SB: If there's nothing to report, there'd be nothing then. HO: Let's try it for the next meeting and see how it works. SB: I will send a reminder email out that Friday before the Tuesday, or do you want it sooner? HO: That'd be okay. Police Citizen Review Board: DF: I asked at the last meeting in our correspondence packet, we had a letter from Ms. Porter dated January 10" and it was to the Police Citizen Review Board, but then also city managers, city council members, the mayor, the Human Rights Commission and also an attorney, which may be hers. It was in our correspondence packet last time and so because it was correspondence that was directed to us I wanted to put it on the agenda to discuss the issues that were raised by the letter about Ms. Porter's concern about the Police Citizen Review Board. But then I'm also not sure how many of you have been following it in the news, whether the local press coverage or some of it _. I asked it to be placed on the agenda so that we could discuss this since it came to us and if there's any action as a Commission or we'd be interested in adding to the discussion that's going on. I appreciate the CC and the Human Rights Commission is seen as having a vested interest in how the Citizen Review Board works. I think we do in terms of wanting it to be a transparent process that people feel able to go to. I know that came up around the immigration issues as well, but somebody who is undocumented or somebody that is an immigrant has concerns about police, they need a place to go where they can feel safe telling it. I think the more transparent and the appearance of fairness and impartiality, the Police Citizens Review Board can be the more apt, it will be a safe experience for people to come and report. I was glad that we were included in the CC. I know that the city council, I can't remember what meeting, but back in the minutes discussed it as a work session, March 6'". As I understand it there was some discussion of content, but really they'd like to defer action until there's a Police Citizen Review Board forum around May 9" I believe. The council is looking at this issue and waiting for a community response on May 9"'. As a Commissioner I just wanted to have a conversation and I was concerned about particularly public comments that were made by some of the people that were both city staff, and also my understanding is the _ council to the PCRP about this process. I don't know whose purview it is to address those to. A question about_ I can't remember when it was actually put into place, but _ since it's been put into place the action could undergo a review of its effectiveness of some of the dynamics. There are recommendations to maybe change the name so it's the Police Citizen Review Board because the complaints were actually investigated. The complaints against the police are investigated by the police. So I would as an individual Commissioner I think I would support what I'm understanding is a recommendation to set up a committee to review what's currently called the Police Citizen Review Board. Its name, its function, whether the model is working, and bear how the community feels about it. Because it was in our packet and it's of importance in our community right now, I wanted the Commission to have a conversation about that. OT: My concern of the way it is now it seems that the police department has too much involvement. I personally feel that if a person has an issue or concern about the police department and they present it, that a group of neutral individuals should be the ones that look at that. I don't think the police department should have any involvement in that. I think the only involvement they should have is once things are presented then they have a chance to present their side of the issue. But the way it is now it's sort of like, like you said the police department is kind of investigating itself, and I think that's definitely a conflict of interest. I think also it creates suspicious atmosphere where a lot of people won't even share their concerns because they feel they're wasting their time or I wouldn't, if I had an issue with the police department I would be very comfortable coming to a neutral group and giving that information, but I don't think I want the police department knowing what I said because of I was looking at the deal that was in the paper with Ms. Porter, and here you have the police chief saying that he feels that this committee member shouldn't be allowed to continue. I respect you know, like I told city council. I respect that individual's rights and his freedom of speech, but my concern is that you know he completely compromised Ms. Porter's right to due process. She should have a right to continue her stay on the board and then if she's not doing a good job, let the board president and the board take care of that and not the police chief being involved. I agree that this is something that the way it is now, I don't think it's a very healthy situation SG: The hierarchy is a bit confusing because who appoints and selects the board members? SB: I believe that would be like the Commission so that would be the council. SG: The city council? SB: That's my understanding yes. SG: I don't understand why would the police chief have even the thought that lie has thejurisdiction to say who should or should not stay on the board? OT: He said that she_, well he felt she couldn't be objective because she's on the board, but she's filed a personal claim against the police department. Which is a very awkward situation, but still I think the healthy way to handle that would be to allow her to just continue to perform her duties, and then if the board was voting one way and she was always negative, then her board members could approach her. Then the worst scenario is the president of the board could approach the city council and request that she be removed. But the police chief I thought it was very inappropriate for him to snake such a statement. DP: As another citizen kind of volunteer commissioner, how I'd feel if Stefanie was making quotes to the paper about my impartiality on this Commission as a volunteer. Or if I took it further that if I had filed a complaint against the city for some type of discrimination, that Stefanie would then go give an interview saying well that disqualifies Diane from serving as a member of this _. I could never imagine you doing that. I would not want the city staff member, the staff to this Commission to be making public statements. SG: Also there is a very easy way to do it with many groups is that an individual whose case is being discussed or voted on to recuse himself. That's happening in many groups because sometimes this is so, it can happen. Sometimes a case or an issue comes to the organization or to the board; an individual member of that board would have a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest can go both ways, just recuse herself. W OT: But the way it was handled, Ms. Porter was never given the right to even recuse herself. She was found guilty before she even got a chance. DF: Assumed guilty by the review board, but certainty not in the court of law. I want to be really clear on the record that a court of law said there was not even enough to make a case. OT: Another thing we might want to take a look at is maybe our city officials need training because if you've got the police chief making a statement like this to the newspapers. It's frightening to think what individuals beneath him might be doing that have less authority. DF: One of the possibilities and I think what I'd like to propose would be that there be a committee that can be comprised of one or two councilors or city staff or whoever, but also community members to review the review board. SG: Wejust had the issue, a new board of directors meeting this last Sunday, and the Hawkeye liaison of the ACLU, she did talk about this case as a serious issue of potential. DF: I see it within the purview of the Human Rights commission to either recommend and or support that because I think it does have a strong influence on race relations in town. I think it has a strong influence on people's belief open and access city services. I think it makes the truth like the police departments harder if there is no recourse and people feel like it's just the. People investigating their own, that's there's a closed system. I think it makes it more difficult for the cotmrtunity and just a variety of things. I believe it is time given the issues that were brought to us and also the way that it's played out in the press. The chiefs statements and Ms. Pugh's statement, who is the consultant, the paid council of the review board in this case. The job of the review board is to listen and review the complaints and the chief's findings in a good light. Whether that's factual or not, that's what is out in the public, and that's problematic. It just seems like it's a closed system that the city can and should do better. CG: Can you repeat that again? DF: Catherine Pugh is the counsel, and maybe you might have more information Stefanie, but it's an attorney who is hired as the council to the Police Citizen Review Board made a statement that was quoted in the newspaper, that the commission is charged with a duty which was to view the chiefs finding in a very favorable light. That was in the Press Citizen February 22, 2012. She's the council and she's not a member, but she is the legal counsel for the review board. Again whether that's factual, I looked on the website. It doesn't say that on the website, but I think it's a concern. It's out in the community that the city council should be concerned about it. OT: I think we need to be careful in terms of what we're recommending. Are we recommending that something be done concerning the review board or are we recommending that something be done in terms of the process? There are two different things here and they are going in totally different directions. The review board could be doing an okay job, but I guess with the way it's set up it could be some big issues. DF: I think the recommendations are minimally the names but more likely is the structure that we believe works best for this system. I'd like to make a motion then that the Human Rights Commission recommends to the Iowa City City Council that a committee is established to review the Police Citizen Review Board. That committee can be compromised of city staff and or Commissioners and or councilors, and community members, and that it investigates strengths and challenges of the current model, bill also takes into consideration whether it is the right model for the city. HO: Asks for a second to this motion? SG: Second. HO: Connie? 10 CG: I would like if I could to abstain just I was gone during the month of February, and I'm not familiar with a lot of what's been going on with this. I'd like to look at it because one concern I have is I don't know if it's our, I realize that she copied us on this and I think it's something that needs to be reviewed. I would hope that the city council would do it without much prompting. I'm just a little concerned about another fellow board or an equal board type situation calling for another board to revise what they're doing or to review what they're doing. I would like to get more familiar with the topic before I would vote to support that. OT: I need to have more clarification on what are we recommending. Are we recommending that we take a look at the structure or are we saying that we want to look at the whole thing? That means how they've been functioning. My concern is with the structure and the way it's set up. What are we recommending? DF: I think my proposal would be that both the strengths and the challenges of the current, but also whether it is the structure that best serves this city. SG: To be honest everything that I've heard about the Police Board, how old is it? CO: It was after the Shaw murder. SG: I've never heard a very positive input to be honest. That's not just because of the Ms. Porter issue. I've heard it so many times from so many different groups that it hasn't been very effective or as they hoped it to be, but I don't know. So maybe we need to look at their history, the type of complaints they've had, what was the outcome. I don't know if that's public information or not. I have no idea. CG: The PCRB is pretty similar to our board in terms of how it's set up, but they would have open meetings like we would have. SB: I think that would be true, but I'm sure they would go into closed session at times too. DF: I think the function of their board is very different than ours because they are actually an investigative body. Whereas the Human Rights Coordinator is an investigative body and we have very little to do with that function. OT: But getting back to my vote I'm going to base upon what the legal person said that they take a look at the chief s findings. I think that needs to be restructured so I would say yes, we definitely need to recommend that they take a look at it. DF: I would vote yes. I actually would hope that another commission or board had concerns about how we're functioning and that we hear from them. So I'm okay with the peer commission board kind of being... If there was a whole lot that we were in the press for that was not promoting Human Rights and the community I would hope my fellow citizens would ask for a review of our functioning. So I vote yes. KH: Could I ask for clarification? Is this a memo to the council or is this a public statement? DF: It would be to the city council. KH: So it's not a public statement? SG: To make sure I understand. We are recommending to the city council for them to consider or to actually put together a review committee that has both community members, city staff as well as someone from the Human Rights Commission to oversee or to review the current police? DF: I would say we recommend, that's all we can do right now. SG: To do what? 11 DF: That a committee reviews, and I had to pert my proposal in actual member of the Human Rights Commission would serve on that. I'd certainly be open to that, if that would a useful part of the record. I had initially stated that, but it would be to conduct a review. SG: On the structure and process or just leave it open ended? DF: I think the structure sounds like it's very important, but is this the right model for this city. SG: Do we know of any other cities that have a similar model? DF: Yes, and my understanding is that there are cities that have different models as well. SG: Do you think it'd be good for us a group to look at these different models before we send a recommendation? DF: That would be best, what I would say structured that you look at pros and cons of different structures. OT: That would be one of the frost things that the committee would do. DF: Do people want to accept a friendly amendment that we'd like somebody from the Human Rights Commission on the committee as part of our recommendations? SG: Agreed. DF: Then I would accept that as a friendly amendment. SB: Who? Diane and Kim. HO: Roll call vote on the motion would be amended. All present voted yes, with the exception of Connie Goeb, abstained. SB: It will be noted in the draft minutes from March where it says recommendations to council. In the last minutes it said no, so it would say yes and then have the recommendation there. DF: That's what they get in their packets? SB: That's correct, but the first set of minutes would be preliminary. It would be placed in their packet so they would see the preliminary minutes, but then the approval minutes would be at the April meeting. World Human Rights Day Proclamation (December 1, 2012) HO: Stefanie I'd like to recommend that the item number be placed to the left... SB: On the left? HO: Yes. This is a proclamation that came to me from Birmingham, Alabama. We talked about having a proclamation welcoming city. I thought this would be a compromise to the welcoming city of using the UN Human Rights constitution that they've come up with. I'm recormnending that we take it and give the city council a proclamation of this F: So you're asking that this proclamation be given to the city council? HO: Yes, it'd be written up in terms of the beginning would be written up in terms of City of Iowa. 12 May 28, 2012 Dear members of the Iowa City Council: Through its Sanctuary City Committee, the Consultation of Religious Communities has continued to take seriously the needs of our neighbors who have come from other nations to live in this vibrant city. We are grateful for the steps the Iowa City Council has taken to make Iowa City a more just and welcoming place for immigrants. And we hope for further action on the part of our City government to make this community more safe and hospitable for all. To that end, a number of clergy people and immigrant leaders will be attending the June 5 City Council meeting. At that meeting, we will present a resolution which we ask you to take on as an agenda item as soon as possible. We would appreciate your prompt and attentive response to our request. Thank you, Pastor Robert Dotzel The Executive Committee of the Consultation of Religious Communities hl N d; ..q C-; F The religious traditions oflowa City's Consultation of Religious Communities (CRC) together espouse a moral imperative: They believe that the essence of our common humanity is to offer the compassion that one hopes to receive. Immigrants in Iowa City deserve our compassion and hospitality,, They are equally guests, friends, and neighbors with all of its. As is true for each of us, the creator has endowed them with inalienable rights that command a deeper respect that must not be contravened by human legislation. Therefore, CRC declares its solidarity with all immigrants, authorized or• unauthorized, in the present circumstances in which they are threatened by federal action. The CRC calls on Iowa City Council to approve swiftly the following resolutions, in addition to carrying out its prior commitments to our immigrant neighbors: Because American democracy requires local municipalities to comply with state and federal laws and regulations, and simultaneously expects federal and state authorities to respond effectively to the stresses experienced within these jurisdictions; Iowa City Council previously has taken bold moral stands on such issues as the transportation of nuclear weapons and the equal treatment of persons of diverse cultures, races, and sexual orientations without fear of retribution or criticism; Iowa City treasures its ethnic diversity, and is culturally and economically enriched by all immigrants residing therein; The federal Secure Communities initiative requires local municipalities, such as Iowa City, to participate in an oppressive policy that has negative consequences for relationships between cities and their immigrant residents; It is the responsibility of the Iowa City Council to comply with federal legislation, human decency and morality compel the Council not to support state and federal initiatives that tend to yield immoral or unjust consequences for our immigrant neighbors; The Iowa state motto asserting that "our liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain" is as important to Iowa City residents as the air we breathe and the water we drink, Now therefore CRC requests the Iowa City Council to implement the following resolutions: 1. Address a communication to the President of the United States, and relevant U.S. Senators and Representatives, protesting the so- called Secure Communities legislation, and calling upon our national executive and legislative branches of government to reform immigratioAjhw so that it reflects the ethics of a nation built on the efforts of immigrants and honors Uie contigbutions of authorized and unauthorized immigrants to our national fabric; 2. Publish and post instructions, in diverse languages, directing city employ�0noHo see information regarding immigration status, except as explicitly mandated by sRte,or fstieral , subpoena, or criminal activities apart from immigration status. N 3. Instruct city employees follow city, state, and federal legal mandates with a spirit of hospitality toward all who seek access to city services, and to publish and post instructions, in diverse languages, for city employees to request no immigration status documentation, except when state or federal law, or program guidelines, clearly obligate proof of such status prior to service provision. 4. Publish and post instructions, in diverse languages, for city employees to allow forms of personal photo identification other than a U.S.- issued driver's license or a Social Security number, except as required to support I -9 forms. S. Instruct all city employees to exert every effort to make Iowa City a safe, hospitable, and friendly community for all persons, regardless of citizenship status. 6. Direct the City Attorney to work with the Iowa City Human Rights Commission to prepare guidelines, regulations, codes, statutes, and municipal laws to be reviewed by Council, to guide all city employees in fulfillment of the above resolutions. N °F C•�1 The Coalition for Racial Justice FILED c/o FBC, 500 N Clinton Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Phone: 338 -7995 7(119e¢R To: Iowa City City Councilors CITY CLE R',1,! From: Dorothy Whiston, on behalf of Th Plifdrl TpAra' I Justice (dwhiston @mchsi.com; 321 -7920) CC: Iowa City Human Rights Commission Re: Coalition for Racial Justice support for the Proposed Resolution from Jim Throgmorton Relating to the Death of Trayvon Martin Date: April 16, 2012 We are writing in support of Jim Throgmorton's proposed resolution asking the City Council to take action in response to the march held in Iowa City after the death of Trayvon Martin. While we all wish it were otherwise, what happened to Trayvon Martin could easily happen in any city in our nation, including in Iowa City. In fact, in recent years many local African Americans report experiences where they believe they have come under suspicion and /or encountered hostility only because of their race, and many white Iowa Citians report witnessing such incidents as well. We also believe that issues of racial disparity in our community go beyond instances of individual racial profiling. Available statistics reveal local racial disparity in law enforcement, education, income, housing, education, the child welfare system and community leadership, among other areas of life. in several of these areas the local disparities are more extreme than they are in other parts of Iowa and in the nation as a whole. The Coalition for Racial Justice will soon issue a compilation of some of these statistics in a Status Report on Racial Equity in Johnson County. In addition to adopting Mr. Throgmorton's resolution, we hope that the City Council will make a formal commitment to look at racial disparity in all areas of life in our community, to respond appropriately as such disparity is confirmed, and to call on other government and private entities in the area to engage in similar study and appropriate corrective action. Finally, we would ask that the Council appoint one of your members to serve as a liaison with The Coalition for Racial Justice to help keep you informed of our work and to bring the related work of the City Council before ourgroup. Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can be of assistance in the Councilors' deliberations on this important proposal and related issues. About The Coalition: In August 2010, the Consultation of Religious Communitles (CRC) of Johnson County established the Task Force on Race, Poverty and Public Safety In response to numerous reports received by its affiliated religious leaders about problems faced by African Americans in Iowa City. The group reorganized in Spring 2012 and changed Its name to The Coalition for Racial Justice to serve as a broader community coalition. The Coalition Is committed to promoting racial justice by developing community leaders and supporting strotegies designed to bring about racial equity In our community. The Coalition has token several actions since Its Inception, Including planning the 'Iowa City Million Hoodie March" on March 26, 2012, which resulted in the most racially diverse rally in the history of Iowa City. The Coalition is on Facebook at www.focebook .cam /RaciallusticeCoalition. About The Coalition: In August 2010, the Consultation of Religious Communities (CRC) of Johnson County established the Task Force on Race, Poverty and Public Safety in response to numerous reports received by its affiialed religious leaders abotd problems faced by African Americans in Iowa Chy. The group reorganized In Spring 2012 and changed its name to The Coalition for Racial Justice to serve as a broader community coalition. The Coalition is committed lopromoting racial justice by developing community leaders and supporting strategies designed to bring about racial equity in our community. The Coalition has taken several actions since its inception, including planning the "lawn City dfillion Hoodie Alarch" on March 26, 2012, which resulted in the most racially diverse rally in the history oflowa City. The Coalition for (Racial Justice c/o 500 N Clinton Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 P,hbne;xzla Email: xxxzz To: Iowa City City Councilors From: Dorothy Whiston, on behalf of The Coalition for Racial Justice CC: Iowa City Human Rights Commission, Iowa City Police Citizen Review Board Re: Coalition for Racial Justice support for the ICHRC proposal Date: April 16, 2012 Given the recent concerns expressed about and the press coverage related to the City's "Police Citizen Review Board;' we are writing in support of the IC Human Rights Commission's motion, passed at their March 20, 2012 meeting: Motion that the Human Rights Commission recommends to the Iowa City City Council that a committee is established to review the Police Citizen Review Board. That committee can be compromised of city staff and or Commissioners and or councilors, and community members, and that it investigates strengths and challenges of the current model, but also takes into consideration whether It Is the right model for the city. We believe that public safety will be advanced by a review of the PCRB, including a review of its name, its structure, what has been effective, and what community members have perceived as barriers to using the PCRB as it is currently constructed. We have been particularly troubled by the treatment of PCRB member and community leader, Royceann Porter, as told in the Board minutes and in the Press Citizen. We believe that all members of the community will be better served, including the IC Police Department, by ensuring that concerns about law enforcement actions are reviewed by a body external to the police department. Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can be of assistance in the Councilors' deliberations of this important proposal and /or in the development of a review committee. About The Coalition: ht August 2010, the Consultation ofRellgious Communities (CRC) of Johnson County established the Task Force on Race, Poverty and Public Safety in response to numerous reports received by its aJjiliated religious leaders about problems faced by African Americans in Iowa City. The group reorganized In Spring 2012 and changed its name to The Coalition for Racial Justice to serve as a broader comrmmity coalition The Coalition is committed topromoting raciaijustice by developing community leaders andsupporting strategies designed to bring about racial equity in our community. The Coalition has taken several actions since its inception, includingplauning the Iowa City Million Hoodie dlareh" on Mach 26, 2012, which resulted in the most racially diverse rally in the history of Iowa City. N �} _O N ^ter About The Coalition: ht August 2010, the Consultation ofRellgious Communities (CRC) of Johnson County established the Task Force on Race, Poverty and Public Safety in response to numerous reports received by its aJjiliated religious leaders about problems faced by African Americans in Iowa City. The group reorganized In Spring 2012 and changed its name to The Coalition for Racial Justice to serve as a broader comrmmity coalition The Coalition is committed topromoting raciaijustice by developing community leaders andsupporting strategies designed to bring about racial equity in our community. The Coalition has taken several actions since its inception, includingplauning the Iowa City Million Hoodie dlareh" on Mach 26, 2012, which resulted in the most racially diverse rally in the history of Iowa City. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES Established in 1997, by ordinance #97 -3792, the Iowa City Police Citizens Review Board (PCRB) consists of five members appointed by the City Council. The PCRB has its own legal counsel. The Board was established to review investigations into claims of police misconduct, and to assist the Police Chief, the City Manager, and the City Council in evaluating the overall performance of the Police Department by reviewing the Police Department's investigations into complaints. The Board is also required to maintain a central registry of complaints and to provide an annual report setting forth the numbers, types, and disposition of complaints of police misconduct. The Board shall hold at least one community forum each year for the purpose of hearing citizens' views on the policies, practices and procedures of the Iowa City Police Department. To achieve these purposes, the Board complies with Chapter 8 of the Iowa City Code and the Board's By -Laws and Standard Operating Procedures and Guidelines. ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 Meetings The PCRB tentatively holds monthly meetings on the second Tuesday and special meetings as necessary. During FYI the Board held eleven meetings and one Community Forum. ICPD Policies /Procedures /Practices Reviewed By PCRB The ICPD regularly provided the Board with monthly Use of Force Reports, Internal Investigation Logs, Demographic Reports and various Training Bulletins. The Department also provided various General Orders for the Board's review and comment. A senior member of the Police Department routinely attended the open portion of the PCRB meetings, and was available for any questions Board members had regarding these reports. Presentations In May of 2012 the Board held it's fourth Community Forum as required by the City Charter. The PCRB Legal Counsel, Catherine Pugh, gave a brief summary on the history, laws governing, investigations, and the name change for the PCRB. There were ten members of the public that spoke at the forum. Topics of discussion included the following: Laws governing the PCRB, and potential changes to the ordinance and operating procedures. Board Members In October officers were nominated with Donald King as Chair and Joseph Treloar as Vice - Chair. Peter Jochimsen resigned and was replaced by Kingsley Botchway in May of 2012. COMPLAINTS Number and Type of Allegations Six complaints (11 -02, 11 -03, 12 -01, 12 -02, 12 -03, 12 -04) were filed during the fiscal year July 1, 2011 — June 30, 2012. Three public reports were completed during this fiscal period (11 -01, 11 -02, 11 -03) and one complaint was dismissed (12 -02). The remaining complaints filed in FY12 are pending before the Board (12 -01, 12 -03, 12 -04). Allegations Complaint #11 -01 t. Officers did not respond in a timely manner after her 911 calls for assistance. Complainant asserts that officers arrived almost 20 minutes after the shift change of 11:00pm. NOT SUSTAINED. PCRB Annual Report FY 2012 — Approved 08/14/12 —1 2. No audio /video from in -car cameras from responding officers. NOT SUSTAINED. 3. Officers made untrue statements in the submitted written reports. NOT SUSTAINED. 4. Improper conduct /treatment by responding officers during interaction with her. NOT SUSTAINED. The Complainant stated that Officer C was untruthful in telling her that three guns had been recovered. NOT SUSTAINED. 6. Officer C made false statements in his report. The report stated the Complainant used profanity when referring to the Cedar Rapids juveniles and was more interested in cleaning up the mess in the clubhouse than speaking with officers. NOT SUSTAINED. 7. Officer C inquired of her personal information while a possible suspect was seated in the back of the patrol car and overheard the conversation. NOT SUSTAINED. 8. Not being told by Officer C that she was going to be charged with Disorderly House and questioned why a warrant was issued for her arrest. NOT SUSTAINED. 9. Officer C called A &M Management apprising them of the damage and telling them that he was going to charge the Complainant for the damages. NOT SUSTAINED. 10. Officer A had made false statements in his report. Report indicated that Complainant had yelled at him and that he made the statement that he was not going to speak with her if she continued to yell. The Complainant asserts this remark was in response to her asking for his name and badge number to report him to the police chief. NOT SUSTAINED. 11. Officer B made false statements in his report that the Complainant made remarks and comments about the police being worthless. Complainant denies making this statement and asserts the officer did this to get back at her since she was calling the chief of police for how she was treated. NOT SUSTAINED. 12. Officer D called the Complainant's employer with the intent of getting her fired. NOT SUSTAINED. 13. Officer D contacted A &M Management in an effort to get them to file charges and informed them that charges were already pending against her. NOT SUSTAINED. 14. Officer D interviewed and questioned juveniles at the schools about alcohol and guns without parent consent, a violation of school board policy. NOT SUSTAINED. Complaint #11 -02 1. Complainant stated that he was threatened with arrest by Officers. NOT SUSTAINED. 2. Complainant stated that he was intimidated by the Officers. NOT SUSTAINED. Complaint #11 -03 1. Officer A followed him, harassed him, and looked for more reasons to fine and arrest him. The complainant asserts that he abided by all of the officer's instructions and was compliant. He states he was mistreated, hand cuffed and Officer A's written statement was false and created to get him in trouble. NOT SUSTAINED. Level of Review The Board decided, by simple majority vote, the level of review to give each report, selecting one or more of the six levels specified in the City Code per complaint: Level a On the record with no additional investigation Level b Interview or meet with complainant Level c Interview or meet with named officer Level d Request additional investigation by Chief or City Manager, or request police assistance in the Board's own investigation Level a Board performs its own additional investigation Level f Hire independent investigators Complaint Resolutions PCRB Annual Report FY 2012 — Approved 08/14/12 — 2 The Police Department investigates complaints to the PCRB of misconduct by police officers. The Police Chief summarizes the results of these investigations and indicates in a report (the Chief's Report) to the PCRB whether allegations are sustained or not sustained. (If complaints are made against the Chief, the City Manager conducts the investigation and prepares and submits the reports.) The Board reviews both the citizens' complaint and the Chief's Report and decides whether its conclusions about the allegations should be sustained or not sustained. The Board prepares a report which is submitted to the City Council. Of the seventeen allegations listed in the three complaints for which the Board reported, none were sustained. The Board made comments and /or recommendations for improvement in police policy, procedures, or conduct in three of the reports: Complaint #11 -03 Attempts to contact the complainant by the ICPD by phone on 11 -15 -2011 and 11 -17 -2011 were not answered in spite of leaving detailed messages. On 11 -17 -2011 a letter was sent with information as to how to contact the ICPD for an interview. Neither return calls nor correspondence have been received. Name - Clearing Hearings The ordinance requires that the Board not issue a report critical of the conduct of a sworn officer until after a name - clearing hearing has been held. During this fiscal period, the Board scheduled no name - clearing hearings. Mediation Officers and complainants are notified by mail that formal mediation is available to them at any stage in the complaint process before the Board adopts its public report. All parties involved must consent to a request for mediation. No mediations were convened this year. Complaint Histories of Officers City ordinance requires that the annual report of the PCRB must not include the names of complainants or officers involved in unsustained complaints and must be in a form that protects the confidentiality of information about all parties. In the three complaints covered by the FY12 annual report a total of seven officers were involved with allegations against them. ICPD Internal Investigations Logs The Board reviewed the quarterly ICPD Internal Investigations Log, provided by the Chief of Police. COMPLAINT DEMOGRAPHICS The following is demographic information from the three complaints that were completed in this fiscal year. Because complainants provide this voluntarily, the demographic information may be incomplete. Category /Number of Complainants Age: National Origin: Under 21 0 US Over 21 1 Unknown Unknown 2 Sexual Orientation: Gender Identity: Heterosexual 0 Female PCRB Annual Report FY 2012 — Approved 08/14/12 — 3 Color: White 0 Black 1 Unknown 2 Sex: 0 Female 0 Unknown 3 Male 0 Male Unknown 3 Unknown Marital Status: Single 0 Married 0 Unknown 0 Physical Disability: No 0 Yes 1 Unknown 2 BOARD MEMBERS Donald King, Chair Joseph Treloar, Vice Chair Royceann Porter Peter Jochimsen /Kingsley Botchway Melissa Jensen Religion: Unknown PCRB Annual Report FY 2012 — Approved 08/14/12 — 4 Mental Disability: No Yes Unknown