Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-02-19 TranscriptionFebruary 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 1 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session 7:00 PM Council: Nov, Baker, Kubby, Lehman, Norton, Thornberry, Vanderhoef. Staff: Atkins, Helling Woito, Karr, Winklehake. Tapes: 97-33, Side 2; 9%34, all; 97-35, all. Nov/Strict time limits. We expect public discussion to cover possible changes in police procedures, possible questions that remain unresolved on the Eric Shaw incident. We have a timer with a stop watch. If you see a red piece of paper, it means you have 30 seconds and you will wrap up. Baker/Naomi, are we going to follow the practice that we usually do with public discussions? That if everybody has spoken and somebody has something else to say, they can come back at the end. Nov/We have a list. We are going to go through the list first. Baker/But once the list is through, they can come back and- Nov/There is a second list at the back of the room. Whoever comes in and wants to sign that list will be heard and the first name on the list is Osha Gray Davidson and the second name on the list is Jim Shaw. If Jim sees the red piece of paper, he can start walking up to the front. Osha Gray Davidson/I want to preface my remarks tonight by stating that what Osha really have to be said at all but we live in a society in which you are ot~en cast as being on one side or the other and life is far more complex than that. And while I have been critical and at times even strident in my criticisms about individuals in city government, I want to say unequivocally and for the record that those criticisms are not meant to tar everyone in an institution and specifically I believe that the overwhelming majority of Iowa City police officers are both good people and good public servants who do a difficult job, it is a thankless job and I thank them for it. My comments ton!ght are addressed to the policy changes as a whole. And on paper, some of them, many of them even see reasonable. But my feeling that merely adding another layer of policies is worthless if there isn't leadership to enforce and implement the policies. And worse, it is mere window dressing. It will be seen as an attempt to paper over the failures of leadership that led to Eric Shaw's death. Those individual police officers responsible for Eric's death violated This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 2 existing policies. Training provided at the Iowa Law Enforcement Academy states in dealing with building searches under the section called Enter or Wait, the first rule is if there is any other reasonable option, do not go in. Many other reasonable options existed on the night of August 30. They could have called into headquarters for instructions. They could have called in to find out if someone usually worked late there and Eric did. They could have sought a search warrant. If they really believed a burglary was present, they could have sealed off the perimeter and waited. They could have called the business owner and checked. They could have called the business itself and checked. They could have announced their presence as police officers and waited. They didn't do any of that. Forty-eight seconds elapsed from the time uniform officers arrived on the scene to when they recorded that Eric Shaw has been shot. Forty-eight seconds. They rushed when training and policy, already existing policy and common sense all dictated that they wait. When asked about all of these decisions, Chief Winklehake's response has been they were simply exercising their discretion. No discussion of policy is complete without discussing discretion and the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies recognizes this fact in their preamble. They write, because the concept of discretion defies rigid codification officers should be trained in how they exercise the broad discretionary authority they have been granted. The responsibility for that training and for insuring the training is followed on the streets is ChiefWinklehake's and he failed to provide that leadership. Because of that failure an innocent citizen was shot to death. Even after that fact, Chief Winklehake has ignored the many violations of training in errors and judgment that occurred that terrible night. Even former Iowa City police officers admit that. But Winklehake insists that those under his command did nothing wrong up until the moment Officer Gillaspic actually pulled the trigger. And if he does not see that the many serious mistakes were made and those mistakes resulted in Eric Shaw's death, then I believe that ChiefWinklehake should not remain in his post. As CEO of the city, the City Manager is Chief Winklehake's direct supervisor. He has refused to intervene even after the killings and has maintained that nothing wrong happened that night except that Eric Shaw died. Steve Atkins is not, in my opinion, fit to remain as Police Chief. It is often more difficult to do the right thing than it is to do the wrong thing. But so much rides on your actions. What ever decision you make on removing Chief Winklehake and Manager Atkins sends a message to this city, one that will resonate for very very long time. Some of you have said there is nothing you can do that will bring Eric back and that is true. He is gone forever and his family must live with the pain of his absence every day for the rest of their lives. You can't bring him back but you can make sure that those in positions of responsibility and accountability are held accountable for their actions and their tragic inactions. You This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 3 can provide one small measure of justice in a case where their has been none. Thank you. Nov/No, them will not be applause. This is not a show. This is a public comment section and this is a meeting. Jim Shaw. Jim Shaw/Thank you. My name is Jim Shaw, I am Eric Shaw's uncle, Jay Shaw's brother. I would like to take this opportunity to address Police Procedure and policy #18. It calls for the use of plain English, clear meaning. A tragedy of this magnitude exposes the weakness of character and policy. Iowa City's leaders procedures have been found wanting. In January, 1996, a policy change was adopted, a policy change that proved to be very significant in the killing, the murder of my nephew, Eric Shaw. In January of 1996, Mr. Winklehake instituted a policy which is absolutely horrifying when you apply the clear English requirement. The policy that I'm referring to is special order # 9601, warning shots are not an option for Iowa City police officers. The first time I heard that in the days which followed Eric's killing, my mind recoiled at the plain English of the no warning shot edict. ChiefWinklehake speaks of the no warning shot policy as sane and beneficial as it prevents unnecessary injury to people in the area. But when you put that policy together with the mandate that police officers are trained to shoot center mass, you have a horrifying policy. The clear English of#9601 is that Iowa City police officers are given no option other than shoot to kill. No option. The hollow point bullet placed center mass will make sure that the prayer that Jeff Gillaspic most sincerely uttered could not be answered. Jeff Gillaspic I'm sure wished to God that he could pull that bullet back, but he couldn't. The next thing that he could pray for is that Eric could live. That isn't going to happen either with a hollow nose bullet placed center mass. It's the same kind of thought that a drunken driver may have when he wakes up from his stupor and realizes what he has done in killing an innocent person on the highway. So please in the interest of plain English, change 9601 and make sure that every policeman in Iowa City and every citizen in Iowa City understands that if that trigger is pulled, excuse me, it is for no other purpose than to kill another human being. Is that a sane policy? In plain English, Dean Thornberry praised Atkins and Winklehake profusely saying that their responses have been accurate, factual, and right on. It may be asked if Dean Thornberry's the right person to make that sort of judgment. It was Dean Thornberry who made a very inflammatory, even disgusting remark about the retribution that Jay, my brother, would require of Jeff Gillaspic if he were given a voice as part of the Citizen's Review Board. In shock at his words, I looked up, expecting fellow council members would be waving him, censuring him, in some way making note of what he has said. But to my surprise, the only move I saw was by Larry Baker, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 4 a motion for Mr. Thomberry to hold it down. Mr. Thomberry was confronted on that at a later meeting and denied saying it. I asked why the coundl members did not speak up and say the same thing. Let's examine how accurate and factual are Mr. Winklehake statements. I asked him September 9 at his press conference with Mr. Atkins if the officers were immediately sequestered. His answer was yes. I asked again to make sure that he understood my question, were the officers sequestered. You can look in the police review summary and it will say the answer to that question is no, no police officer ever said that. Mr. Winklehake said it and he said it September 9. There are other factual errors that Mr. Winklehake has made and I would like for him and other to take responsibility for these factual errors. And I'd like it because #206, Integrity, is a part of the personal conduct section of the Police Officers' Code. The public demands that the integrity of its law enforcement officer be above reproach and the dishonesty may impair public confidence and cast suspicion upon the entire department. Succumbing even to minor temptation can be the beginning ofa malignancy which may contribute to the corruption of others. And officer must scrupulously avoid any conduct which might compromise the integrity of the officer, a fellow officer, the department, or the city. Nov/Okay, it's someone else's turn. We have Tom Immermann next on the list. Jim Shaw/Thank you. I had more. Nov/You may have another turn later. Jim Shaw/Okay. Thank you. Tom Immermann/Members of council, I come here with a speech and five minutes is not a long time to address all the issues. I'm not about to get involved in all the little battles that have been going on. There have been many well meaning people involved and many well meaning and not so well meaning statements made from- coming from different directions. I'm not getting into that. I haven't appeared before because I wanted time to think about a lot of things objectively. I don't have, still have enough actual information, although I think I have enough to make some personal decisions and come forth with some kind of opinion on some things, many things in fact which I'd be glad to do in private, not in public. I served in the Iowa City, served the public in the Iowa City Police Department for 16 years, 1974-1990. I currently teach courses part time adjunct at Kirkwood in police patrol procedures, History of Police in America, and I am on a- appointed to a committee originally constructed as a curriculum advisory or curriculum oversight This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 5 committee for the Academy which now has turned into a long range planning kind of thing. I'm happy to serve with many distinguished people from around the state law enforcement community. Sixteen years- the full retirement is 22 years at 55, you know, I took an early retirement because, because I saw what was going on that summer. I, in violation of the contract, I was harassed' and put on late nights in April of 1990. We fought it and all of that. It went to arbitration. Finally in November and of course they weren't supposed to do it so I was slated to go back to days. In the mean time on late nights where I'd always served previously for ten straight years, I saw what was going on. I was very unhappy with it. I took my early retirement because I didn't want to be part of something that I knew was going to happen. Not this. Not this. This is a police department's worst nightmare, except for a police officer, him or herself, getting killed under any circumstances. I thought what was going to happen was somebody's skull getting, you know, cracked on concrete and dying in the hospital. Now this is difficult for me to talk about but the department has been under a set of stressful conditions. The internal stress in the department has been wicked for 30 years or more. Certainly it has gotten worse. I guess I cannot speak exactly for the last six years or so and I haven't been there. I only know what I hear through the grapevine. I do not think things have changed a hell of a lot. I tried to warn the Chief but he wouldn't listen. I am some kind of malcontent, you know. But it was quite clear to me that something was probably going to happen and I didn't want to be part of it. So I figured my years of public service were over in that league in that area. As I explained to my students who I always teach that this is a people oriented job and I think the Department long ago forgot that at the higher levels. I echo the sentiments that there are many good officers, veterans and rookies who really try to do a good job and get mixed messages about what really is expected. The policies are interesting. They just pile up and they are stated so that they can be done either way, you know. They can support you or get you depending on how management feels about it. They know it, we know it. So I don't know if more paperwork is going to answer any questions, resolve anything. I just want to- I need to address two specific things. I can go and go about the problems. You see the listings in the paper. You know, open container, open container, open container. A long list of those arrests and burglaries, burglaries, burglaries. The officers are d.t. too much. We need to address the alcohol problem for sure but busting students is easy marks. We are not getting enough of other things. They do not know the areas clearly. When that happened that night my first two reactions were #1. Of course they don't know the areas. They should have known who is in that area. I did when I worked it and the answer was instead of being d.t. all of the time, even on busy night, you go out to your area and then come back. It is what I call showing the flag. I am willing to bet the research would show that not a hell of This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 6 a lot of burglaries were done when I was in that area. Some, no doubt. But I bet I beat the odds on that. And that was my personal answer on how to deal with that. They don't know the areas. And of course the gun didn't go off because it dropped. The finger was on the trigger. I was very dismayed to'see in the paper a quote by a council person saying that we want our police to have their fingers on the trigger. No, you don't. That is not the training, that is not the proper procedure. It is not common sense. The police officer always has a half a second disadvantage to the bad guy. That is the problem with police work. You know people who don't= I can't go on. Can I come back? Nov/If you put you name at the bottom of the list, you can come back, yes. Kubby/He has got 30 more seconds. Thomberry/Do you want to keep time? Next. Nov/Please come back later. Richard Twohy is next. Richard Twohy/Good evening. My concerns essentially have to do with the myth that continues to be repeated that this was a horrible sudden accident, as, you know, one of those things that happens. This was not just an isolated accident. This was part of a long term custom of uniawful police violence in our small town and that needs to be recognized and that needs to be acknowledged by you as our leaders for this community. Just a very few, just tip of the iceberg items that we know about which have cost us taxpayers money. In 1994 it was Chris Lenz who was unlawfully beaten up by a police officer and we wound up paying $12,000 in a settlement for that. One year later in 1995 it was Steve Jeager who wound up being beaten up by a police officer. We wound up paying $75,000 about three weeks ago for that act of unlawful police violence. In 1996 it was Eric Shaw in which we have now paid. I am glad that you kept your insurance premiums up. But that ought not to redirect anyone's attention from the fact that liability wound up in financial terms being drawn. And that was $1 1/2 million for a life that will not come back to us. Nothing yet that I know of in 1997 but it is only February. But this is not just an isolated exercise, a mere happenstance. This is a product of gross failure of leadership on the part of the Police Chief and on the part of that person's boss, Steve Atkins, the City Manager who has been in charge here through all of these years as well. I tried to ask a couple of citizens about our Chief of Police. when was the last time they had ever heard this leader make a public statement? And other than his appearance on February 1 here, no one could remember. I don't know who is running the Police Department but it seems to be This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 7 an organization with a lot of force and a lot of violence against many citizens who have not brought lawsuits and you heard from a good many of them in September, councilors. And then when violent actions, unlawful violent actions are done, it seems to me that even a slap on the wrist sounds too punitive. This is not. the time to inquire but it is a time to remember that a police officer who costs the city twice in two of those settlements for unlawful police violence is still on the force. So I think we need to take a look at the general leadership question because this is not just a sudden horrible accident that sometimes will happen. It is a part of a pattern in this town. Then what was to be done about it? There was discussion about a citizens police review board but the first city council meeting that I ever attended there were only about four people present and by the way, here was a group of our representatives who have live and families of their own who sat there in that work session for about four hours, struggling over the city budget and how to maintain our parks and how to protect our libraries and so forth. We citizens never hear. These folks were there. It was my first experience with this city council and I was really really impressed and pleased without any TV cameras. But this council was working hard on things that affect us all. Nonetheless, you all have lives and families outside of this room and you rely on the staff. So here is the City Manager who comes forward with a different kind of idea for this police review board, in which case it was not going to .be an independent group of citizens that you dty councilors should thank your blessed stars for the possibility of having the help, they volunteer, an independent group of citizens. But no, Mr. Atkins wound up because he had the time, he is paid to do it, he has a typewriter, he has a staff. So he came out with this written presentation for a police review board whose job is to beg, not to make findings. _And in fact, his recommendation to you part-time and very diligent and devoted public servants that I think all of you city council people are. His advice was that you have this police review board but the investigation gets initiated by the Chief of Police. My question of course it, you know, it is one matter when you have a police officer who is dearly focused on for some perhaps inappropriate behavior. What if it is the leadership? What if it is the Chief of Police who is on the stand in people's mind and in people's hearts in this town. This very well appears to me to be an instance of that. So then the Chief of Police initiates the investigation. Then those findings are sent to this police review board and the review board either concurs or not- Nov/Mr. Twohy- Twohy/And then it is up .to the Chief of Police whether to initiate discipline or not on his own. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 'WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 8 Nov/There will another p.h. on police review board after we have written the ordinance ' and we will consider all of your comments. For today, however, your five minutes are up. Thank you. Twohy/Thank you. Nov/Loft Klockau. Lori Klockau/I am an attorney here in Iowa City. I have lived here in Iowa City for 25 years. I left my hometown where I grew up straight out of high school and I have lived here ever since. I have always thought that this was a good community to live and to raise a family. I also want to tell you a little of my background. My last year of law school I worked as a prosecuting intern at the Johnson County Attorney's Office and in that year I gained a great amount of respect for both the County Attorney's Office and the police of this community. I also made friends with many of them. I am not sure when this is all over that they are still going to consider me their friend, although I hope that they do. But in those-that year that I worked there, I made it a point on several occasions to ride with police officers so I could observe what they did, how they did things. I saw first hand how difficult their job is both physically and emotionally. I think people just do not realize that the taxing amount of effort that goes into every night a police officer is on duty. But on those numerous occasion I was with the police I never once saw a police officer draw a gun and this was approximately 6 to 6 1/2 years ago fight when ChiefWinklehake began to work in this community. I was at incidence when there were fights. I went to incidence where there was domestic abuse. There were incidence when people were drunk and crazy and out of control and it took six officers to subdue them. I never once saw a gun drawn. In this community in the last 2 1/2 years, we have had three incidences where citizens have either been hurt or killed by a police officer and I believe we would all be hard pressed to find another community in this country of this size that has such a shameful record. One of the problems that I think has occurred is do any of you know what is an appropriate number of times for a police officer to draw his gun in a year? Do you know how many times a particular police officer has drawn a gun on the job in this community in the last year. You don't because I read the internal report. ChiefWinklehake doesn't know. Those numbers are not monitored. Nov/Those are numbers that we now have and you may request a copy. Klockau/But JeffGillaspie said in his statement that not every time that a gun is drawn is reported. There are incidents when guns are drawn that are not reported and I- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 9 Kubby/That was true in the past in the past and as of October, 1996, every time a weapon is drawn. So we don't know for the past but we will know from October, 1996. Klockau/I think that is a good thing. I think that one of the problems that we have had in this community is that there has not been a way to target and monitor potentially problematic behavior and that behavior may not just involve drawing a gun. I know there has been a great discussion in this town about personnel changes and whether or not they are necessary. That certainly not my call. It is probably not the call of the citizens here. It is you folks and Mr. Atkins. But before you make any decisions, I would ask you to talk to the people and the powers that be and challenge them to say if you are going to remain on this job, I want you to promise us, council, I want you to promise the citizens of this community that no citizen in this community will again be injured or killed by a police officer wrongfully. I don't think that is too much to demand considering what the citizens of this community have to experienced in the last few years. Thank you. Nov/lean Soper Cater. Jean Soper Cater/Members of the city council, my husband David has been a resident of Iowa City since 1961 and I have lived here since 1969. We have seen many changes in the council over those years and we have seen many changes in the Iowa City Police Department in the last 36 years. There have been changes in the size of the force, the policies, procedures, recruitment procedures, training and now we have a younger, better educated, more highly trained officers that are much more service oriented than when I first moved to Iowa City. There is still room for change and improvement, no doubt. The job is much more difficult than it was during the past 36 years. There are more alcohol, drugs and younger people are using that. More faster cars, more students, and more diverse population, more people owning guns, and more people dropped on and off the interstate which wasn't even there then. Crime drops on and off, not just tourist and game fans. I have voted for, I contributed money to or I have worked to elect every single one of you sitting on this council. I did that because ! thought each of you were competent to make fair and impartial judgments based on facts as you knew them at the time. I had hoped you would set personal agendas aside and represent all of us. Most citizens of Iowa City have jobs or businesses, children to feed, elderly members of families to care for and civic, church and school responsibilities and don't have time to come to these meetings unless an issue personally affects them. I have been out of town since April taking care of some of my family responsibility, my elderly parents. I was here two weeks in early November for my This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 10 husbands surgery since April, four days at Thanksgiving for my 95 year old .fathers retina surgery, four days in early January to prepare for a trip to Houston soon to visit my grandchild, and I returned Sunday, just four days ago. Iowa City is caught in a time warp over this case. It feels like I am catching up on my soap operas. I see the recapitulation but the story line doesn't proceed at all, doesn't progress at all. And in talking with friends and neighbors, I find many who feel they have exhausted their sense of sympathy of the Shaw family because of the excessive hammering of the police and council and personal attacks by a few vocal groups for politically or personally motivated to continue to grandstand this case. Using the Chicago Tribune and all the media today is an example. This is the second real tragedy that the Shaw family has to endure. I knew Eric as one of the neighborhood kids although I didn't know his parents. We all must remember this tragedy. No one can possibly understand the Shaw's grief unless they too have lost a child. Can't we put some of these vindictive personal agendas aside and let this family deal with their loss. Then we can let the council whom we citizens and residents of Iowa City elected do what we have given them to do. We don't need a police commission. We elected you people to be our civilian overseers. I just hope you all have the courage and fortitude to do what needs to be done to develop proper police policies and continue to support the men you hired to do the job. Most of us have great respect for the Iowa City Police Department and all their staff. We thank them for making this town safe for all of us at any age and for all the services that we take so granted. And I guess it is only, this is a little addendum to what I prepared, but I think it is only been the last few years as I become one of the elderly citizens of the town, that I really appreciate the kinds of services, the generosity of their time, the kinds of personal interactions that I have had with them. My house backs on Hickory Hill Park and I have lived there almost 20 years and there have been a long course of problems related to Hickory Hill Park. The dogs running loose, the drunken brawls over in the park. 'You know, we finally got to the point we didn't call unless it sounded like someone is really getting hurt because at the time they printed everybody's name in the paper if you called about anything and the newspaper trotted down and copied down everybody's name who telephoned in and so I got to the point I didn't give my name when I called about things going on over in Hickory Hill but the Police Department always said oh Mrs. Cater, how are you doing. But I always found them to be so helpful and I appreciate the good work they do and it is up to you folks. Nov/Dianne Kaufman. Dianne Kaufman/I guess I am one of those people Mrs. Cater has been talking about who is hammering away at you folks and this issue. But I don't see it as a personal This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 11 attack. I personally have taken this issue to heart because I care deeply about the community and I think this is an issue about community values, important community values. I know some people I talked to this week didn't see didn't see much point in attending this hearing tonight because they said well, the majority of them have already made up their minds and publicly stated that they don't think anyone is responsible for the killing of Eric Shaw, that we have no problems with police policies, the Chief of Police or the City Manager. So why bother? And it is difficult to continue to speak in the face of such blatant denial by the majority, not all, majority of council members. But because I do think it is vital to the ethics of this community and the morality of this community, I continue to say perhaps things you don't wish to hear. And one thing, this is a little flippant, but it really isn't. I am really glad that Ernie Lehman is not a police officer since he has repeatedly stated that he sees nothing wrong with allowing police officers to pull their guns as they see fit. He has stated that he only cares about the times they actually shoot their guns, not how ot~en they pull them and though there is no relationship between the two, if JeffGillaspie had not pulled his gun, he wouldn't have shot it. I mean, yet this is-there is sort of this amongst bizarre kind of logic that has come out of this. That when a police officer did shoot this innocent citizen, Mr. Lehman at one of the last meetings I attended, blamed us for that act because we dared to have a police force. So something is, you know, there is part of this kind of process that is almost hard to understand how- What seems to be very simply facts have become very complicated in the process here. I only hope we never arm our city council people. ChiefWinklehake, this is based on one of the last p.h.s. ChiefWinklehake wants officers to have as much leeway as possible to respond in the field to protect themselves which that is his job, to look after his force and I don't disagree with that. But what disturbed me about his comment were that he doesn't seem nearly as interested in how their behavior is affecting the health and longevity of those of us they are sworn to protect. Now, yes, they need some leeway but we need to make sure that they are also very clear about what they are charged to do and who and what we the community, how we want to be policed and I think that the majority of people on the council after-during that hearing saw nothing wrong with this attitude and despite the fact when you questioned him, he seemed to have very little knowledge or idea what was actually going on in the field. The majority of you seemed to me amazingly untroubled by his lack of knowledge and leadership. And in fact, you commended him. Told him he was doing a good job and just at the very moment when cleariy we need to have a broad based community discussion of how we want to be policed and that is my main question to you folks tonight is are you going, and Karen, I saw that was one of the recommendations you made in your suggestions, is are you going to do anything proactive to find out how this community wants to be policed other than This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 12 this one very brief moment and I will wait for my answer until ai~er my comments. But I think that is one of the critical issues that there is out of the heatings in my mind. So I guess basically my point is I don't think that we have a Chief of Police tight now who is able to take us into a situation where a strong active police chief is needed. In his own-He basically, I felt, damned himself with his own words. It is just Mr. Winklehake did not seem to know what is really going on in the streets or in his own office and it is clear to me that that just cannot be-that is not the kind of community police leadership that I think serves us well. As CEO of'Iowa City, Mr. Atkins has meticulously framed the issues for you, flooding you with much irrelevant information and he is masterful. I respect his intelligence and his technical skills. But his message to you has been you are not to blame. Nov/Okay, Dianne. Kaufman/Okay, well basically I have got 30 seconds. You chose to hide behind the smoke screen he offered. I think you made a big mistake doing that. You abandoned your job as our community leaders and maybe someone else won't get killed by the police officer while you are still elected. Nov/Diane, your time is up. We have Greg Thompson next on the list. Lehman/Naomi, could I have just a second? Just a second, Dianne. My comment regarding the number of times a police officer drew his gun and I think that is discretionary. I think he needs to have that discretion. My concern was how many times he fired his gun. If we look at the police record over the last many- I have lived in Iowa City over 30 years. Very very few times have officers fired their weapons. I have no problem with an officer drawing his weapon when he feels that he is in danger or you are in danger or my kids are in danger. I have a real problem with the number of times he fired his weapons. I hope you did misunderstand what I said. Kaufman/See, I didn't misunderstand exactly. I very much- Nov/Okay, Dianne, Dianne. Okay. Greg Thompson, please. We are finished, Diane. Kubby/That is a natural (can't hear). Nov/Okay, ready, there is a clock on the podium also. So, if you want to keep track. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 13 Greg Thompson/I had some remarks prepared but I would like to see my time to this former officer who spoke before because I have some things to say but I think his things are more important and relevant. Can I do that? Nov/Well, he has already signed up to speak again and he will. Thompson/But he has to leave. Nov/So if you if something else to say, say it. If not, please sit down and let me call the next person. Thompson/Okay, yeah, I have something to say. Concerning item #8, the requirement for a police review board and to the point that the Chief will be the one who decides whether or not something is to be investigated. I think is the police review board is to have any power, it has to decide that. Soon after Eric Shaw was killed, I contacted a woman named Mary Powers, a group called the National Commission on Police Accountability. She told me several things that are absolutely mandatory for an effective civilian police review board and one of those things is the ability in the budget for independent investigative powers. Does your police review board want to have a budget to enable them to hire independent investigators and the authority to do that? Nov/We haven't written the ordinance but we will consider that. Kubby/That is something that was talked about. That will be written into the ordinance. Thompson/I appreciate that because that is a crucial element of the police review board. Kubby/But it is only after they have gone through the internal process. If they are not satisfied with that, they can go to an external. Thompson/And can a citizen go directly to a police review board and request an investigation? Nov/Absolutely. Thompson/Independent? Nov/Yes. And there will be a ordinance proposed on police review. There will be a p.h. on that ordinance so you may comment on specifics. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 14 Thompson/Okay, thank you. Anther thing. I was here last week and Mr. Councilor Lehman, you characterized your opinion of the Iowa City Police Department, other than the shooting of Eric Shaw, as stellar. I notice in some of the materials I have read that I believe Officer Gillaspic reported drawing his weapon 20 times in the year previous to shooting Eric Shaw. I believe I did read that and if that is correct, we have over 60 officers on the force, 1200 guns drawn a year means 3-4 times a day guns are being drawn. With a population of 60,000 people, that means that ifI live in Iowa city 50 years, chances are I am going to have a weapon drawn on me. Now that seems like excessive use of force and rule by terror, frankly to me. Thomberry/That is not a fact. (Can't hear), Lehman/No, I think it is a fact. One shot fired. Thompson/Well, the act of drawing a weapon is an aggressive act and I have never had one drawn on me and I hope I never do but I heard that it is a very terrifying experience. Lehman/I agree with you. I hope I never do ever. Thompson/And I hope nobody else does who doesn't really deserve it. So, okay. One other thing, you may have or may not have received this in the mail. I sent this to ChiefWinklehake and to all of you councilors. As you may know, I circulated a petition asking ChiefWinklehake to resign. I did get 80 signatures. You will be getting it soon. A lot of dedicated activists type people requested petitions from me and did not return them. And some people returned them with a comment that they felt people were afraid to sign it and I just want you to know that I think there is a tremendous amount of fear out there for the Iowa City Police Department and I think I just want to remind you that as councilors, you serve the people and the voters of Iowa city, not the Police Chief or the City Manager. Nov/Thank you. Thompson/Thank you for listening to me. Nov/Bill Kidwell please. Bill Kidwell/Madam Mayor- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 15 Thornberry/Can I ask one question before you start, Bill? Where did you get the figure of how many times a gun was drawn? Wait, let me ask him. Where did you get that figure? Thompson/I believe it was in some of the materials that came from the City Clerk's Office (can't hear). Kubby/I think what G-reg was talking about was when Gillaspie was interviewed by Fort and Sellers and asked to approximate how many times he had drawn his weapon in the last year. His response was 20 times. Thornberry/Then he just extrapolated that for the whole police department? Nov/Yeah. ,Kubby/What we had gotten was a breakdown, which is important for people to know about, that has the number of times guns were drawn that were reported which is an important difference and that is why the change in collecting that information will help us monitor it in a more thorough way in the future. What we have is as complete as what we can get but it is not complete. Norton/But it shows only 80 for the year of which 41 were connected with searches. So, I don't know how he could come up with 20. But its certainly issues there. Nov/Yeah and that was an approximation relying on someone's memory. We have what was actually reported in writing as a police report. Okay, please go ahead. Bill Kidwell/Madam Mayor and members of the council, it is difficult to stand before you tonight and speak to you considering the terrible tragedy of the Shaw family and the entire community has endured. But I have been here before and I have listened to criticisms of council, City Manager, Chief of Police and I just heard the man speak and say there are a lot of activists who are concerned but who are afraid to come forward and I believe that is true on both sides. I know that several of you have received telephones calls or personal visits from members of this community who don't want to come forward and stand up and be counted. But I am here tonight to tell you that there is an awful lot of us that are getting rather upset with all of this public discussion. I haven't heard any criticisms tonight that I haven't heard 2-3 times in the past. A lot of us believe that you folks are doing your utmost to correct any problems that might exist. You can't go back and undo This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 16 things that have happened. We commend you for it. We also think Mr. Atkins and Mr. Winklehake are doing a good job and we hope that you folks will continue to work on this and cease these public discussions. Thank you very much. Nov/Kim Painter. Kim Painter/Thank you for giving us an opportunity to speak to you this evening. I really appreciate- CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 97-34 SIDE 1 Painteft I have written a number of columns on the topic and I have sat through a number of the meetings that have taken place in this chamber. But I haven't said anything here. I have sat and watched. Much of what I have seen have been floor to reductionist. After all, the shooting of a human being in a place he had every right to be for no reason other than a physical flinch on the part of a police officer can only be reduced so far. It is professional misconduct of an awful magnitude. It is far more than a good reason to fire some people we may not like just as it is far more than a good reason to stand beside people we do like. For all the horror of it, it presented us with an opportunity. It gave us a chance to look at ourselves in a state of humility and try to find better ways to do the things we need to do as a community. That opportunity has been squandered in part in turn between making political hay and emotional hash. I will spare us all a recap of that and simply say this. There are many reasons this incident has not faded from memory, most of them are very good reasons indeed. We have witnessed an epic dimension of professional misbehavior. Councilors have waged sniping wars between themselves against the public. The County Attorney has made a unilateral determination that justice is not going to lean down from the heavens to kiss the bereaved Shaw family. Insulting rude quotes keep coming from elected and appointed city officials week after week in a downpour in the pages of the newspaper. But none of it has stopped the uproar or the interest. Why? I am here tonight with one answer. It is, interestingly enough, a parent's answer. I have spent more hours with my partner talking about her son since Eric Shaw was killed and I can tell you, he is a young man, who like many others, brings with him into the word particular challenges in the form of developmental disabilities. He always carries particular gifts. He is able bodied and mad for basketball. He could drive most garden variety sports wizards to weep with his knowledge of that game. But his brain absorbs the details and nuances of human behavior differently than your or mine. His mother and I imagine the following scene. It is dusk or after and he is coming home from a pickup basketball game. Somewhere along the route something has gone awry in one of This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 17 the houses and the police have been called. He is in the wrong place at the wrong time and he is told to stop and approached by the police. That is as far as we've get. We do not know, you see, how he might react. He might spin to face the officers instead of standing still and he is 24, a grown man. he is well built and he likes to work out. He could make many police officers flinch and he could end up dead. This is what we see, my partner and I and we have seen it every time our boy hasn't been home when we put our heads on our pillow at night ever since last August when Eric was killed. Some people here would tell me that is just the cost of doing business with a police force in a community. I don't accept that. I don't any parent who accepts that kind of reasoning has any right to raise a child. I want accountable professionals at all levels of city government and I especially want policy driven accountability among those professionals in this city who carry guns. Thank you. Nov/Jessica Kardon. Jessica Kardon/I reside at 1029 Kirkwood Avenue. The young man previously referred to is my son. I would like to cede my time to Jay Shaw. Thank you. Nov/We are not ceding time. If you would like to say something, you may and otherwise I am going to the next person on the list. Kardon/I would just like to say I think that many of us are very afraid and I think it should matter that we are afraid. Nov/Thank you. Nov/Carol deProsse. Carol deProsse/In Iowa City our former city government is one that follows lines of hierarchy and line of authority. The citizens of this community elect the city council. The city council hires the city manager. The city manger hires the chief of police, the city attorney, the city clerk, department heads. The department heads hire people under them. all with certain levels of approval and authority. In the Police Department we have the police chief and then I just checked back with Bill Kidwell here. We then have captains, lieutenants and sergeants and then we have police officers. So my comments tonight are related to the structure of city government, to the open door policy that existed prior to some time after the killing of Eric Shaw and #206 Personal Conduct portion of the police manual particularly relating to what I would consider to be integrity and then the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 18 translation of that integrity to other members of the city that fall under your purview. Tonight I am here in the memory of Eric Shaw requesting that you remember Eric Shaw as well as his parents and uncle, Jay, Blossom and Jim Shaw, by doing what is morally right for a citizen killed because of a policy, though proclaimed legal and responsible, reasonable. Excuse me, though proclaimed legal and masonable. it was apparently not legal and reasonable enough for it to remain unchanged in the after math in the killing of Eric Shaw. In fact it was changed within weeks of Eric's death. I personally cannot find it possible that anyone after careful reading of the evidence available to us at this point in time could believe that the night of August 30 and its at~ermath can be laid at the feet of only one man. I do not want to believe that the city council can think that no one besides Jeffrey Gillaspic bears any responsibility for the killing of Eric Shaw. Someone sitting on a stool inches from an open door to his own place of business, talking on the telephone to a friend. It is unfathomable to me that the City Manager, the Chief of Police and Officer Troy Kelsay of whom acknowledges gilt in the settlement reached with the Shaw family. That none of these people has the honor to stand up and say I share in the responsibility for what happened the night of August 30, 1996. I share in that responsibility. As the council goes forward with its deliberations, please remember that no one under you, no one, has had the courage to accept any shred of responsibility in any form for Eric Shaw's death. Instead, they have been too willing to let the blame lay with the one man who pulled the trigger. Their lack of honor and courage replaced with their constant justification as to why they have no responsibility should tell you in a system built on hierarchy, structure, lines of authority, as it has told many of us, that these people are not fit for employment in the City of Iowa City. Thank you. Nov/Thank you. I have asked people to not applaud. We will have decorum. if you must applaud, you may watch this on television in the hallway. Woito/Can I make a clarification? Carol, I am appointed by the city council, not Steve Atkins. Kubby/As well as Marian Karr. We have three direct employees, the city manger, city clerk and the city attorney. Nov/All right, the next name on the list is Darrel Courtney. Darrnl Courtney/My intent tonight to come to this meeting was a newly formed group of one, The Former Mayor Against Redundant Investigations and Studies. I figure a group of one in a city of 60,000 should have just about as much weight as a group This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, i997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 19 of six does and that anything that I wanted you to do as far as studies and investigations should be carried out. Actually I truly believe that you have had all the investigations and studies that you should see to make a decision. They have all pointed in the same direction. The answers are clear. The cause is established. I don't personally believe that policy caused it. I believe one person caused it. It was a tragic error but it happened. The people that we have elected, Pat White, and hired, Linda Woito, to answer the questions have done so and it is time to move on. The request will not end until four of you say that they are going to end. And I would only submit that it is time to do that. Then this afternoon another unnamed group that just didn't choose a name for themselves asked me to present a petition for them and I agreed. It is very simple and straight forward and I will read what they had to say now. We, the undersigned, having deepest sympathy for the family of Eric Shaw, hereby petition city council of Iowa city, Iowa to close all discussion and further action related to the Shaw matter. We believe all reasonable effort has been expended. It is time to move forward to other council priorities. They started this at noon today and I believe there is 145 signatures. I will give it to Marina when I am done. You all know as I do how difficult it is to dismiss a public employee. You have a Civil Service Commission to deal with, you have the unions to deal with, you have the courts to deal with. It is not as easy as it sounds to get rid of a potentially bad cop. Everybody makes it sound like it is the easiest thing in the world. There are reasons why there are some on the force we have had to pay money out for. If you want to be proactive, as one of the speakers suggested that you be, eliminate the Civil Service Commission and bust the union. That would take care of it. Then you could hire and fire however you wanted to. I would submit that most of these same folks in the room that are asking for immediate action on the employees would defend those unions to the end. You can't have it both ways. You must move on to other issues facing the city. You must do so with the current administration and the current Police Chief. They are both confident professional persons and hey both care very deeply about the community. Thank you. Nov/A point of clarification. The last time we met, we did say this is the opportunity for questions on the Eric Shaw case. In case anyone had not heard that at the end of the last meeting, I will repeat it now, this is the end of the Eric Shaw discussion. We will move on to revisions of police procedures, forming a review board for police complaints in the future. Next one on the list is Jeffrey Martin. Martin/I would like to comment in general on the policies, procedures that are recommended and say that in general, I think they are good taken as a whole. I think they are good because they stand a chance of changing the culture in the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 20 Police Department. And it seems to me that there has been a culture develop within this Police Department as in which a few, maybe a very few, officers on the department feel free to act like cowboys out in the field. I don't think that is the norm for most of the police officers. I think most of the police officers in Iowa City everyday do an excellent job. But it seems pretty clear to me that there are a few who have gotten fairly well out of control and it seems to me also that the Police Chief has been unable to maintain control of his Police Department. Many people have said all along that Eric Shaw's death was a tragedy and with that I agree but I don't think it is just a tragedy. I think it is also an outrage. I think there is one thing that Darrel Courthey and I agree on and that is he said that the answers are clear and I think the answers indeed are dear. This was outrageously bad police work and it was police work done by a police department that has been poorly led. You can change policies all you want and I encourage you to do that. but unless you hold people accountable, this kind of thing can happen again. And to those people who say that they are tired of us stepping up here and doing this, I am tired of coming here and talking to you. I hate doing this. I would much rather be home with my family than doing this. I didn't get into this because I have any sort of political ambitions. I got into this because I think there has been a great injustice done in this community and until something is done to right that wrong, to hold somebody accountable for it, we are not going to go away. Nov/Thank you. John Calvin Jones. John Calvin Jones/Hello. I am a graduate student in the Department of Political Science of the University of Iowa. First I would like to say that I want to thank the people who came here tonight. It is actually pretty hard for me to talk because I don't know anything about Eric Shaw. I don't know anything about this incident but I am really glad that you people came here. To be, that is really important, you know. And I feel really bad for the Shaw family. And I want the Police Department to be good and I want it to be really good and I think everybody does and that is a real important thing. And my dissertation is on policing and police policy and if we want to talk about going forward and moving forward, we need to talk about what makes a good police department and what is good policing. And I am in student government at the University of Iowa and one pet project we talked about doing which hopefully I can start to implement later this fall is having students ride with police and someone said they did that. they did that for six years. They rode with the police and you learn a lot and you know, if we talk about crime and criminality and who is doing it and who is at risk and who is the problem. You know, I know that people who are under 25 who drink are a problem for the police. That is what I am studying. That is my dissertation. I am looking at who is more likely to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 21 commit a crime, who is a delinquent, who is a problem. If we get the police involved with and communicating to students and have students understand the life of the police, it is stressful. We can imagine that. But when we get the two groups integrated, maybe we can have better cooperation, better relationship so we don't have incidents like Eric Shaw. Mr. Immermann brought up an excellent point. He said, you know, if you are a police officer, you need to know your community. You need to know who is in this neighborhood, who works in this neighborhood, what are the patterns of activity in this neighborhood. I don't know any police. I have only lived here three years but you know, I never say police walk up and down the street. I never saw a police drive. I lived over on Summit Street. Now I live on Rundell. I never met one police officer. I never had one say hello, my name is so and so. I have a beat that I come by here every now and then. I just wanted to say hi and if there was a problem, you call me. At one time I had a problem, I called the police, they were very nice, very helpful. But at the same time I don't know the police. I just came back from Holland. I am doing a comparative study and I talked to the police there and they have a completely different culture with the police. The police said people will come up to us on the street and complain about something. They are not intimidated. They are not afraid of us. We feel we are part of the citizens first and if we see a problem with the police and we are off duty, we are going to approach that policeman. And I saw police walking into bars and walking into casinos, 'walking into places where people are smoking dope and they had all kinds of cordial relations with the patrons there. They had tourists coming in and out drunk. You know, they didn't have an attitude. The people weren't afraid of the police. They were glad the police were there. You know it is kind of like having your parent there when there is a bunch of little kids or a teacher and you say okay, we are not going to get in a fight, right, because I mean the person is there watching. But at the same time we don't have an antagonistic relationship because we like that person there. I mean, that is helpful. So, you know, if we want to talk about how do we have a better police force and what the policy that we can implement, you know, I would advocate one thing is getting involved with students. I mean we said in student government we want to try to get people involved with the police but we never had the police come and knock on our door. We never had the police come and say you know, we want to let students understand how stressful it is on Friday and Saturday nights or Thursday nights for us. And we want to actually have students come around driving a car, maybe an off duty police officer or something. Just so people can get the message out that this is the job the police have to do and it is stressful and it is uncomfortable. We need cooperation at times when it could be stressful. But where are the police? I don't understand why not. If you want to make a better police force, you need to make a better police community with the people in the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WSO21997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 22 community. A better ethos between two different groups. So and the last comment I would like to make and again, this is based on what Mr. Immermann said. It is about risk. If we talk about crime and policing, we say we want police to reduce crime. But you don't have to reduce crime in communities where there is no crime and you don't have to worry about people having guns late at night in their office where they work if that is not an area where people have guns who are committing crimes. And I think it is very simple. I mean, maybe I have been out of the loop but I haven't heard of a whole lot of, heck of a lot of armed break-ins in this town. I mean I have heard of people going to convenience stores and robbing place's money. But I haven't heard of some abandon warehouse, someone went in and they took a gun and they were robbing something and the police officer' saved the day. So we need to think about, you know, where are the crimes committed, who are the population who might commit a crime, what kind of crimes are they committing. Are they armed? Are these people dangerous? You know, what kind of strategies can we have as a police force and as a community, i.e. community policing to reduce the risk and to limit crimes and I guess I am almost done. But- Thornberry/Yeah, it has been five. You are over five. Jones/All right. Well, I just want to say some things that I hope that we can move forward. Thank you very much. Nov/And if you ask to ride with a police officer or if any other student would like to do that, they can do it. Jones/It is possible. I understand it is possible. I know that. Nov/Keith Kinion is next. Keith Kinion/Five years ago I moved from Missouri and I was very struck about how caring and concerned people were for one another. And I saw this in a number of ways. It was really moving and I knew right away this is where I want to live, in Iowa City. But after this incident I have changed my mind completely. I don't see the reaction has been, I don't think there has been much of a reaction. I think people have beenvery tepid. There hasn't been the outpouring of anger over this that I would have expected in Iowa City or even in Iowa. And I wouldn't agree with this person's comments that said people are grandstanding or they are trying to advance some political agenda. I don't see that at all. In St. Petersburg, Florida several months back riots broke out over police shooting. A young boy was murdered basically by a cop and they rioted, burned down stores. The whole town This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WSO21997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 23 was wiped out and nothing like that has happened in Iowa City. People have been very forebarren. I am not going to presupposition or assumption that many people have over this case, both pro and con. People on both sides or pro and con. That somehow the police are here to protect us. I don't think they are here to protect us. I don't think there is such a thing as a good cop when you consider the source of economic injustices, I am not going to get into that. I am not going to discuss my political philosophy with you. But I think people ought to start thinking about that. Whether there can actually be a good cop. Noam Chomsky, the famous political philosopher has said over and over, everybody has heard of Noam Chomsky, the guy who teaches at MIT, one of the bravest men I know and one of the few people I admire actually. He says you got to, because there are an opulent few who control all the wealth, you have to control what people think because you can't control what they can do under democracy. So if you can't control what they think, then you got to control what they do. Looks like that is what the people in power are going to do. They are going to resort to physical force because they can't control what they think anymore. A couple of weeks ago I was here and I talked about the fact that the city had insurance for their employees to protect them against liability and I hope you take that matter up if you haven't already. Karen Kubby had said that she supports the idea that you can somehow disentangle the protection for cops from the other employees, city employees. So are you going to take that matter up or what? Nov/We will have insurance for city employees. I cannot imagine that we would not. The topic that we have discussed is whether or not we should be self insured. In other words, fund it ourselves rather than self insurance companies. We will have to be insured in some way. Kinion/Okay, anyway. Nov/I think your time is up. Oh, okay, I am sorry. Kinion/I want to talk about the cost benefit aspects to this. When C_fillaspie went into the business, he didn't go into the business, but he went up to the door and fired off those rounds, basically he was thinking about the cost benefit of actually firing the weapon. now most people when they make a decision they analyze and weigh the costs and benefits before they actually undertake any action. And he must have thought that the benefits of killing Eric Shaw are going to exceed the cost, the benefits of actually protecting himself against the possibility that he is going to be in big trouble, I think, you know, so I think that is why he did it. He thought he could get away with it and you know what, he was right. He got away with it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 24 Nothing has happened to his supervisor or the City Manager and I think a person with good moral conscious here would have to say that something more should be done. I would ask you to please remove the City Manager and the Chief of Police from their position. I don't think that is too much to ask. They can go down and work at Proctor and Gamble for $5.00. I am sure they would take them on. They are always looking for people. I am sure they can do some real work for a change. That is all I have. Thomberry/Your time is up and I can't let your comments go without some kind of a rebuttal. But I have been told not to. Nov/We are not rebutting. We are doing our best to answer questions but hopefully not rebutting. Caroline Dieterle is next. Caroline Dieterie/Basically I listened with surprise to hear Councilor Lehman say that we were basically the cause of the tragedy because we wanted our property and our families protected. It is true that that is why nominally we have the police force but I think if we are talking it to the extreme of protecting the property at the expense of life, it is going a little too far. I would never like to see the son of my neighbor lose his life to save some property within my house. I would rather be robbed than have that happen. The other thing that makes me wonder a little bit about this situation if nothing more is done to revise policy is that ifI hear a disturbance going on in my neighborhood and suspect that it might be a good idea for authorities to be called, I will think twice because I will wonder if I call, whether that will mean that someone will be unjustly punished to the extent of possibly being shot at depending on what's going on there. I mean, obviously I don't know what's going on in there and I hear a lot of noise and I'm worried that someone's getting hurt in there and so forth, but whereas before I would, without considering it further call the police. I don't think that I would want to do that any more under the current circumstances. The second thing is that I think people are afraid. I've run into that too in talking about this with people. Certainly you know I would rather not come down here as well and put yourself in the public eye. I resent the idea that I would come down here for political purposes. That's not why I'm here. I'm here because the son of one of my children's, you know, one of my children's friends, the son of a neighbor has been killed. And I'm here because I'm very disturbed about the Bill of Rights. My children have taught me a lot about the Bill of Rights. When I was a kid, I used to belong to the National Rifle Association. I was proud of that. I was proud of the right to bear arms. I was taught by the National Rifle Association how to treat guns. Having brought up in the country. I saw a lot of animals killed that needed to be killed. They were rabid or there was This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 25 something the matter with them. So I've seen guns used as a tool and I know what they can do. As far as the right of free speech goes, nobody needs that more than I do, because I constantly seem to be using it, but ultimately the right to bear arms and the fight to freedom of speech are going to mean nothing if we also do not have the right to be secure and left alone in our own premises, free from unreasonable seizure. Because any person ever left alone, if they don't have the right to be secure in their own premises can be knocked off and that means that your fight to bear arms and your fight to talk doesn't make much difference. I've often thought about the fact that a Republican or a conservative, whichever you . want to label it, has been called a potential Democrat who nothing bad has ever happened yet. And I think that there's a lot in that, because certainly in my youth I was a Republican. I thought that ifI did the right thing, my life would go my way. Everything would be fine. Nothing bad will ever happen to me. That is not the way life is. And you have to care for your fellow man and you have to stand up and try to help when things are going bad for the people you care about. So that's why I'm here and I hope that you will revise your policies so that the Fourth Amendment is respected in the City of Iowa City. Thank you. Nov/Thank you. Excuse me. We have allowed questions on cards based on the fact that some people may have hesitated to come to the microphone and to be on camera. I'm going to get to some of these questions and I'm going to let staff answer them and then we'll get back to the list of people who have asked to speak. I think this one is probably for ChiefWinklehake or Stephen Atkins. Is he coming back ? Arkins/Yes. He'll be back in a moment. Nov/It asks, how many incidents of excessive force must an officer be involved in order to be dismissed? And this is probably in relation to the fact that we have had an officer that was involved in incidents and was censured in some way but not dismissed. Atkins/I suspect that the easiest way to answer that is one, the circumstances will dictate the punishment that is meted out, but there is no number that says two or more will be immediate dismissal. It would be a dismissal on the first in circumstances. Nov/Okay. There's a question here that goes on for ten cards which is hard to ask. There's a question on the Shaw case asking why wasn't the Shaw family informed of Eric's killing by the Police Chief?. Why wasn't this information given to them in person rather than over the phone? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 26 Atkins/You'll answer? Winklehake/Yes. The notification normally is made in person. In this particular case, Captain Harney received the phone call from, I believe it was Jay Shaw and Captain Harney answered the questions of Jay Shaw at that time including the fact that Eric had been killed. Nov/It was because they had called? Winklehake/The call came into our dispatch center which was handled by Captain Harney. Kubby/I think that one of the questions that we received from the public that hadn't been answered is very similar to that in that I think the call from the Shaw's came into the city about 45 minutes after the shooting and one of the questions was why wouldn't we have notified the next of kin within that time period. Why would it take 45 minutes or longer for us to initiate communication with the next of kin? Winklehake/I'm not sure of the time frame that was there, but 45 minutes would not be an unusual length of time for the officers to be able to gather information and make sure that they knew what they were talking about and try to have the information so they could answer as many of the questions as possible. Kubby/So not just not just identification of who the person was, but what the circumstances were. Winklehake/Yes. And we also generally when we do the notification, it's in person. And we also generally have a chaplain with us. We have three people at that time there were three people who were serving as chaplains and when we make death notifications, we always try to make sure that we have an officer and a chaplain and it's in person. Nov/May I assume that this is any death notification, not necessarily one that involved a police officer? Winklehake/Any death notification- Nov/A traffic accident or something like that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 27 Winklehake/Any death notification that's made, the ideal way to make that is in person and for our department, we also try to involve the Chaplain at the notification and in person. Kubby/Are you the officer who is usually the person who makes that in person contact? Winklehake/I'm sorry. I missed the first part of your question. Kubby/Are you the officer who would be the person to make that kind of personal notification? Winklehake/No. Generally the person who makes the notification is somebody who is involved with the investigation and knows as much of the facts about it as is possible. Nov/Here's another one for the Police Chief. Why does the Chief of Police wear a sidearm even to a City Council meeting? Winklehake/I generally always wear a sidearm because I'm a police officer first. Nov/And all police officers will wear one? Winklehake/Most police officers do carry a sidearm and I choose to carry one because I'm a police officer. I'm on duty. I'm generally in uniform. Times when I'm not in uniform, I still carry a sidearm because I'm a police officer first. Nov/I'll go back to the list, people who have signed up and asked to speak. Tom Immermann. Immermann/I apologize for not being so fully organized and that I should've been. As I said I'd come with a prepared speech. There were two things that bothered me the most. I could not comment at earlier times becaus.e of this class time and some other previous engagements and commitments. But I already mentioned one in that the quote about the finger on the trigger thing by a council person. The other thing that bothers me is that someone mentioned the supervisors had not, nobody had been chastised or whatever at the higher levels. In fact what did bother me was the recent promotion of the watch commander. Is that right? The watch commander for that watch was just promoted. Is that right? Is that right, Chie~ Lieutenant Widmer is now Captain Weidmer. Was he the watch commander for that 3:00- 11:00 shific? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 28 Winklehake/No. 3:00-11:007 Immermann/Was he the watch commander in August 30, 19967 Winklehake/For 3:00-11:00, yes. Immermann/Those were 3:00-11:00 officers that were involved in that, right? Winklehake/Officer Gillaspic was. The watch that was on duty was late night. Immermanrd Because my understanding that they were 3:00 to 11:00 officers, I withdraw that. Them are some issues that came up that need to be addressed somewhat. I am not going to go into all of the- Even what I have heard tonight that when guns are drawn and who draws them and when. When you are in empty building or around people, that kind of thing. Well, I would like to say something about leadership. The young man that has left now that mentioned the Dutch example. Of course that is a nationalized police force and all the way down there is a hierarchy that answers directly to the crown. The Queen of Holland as a matter of fact appoints chiefs of police for the major cities. I am sure that is somewhat political but then they have to have some merit to even for the names to be presented to her. Much like the crown actually indirectly in England has some say over who was superintendent of police them. I mentioned what I thought was a problem over the years of the general atmosphere of harassment, intimidation that comes down from above to below within a department. That is why I am seen as a malcontent. I do speak for some people who fear retribution. I no longer have to fear that. But it has to be said. The stress on the street is one thing. The greater stress for a police officer in many areas is the stress generated within the department by disturbed personalities at the top as I put it somewhat kindly. And I am not the only one, there are several. I have seen good men terribly damaged from that kind of constant harassment. There are several people at the top. You can talk about getting rid of the City Manager and Police Chief and that wouldn't hurt me too much personally. But on the other hand, that is only a scapegoating. I feel that there is a hierarchy at the highest levels that need to be either retired early or demoted. They all bear the responsibility for the training or lack of it. They all bear the responsibility ultimately for the conditions under which the atmosphere or the mood created the conditions under which this people work. I finally get tired of it. I finally got hassled enough to get out especially after seeing what I saw on late nights. Now I understand that the 3:00 to 11:00 people are the hot-dogs now. I don't know. I am a little out of touch. Maybe these people watch too many cop This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 29 programs where sometimes the finger is on the trigger, sometimes it isn't. How much that has a difference, I am not sure. This one individual officer did make a mistake. You go into- When that gun is drawn, whether it is fired or not, when it is drawn you go into a building or whether it is on some felony arrest, car stop or whatever and some kind of arrest when you have to draw your weapons, even aggressively let alone in self defense, that finger is always on the trigger housing, trigger guard, on the frame, whatever you want to call it. It is not on the trigger and that as I was starting to say when my time ran out or toward the end of it, is part of the reason why the police officer is always a half a second behind the bad guy and you have to think of other ways to regain or get initially the advantage. That door that they went through was already partially opened. It is hard to second guess and it has been 5-6 months now. I have done my best to stay objective and try to think about this and imagine what it was like to have been there because I have been there. Not them but I have been in similar situations and there are other options, many other options that could have been resorted to. Also I see we are washing our hands of the second officer. He certainly was foolish not to wear his vest. Why didn't he wear his vest? I don't have an answer for that. I don't even know if them was an answer. I have just picked this up. I really have not had a chance to look at it thoroughly. I will. I would be happy to answer questions in private about certain matters. I have high hopes for this department in the long run. The recent promotions to sergeants and lieutenants by and large except for a couple of exceptions and I will name them in private, not public, are very good. Until you solve the general problem of the atmosphere down there, other things is going to happen. Not this again, this is really an unfortunate aberration and that is a terrible irony. And now there is an opportunity to clean house down there and it better be done. Nov/Yes, we are thinking seriously about changing policies for the future to prevent this from happening again. Kubby/Naomi, can I ask Tom a couple of questions? Baker/Yeah, I have got one after- Nov/He said that he may prefer to talk to you in private. Immermann/I said I would. I will answer questions. Kubby/It is about something that he said during his comments. I guess I want to clarify what your role is with the Academy and the curriculum. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February I9, 1997 Council Work Session page 30' Immermann/I am a committee member appointed by our police association, Iowa State Police Association. That association sends two people, this was done at the request of the Academy director, Gene Shephard. And the members of the committee, this overall committee, come from many jurisdictions. The DNK from · the State Highway Patrol, Cedar Rapids. It is a big working committee. Kubby/And do you have any role in training people at that Academy? Immermann/No, not directly, no. Kubby/You mentioned something about training that you do. Where do you do that training? Immermann/Well, I am a teacher at Kirkwood, adjunct faculty. I teach courses in how to do. I am not certified anymore but I certainly- You bear a terrible responsibility once you are either retired or an ex- Anybody who has been a police officer for a while, has been certified, forever thereafter you have the responsibility to act as if you still were. I don't mean in the aggressive up against the wall arrest sense. Just simple because of how you have been trained. When I teach, I cannot teach what I have been trained at the Academy. Those students who go onto the Academy will be trained in those areas. But I do feel responsible to teach that course. Any citizen can sit in on it and know how the police do and why. Kubby/And I guess my question is for maybe a combination of Linda and Tom and that is that I guess I am hearing different things about what the training is at the Academy in terms of where the finger should be on the- Immermann/The finger almost universally is not to be on the trigger. Kubby/The only thing in the materials, I think, Linda that I remember is talking about when you are on the firing range and then I guess this is partly for R. J., too, maybe in that when you talked at our last meeting, you talked about the need for discretion on the street and that it matters if you have cover, what the situation is. And so I am hearing these different things and reading one thing and so I am confused- Immermann/Training on the range has changed as well. Training on the range has changed as well. It use to be just stand there and go this way and the street experience has taught that that is counter productive to say at least. It gets officers This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 31 killed. Now you have combat training and as you go running from one combat target to another, you do not have your finger on the trigger because you can shoot yourself in the foot if you stumble. Your finger, that is right, you have to develop and exercise quick reflexes as well as quick thinking. Kubby/Linda, would you repeat what your understanding of the Academy training is on that question? Woito/My understanding was that whether you have your finger on the trigger is largely left up to the officers discretion although they are cautioned to use common sense, consider all the facts and circumstances. The trainer, Mr. Van White that I spent a fair amount of time talking with, he said they taught that when you do a building search with the pure open door, that you do it with your finger off the trigger. Kubby/Unless you have certain circumstances to believe- Woito/Unless there are obviously dangerous situations. Other departments said that that is the way they train. I have no experience whatsoever if that is actually what is trained. That is what they told me. But there is still a wide variety within all of the departments and within the state. Immermann/There are many ways to do it right. There are many ways to do it wrong. Norton/I would like to ask would you identify that committee on your note somewhere, that specific committee that you are a member of. Immermann/For now, I lost track exactly what the name is at the moment. As I say, it switches priorities now to long range planning. It began as a curriculum advisory committee. Norton/Okay, I just want so I know what I am looking at. Immermann/Director Shephard can tell you more about it if you call him directly in Des Moines because we haven't met in a while. We don't meet often and we talk about issues that have come up since. Nov/So it is long range planning in terms of the Police Academy and its training practices. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 32 Immermann/More specifically the curriculum in total which includes training practices. It is an advisory committee. We have no, you know, power of function other than that. Norton/Is this formed by the Police Association or by the Academy? Immermann/It was originally formed by the Academy, Gene Shephard, at the director's request and it formed from members of various police agencies, both retired people. (Can't hear) which is what the Iowa Police Association and also active duty constituted agencies. Norton/Thank you. Nov/Thank you. Larry, did you have something? Baker/Mr. Immermann, I just want to be very sure I understand something that you said. You thought that just getting rid of the Chief and the City Manager might be just scapegoating. Immermann/Seen as scapegoating. Baker/Seen as scapegoating. That the real solution is a revamping or shake up of the top hierarchy? Immermann/A phase out, shall we call it that, by attrition. We had high hopes for the Chief when he first came in. Baker/So your solution is that there are individuals in the department that need to go? Immermann/Oh, I think so, yes. Baker/You don't have to name names but give me an idea- Immermann/I wouldn't be public about it, private only. Baker/Give me an idea of just what sort of a shake up are you suggesting as far as numbers of people? Immermann/You have very promising upcoming people. They need more experience in- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 33 CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 97-34 SIDE 2 Immermann/I feel good about that. But the people where they are should just be retired, eased out. And those ranks- It will take time. It is the only way to do it properly and it is just going to be a matter of time. So we all have to cross ourselves and hope nothing else happens. Baker/But are you talking about the complete- Immermann/Well, the 20 program I don't know what it is. It changes and it is one thing one day and one thing something else. I know there are policies and pieces of paper. That is not what really happens. I don't know what kind of program everybody has. What is the training program for sergeants? Is there a training program for sergeants? Winklehake/A lot more than you ever dreamed of, Tom. Immermamff Well, why don't you make that more public because it could be, it could be. That was never- You know, a lot of things weren't told us that probably should have. One of the biggest problem of police departments and here is an example of it is the problem of non-communication. Not only up and down but unilaterally. Detectives don't talk enough to patrol, upper levels like to keep little secrets. It could really help people on patrol to share information. That is not a good admission to make, Chief. You know, to keep us in the dark about what goes on. I know certain people over the years go to lots of schools and lot of other people got no schools or few. I really don't know what those are based on. Thornberry/Tom, you have given us lots of information and you teach police- Immermann/Patrol procedures, how to do the job. Thornberry/Patrol procedures for Kirkwood. You would hold yourself up as an expert in police tactics. Immermann/You may do that. I would hesitate to do that myself but a- Yeah, I do have that- Thornberry/I would rather not. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 34 Immermann/I have 16 years experience on the street and teaching as well. I grew up in New York City. I learned a long time ago how to treat people. Thornberry/What I am asking is would you consider yourself an expert since you teach the class and under the auspices ofthe- Immermann/(Can't hear) I would be a witness in court, yes. Thornberry/And you have also told us that others have characterized you as a malcontent ex-police officer who couldn't stand the heat so you got out of the kitchen and quit the force. Is that accurate? Immermann/I suppose. I believe it is. I don't know. I believe so. I believe that is a fair assessment. Thornberry/I am not quite sure how much credibility to give you with some ofyour- Immermann/Mr. Council Person, I tell you what. I live out in the country now and I don't care what you think. I am telling you what I feel and believe and it spurns the witness. Thomberry/If you don't care what I think, then why should I care what you think? Immermann/Well, you are asking the questions. Nov/Let's not get into this. Immermann/You are asking the questions. Lehman/It is time for a break, Naomi. Nov/Okay, all right. We will take a break for a few minutes. We will come back. We still have people on the list and we still have written questions. Baker/Five minutes, Naomi? Nov/Yeah. [Council Break[ This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 35 Nov/Did I say your first name? Evonne Johnson/Evonne Johnson. And I think there are going to be two people here, Linda and I think the Chief has tangled with me. I am very sorry what happened to the Shaw family. I think the problem is the Police Department is only as good as its leaders. My husband has been a police officer for 16 years, 4 of that being in St. Louis, Missouri. He wrote training manuals for the St. Louis Police Department and Columbia, Missouri Police Department. So it is not like I didn't come from a long line of law enforcement. My husband did get out for the same reasons that this ex-chiefback here said. We did have a circumstance that happened on February 8 of last year. We have a disabled 22 year old son that graduated from the Iowa Mennonite High School. He fell cleaning the top shelf of his cabinet, hit his head on the register in his kitchen and slit his head open. He had blood gushing out of his head. I come down, hit the wrong street, come up Market Street in front of Mercy and realized I had to go to the other side of Mercy in order to get to the emergency ward. I turned right on a green light, a red light came on behind me and Mr. Cox is a police officer yanks open my car door and wants to know what I am doing. Now I have got my name on myself and my profession all over my van. I explained to him and asked for help and it is very interesting because Karen Kubby has on the back here, respond calls for emergency and routine services, aid or advice as necessary. He informed me that that no longer is a police officers job. I said but that was 50% of my husband's time was helping people. At this point I said well, I am going on, if you want to arrest me and drag me down to the jail, that is fine. So Steven starts up the alley to the emergency ward. I said Steven, get back in the car before you pass out. I proceeded after 8 1/2 minutes by my clock radio to proceed to the emergency ward of the hospital. At that time the nurse asked me why I was so upset and I told her and she said why don't you call the P.olice Department from right here and I did. The guy says oh, I believe it was Widmer, is off tonight, our command watch. But I will tell you what, I will have the police get back to you tomorrow. I stayed home all day the next day and I still have the recordings on my recorder that said I called them back twice and finally Hamey calls me and says oh, we are so sorry we didn't get back to you. He said you need to come down and filed a complaint. I came down, I filled out a written complaint. I got a letter two weeks later from the Police Department that that my story was a lot like Cox but there were a few disagreements with what was said. So I wasn't happy with that at all and finally Widmer asked me or Harney, one, I dealt with both of them, what I expected. I said an apology and my son an apology. Well you are not going to get that now was the exact words and that is still on a recording that I have. After that I called Linda. Well, I called her once on that. And then the following couple of months he went to Hagens down here to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 36 check out a tape. Now this is a kid that hasn't even had a speeding ticket and he lost his keys in the car. He called the Police Department and asked for help. In Coralville, they do unlock your car doors. And he is quite use to them. And they informed him that they do not do that. So he thought, ok/~y, I will call 911, he not knowing that they are together at the same desk at the same place. She told him under no circumstances did they do that and I heard the recording. They have a copy of the recording. it was played in court. And Steven turned around and was frustrated since he has a very severe speech difficulty and said you know, you are stupid. That is exactly what is on that tape. They flied a false report, filing a false reporting against Steven Johnson. He went to court and they found him guilty and I called that man right there and asked for his help and he says ma'am, that ticket has been written up. We found him guilty, they is not a thing I can do. Now those are both incidents. They are documented and I will not come back into Iowa city. This is my first trip into Iowa City since that time because if he has that problem and never been a kid in trouble, what other problems are happening. And I am sorry. I come from a law enforcement family, my husband's dad was in for 54 years. His three bother-in-laws are in the police work now and my husband now is a counselor in a prison system. So I am saying to you that this Shaw thing- In the first place gun should not be drawn unless it means that police officer's life- In the St. Louis and Columbia, Missouri, both of those training academy manuals say that. My husband did think that the Law Enforcement Academy in Iowa was a joke. He went six months in St. Louis down in St. Louis. He was not hired until he finished and out of 78 men, he and one other gentleman made the St. Louis Police Department. He came up to Iowa at~er we got married and he went to the Police Academy at Camp Dodge and an FBI Officer told him he had better get himself studying and he said I will take the test with you right now and the guy bet him $100 that he wound't beat him. He took the test with a 99 an the FBI officer got an 84 and he went out on the gun and took marksmanship and everything else and so that goes to show the training that they had in St. Louis. I knew Jeff Gillaspic ever since he was three years old. I noticed in the paper the compliment was he was voted Mr. Popular. That was one thing my husband had a complaint about. You don't go to Police Academy to see who is most popular. Nov/Thank you, Evonne. Johnson/Thank you. Nov/May I ask why a police officer is no longer unlocking a car? I thought they did that. Winklehake/I am sorry, what? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 37 Kubby/CSO. Nonoff CSO. Nov/The CSO wasn't available? Winklehake/We do unlock cars unless it is an electric lock and then, as she explained, that we don't do it because we damage them and risk management tells us we should not do that. Nov/So it was an electric lock? Johnson/No, it was not. Winklehake/The way it was explained to the dispatcher and we do have the tape. Can I ask you a question? You say the dispatcher told your son that he was stupid? Johnson/No, my son told her the second time because the police department out in Coralville has unlocked his car 2-3 times. And on that tape, you better listen to it, it says we do not unlock cars. You call a locksmith. Winklehake/What we don't do is unlock cars with electric door locks. Johnson/It was not an electric door lock. Winklehake/In this particular case, what Mrs. Johnson ask me to do was do something about the conviction. I cannot do anything about the conviction. That case went to court. It was a trial in front of a judge in Johnson County and a conviction was entered into court. There is nothing that I, as a police chief, can do about a court case that has been in the court and a conviction has been entered. It is simply not my jurisdiction to be able to do something. Johnson/Filing a false report. Do you realize what a false report is, Chief? Nov/Okay, I just wanted to ask about a car lock. I thought that is something we did. Winklehake/We still do that. Nov/Jim Shaw. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 38 Jim Shaw/Thank you, again. What I want to take up now continues to pertain to integrity. I will go right back to where I was regarding, I guess I have to look at Chief Winklehake's statements. I assume that the police review summary was signed off on by Mr. Atkins and ChiefWinklehake. And so I was very surprise to hear Chief Winklehake say in response to a question about Officer Kelsay being at the scene when Jay and Blossom arrived that there was no interaction with Jay and Blossom. The Police Chief must have forgotten to read this. It states in there very clearly that Officer Kelsay not only was their for 45 minutes, he clearly interacted with jay and Blossom. I am not sure what integrity means when it is so frequently abused by the Chief in this manner. I mean I think of integrity as honesty or if you don't make an honest statement, you apologize for it. You come to the family and say oops, I goofed. I just don't hear any of that coming and I very much echo Carol de Prosse's statements. I think she did a very good job of saying what is really at the heart of this and why this is so painful to Jay and Blossom because the just leadership just seems terribly absent here, terribly absent. From Mr. Atkins saying things like we would have to get into the head of Jeff Gillaspie to know why he pulled the trigger. We don't have to get into his head. Any attorney can tell you that you determine things by actions. You look at the actions of what happened there. You don't have to get into JeffGillaspie's head to have a trial to determine fault. Fault is essential here because you have got to learn from it and we are not, well, I hope we are learning. Mr. Lehman came up to me at the break and said that he is learning, that all the council people are learning. And I hope that is true. But there has been one area that we are not going to apparently be allowed to learn in and that is the area of criminality because one'person made a determination this won't go to trial and that is why this statement that Mr. White makes of saying that we can learn a lot more because he made the decision. Well, what he is forgetting to realize is that if he had not made that decision, we would learn all kinds of things. The fact that the Grand Jury is secret doesn't have anything to do with it. If it goes to trial, then we can get to the truth of this. And that is why that has been so painful for this community is because the very heart of this country was ripped out when Mr. White said this won't got to trial. Matters of this import need to go to trial so that a community can understand what went wrong. There is so much that went wrong here. Ms. Woito says that the 4th Amendment was not violated in her opinion. But she added to that a very interested addendum in the paper. I have not spoken with you directly, so I hope I am not misquoting you. But the addendum was that if this went to trial, it may be a different outcome. Is that close, Ms. Woito? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 39 Woito/Yes and I can think there is some confusion. I made it clear in my memo I think in terms of the building search that under Iowa law, there would not be likely a finding of a 4th Amendment violation. Jim Shaw/Right. Woito/(Can't hear) the shooting of the gun, the law is unclear enough that likely ajuW would have found a violation of the 4th Amendment with respect to the shooting of the gun and for that reason, as I said, I preferred to settle the civil claim. Jim Shaw/Okay. Well, I appreciate your clarification on that but I think there is a clear danger here if the Justice Department does not come forward and say this is a clear violation of the 4th Amendment because that is where this all started. I want to jump back because I can see the Chief is'looking through the book and maybe this is what he is looking for, I don't know. But on page 6, 9/19, Officer Kelsay. Eventually, and this is probably about 12:30 1 would guess, 45 minutes after. Eventually the family did show up. They both charged the police tape. Three of the officers, first supervisors, three people there restrained the father and escorted him back out. A, myself and Sergeant Wise did the same with the mother. He was there Chief. This has happened too frequently that you are either mistaken or you are not answering the questions. When I asked you about the sequestering, this obvious says this was not true. I don't understand these lacks of leadership that you exhibit and I would like this council to sincerely look at these things as rather egregious because I think leadership is really what is needed for this town to get back on track and for Jay and Blossom to live in this town or at least have a chance at living in this town without this specter of this lack of justice, the lack of leadership, · the lack of accountability haunting them everyday that they live here. Thank you. Baker/ Mr. Shaw, can I ask you a question just for clarification? I am trying to get clear in my mind your view of the interaction between Officer Kelsay and the Shaw family at the scene. Is it this presence of Kelsay is the interaction or was there an exchange of words between or at least coming from Kelsay? Jim Shaw/Well, there was an exchange that was very hurtful. Baker/From Kelsay? Jim Shaw/From Kelsay, as far as I know. Norton/According to his report, yeah. His report, I think. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 40 Jim Shaw/That he is right there and Jay made the charge that it was Mr. Kelsay- Well, let me back up just a little bit. Mr. Kelsay, upon seeing that Jay and Blossom were coming to the scene, said in reference to Officer Zacharias, he doesn't need to see this, this emotional outpouring of grief by the parents. That would indicate that Officer Zacharias is still on the scene. Somebody who was told by me- Excuse me, somebody who I understood by what the Chief said was immediately sequestered. I had many questions for the Chief if he would have answered that truthfully. But when he doesn't answer that question truthfully, I have to call him a liar or to get him to continue to answer it. There is no- When he says they are sequestered, they are not talking to each other. They are sequestered and they are not talking to each other. Mr. or excuse me, Officer Kelsay was there and I just-I can't quite get through my mind how somebody who has been directly responsible for a death like this is not immediately when Sergeant Jackson gets on the scene, is not immediately sequestered. Ask him questions, fine but sequester him. For crying out loud, you would arrest anybody else. Baker/I was just trying to get a sense of the interaction between- Jim Shaw/Okay, now, I lost track of your question. Baker/OfKelsay and the Shaw family on the scene. Jim Shaw/That was the thing that was troubling me at the time when I asked that question, was the sequestering. But I have come to learn that Officer Kelsay made that comment about Officer Zacharias does need to see this and neither do I. I say if anybody needs to see it, it is somebody who has been directly responsible to see Jay and Blossom trying to crawl or to jump the police line to get to their son. I mean, I am sure it was not-it was very painful to see. It would have been painful for me. But there are two things there. It is what he said is stop laying in the dirt. Stop laying in the dirt, Blossom. Baker/And he said that directly to Blossom Shaw? Jim Shaw/Somebody said it. Officer Kelsay helped Blossom up. It is in the report that he was standing very near her. Somebody said it. Baker/Somebody said it. Jim Shaw/Somebody said it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 41 Baker/Okay. Jim Shaw/Most likely it is Officer Kelsay. Baker/Okay, thank you. Nov/Richard Twohy. Richard Twohy/A few quick points that is worthy of more detail even though Mr. Courtney would rather think everything that needs to be said has been said. #1 the Chief said that all proper procedures were in fact followed by Mr. G-illaspie until the shot went off, until the gun went off was his phrase and everybody can appreciate that that was at the point- There is not even a procedure or policy about that. That is just an accident, a flinching, whatever it was that happened. If that is so, if Mr. Gillaspic followed the proper procedures, then he should have his job back. His family should have their Labor Day and their Halloween and their Thanksgiving and their Christmas and their New Years and wherever we are now back. If in fact he was following the procedures, he was run out of town without a hearing, without an opportunity for any kind of factual determination. If he was following the procedures, then he should not be out of town. And in fact, if we was following the proper procedures and some irresponsible people in positions of authority should be leaving town. #2 Since it is apparent that we are not going to have a chance to get to the bottom of things without finding our-without questioning Officer Kelsay,'I submitted a request to the City Clerk for each of you and for the Chief of Police and for the City Manager to have Officer Troy Kelsay here this evening to answer some questions. It was only a request but it was a sincere one. Since apparently there is not going to be any prosecution even if a Grand Jury of citizens in this democracy with the subpoena power convenes itself, it should issue an indictment or two or more. This prosecutor with his what I can only think of as an emperor complex says no matter what they do, I won't prosecute. I guess that means that basically these guys have been granted immunity haven't they? Then I would like to see it made official so that we citizens and you as a city council representing us, can have out benefit of the bargain. Officer Kelsay and Officer Gillaspic and Officer Zacharias should be officially granted immunity and therefore called upon to testify under oath as to what happened in this case so that we can learn from it. There are other things, too. You know, you as a council and we, as citizens who may be afraid but we are still lucky to live here in Iowa city. You know, there are lots of other things. You know, the Mont'r Glasper case. There are a whole bunch of other things where there weren't This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 42 lawsuits, you know. But there is a long range pattern here of where the police are out of control and since the Chief isn't going to do it, since his boss the Manager isn't going to do it, it will be up to you, the council, to do it and I am glad you are in office. As to the 4th Amendment thing, again, you are a part-time council, you rely on your staff. Your lawyer issued this report with her conclusion that there was no 4th Amendment violation but she didn't state it globally. She said in the State of Iowa, in the 8th Circuit under the federal system. There are actually ten of them. Iowa happens to be in the 8th Circuit and in the U.S. Supreme Court there are no cases at all. That is why she said well, apparently it is legal. No cases at all in those Circuits and that is the basis on which your attorney said well, then it is not a violation. The fact of the matter is there are nine other federal circuits beside the 8th Circuit and several of those jurisdictions have addressed this very question and the 4th Amendment was determined to have been violated by the police and when the matter came up to the U. S. Supreme Court, the reason there was not decision was because the Supreme Court decided not to bother to hear it because they were accepting the rule that was made. It is unconstitutional. And as far as I am concerned if that is the most that you can get from your lawyer, maybe you need another lawyer or at least lets call it much clearer coverage of this topic and let the public know as well because you don't have a final answer. Nov/No, we don't have a final answer and I assume that you know that the federal government, the Department of Justice, is now considering that and it is really out of our hands. They may decide that there is a violation. We don't know yet. Twohy/I hope that no credibility is given by this council to the word of your attorney who made a very narrow little subgrouping of jurisdictions for her conclusion. You know, you are to being well served by your staff, councilors. And since you are part-time, you are required. In the 63 questions that you all offer which were very good questions, once again, talk about the waffling here. Quick, question # 17, which Mr. Baker. you pointed out at the last session was a crucial question as to whether or not there might have been premeditation. And the question was asked by four city council persons and the question was, was Gillaspie seen stepping back out of the door, raising his gun, pointing and firing, indicating premeditation and forethought. That was the question and three other councilors asked it. The answer, JeffGillaspie statement, as reported to Sergeant Jackson within minutes after the shooting was to the effect that quote, he said so you don't get any answer to the question was Gillaspie seen stepping back out of the door and taking actions. The answer they gave was a indirect citation of Gillaspie's own comment. That wasn't the question and then the question gets asked by three other council This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 43 persons and the answer to them was refer to question 17. That is not the support you need as leaders from your staff. Nov/Okay. Thank you. Twohy/We need to have zero tolerance of unlawful police violence. Nov/We heard you. Twohy/And then we citizens can go home and stay home. Nov/Holly Berkowitz. Kubby/I think Holly had to leave. Nov/Okay, I will see who else. Jay Shaw. Jay Shaw/An open door is not a statement by any rightful occupant of that building that he has given up his 4th ,Amendment rights. If the police are allowed to enter through an open door without a search warrant, then any rightful occupant of that building has not 4th Amendment rights. You can't have it both ways. If we want to allow warrantless entry to open doors, we will have to inform every citizen that they have given up their 4th Amendment rights by virtue of being in a commercial building. But you can ask the question do you need the 4th Amendment here? I think you do in a very broad picture because police departments all over this country are going to have to ask this question, are we going to allow warrantless entry through a door because it is open? The answer should be no because there is no way for a policeman to know if there is a rightful occupant in that building with any certainty. There is simply no way to know as was proven by your officers that night. My God, if they couldn't figure out there was somebody in there who was talking on the phone, with the door open, with a clear view of him had they looked through the window from the right angle. If they couldn't determine it under those circumstances, imagine other circumstances where a person was little more quiet not talking on a phone. It is so obvious that an open door is more likely to mean that the rightful occupant is in that building than it is that a burglar is in that building. It is so obvious that anybody can think of it, anybody. But what, not the police? How many burglars, how many burglaries have been discovered by the police as burglaries in progress in this city. I haven't been able to find any. The rightful occupants, the owners of that building are the ones who discovered the burglaries. They report them to the police. So the chances are so damn slim that This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 44 you are going to find a burglar behind that open door that the assumption should be that there is a rightful occupant in there and that assumption should make you think don't go in. That is the assumption. Don't go in because there could be a rightful occupant in there. It is not go in because there might be a burglar in there. If there might be a burglar in there, wait and for them to come out. There are so many other ways to handle an open door. Bu the method that they chose was wrong and so dangerous that it boggles my mind that such a method was used. I call going through that door criminally negligent. Criminally negligent because the chances were so great that there would be an innocent person in there and the chances are so great that they would kill them. That it becomes very similar to the drunken driver. I like this analogy. I think it is the best one you could come up with. The drunken driver can honestly say that he did not intend to kill his victim. The drunken driver who kills behind the wheel do not intend to kill his victim. But the law deems him guilty of homicide because the chances that he would kill someone are increased dramatically by virtue if the fact that he is drunk. These officers engage in an operation that was so dangerous that the chances that they would kill someone were dramatically increased. I call that the same kind of negligence. Eric Shaw's killing was not a wrongful death. It was a criminal death. It is not rational to ignore negligence so gross and so pervasive and so obvious that made a killing inevitable. With such blatant disregard for safety, it was never a question of if these officers would kill someone. It was when and who. The question was answered the night of August 30. At Mr. White's press conference, he used the following medical analogy as part of his justification for filing no criminal charges. He likened these officers mistakes to the mistakes that a doctor might make that end up killing his patient. When a doctor makes such a mistake, it is not a criminal matter but a civil matter. To be a valid analogy, we have to accept that the deliberately unsafe actions and inactions of these officers are in some way like the accidental mistakes of a surgeon. The deliberate actions that put citizens are grave risk are not accidents and cannot be called accidental mistakes. Let me reverse the analogy so Mr. White can see what I mean. I am talking to Mr. White here. If a surgeon came to the operating table with butcher knives and proceeded to carve open his patient without any clear ideas of what he was doing and mistakenly slashed open the patient's heart, do you think we should call it malpractice or murder, Mr. White? I am skipping ahead here. This isn't going to make a lot of sense. I intended to introduce some of the main players in this tragedy and I let~ that out because I don't have time. So I am ending up with my son. I intended to introduce everybody else. Well, that is just about all the main players except of course, our son. Thank God that he does not have to see this. I trust that God would not an at~er-life which would allow our son to watch as this city tortures his parents. Let me end with a quote from Mr. White translated into This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 45 English, of course. The Shaws will have to learn to live the rest of their lives with injustices. That is not true. The city council cannot provide much justice, of course, since they are not a court of law. But they can hold the men with direct responsibility for the death of our son accountable and if they deem it justified, they can terminate their employment. When it comes to justice, even a little would help. Thank you. Nov/Thank you. We don't have other names. I will see ifI can ask some of the questions that have been written. Karr/No, there are more names. They are coming over. Nov/Okay, sorry, I just didn't see them. Okay. Osha Gray Davidson would like to speak again. Osha Gray Davidson/That is how I knew that there were more names. Nov/I assumed that is how you knew. Davidson/These are two very simple questions. Am I allowed to direct them at- Who am I suppose to direct them at. Nov/You may direct your questions to whomever you would like. Davidson/This is a general question. I am not sure who is going to have the answer to it but Mr. Shaw stated and I just want to know if this is so. That there have been no burglaries caught in progress in Iowa City. I would use a timeframe that is reasonable like the last five years. I assume that has been looked at. Is that a fact or is that not a fact? I just don't know? Winklehake/No, it is not a fact. Davidson/There have been burglaries caught in progress? Winklehake/Yes. Davidson/Okay. The other one is for you, ChiefWinklehake. It is another very simple question but I wanted to know, in your opinion, was- We have talked a lot about discretion being important and I certainly agree that that is a vital part, that our officers have to have discretion. That also carries with it the proper use of This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 Febmary 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 46 discretion and so what I want to know from you, as the Police Chief, was Officer Gillaspic using proper discretion on the night of August 30 when he open door with his finger on the trigger of his gun. Was that proper discretion? Winklehake/In my opinion? Davidson/Yes, sir. Winklehake/I wasn't there. I don't know what his mental state was. I don't know what he was thinking. Unless I knew exactly what that is, I can't tell you what I think he had. If he thought there was a possible threat, it is proper to put the finger on the trigger. Davidson/But given all the evidence. You have seen at least as much as we have. You know as much as we do. All the evidence has been there that we know of. There is nothing that I know of that was secret. There were pry marks on the door. This was an area of burglary where there had been a rash of burglaries. I think that has been well documented or at least a number of them. I am not asking you to get into his mind. I am.asking you as his superior, was this officer using proper discretion to go through the door with his finger on the trigger under the circumstances that we all know of without any additional factors? Winklehake/Say what you said again. He was doing what? Davidson/When you went through the door on the night of August 30, pushed open the door, was he using proper discretion? Winklehake/Which did he do? Davidson/Which what did he do? Winklehake/Push the door open or go through it? Davidson/Yes, when he pushed the door open. Winklehake/When he pushed the door open? Davidson/Let me finish it. When he pushed the door open, was he using proper- I am not talking about whether he was right to push the door open. I am asking you when This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 47 he pushed the door open, was he using proper discretion in having his finger on the trigger at that point. Winklehake/If he felt there was a threat, yes, he was. Davidson/I don't find that a very reassuring answer. That is saying if he was showing proper discretion, then he was showing proper discretion. It is totally logical. I am asking he superior, under those circumstances, it is a very simply thing. Was he showing proper discretion in your opinion? Winklehake/If he thought there was a threat, he was showing proper discretion. Davidson/Well, from what we know, was there a threat? Winklehake/From what I understand from the statements he made, he perceived a threat. So in that case it was proper for him- Davidson/Okay, that is what I want to know. In your opinion, he was exercising proper discretion pushing open the door with his finger on the trigger. That is what I wanted to find out. Okay. Thank you. Baker/Osha, a different line of question. Davidson/Of whom? Baker/For you. Davidson/Okay. Baker/ Because I need some help here. You and I have talked on the phone off and on the past few weeks. We are near the end of the list of speakers and the council is going to ask some questions and talk among ourselves. What do you suggest as a method of analyzing, a method that the council can use to analyze the Police Chief, City Manager? So what are the building blocks that help us reach a conclusion? Let me give you something you and I talked about earlier. If we come to the conclusion that the policies in effect at the time were reasonable. That the training of officers for the whole department is reasonable, how does that affect our judgment of the Police Chief?. I am trying to see if there is a difference between what happened that night, whether it is inevitable? If it is inevitable and people could foresee that, then there is clear responsibility. I am- Very shortly, we are This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 48 going to- I hope the council will come to a formal conclusion on talking to you and the rest of the public about how we look at this Situation. How we look at the personnel and why we feel that way. Is it your firm belief that the policies were flawed to begin with and therefore the people responsible for the policies have to be held accountable or is it your firm belief that the policies allowed a range of actions, the actions were wrong and how the personnel involved responded to that situation? How they responded is how we evaluate them. Help me from this point on. Davidson/I don't think it is as simple as you are presenting it. I think your task is more difficult than that because you have a whole range of things you have to consider, not merely the one-the two options that you have posed here. You have to look at policies and make sure certainly that they are appropriate. If they are not appropriate, then absolutely the people who are responsible for those poor policies have to be gone. Normal management principles. You have to look beyond policies, written policies which is I assume you are talking about to actual performances in the field, how people are dealt with, what the culture of the Police Department is, how they react. You have to look at- after something like this has happened, how it is dealt with, what happens in a matter like this, what is the reaction of the Police Chief and the City Manager to a crisis situation like this. And one key component of that is not being evasive and being completely honest and truthful in answering questions about what actually happened and there can be no equivocation on that. And if there is, in my opinion and your are asking my opinion, in my opinion you fire people whom you cannot trust. It is. not easy to fire people and I understand that. It is not a pleasant task. But a man died in this case. The policies that led up to it, not only written policies but policies that were allowed to go on. I know what the right word for non-written policy is but that was allowed to result- There were 48 seconds once again that elapsed. Chief Winklehake has said he saw nothing, he sees nothing wrong in anything that happened that night other than the actual pulling of the trigger. And he reinforced that now telling me that yes, it was fine for Gillaspic to have his finger on the trigger given that situation?. I am sorry, you don't think he said that? Nov/Given Gillaspie's state of mine which we do not understand because we were not there. Now we are still dealing with the state of mine, the discretionary option and we just don't know. Davidson/Well, I think there is more to it than that. I don't think it is just that we don't know. But regardless of that, the fact is you can focus on several different- You will need to focus on several different areas and in each of those areas, the people This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 49 you are focusing on have to meet certain criteria in all of those areas. One of those areas that I am most troubled by, that is the most apparent since we don't- we have trouble going back and finding out what happened. Where my time frame really begins is that night. Thomberry/Are you answering Larry's question? Baker/Yes, he is. Davidson/Yes, I am. When 40 seconds elapsed from the time police officers arrived to the time somebody is killed, then and the Chief says there is nothing wrong with that. They did a fine job other than pulling the trigger. And when he says that yes, having his finger on the trigger was fine. Now I understand you are going to have to debate among yourselves whether his state of mind really did that. But I think that should be a serious debate. It shouldn't just be written off, well, we don't know. We weren't in his head. You need to figure out what was going on there and whether that is an appropriate response that is okay to have your finger on the trigger in that case under those circumstances. There are other cases in which the Chief has equivocated to use the best possible word on truthfulness about the Human Rights Commission. He was given the chance. I read the transcript and it was quite clear. I was here at the time and it was quite clear to me that you all assumed that he meant the Human Rights Commission did review the whole policy. At least that is what it looked like to me. In reading the reading the transcript, that is what it looked like. He then later said no, that was not really what I meant to imply. You have to judge whether you were being mislead. That is all. Nov/Okay, thank you. Shelton Stromquist. Shelton StromquistY Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I didn't come tonight expecting to speak. There are others who can speak far more eloquently and with far more insight than I can into the facts of the case and to the killing of an innocent citizen. I am troubled by the notion that it is somehow inappropriate for us to be here testifying, for us to hold such hearings, for us to continue as a community to grieve together. Not only as we profoundly must over a loss of a innocent man but in my view over the failure of local government. I sat at home watching city council that first hearing- CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 97-35 SIDE 1 This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 50 Stromquist/And it was not a pretty set of stories we heard. It suggested problems that were much deeper than the question of a police officer misbehaving in a 48 second period. Deeply tragic though that was. I was troubled by what seemed to me that night and has seemed to me ever since a failure to take responsibility on a human level. A fear of openness, a fear of questioning, a smug-ness that I have even seen here tonight that continues among unelected officials and elected officials alike. A lack of compassion, a profound lack of compassion. A desire to defend the status quo no matter what. I am troubled by this failure of local government because I believe Iowa city is a place where it can work. But it can only work if we stop giving deference to unelected officials. We didn't choose these men. Ultimately you chose them although I suspect you most of you didn't have much voice in their selection either. The council has to take executive authority. It has to assume responsibility and it has to do what this community, I think, profoundly desires you to do and that is to hold those people in the chain of command responsible. Not a single police officer but those in the chain of command who ultimately bear responsibility for the policies that created this tragedy. Nov/We have respectfully requested that we not have applause. This is not a performance. I am going to switch to questions because I don't have any more names. Does anyone have other names, Marian? I will ask a question in the meantime. There is one here. ChiefWinklehake's name asking was there investigation into the Dodge Cleaner's incident? Winklehake/Yes, there was. Nov/Can you tell us a little bit about it? Winklehake/What would you like to know? Nov/I don't know what the questionnaire is asking but tell us what kind of investigation. Winklehake/You have a handout on that in the material that was given to you. Twohy/Does this refer to a situation that very same night when Troy Gillaspic walked into another open building? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 51 Nov/No. Just give us a general idea of what kind of investigation happens on a complaint such as that. We have this sheet in front of us, the public has not particularly read that. So just give us a summary. Baker/But, Naomi, that report is public record, right? They can get copies? Nov/Yes, they can get copies, Winklehake/Basically the incident at Dodge Cleaners happened at 5:13 and at 6:30 in the morning Captain Harney was advised of the incident and he at that time made note to review the incident. A number of things did occur. The next notation that is on the list that Captain Harney made was receiving a phone call at 8:10 on the 3rd of September. At that time he also advised me of that particular phone call. There was some stuff. The phone call that was made was the wife of Earl and she had at that time requested that there be a meeting of some sort, that they would be able to get together and make sure that the officers new who was there, who resided upstairs and that kind of thing. Nov/And they did have that meeting, did they not? Winklehake/Well, there was a phone call that was made I believe on the 4th by Captain Harney to the location. He spoke very briefly with the Mrs. Baugh again and at that time she handed the phone to an individual identified himself as an attorney by the name of Tom Riley. Atter that on the 6th there was somebody from Tom Riley's law firm, Lester something and we don't know the last name who did call and ask that that meeting be set up and actually take place and that did take place with the people were working late nights. Lieutenant Sellers in charge of that particular watch and the notation here is that the date of that actually is not known. Nov/Okay, that sounds fine. Kubby/But them was not an official internal investigation about that incident? Winkdehake/No, the investigation began with by Captain Harney being made aware of it and then it ended up with the meeting at the or with the people from the cleaners and the late night officers. That was the end result of it. Thomberry/That was a real sketchy brief summation of this memo from Captain Harney to you and the memo that is, like Larry said, public record goes into quite a lot of This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 52 detail as to what happened that night and if somebody wants it, I guess, it is available in the City Clerk's Office. Nov/Yes, it is available. All you have to do is ask. Okay. There is a question here addressed to Steve Atkins and ChiefWinklehake and Linda Woito asking are any of you aware of items contained in the DCI report that would cast Eric Shaw into a negative light? And if so, what difference would that make to the fact that he was shot? Atkins/Yes, I am aware of that information and to the best of my knowledge that is privileged and not to be released. Kubby/And the second part of the question would it make any difference. Atkins/Would it make any- No, that is an opinion? Nov/It is an opinion. It said in each of your opinions, what difference would that make to the fact that he was shot on the night of August 30? Atkins/In my opinion is it is irrelevant. Winklehake/I agree with that. Nov/Linda. Woito/I don't know of anything in the report that would be negative about Eric and even if there were, it would have no bearing on the fact. He certainly didn't deserve to be shot because of whatever it might be. Nov/Okay. Oh, we have one more name. Jim Shaw would like to speak again. Jim Shaw/What I want to address is, again, personal conduct because I listened as Mr. Gray Davidson talked to Officer Winklehake and I just would have to go back to the personal conduct law enforcement code of ethics and ask you to determine if Mr. Winklehake is living up to this. The primary responsibility is with a police officer. A police officer acts as an official representative of government who is required and trusted to work within the law. The officer's powers and duties are conferred by statute. The fundamental duties of a police officer includes serving the community, safe guarding lives and property, protecting the innocent, keeping the peace and insuring the rights of all to liberty, equality and justice. All citizens This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 53 will be treated equally with courtesy, consideration and dignity. Police officers will conduct themselves in appearance and deportment in such a manner as to inspire confidence and respect of the position of public trust they hold. I don't get a sense that Officer Winklehake and his answering of questions that he really believes that. He seemed to be taking Mr. Gray's questions very lightly saying that he doesn't know what was in Officer Gillaspie's mind at the time. It is pretty well established that there were no extenuating circumstances for them to walk through that door, nor did Officer Kelsay feel he needed any extenuating circumstances to go through an open door. he had done it only minutes before at Dodge Cleaners with no extenuating circumstances. When he called in he said I have an open door. he didn't say he had a burglary in progress. I have an open door and I don't want to go in in plain clothes. What is the establishment? Chief, what was the threat to their lives. They certainly. have not established any. There was this question of marks that came up September 12 on the door. That was an add on. White saw that. Excuse me, County Attorney White saw that. He called that a stretch. The family knew it was a stretch. Oh well, the family knew it was more than a stretch. It is that kind of thing that is deeply disturbing, Chief. You just don't seem to get it, that somebody wrote these things up for a reason. Integrity. That the integrity of law enforcement be above reproach. I don't see you are above reproach there. And you are the leader. I heard of one of your officers got involved in a crash in an intersection and they talked about they didn't see that person they swerved around. It just the incredulity to believe that we can have faith in officers when they talk like that or when you can say and not retract when you make a mistake or not retract. That speaks to your leadership. Officer statements must be true. Let me start again, I am sorry. Officers statements must be the result of considered judgment and be absent from personal opinion, bias, or editorial comment. It is just not, it is not happening and I hope as you consider all of this, council members, that you will see that what started with County Attorney White saying hours after Eric had been shot that they are still looking for a gun. I knew not to trust County Attorney White at that point. Still looking for a gun. Whose gun? Were they going to plant a gun? Do you understand? You have a quizzical look on your face some of you council members. I am referring to a statement that County Attorney White made and maybe one of the reporters in here knows what I am talking about because he made it to that reporter. That they are still looking for a gun hours, hours, like 4-5 hours I think. Anyway, even if it is one hour later they are looking for a gun that Eric might have had. What is a family to think? We know Eric doesn't have a gun. How can I hold this police officer, that county attorney up to any kind of- How can I have any respect for him when he states we are still looking for a gun. The reason he says it is so that it appears that there is a burglary in progress. That goes into the paper. To ChiefWinklehake's credit, he says not This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 54 there was no burglary in progress. But it took us two or three months for us to talk to every publisher in this area to get them to quit reporting that. You will look through here, every time it is called an open door. It is not called a burglary in progress. But we had to hear that for months. The Chief stated it once but it wasn't. That got buried. So those first things that go out in a tragedy like this are very important, council members. And as a family we have had to fight that. And County Attorney White almost won. He almost did. In November nobody wanted to listen to us. I talked to seasoned reporters about County Attorney White saying Jeff Gillaspic made a conscious decision to pull the trigger and he said he will just deny it. He is an intelligent man. What does intelligence have to do with moral background? It doesn't have any. AM I going over? Am I preaching too much? Thornberry/It has been a long time. I mean- Nov/I am letting you go over. I realize that you are upset. I realize you have the right to be upset. But we are getting a little repetitious. I would appreciate if we could- Jim Shaw/Okay. Well, I appreciate you bearing with me on this. I think it is a leadership- Thornberry/One question or point that I have to make. I think in looking for a gun, just to clear my mind, they were looking for a gun on the premise where Jeff was shot. Is that correct? Eric- Jim Shaw/They were looking for a gun that Eric had in his possession. Thomberry/But he didn't have? Nov/No, he didn't. Thornberry/I understand that. Jim Shaw/The intent of that is to act like they are being very thorough. But- Thornberry/You don't think that is accurate even though- Jim Shaw/What is accurate? Thornberry/That they were looking for it to be thorough to see if there was or was not a gun there. Could there possibly have been some thought that there might have been a gun there is in a conversation? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 55 Jim Shaw/What beating would that have- What bearing would that have if there was a gun in that building? What bearing would that have? Thornberry/I don't know. Jim Shaw/It wouldn't have any. I can answer that question. If Eric has a gun, it would have been on the floor beside him. It wouldn't have taken two or three hours. So County Attorney White just cast this community in a very bad light when he started the investigation out that way. So I had a lot of reasons to distrust him but he is a Teflon kind of guy. He got me to trust him again but no longer. Thornberry/Well, they shouldn't have looked for a kind of a weapon of any kind. Jim Shaw) No. Thank you. Nov/Would you like to come to the microphone please? Jay Shaw/I have to go back to the threat. What threat was there and who created it? If there was a threat to these officers, it was the officers who created it. Like going through the door. Now they could say they are not going to go through a door without their guns drawn. That makes sense, sure. Would any sensible officer go through a gun (door) that he doesn't know what is behind without his gun drawn? I suppose not. Then the answer is don't go through the door. Just don't go through the damn door, that is all. It is so simple. Don~t go through the door. If it is a burglary, it will wait. If you don't hear anybody screaming, it is not an emergency. You have not tight to go through the door without a search warrant, period. That is all there is to it. The 4th Amendment protects the officers. Had these officers followed the 4th Amendment, Jeff Gillaspic wouldn't have to live the rest of his life knowing that he killed somebody. The 4th Amendment protects the police as well as the occupants of these buildings. It is not there just to protect the occupants. Jeff Gillaspic I am sure wishes he had. Maybe Mr. Kelsay wishes he had obtained a search warrant. It might have taken a little more time. I mean there were so many other things they could have done that didn't involve the 4th Amendment. They could have simply asked someone inside to come out. They say they wanted to get the jump on him. Well, did they know that somebody was in there? Gillaspie said when asked why he didn't announce their entry, we want to get the jump on him. To me that sounds like they really thought there was somebody in there but they say they did not think there was anybody in there and you have to accept that. Did not think there was anybody in there, then they This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 56 shouldn't have gone through the door. They created the threat themselves. Regarding the open door policy which was no policy at all. The policy should be written down. If you have a policy that is not written down, it means that the only way that it is passed from officer to officer is by word of mouth. We have all played that game where something is passed around a circle by word of mouth and it comes out the other end different. Even with the beset training, if it's just passed from word of mouth, first of all it's not going to be considered very important if it's not written down. I think the chief didn't think it was a very important policy if he didn't write it down. I don't know which chief. This chief obviously didn't and maybe previous chiefs didn't consider it a very important enough to write it down. It should've been spelled out in extremely precise language what situations they could go through an open door and what procedures they should follow when they did go through an open door. State of mind. Lack of knowledge of state of mind in never a reason for failure to prosecute because we never have that. You never have the state of mind in any case. There's no way to get in anybody's mind. Not in Jeff Gillaspie's mind. Not in any criminal. What you take is you take the evidence, what they did, to infer their state of mind. And that's all you're ever going to get. At this point we don't have state of mind meters. And so to say that we don't know Jeff Gillaspie's state of mind is total nonsense because you never do. So it's not an excuse for anything. If you use that excuse for JeffGillaspie, you have to use it for every criminal that came before the courts and there'd be nobody in jail because they all say, my state of mind was whatever it has to be to avoid prosecution. JeffGillaspie's actions were described by Zacharias in a way that would lead almost any reasonable person to conclude that he did fire the gun consciously out of a fear perhaps that his life was in danger. It was not a flinch. He would've had to, before he could flinch, he would've had to back up. He would've come to an upright position. He would've raised his arm. He would've had to aim. And then he would flinch. It's just not plausible. The real question though, the real question just comes back to going through the door. The crime began not when the trigger was pulled. The grime began when Officer Kelsay came down the alley, saw an open door, and through a lack of good leadership, a lack of good training, a lack of a policy that was understood, believed that it was okay, just plain okay to go through that door without a hell of a lot of thought. Without any thought apparently. There's varying reports as to how much time Kelsay was there but from his statements and my walk around that building and my knowledge of that building, I don't think it could've been more than two minutes on his own, maybe four. I don't know, but most of that time was spent waiting out front for the back up to come and then canceling the back up and then getting the officers in position. Very little time was spent thinking about what would happen if they went through the door. The crime began when they went through the dobr. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 57 Nov/We have no more people who have signed up, but if there is someone else who still has a question or a comment on police procedures, you may come forward and speak. Richard Twohy/One sentence from a letter to the editor of the Press Citizen, October 17, 1996, by J. M. Hagen, quote, how ironic that Johnson County Attorney $. Patrick White chose to press murder charges against Shawn Shrader, a seriously mentally retarded man with a mental age of a six year old who started a fire that accidentally resulted in the death of his roommate. Charged with murder by Patrick White, yet chose not to press even the mildest charge against police office Jeff Gillaspic. Please do fight. Nov/I assume everyone here knows that we do not have jurisdiction over Pat White. He's a separate level of government and we cannot tell him what to do. We may or may not agree with him, but we still cannot tell him what to do. We have requests to be the Attorney General at the state level to release all the information that is contained in the DCI report. We have a letter from Pat White also to that department asking for a release of information, asking for opinions. We hope that this can be done, but we still don't know if it can or not. Should we go on to a couple more questions here? Here's one for the city council. It says if you agree with the city attorney that the actions of the officers the night of August 30 were reasonable and legal though not wise or prudent, how do you in your own minds define the difference between reasonable and legal and not wise, not prudent? This is a toughie. Woito/May I clarify that? Nov/You may. Woito/I have never said that the officers actions were reasonable. They were legal. I said they were lawful. I did not say they were reasonable. Nov/Okay. They were lawful. Woito/I said they were unwise, which means that they were not reasonable. Norton/We're going to have to discuss at some length whether they're legal. They were certainly not wise. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 58 Kubby/But that's where our discretion in terms of policy direction comes in, that even though some actions may be legal, we may choose not to allow those actions in our community. And that's where policies and training and direction and oversight come in. Baker/And some of those have already changed. Lehman / Well, in that case, Karen (can't hear) Nov/And others are going to change as we get to them. Norton/Well I still would like to clarify the legality question. Now we got a note from John Kinnamon today and it's a question that we've raised here before, that as the Fourth Amendment has to do with, if you don't have exigent circumstances, you don't have manifest screaming going on, nothing going on, and you go through a door, don't you have to get a search warrant? Kubby/Or consent. Woito/There's the law in Iowa is not clear on that. Norton/But the law in Iowa City- Kubby/But we can make sure- Woito/I'll point out to you, you can, there's plenty of authority that says, it's lawful. I don't necessarily think it's wise at all in terms of safety. But there are states that find it lawful. There are states that find it unlawful. Norton/But it is illegal under the code as John cites Chapter 808 or something. If it's illegal under the code, to go in without a search warrant unless you have exigent circumstances and we.determine that there were not exigent circumstances, I don't think anybody argues that there were, then why is it, how is it possibly still legal? Woito/Well I think there's some, I think there's some evidence that someone argue that there were sufficient showing of a possible criminal activity of warranted intrusion. Norton/Even if there were evidence of, even some more evidence, suppose a crow bar had been lying there and the door marks were manifestly fresh. That suggests This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session something's going on. You still have to get a search warrant. The way I understand it. Woito/They're trained at the Law Enforcement Academy that an open door is enough to go in. Norton/It says in the policy, stay out. Lehman/No, no. Woito/No. Lehman/You read two pages farther and it says, go in. Norton/I think if at all possible, do not go in. Woito/It says that they can go in legally. Lehman/Karen, I think you're exactly right. It may be legal to go through an open door in Iowa City today. It isn't going to be legal because we're going to change that policy. Norton/How could it be legal? I mean if that's the case, then search and seizure doesn't make any sense. The Fourth Amendment doesn't either. Woito/Well we'll have a long session on the Fourth Amendment. Norton/Well we'd better hurry. Audience/(Can't hear) Nov/As we can all see, this- Kubby/It also means all those other communities in Iowa- Norton/Are also wrong. Kubby/-and other states in the 8th District and 8th Circuit are vulnerable in this way, not just citizens but police officers as well and so when we come to our conclusion as well as the PCRB, I hope we will send this all over the Eighth Circuit. page 59 This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 60 Woito/Oh yes. People want to know what direction we're going, because we've called all over the state. R. J.'s called all over the state. I've called all over the state. I mean everyone's listening. Norton/But who is to determine if it's legal. If it' s illegal, then there's other problems. Either Pat's got to do something else or we've got to do something else. Because if they're illegal, then not even acting under their, within their authority. Council/(All talking) Thornberry/The Supreme Court's going to have to look at that then. Norton/The federal government- Twohy/(Can't hear) Nov/Mr. Twohy, please. It's not your turn. Baker/And we're not going to resolve this here because quite honestly the only way it's concretely resolved is in court when it's tested somewhere. And we'll change our policy to preempt hopefully of being a problem. Woito/No, and I'll be happy to go over John Kinnamon's memo with you tomorrow morning if you want me to. Norton/Certainly have to. I would certainly want it. Because I don't understand where we're at. It strikes me as inconsistent (can't understand). Kubby/Right. Because that's what some of my questions at our last meeting were trying to get at those points and so there's at least two of us and probably many people have questions about it. Woito/There's about four things that need clarifying in there. Nov/And this is a memo that was just sitting here that we haven't really discussed. Woito/I've read it and- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 61 Jim Shaw/Councilman Norton has the essence of it and I think that the federal government is going to help you out on that. It is clear. Councilman Norton has it right on the head as to what the problem is and the fact that it has been an accepted policy for people to go in does not change the Constitution. Nov/And we expect something from the department (can't hear). Norton/All across the state they are doing this thing. Jim Shaw/I understand and I made the point at the break to Councilman Lehman that this city is being watched and should be watched because what is decided here and what Mr. Nickerson is going through right now is very important all over this country because we have become kind of a law and order kind of society and I'm afraid we have just let that go a little too far with what given out police to much latitude. Kubby/So Linda, basically in your conclusion, you are saying that if there is no specific case in our area that speaks to an issue, that means it is gray and that it maybe it is legal, maybe it is not? Woito/ Well, the reason why I say it is not just gray is because of the secondary sources that I cited. Professor LeFave who is suppose to be this well known expert on the 4th Amendment. He's recognized the security check for a plain open door since 1978 and the American Bar Association has recognized it as legitimate since 1980 and the last Iowa Supreme Court case, the Carlson case, implies, cites with approval Professor LeFave in terms of expanding the emergency aid to protect property. They don't go as far as saying an open door is justification for entry. Kubby/So an expert citing a certain conclusion, an acceptance or a professional organization is enough outside of the Supreme Court or other specific cases to create an atmosphere where we can say if there is not a case, therefore you can do it? That is an accepted legal tenant? Woito/In the absence- You start out with this body of law and you try and find something within your jurisdiction that has similar facts and similar law and in the absence of any, then you have to' look to other bodies of law to try and draw from that some basic principles. Kubby/Instead of just saying you can't since there is no court case that speaks to the circumstance that you can't do it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 62 Woito/John Kinnamon can say on the other hand, if it is silent then it is illegal. Kubby/Right and that seems like a really fundamental legal question that I just assume would be a very basic one that is answered in the legal profession. If it is spoken to, you can do it. I mean, if it is not spoken to, you can do it or if it is not spoken to, you can do it and I am hearing you say there are disagreements about that. Woito/Yeah, I mean I can come in and argue that we follow the 10th Circuit. You know. Or I can come in and argue that we should follow Alaska law. Jim Shaw/Let me point out an important distinction Ms. Woito said. She said a security check. A security check is different than going through an open door. A security check is this, to see whether a door is locked. That is not a violation of the 4th Amendment. To go through that door unannounced without exigent circumstances is. A security check is not the same. Woito/ But Jim, in those three cases in those three states, Alaska, California and Illinois. When they looked at the fact patterns, they were an open door and they called it a security check. I mean that was an exception to the 4th Amendment. Jim Shaw/If that is the case, then I think that is why Justice Department is taking all the time that they're doing looking at this because they see the problem. Woito/Um-huh. Baker/We don't need to resolve that to change our policy. Council/(all talking). Norton/It has nothing to do with changing our policy, but it has to do with other matters. It has to do with all kind of issues it seems. Nov/We can't change our practices, our procedures without waiting for somebody else to have the law that justifies it or does not. Norton/I understand that. But are we asking questions? Are we doing the right thing here? Can we ask our own questions? I just took a turn. I don't know whether- Nov/Well, you took a turn, okay. Do you want somebody else to take a turn now? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 63 Thornberry/As far as open door is concerned, you have a problem with this and I do too. What a prudent person would do in a certain circumstance is people are all different and all circumstances are not identical. I have gone down to my place of business after the close of business with all the lights out, with all the doors locked, to work on a piece of equipment that could not be worked on during while we were open. I unlock the door. I went in. The first thing I did was lock it behind me so nobody would come in after me. Then turned on the lights, worked on the piece of equipment. What a prudent person would do in a certain circumstance changes with the person, with the circumstance. Norton/I understand that, Dean. But my concern is this and I want an answer to this question. I don't know whether it is R. J., Linda or who it is. You look under building searches in this thing about the Academy and they talk-they say and we have read it a hundred times. Don't make assumptions. The most common reason is the owner forgot to lock up. If there is any other reasonable option, do not go in. Now why in this section does it ever say anything about get a search warrant. Why doesn't it? They must teach that at the Academy, don't they, something about search warrants? I can't believe that they don't. Winklehake/Because the standards you have is that you don't require a search warrant. Norton/Why in the hell not? Winklehake/Because the law, the way it is stated, you don't have to. It is one of the exceptions. Norton/Well, then we got to get rid of the Academy. Lehman/I don't think that is going to work. Kubby/Or talk with them about what we are willing to do here. Council/(All talking). Nov/We need to be sure that our procedures and practices follow the best letter of the law and we do train officers after they have finished at the Academy. We don't accept them as is. They do get on site training. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 64 Kubby/And we can choose to lobby the Academy about changing some of their curriculum from our experience That as contracts have already been made and we may choose to focus on three or four specific areas that we fell (can't hear). Norton/What does our training say about such entries? Nov/We need to specify and be more specific- Woito/Nothing yet but they will. Kubby/We do no have written- Nov/We need to put it in writing. We need to correct our practices before we get to the point of lobbying for changes at the Academy. Lehman/Your Honor, I respectively request that this discussion regarding procedures is going to be an ongoing discussion far more than just tonight. Now if we have more questions that we need to answer from the public, I think we should do those things. But these procedures, I think, are going to be under constant review by this council and well they should be. Nov/All right, may I suggest that we aim for 10:30 and then continue tomorrow. Would that be acceptable with the city council? Lehman/Yes. Nov/Okay. Evonne, would you like to ask one more question? Evonne Johnson/I would just like to ask one question. If it is very clear in Missouri law and their Academy that it is a federal law that they have to get a search warrant, they can surround the building. Why, if that is federal, why does it not aff'ect Iowa over state law? Nov/Good question. We will see what we can find out. Okay, council. Karen, did you have a question? Kubby/Well, one of the things that we decided at the last meeting is that we would take some time to go through- This is a stack of questions that I can find at my house that the public has asked. And go through and scratch off ones that I believe had This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 65 been answered. And there are still quite a few that are not answered and we had agreed that we would at least look at some of these. Norton/I did that, too. Nov/Can you do this kind of under the time and then let somebody else move onto the next one? Kubby/Yes, I can. Some of the questions were about in looking at the overall the Police Department and some people have been talking about an us versus them attitude, if not in the majority, maybe in the minority. That how will we deal with that? How will we establish whether what the attitude is or the on-street philosophy of the Police Department and will we be interviewing retired police officers to clarify this perception? Will we talk to current officers about this? And that we have not answered that question. Baker/ One of the- Can I ask a variation of that? One of the comments that was made tonight was about the evidence that was presented to us of a problem of the Police Department and sooner or later it seems like the council has to have an opinion, is there a problem at the Police Department? Kubby/And how do we establish that? Baker/Yeah, and how do we establish that? Kubby/Or to establish what the attitude is? Baker/ Because we can't- We have to have a position, I think, whether collectively or individually that says we agree that there are x, y, z serious problems at the Police Department that have to be addressed that haven't been addressed before. Or that listening to the public, doing our own discussions, we disagree with that position and- Council/(Can't hear). Norton/(Can't hear) inquiry is delicate. We are going to have to review exactly how that proceeds. Kubby/Well, that is what the question is. It is are you going to proceed to examine that question and how will you go about doing it? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 66 Baker/ Well, I guess one of the things we need- I don't think we have to answer this tonight. But the simple question is we have been looking at this for months, listening to at meetings, out of meetings, private correspondence, phone calls. Some point we ought to have an opinion as individual council members that is expressed as a group. What is our view of the Police Department? I don't know how much longer we need to prolong that decision and how much more information we need to give? But we need to- Norton/It would have to be based on more systematic information than we have yet from members of that Department. Kubby/Well, Larry is saying maybe not. What more do you need? Baker/Can we articulate what more do we need to have a position? Norton/You get into a whole personnel evaluation. We need to see what they have got in the way of data. If they haven't then we have to get it. Lehman/No, I think it is much much more than that, Dee. And Larry, I disagree with your question, how do we- Do we say do we have a good department or a bad department? I think that is simplifying the question entirely too much. But I do believe that it is our job to look at policies that we feel could improve our Police Department. It is our job to look at the deficiencies that we think we see and talk to our Police Department. but to say we have a good or a bad Police Department, I think that is- You know, I think that is way too simple. Baker/Way to simple? Lehman/Way to simple. We can- You know, I guess my personal opinion is I think basically we do a good job but we could do it better and it is our job to see to it that we do in fact do it better and we prevent the sort of things- the sort of thing that happened. You know, for example- We can surround the building, secure a building, announce our presence. We don't have to open a door. We don't have to go in with a gun. Now, that is one of my pets. I mean this one really really bothers me. I think we can talk about courtesy. We can talk about a lot of things. but for us to evaluate our Police Department as being good or bad is entirely too simple. Norton/Isn't that what a accreditation is likely to help, Larry? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 67 Lehman/Oh, yeah, I think you are right. Council/(All talking). Baker/(Can't hear) rather than good or bad. Kubby/Say what kind of job are we doing and- Council/(All talking). Lehman/Can we do it better? Baker/But Ernie, at least sizable portion of the public if not a majority wants us to evaluate the leadership. You can't evaluate the leadership unless you get a sense of the Department. Norton/But that would be fairly gotten. Baker/I agree. Lehman/I think that is a different question than saying whether or not that is a good department. Kubby/Well, if some people don't feel that they have that information, how we will evaluate tomorrow? We have a meeting tomorrow to evaluate personnel. Baker/Also, how much longer? What do you need to reach that conclusion? Norton/I don't think you are going to finish that tomorrow if you are going to try to do that kind of survey in-depth that you think is necessary and I share it with you. You cannot do it with just a few random comments from a few random members of the Department. Thornberry/What do you need, Dee? Norton/A systematic talk to a whole range of people in the Department. Thornberry/Have you tried that? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 68 Norton/No because I think we ought to do it collectively somehow. We got to figure out a way. Thomberry/You mentioned before that if you had a problem, or not a problem. If you had a question about the officers of the Police Department, talk to whomever you want and you had the direction from the Chief, talk to any of my people at any time present or past officer and I have done that. I have talked to quite a few officers. Norton/I think that needs to be- Kubby/So your answer to this question is you felt free to talk with people, fight. I am just- My task was to go through, not to say- It was just to ask the question that other people have asked to make sure we are answering them. For you, yourself, you have answered that. Dee has not answered that. Thornberry/I got answers that I wasn't prepared to get, both pro and con of the Department and I went into depth with those people and have talked at length with officers on the force currently and- Kubby/So the answer for the group is that we are not going to systematically do that but individually. Thornberry/If you want to troop the officers in one by one and ask the questions, I think- Norton/You can't do that. Thornberry/You can't do that. Kubby/We could do that. We are choosing not to. Baker/We are choosing not to because it is a bad idea. Lehman/Yes, I agree. Norton/Maybe not. Council/(Can't hear). Thornberry/If you have questions, go dig out the answers to your satisfaction. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 69 Norton/I just say that getting a range of opinions is how to know what you are getting. Thornberry/Well, you talk to a lot of different officers, you will get different opinions. Norton/You are getting a piece of the element is what I- Baker/Lining up policemen in a public forum and saying what do you think of the Chief or where would you change Department policy? That is not going to work. But to go back to my original question. What do we do in the near future? We need to need some resolution son some things. I think one of the resolutions we need to reach is how effective, in our view, is the Police Department. How effective has the leadership been? ', Norton/Part of that remains to tomorrow morning when we decide where we are at. At that point whether we reach it tomorrow morning or whether we reach it the next week, I don't know. But we ought to reach it soon. We don't have to reach it tomorrow morning. Lehman/No, but the thing we do have to reach is a resolved to see to it. CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 97-35 SIDE 2 Lehman/Policies that we feel are not working. Norton/There is no problem about that. We are going to do that for sure. That is no issue really in my judgment. Baker/So what are we doing tomorrow morning? I mean where we are at? Council/(All talking). Nov/We are suppose to do personnel evaluations tomorrow morning. Norton/We are going to see where we are. Baker/We don't have to reach a conclusion tomorrow morning. Council/(All talking). Baker/Because I have a lot of questions that I would like to ask in executive session. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 70 Nov/That is what we are doing tomorrow morning. Norton/That is what we are going to do tomorrow is share our information about that. Whether that gets us- Baker/Where are we going here? Norton/I am not prepared to say. Baker/Because sooner or later we can't just say I am passing along with the public, asking questions. I have taken questions from- Kubby/I know, we agreed that Dee and I were suppose to go through here and I am fulfilling a commitment that I made to the group. Council/(All talking). Baker/Sooner or later we have to decide something. Norton/Precisely. Kubby/But that wasn't our task for tonight. Baker/I understand. All I just wondered where we are going. Norton/(Can't hear). Nov/We are not going to guarantee that everything gets resolved tomorrow. Okay? Lehman/We are really not getting anywhere tonight. Council/(All talking). Kubby/In terms of other future discussions about these. There are 22 policy suggestions by staff. I had a memo. Other people, maybe they have them, they haven't been written down for council. In terms of policy changes, when will we be discussing those? Nov/Hopefully tomorrow. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 71 Kubby/But that will not be executive session. Nov/Well, we have a formal meeting tomorrow. We have one vote that we wanted to expedite. We have an executive session. There is no reason why we cannot go into a discussion of these kinds of things. Kubby/It matters how long the executive session lasts. I would request that we do the executive session first so we have as much time as we need for that. Nov/Well, I believe the agenda is so that we are going to do this quick vote first. Kubby/I think that is fine. But before we do policy discussion in public, I guess, to take as much time as we need or can do tomorrow as a group. Baker/To make sure the public understands. It is perfectly all right for us to go into executive session to discuss personnel matters, personnel evaluation. I mean this is not something that we are trying to hide from the public. It is appropriate that we talk first. Kubby/I guess I have a legal question for Linda. When we come out of that executive session and want to communicate with the public our conclusion or our conclusions, do we- Can we talk about why we have come down where we have come down in public.9 Woito/Yes. You are suppose to formally take action in a formal meeting later. Nov/I think we are stepping on toes here. How much executive session can you come out and say afterwards? It seems to me there isn't much. Kubby/That is what I am asking about, especially if there are differing opinions. There might be a majority and a minority opinion that might need to be justified or clarified. And maybe not tomorrow but at some point. Nov/If an employee has requested an- Woito/(Can't hear) call me up in my office and we will dig out the book and we will figure out where we can go from there. Nov/All right, if it is in a book, would you look it up tomorrow morning and be prepared- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 72 Lehman/Before 10:00. Woito/You may not have to take any final action. If you do take final action, it has to be in a formal meeting. Kubby/The other question is that I feel very uncomfortable just saying we have decided x, y, z without explaining ourselves. And that I want to be free to explain myself and each one of us. Lehman/Karen, you always have been. Council/(All talking). Kubby/Not if I legally cannot say certain things. Baker/I think- I am assuming unless the Attorney tells me differently, that we can walk out of an executive session, personnel evaluation there is a result eventually and then we have some rationale for it. We don't have to go into the specifics of everything that was discussed in the executive session. But I think, Karen, you, I, everybody on this council ought to be able to explain their positions without jeopardizing the confidentiality of executive session. Kubby/I won't to know where that line is because- Norton/I just want to be clear that we do not know collectively where we are going to end up after that discussion tomorrow. So I don't want to make any rash promises about whether we may reach firm conclusions personnel-wise tomorrow or not. Baker/Figure out what we want to say, take it to the City Attorney and say tell me if this is kosher. Norton/There is a context here. Lehman/Yeah, but Dee Norton and I don't disagree with you but I think that the conclusions that we reach in executive session, that result should be expressed to the public. Norton/At some point. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 73 Lehman/I don't believe that all the rationale that went into it probably should be public- We are talking about personnel issues. Baker/Certainly if there is disagreement. Kubby/There needs to be an'explanation. Baker/We got to be free to express that disagreement as well. There may be a majority, Karen says a majority dependent. There may be two minority opinions, who knows. Lehman/There may be three minority opinions. Baker/But I am assuming that I can articulate why I felt the way I did atter all of these discussions. Clear it with Linda but I- Council/(All talking). Baker/There is a lot you can do in executive sessions as far as asking questions, soliciting information. Thornberry/Not if you come out of an executive session and say hey, the majority said this but I disagree and this is why I disagree. Boom-aboom-aboom. You can't really do that with personnel. Kubby/That is a legal question. Thornberry/You can say that I disagreed with a major- Council/(All talking). Woito/We will cross that bridge when we get there. Baker/I can disagree and be articulate. Norton/May I ask- ~Nov/Can we cross the bridge tomorrow? Council/(All talking). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 74 Nov/Can we wrap up this meeting? We will have another meeting tomorrow morning at 10:00. Norton/Don't we have to have another schedule to take up these particular procedural changes that we have identified? Lehman/Those are going to be ongoing. Nov/We will do what we can tomorrow and then we will continue at some point after that. Anything else? It is time to go home. Kubby/I have one question. Well, I have another question at this point. We have some questions here from the public that have not been answered yet that were submitted tonight. We still have questions that had been submitted to us previously that have not been answered. When will those be answered? Nov/I think the best thing to do here is to give you a copy of it and you can decide if they have been answered or not. There are some that I have just sort of turned over things that I thought they had been answered. Kubby/But the ones that have not been answered in our collective estimation. Norton/Well let's review and see where we stand because I.might not agree. I think a lot of them have been answered. I have got about 8 that haven't. Maybe we agree we could write out answers to 8 of them. _ Nov/We were going to all bring our copies and say this has been answered and this has not been answered. But it has taken us quite a while to get this far and I think it is getting late enough that I prefer to put that off for tomorrow. Kubby/Okay, from that answer I am deducing that the unanswered questions will still be answered. Nov/We will still talk about the unanswered questions. Kubby/That is what I wanted to clarify. Nov/We don't have to do it tonight. Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997 February 19, 1997 Council Work Session page 75 Kubby/I am not asking for that. I am asking for a commitment that they will be answered and I have heard the answer is yes. Thank you. So we are adjourning. I would like to move that we accept all correspondence that we have gotten. Do we need to do that? Karr/No, it is not a formal meeting. I think what I will do is put it on the agenda or put it in your next packet. Kubby/So it will be public record. Nov/The next formal agenda as part of the Consent Calendar. Karr/Because it isn't a formal meeting. Kubby/I appreciate people being here. Thank you. Nov/I appreciate everybody who stayed this long. Thank you. Adjourned: 10:35 PM This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of February 19, 1997 WS021997