Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-04-08 TranscriptionApril 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 1 · April 8, 1997 Council Work Session 4:00 PM Council: Nov, Baker, Kubby, Lehman, Norton, Thornberry, Vanderhoef. Staff: Atkins, Helling, Woito, Karr, Winklehake, Holecek, Widmer, Harney. Tapes: 97-59, all; 97-60 Side 1 PCRB 97-59 S1 Nov/Due to the fact that we all tend to talk over each other the last time we talked about PCRB, I am going to call on you in order and we are going to rotate for the sake of the tape. Baker/Can we have any follow-up questions or questions whether council asks? Nov/Yes, but please say it, don't just talk over them. Say I have a follow-up question. That would be fine. Okay. Linda, do you want to start with your charts? Would that be the best way to do it? Woito/ I would like to. What I want to do before we get to the charts is talk about an additional guiding principle that I think needs clarified. As I tried to work through the personnel matters and confidential questions and the closed and open meetings, etc., in speaking with Ivan Webber and other attorneys, I just discovered about 15 minutes ago that St. Paul has a process that sounds similar to us, in speaking with the attorney from Minneapolis. So I made a phone call to them and haven't talked to them yet but it may help sort through some of these things. But one of the things that I want to point out is that our ordinance does not attempt to waive any of the employee's/police officer's rights under state law, under federal law, constitutional law, the union contract or Civil Service. That ought to be- I may have said it in another way but I want to make it very clear that that is one of our guiding principles. Nov/Yes, it is clear. Woito/And now, if you will look in your packet and find Supplemental Additional Investigation- I. Nov/If it is okay with you, Linda, we are going to say that city council members may ask questions for clarification of this chart and then we will move onto something else. Okay. Ernie, do you want to start and rotate this way. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 2 Lehman/I will pass right now. Nov/Okay. Karen. Woito/First I want to clarify that this needs to come out. Nov/Okay. We also took out the police officer when we talked about this last time. Norton/Why? Nov/I don't remember why. I do remember that both of those were X'd out. Kubby/Because ofthe- Thornberry/Who can talk? Nov/Please go ahead, You can talk. Kubby/I would love it if we could just have a conversation with each other. Baker/It worked in the past. Nov/It did not work because we talked over each other and no matter how many times I said let's not all talk at once, we did it and Karen said let's not all talk at once and we still did it. So, can we start, please, one at a time. I don't care who starts. One at a time. Kubby/Dean, would you start? Thornberry/Thank you, I will start. I think we took out the police- Didn't we take out the police officer because at the time- Maybe R. J. can more accurately talk about it. I understand why we took out the officer because he would know what sanctions he was going to be under and then if it went to the Board and came back and they changed it and it came back, then it would be different and that is not fair. Or he would be in limbo for an extended length of time, 60 or 90 days in limbo not knowing if he is going to have a letter in his file or three days off or whatever and it is not a good working atmosphere to be under. Woito/It can be in there or out. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 3 Nov/I have notes from last time that said the Chief's findings and report will go to the Board, the citizen, the city manager and the police officer. Then the Review Board will report and comment. What we did is take the citizen and the police officer and move them below the point where the comments came in. Woito/Right. Thornberry/For that reason. Nov/Right. And I don't remember days. Did we have 45 days? Woito/That is something that I pulled out of the air after listening to R. J. Nov/Okay. Thornberry/Well, how long does the Board have to review it. Again, I am not- I am thinking that to usurp the authority of the department head as far as commendation or days off or a letter of reprimand or whatever it may be, you are usurping the authority of that department head, of the Police Chief. And I do not believe that the citizen or the Review Board should tell the Chief what to do with his people. Nov/I think they should comment. Thornberry/They may comment all they want after it has been done but I still think I don't want to usurp the authority of the department head. Nov/Okay, I did not view a comment a statement of opinion as usurping the authority because we have already said that only the Police Chief and the City Manager have that authority. Woito/Larry, you had a comment. Baker/I am just disagreeing with Dean's interpretation that Naomi clarified. Norton/I don't understand where we are at all. Is this the case where the citizen is not appealing? Woito/We haven't even gotten that far. Norton/What is this situation related to the other two methods? I need to understand this in context. This is to deal with what? A complaint? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 4 Woito/This is a complaint by a citizen which is then investigated by the Police Department. The Police Chief reviews that investigation and does his own report. He gives a carbon copy- He gives a copy for sure to the Board on the presumption, is what I read last meeting. That regardless of what the Police Chief decides, you wanted a copy of all of those to go to the Board and then the Board would decide how much or the extent of review. Whether they looked at it, whether they reviewed it or whether they really dug into it. Norton/I guess I don't understand. Woito/I think- Are we agreed up to here? Norton/No, I am not because I don't understand why you would try to draw a picture here. It has got to have a branch because the Police Department review has got to go to the citizen so they can decide whether to appeal. It may go to the Board at the same time. Woito/The citizen's involvement cannot be kicked in at this point because at this point you have directed the Police Chief to do the job of investigation and we need to let that department and the Police Chief do the job of the investigation. Then it goes to the Board. Nov/(Can't hear) with the citizen. Woito/The Board reviews it. The citizen has no input at this point yet other than filing a complaint and participating in the investigation by the Police Department. Norton/The issue I want to raise is this. I understand what you are saying but it seems to me that if it went to the Board and the citizen, the Board might take a different approach to this thing if they knew an appeal was coming than otherwise. Therefore, it would seem to me that the report would go to both. The Board holds up for five days and if they don't hear an appeal, they can decide what to do the way you are outlining here. If they do hear an appeal, they may proceed slightly different. Woito/It is my understanding that the Board- You want this- The Board to be a Review Board and the Board cannot review anything until they receive it from the Chief. Norton/True. But they can review it either quite independently of a appeal or only after an appeal and in one case they must and the other case they may. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 5 Woito/And what you are talking about is my II. Nov/You are going beyond the step. Woito/Right. Nov/Just proceeding to another step. Dean, what did you want to say? Thornberry/I was saying how would the complainant appeal if he didn't even have- If the investigation wasn't completed yet. Norton/You have the Chief reports, right? And you are talking about where his report goes. I think his report goes to the Board and simultaneously to the citizen. Nov/But his report at that point is proposed, not final. Woito/Up to this point, all this information is confidential. At this point, the citizen is not entitled to that confidential information until it has been reviewed by the Board. The Board will have to decide a number of things. Nov/Can we add the City Manager. Do you think he also should be reviewing it? Woito/If you elect not to have Steve be the final appeal Board up here, I would insert Steve in here. But if he is going to end up being an appellant reviewer, he should stay out of it at this point. R. J. would have consulted with Dale and my office and Personnel. So it is going to depend on whether you want to take Steve out of the final appellant role. Nov/What about the police officer? Woito/I think in many- in some respects, the police officer is entitled to some due process rights knowing of what the investigation shows. In some ways, if you give them a copy, you are giving them more due process than perhaps the Constitution requires. It depends on what side of the Constitution you want to err on, giving the police officer more rights or- Kubby/I guess what I want to do is have the complainant and the officer being on parallel tracks. Lehman/I agree. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 6 Kubby/Whether it is earlier in the process or later in the process. I guess at this point I prefer later in the process so that the Board has had a chance to comment so that they know when they get it that they would be able to appeal or not. Woito/They would then be on a level playing field. Do I think I see agreement for that? Nov/Yes, this is what we agreed to last time. We agreed to defer the report to both of them until after the comment from the Board. Lehman/Which is in the final report. Nov/Okay. Woito/Then the Board, if they want to do a cursory review, they review it on the record with no additional evidence, make a final determination, and at that point the police officer, the citizen and the police chief get that decision. Nov/That is still a recommendation rather than a decision. Thornberry/Yes. Woito/Yes, this is only a recommendation. Any discipline imposed or any finding or misconduct or finding of no misconduct. Norton/But that one, until the Chief has taken account of the Board's comments presumably, yeah. Woito/At this point the Chief has not talked with the Board unless the Board has asked. Norton/But he has gotten the Board's comments? Woito/He has received the Board's comments at this juncture. Kubby/So, in that course of action that is the point at which the citizen can go back to the Board and ask for an appeal? At~er the final report has been issued? Woito/Yes. Norton/Then it makes no sense to me. This represents only a reasonably accurate trauscription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 7 Woito/That would be- That would be my II. Norton/It makes no sense to me. I don't see why they don't- The thing that they were appealing from was the police investigation, not the police investigation as reviewed by the Board. Kubby/And the final outcome is what they are reviewing and the final outcome cannot be determined until the Board has reviewed the investigation and made their recommendation to the Chief and the Chief has made the final determination. How else can they appeal mid-process? Woito/I think you want the Board to review the matter and then the citizen can ask for further review either to the Board or to the City Manager. Norton/I thought they only appealed afterwards but I am totally confused. Because what they were appealing from and what Dave Baldus cited in his article and his comments always was that the police investigation is done and the proposed- everything is proposed there and then the appeal. Now, if they appeal, the Board has to deal with it. But they might not appeal and the Board may not have to deal with it at all other than read it. Nov/That is another scenario. Woito/That is scenario II. Kubby/That is what A is. If the- Norton/But you have the citizen seeing it only after the Board has had input. Woito/That is correct. Norton/I thought the Board ought to see it. I don't see why the citizen wouldn't see what the police investigation said. Woito/The citizen can become involved. Let's assume the Board does not want to do a cursory review. They want to do a more in-depth review which is over here. Norton/Before or after citizen complaint? Woito/The citizen complaint is up here. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 8 Norton/I mean before or after an appeal? Woito/There is no appeal yet. They is a request for additional review. Norton/I am lost. I am not totally agreeing but I am lost. Thornberry/What are they going to appeal until the final decision? Norton/The police investigation. Woito/But I think in terms of fairness, you need to give your Board a chance to see what the Police Chief has done. Nov/Okay. Baker/Is- Can I ask a question? Woito/Sure. Baker/ Dee, is your- I am trying to read between the lines. Are you saying that when the Board gets the report, that is when the citizen ought to also get the report? So as the Board makes it recommendation back to the Police Chief, they will have had an opportunity for the citizen to respond at that level. It may not be a formal appeal since the discipline hasn't been imposed yet. But at least the citizen has had input at that level before- And the Board takes into account the citizen's concerns at that level and they make their report back to the Chief. Norton/The Board does nothing because the report of the investigation- I made my own charts and the police investigation goes to the complainant and to the Board. Now the Board- The complainant has, let's say, five days to appeal and if there is no appeal, the Board may process that complaint quite differently than if the person does appeal. Baker/What I am saying is that if the citizen gets the report the same time the Board does, the Board responds offers that citizen a chance to respond to the report at their level and the Board makes their recommendation review back to the Police Chief. The Chief imposes a discipline, the citizen then can formally appeal the decision but that appeal, maybe we are jumping ahead. But that appeal can't go back to the Board. It has got to go back to the City Manager. I mean that is where I think you are leading. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 9 Nov/That is what I think we have done here. Kubby/No, that is not what we have here but that may be a slightly more streamlined process but it may not be as full of a process. Woito/Right here the citizen, if the Board chooses to review the Police Chiefs investigation in a more in-depth approach, the Board may well call in the citizen and interview them and get their input with a further investigation at this stage, Dee. Baker/Yeah but regardless of the Board calling in the citizen, the citizen ought to have an opportunity somewhere in that process to go to the Board. Norton/Yeah, what is the citizen appealing. They are appealing the findings or the results of the findings of the police investigation and the proposed sanctions or whatever may be there. Baker/The report back to the Chief from the Board takes into account any concerns that the citizen has. Woito/You are going to have some tremendous problems with confidentiality if you interpose the citizen rights at this stage. Baker/Well, maybe that is the point where at that point the report that goes to the Board, if a copy is going to the citizen, it ought to go to the police officer. Woito/How do we maintain confidentiality at that point? Nov/I don't know that you can. Baker/But at some point you are going to lose confidentiality anyway. Woito/The personnel records. Until there is a finding of misconduct and an imposition of discipline, the personnel records of an employee in term of performance and evaluation are private, confidential personnel records that are not public. Baker/I don't see the problem here. I am like Dee. I mean, I may be stupid but I am not dumb. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 10 Kubby/Because when discipline is imposed, that discipline if it is a stepped discipline, a punitive discipline and that can be told that this is a second time at the point which it is imposed. Right? But only when it is final and imposed can we say that. Baker/But the chief is making a recommendation about discipline to the Board in that report, isn't he? Norton/Yeah. Kubby/At that point though, because it is not final, (can't hear). And you have to wait until it is final before it becomes no longer confidential. Norton/But it is not final if the review comes at the point she just suggested on B. Things are not final yet. Woito/It could be final here unless the citizen requests additional review either over to the City Manager or in my II it would be a request for additional review by the Board. Baker/ What about separating the report to the Board from the recommendation of discipline? The report to the Board, citizen allowed to see the report and comment. Then the Board gets a separate recommendation on discipline that is still confidential. Woito/ Yes, a number of- Minnesota cases, they bifurcate the data into factual information concerning the complaint and misconduct versus a finding of misconduct and discipline. Kubby/But how can the citizen fully comment on that if they don't know what the final outcome is? That there will be no action taken, that there will adjustment in record taking, that there will be an apology or a meeting or discipline. How do they know if they want to react to that? Baker/They actually have two opportunities: one to respond to what are the facts of record. Do they want to add to that? Is there something else that needs to be considered. And then it goes back to the Chief, the Chief makes a recommendation for discipline, the Board may or may not comment on that. But the appeal from the citizen doesn't go back to the Board on the discipline. It goes to the City Manager. Norton/How do you respond to Dave's comment that if you don't get into the discipline, you become a paper tiger which he seems to worried we are going to become. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 11 Baker/In a sense you are a- You are not a paper tiger but you are a advisory tiger. You are not going to impose- The Board is not going to impose discipline, period. And all we are dickering about now is when they comment on the discipline. And how the citizen comments on the discipline. They are not going to change it unless it goes through an appeal to the City Manager. Kubby/The citizen gets there- The thing that I have been worried about in the past couple of minutes is where does the citizen get to have their say. That internal investigation happens and police officers get to explain from their perspective what happened and bounce that off of policies and procedures and accepted behavior. Where does the citizen get to do that? They get to do it when they make the complaint. And everybody- Baker/They are part of that investigative process just like the police officer is. Kubby/Right, so actually they have two times where their information can be part of the system. In A, everything is on record. You are not talking to any bodies at this point. You are just looking at the record. So you have got the record from the citizen within the internal investigation and the record froln the citizens, the other written complaint which can be as extensive as they need to tell their story. Thornberry/Again, I thought we were setting up a Review Board, not a Board to mete out anything. It is just to review. Kubby/And comment. Thornberry/It is still a Review Board of the current procedures that we have got in place. The only reason that we are doing a police citizen Review Board is because of one incident that has never happened before. That is the only reason that this ever came out. Norton/(Can't hear). Thornberry/That is the reason that we are even talking about a citizen Review Board for the Police Department. All they, as I understand this Board to do, is to review the procedures that the Police Department does and to review the policies that the police are working under. Am I wrong? Baker/And actions. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 12 Kubby/Right, I would say there are two other functions of the police Review Board. One is that you have a more comfortable place to make a complaint. And two, that they make comments about the investigation and about the outcome of the investigation that the Chief then can use as one piece of information in which to make his final determination about outcomes. Thornberry/Say that last part again. Kubby/That the Review Board looks at all the records and say I agree or disagree with the Chief's determination about what the outcome of this complaint should be. Thornberry/Now wait, stop right there. If they disagree with the Chief, then what? Kubby/They can say what they think should happen and the Chief uses that information as one piece of information in making his final determination about outcomes. He may adjust it, he may not. Thornberry/Like he gets information from the City Manager or the City Attorney or- Kubby/We understand that the PCRB cannot dictate to the Chief or the City Manager. That he will use their comments as one of many pieces of information in which to make his final determination about the outcomes of this claim. If the PCRB doesn't like the final outcome or the citizen doesn't like it, then they can go to the City Manager and he is the final say. Norton/Well, the city council has got to be the final say I suppose, don't they? Kubby/No. The City Manager is- Council/(All talking). Thornberry/They can take it to civil court. Vanderhoef/Karen, I don't quite agree with what I think you are saying and I am not positive that this is what you are saying. As I look at it. We have got a citizen who didn't have his complaint taken care of at the initial time of the incident, whatever it might be. So he writes a formal complaint and it is handed on. And the Chief sends his recommendation to the citizen Board. The citizen Board looks at it, agrees or disagrees. Up until this point, I don't see that citizen coming to the Review Board. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 13 Kubby/I have not stated that. Vanderhoef/Okay. So, then if this is the case, then the Review Board sends their recommendation back to the Chief and the Chief hands out his discipline, whatever it is or lack of, So we still don't have anything to do with the citizen and the citizen is not going to be coming back to the Review Board. Kubby/If they appeal they would be. Vanderhoef/No, once the procedure ends when the discipline is put in there, there isn't anyway that we can ask the Chief to change that discipline. Kubby/Right, but in your process, before the Chief makes the final determination, there is a period of time that we had talked about being maybe five days where the citizen can appeal the Review Board. Vanderhoef/What are they appealing? Kubby/They are appealing that final outcome. Vanderhoef/But that is not possible, Karen. And when you have already gotten a recommendation from the Chief, you have gotten a chance to look it over as a member of the PCRB. Then you either agree with what the Chief said or you make up another recommendation to the Chief and you send that back. There is no place in there for the complainant and the Chief still has to make that decision. The only time the complainant can get into an appeal is after discipline has been- You are making it very complicated on a very simple kind of thing. This Board does not have appeal power. Council/(All talking). Vanderhoef/I don't agree that we decided anything and this is where it is going way off into a different track of what a citizens Review Board can look like and we do want- Woito/Can I suggest something? Nov/One more minute. What can a citizen's Board look like? Vanderhoef/It can be a place to listen and to see and review on a regular basis what the Police Department is doing. we are also gathering statistics in here which is a great This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 14 offer to the community and gives us information that leads back to how our truly Police Department runs and that is with policy and procedure. As a council, we are in charge of policy and procedure. That is how a Police Department is run. It isn't run with all sorts of appeals. Nov/However if you were a complaining citizen, this Board would act as a receiver of your complaint and would review whatever you were complaining about. Vanderhoef/And you are, in that case, you are reviewing us over the Police Department and the procedure that they have for discipline. Norton/That part, there is a general review that they are certainly going to do as a result of this particular process. But the particular process- What I am looking at is you take the history of the case that is in front of us and here is an internal report that comes along, right? And my judgment is that if the report comes in, the Board, the Review Board would process that differently if a person has complained or if the person has not complained. If the person has not complained, the point that we look at it for information and may not say anything to the Chief. Just try to keep track of things and understand what is going on. But if the citizen complains, the Board is obliged to try and take a look and see if there is any more information needed. Vanderhoef/That is true but it still does not put the citizen sitting in front of the PCRB. The PCRB is doing the investigation and looking at the Chief's report, making its own report and sending it back to the Chief for final dispensation. Norton/Yes, but they are responding to a complaint to an appeal from- Vanderhoef/And there is no place in this that the citizen is making appeals to a PCRB that has no power, no jurisdiction. Kubby/In your design of a PCRB, that may be true. But we can design it to have that process that we talked about last time. Vanderhoef/And I don't choose to do it that way. Nov/From what I understand that this conversation from a couple of weeks ago, we did say we were going to allow the complaint to come to the Board originally or the Police Department but there would be a review and an appeal process. Am I remembering directly? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 15 Woito/In this case, the appeal process goes to the City Manger after the Board has reviewed. You could have an appeal from here if you wanted to over to the City Manager. Kubby/But we had talked last time that before the final determination, the Board gives its recommendations and comments to the Chief and at that point, the police officer and the citizen were notified of the Board's comments and that is when they can have that five days to appeal. Woito/Right. And that is what you have here and you can have an appeal- I am calling this a request for additional review because it is my understanding we don't have unanimity. I wish we had unanimity but I think we have unanimity in saying that this is a Review Board, not an appeal Board. Norton/What does that mean? Thornberry/That is correct. Woito/Is reviewing what the Police Department has investigated 99 times out of 100. Norton/They are reviewing that but they are also in a position to deal with an appeal. Woito/Okay, let me approach it another way. Kubby/But it is not a legal term appeal, the way we are using it. Where they are saying they can say I want- Norton/If the investigation is incomplete or something? Kubby/Right. I want another hearing- I want you to hear me. Woito/Call it a hearing. You didn't hear me using the term hearing. If we don't call it- We can call it an appeal, traditional. You can call it an additional investigation. What I am calling it now is a request for additional review. Norton/Okay. Nov/All right, additional review rather than appeal but it is basically- Woito/Because I didn't have consensus on the term appeal last week. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 16 Nov/Right, the terminology is not in question at the moment but I don't mind which terminology. I want some clarification that if a citizen were to receive this report, the final report where it says citizen, they can tell somebody and preferably the appeal Board that they want this reviewed or do they tell only the City Manager? Woito/If you want it to go to the appeal Board, then you go to my II, which is the appeal to the Board rather than the City manager as the final say. I see heads shaking no. Norton/Tell me where you are now. Woito/I am on Supplemental Additional Investigation II. Baker/ We all agree there has to be some sort of- I will use the word appeal process at the tail end. Now where they appeal, to whom they appeal is directed at what stage is still in question but not the fact that once the discipline is announced, not necessarily imposed, that citizen has a right to say I disagree. I think, personally, that disagreement after the Review Board has already looked at (can't hear), that disagreement ought to go directly to the City Manager as the last resort because he hasn't signed off on the discipline yet. Kubby/But how does the appeal of the citizen may raise questions that weren't raised before in front of the Board who may then want to vote for supplemental investigation, internal or external. Norton/The second one you mean? Kubby/How does that happen? How can the citizen then have influence to make that happen in our process? Baker/ Go back to the idea that Linda talked about, bifurcation of the report. here is the report of the facts, policies affected, everything but the recommended discipline. At that point, the citizen gets a copy of the first report and say I agree or disagree with the facts, I agree or disagree with the interpretation of the policy and then if you want more information based on the facts of the case, make that request at that time. but once the Board signs off on the discipline which is a separate report, it can be done concurrently. I mean, they could get copies of two reports at the same time, the citizen gets one copy, the Board gets two copies. The citizen can comment to the Board about what they have received. Once the Board sign on the discipline, signs off on the sense of reviews the discipline, sends it to the Chief, there is a period, five, seven days, whatever it is in which the citizen is aware of the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 17 discipline, the police officer is aware of the discipline. The appeal of the discipline goes to the City Manager. Norton/Of the discipline. Baker/Of the discipline. Norton/But the appeal, for example, the citizen gets that initial police report and says you didn't interview X- Baker/That is the Board. Norton/Didn't ask question Y- Baker/That is the Board. Norton/Okay and thinks that is the reason they are bringing it to the Board. The Board has to consider whether that is a reasonable request. Baker/To ask for more information. Norton/So that is why I think it would come to them right up there, up high on #1. Baker/I am trying to get us to the end somehow. Lehman/Well, it would seem to me to be very difficult to have a final report without a citizen seeing the police report and saying look, I don't believe this is right. I think this, this, this, and this should be looked at. So I don't think that it is totally appropriate that the Board review the police report and based on that alone without an opportunity for the citizen to comment. That they then issue a final report. However, I am absolutely opposed to the citizen even being involved in commenting on the discipline. The Board, I think, is qualified to do that. I do not believe- Baker/ I think what you will- I think what you will discover is that they get concurrent reports, the citizen disagrees with the facts of the first report. The discipline recommendation or review is put in hold if the Board so chooses. But there is no reason to hold up that process, that can be held in limbo if there is more information that can be required and then perhaps they take that into account and maybe as they are getting more information, the Chief will amend his recommendation for discipline at that time. You use the word streamline which I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 18 think it is important because this is one of the things that the officer and citizen both expect, to get it through fairly but- Norton/But the citizen has got to get in very early, not after the Board has chopped away on it. They ought to see the police report. Baker/And they will. Norton/That is what you are suggesting, yes. Kubby/But does having the citizen come into the Review Board to talk with them streamline things or make it more complicated versus reading stuff on paper that the citizen has had a chance through the complaint process and the internal investigation to express themselves in those two manners. Baker/They are expressing themselves in an investigation process even before the report is finished, right? So I am not sure where they are shut out. Norton/The appeal is different than the complaint. Kubby/You are saying the comments about the investigation. Norton/Their comments about the investigation are different than their complaint. They are saying to the Board hey, they didn't look at X. Woito/Well, in some- I think Larry has hit on something. In some respects you are giving the Board authority to sort of stand in the shoes of the complainant and protect the complainants interest in some ways. And I think for that reason, Dee, it isn't the complainant that needs to be triggering all of these things but the Board needs to be involved and so when they review the police report, they will be standing in some ways in the shoes of the complainant. Norton/They can take initiative to review a report in more or less depth. They will see them all and they can review them in more or less depth at their discretion, assuming the complainant didn't do anything besides file a complaint. But my point is if the complainant appeals from the police internal report or their investigation, says that doesn't seem adequate to me, the Board ought to step in to try to see what they can do to make it more adequate. Vanderhoef/What are you saying isn't adequate? Excuse me. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 19 Norton/The Board says you didn't introduce Sergeant X and he was right there. Woito/And in both of my I and II, I have that capacity for the Board to do that very thing. Norton/I don't want to do it so late. I want to do it right after they- Kubby/Before they make a determination or before they make comments to the Chief, you are suggesting that the citizen be able to- Woito/This is something that you did not agree on last week which is something the concurrent jurisdiction, the ability of the Board to jump in at the git-go. Norton/That was the one that we were so torn up about. Yeah, that is very difficult. Woito/And I think that is partly what you are talking about, Dee. Kubby/I really think, at some point, I would like to- Because it was 3-4 and 4-3 that we should talk about that again because we had discussed the possibility- We had narrowed it down to the possibility of in the case of death or serious injury, the possibility of this and it was going back 3-4. Nov/Can we get to that later? Can we try to solve this one first? Norton/This is still supplemental that we are talking about? Woito/Yes, this is still supplemental. We are not on concurrent because Naomi said we are putting that aside. Nov/I really would like to do this, finish off this before we go to the next one. Woito/I agree. Thornberry/You are saying, Linda, that the Board is not equal in that they're representing the complainant against the Police Department. Woito/No. No. Thornberry/You said they are standing in the shoes of the complainant. This.represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 20 Woito/I am trying to get you to think about rather than giving the citizen a lot of rights to appeal, the right to assert their rights to go to the Board or to got to the City Manager or whatever, that you are setting up a Board which is going to be doing a lot of those things that you want to happen in terms of review of the investigation and complaints, receiving complaints, looking into them and maybe even deciding to do additional investigation. In some ways they are carrying out your purpose which is to provide external accountability to the public. But no, they are not in an adversarial role with the police officer. Thornberry/Then they are not standing in the shoes of the complainant. Norton/That is not quite right. Woito/No, I am saying in some respects, you have chosen to set up the Board to receive citizen complaints, to make sure that this citizen down here is getting heard and you have assured- By either I or II, you have assured the citizen always is heard. Their complaints are seriously taken because the police must investigate. Their complaints, they are listened to, they give their testimony and the police chief writes up a report about their complaint and then the Board reviews all of those, reports and decides whether to do additional evidence or to do a review on the record and in this case, if the citizen is still not satisfied they can either appeal for here to the Board for review, they can review to the Board from here or you can send it to the City Manager. Norton/I don't get it to come back to the Board there. That would be bizarre. lit goes- Once that preliminary investigation comes in and goes to the Board and the citizen. Let me just try and outline. It goes to the Board and the citizen and, in my judgment, to the officer. We will talk about his prerogatives in a minute. The Board would- You got to look at time things here because the citizen has to have time to read the report and decide whether they can buy it or not, right? If they don't- They get five days. At the end of five days the Board is sitting there and they have got a report with no appeal. At that point the Board doesn't have to do anything except they have seen the report and studies it. They don't have to do anything. But they may choose to intervene there and say something back to the Chief about the report but they don't have to. Woito/In that case you are giving more credence to the citizen than to the Board's authority. Norton/But they would have to if the citizen filed an appeal within five days, the Board would then have to do something. They would have to file a report, either working This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 21 from the record or asking for additional information or initiating additional investigation on their own and holding hearings, all of which would take different time lines depending on which of those routes they go. Woito/It depends on you philosophically whether you want to give the authority to the individual citizen to trigger all of these steps or you want to give an overall review authority to the Board to decide. Kubby/But on the question if the Board has to take every complaint, I think the Board needs to comment on every complaint, even if they say the way it has been resolved is fine. Woito/And that would be either under- Kubby/They have an obligation to respond. Norton/Say Chief, yes, okay, go. Woito/You have got that- Nov/I don't want to give them any discretion, Dee, to read a report and hand it back without comment. Norton/Hand it back, I agree with you, for the record. Nov/A paper trail. Norton/Okay, leave a paper trail, notify the PD that they agree or don't have any comments basically. Nov/They can say this is fine the way it is or we recommend that it be changed. Woito/That is A. Council/(All talking). Lehman/Wait a minute, Dee. Baker/What be changed? Nov/Anything. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 22 Lehman/I would say if a citizen appeals, the Board has the discretion to do further investigation or say we are satisfied. Norton/They have the discretion to say we have to decide where we are, to read the record again or to ask for additional- They have several levels. Lehman/Or just leave it the way it is. Norton/They could say yes, we don't agree that it needs to be pursued any further. Lehman/That is their discretion. Norton/That is right but they have to look at it whether I am going to say more seriously perhaps then they did in the case when an appeal was not filed. Lehman/I agree. Woito/Is there any interest in pursuing Larry's suggestion ofbifurcation of facts versus discipline? Nov/I think it sounds good. Baker/It expedites the process and it is fair. It is clear. It allows an appeal process at the end. Kubby/I would like to see what that looks like so I can compare it before I say yea or nay. I would be interested in looking at it for comparison purposes. If it streamlines it and allows more input early on at the same time, if it seems like it is going to do that, that would make sense. But if it adds another layer- Baker/That is designed to eliminate layers. Norton/And make it possible for the citizen to come in earlier without getting- Nov/Let me try to ask a question which may clarify. Do I understand correctly when the Chief comes back with a report and hands it to the Board, it has two pages or two sections that are separated. One section is all of the investigative procedures, findings, etc. and the other part of the Chief's recommendation of discipline or no discipline which is on a separate sheet of paper. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 23 Woito/If that were the case, it could not be given the citizen at that point because there would be confidential personnel information in there. Nov/However, if both- CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 97-59 SIDE 2 Nov/Just the first piece of paper is given the citizen and to the police officer. Woito/As long as that first piece of paper has been redacted for confidential information, yes. Nov/What is confidential information in that investigation? Is there confidential information aside from the discipline? Woito/Yes, there will no doubt be. Yes, there will be. There could be. Vanderhoef/There could be something from the Police Department. Woito/That is why, in terms of the confidentiality, that is why my plans are simpler in terms of when it can be released to the citizen and be public. Once there is a finding by the Police Chief of misconduct and the Board agrees there is misconduct, then it can become public. Kubby/That is a separate decision as to the imposition of discipline. Woito/Yes, that is separate. Norton/Your scheme puts the citizen too far down the pile. I want him up right after the police report is in. That is what Dave says ifI look at Dave's comments very carefully. Woito/I just want to remind you that we don't want to set up a system that tells our citizens that they may- That they have some input into discipline when, as a legal matter, they have input into if there is a complaint, there has been something done by the Police Department. The facts should be dug into, they should be disclosed but they have no rights of input into what discipline is imposed by either one of these two gentlemen. Council/(All talking). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 24 Woito/They can, yes, they can comment. Norton/Nobody is disagreeing with that, Linda. And I think Larry's mechanism is presumably designed to facilitate that. Woito/Yes. Vanderhoef/But their comment, as I would envision it, would be with their initial complaint. I don't like X, Y, Z and this is what I saw happen to me and this is what I would like to see happen to him. That kind of thing. But they don't have any other- Unless the Board asks them for more information or corroboration to the information that was on the original complaint, they have nothing more there. Woito/The citizen would have been interviewed by the Police Department and the Police Chief if need be. Vanderhoef/And if the Board wanted more information, they could ask for it and the Police Chief could get it or if they chose to ask the complainant, they could do that. Otherwise the complainant is all completed with their whole part of the process until the Board has reported back and the discipline has been meted and then if the complainant still wants to have an appeal on the process of the discipline, then it goes to the City Manager. Kubby/There are at least three people who disagree, saying that there should be an opportunity for the citizen to look at the investigative report- Vanderhoef/And what- Kubby/These kinds of questions weren't asked and I would like them to be asked. Would you consider that and then the Board has to vote 4/7 to choose to get supplemental information. Vanderhoef/But the Board can do that initially, Karen, is what I am saying and they can initiate the additional information that they want. So if they don't feel they have all of the questions answered for them on the report, they can invite the chief to get more information for them. but leave the complainant out of it from the idea that they think that they have some say in the discipline which they don't. Council/(All talking). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 25 Kubby/Where in your design does the citizen see the investigative report and then where do they, if they feel like it, approach the Board asking for more information or different perspective. Where do those two things happen in your design? Vanderhoef/They happen after the discipline has been imposed. Kubby/That is too late. Baker/That doesn't make any- Vanderhoef/That doesn't make any difference because we have already had the opportunity to get all of the information that we need from the citizen and once all of the information has been received. Kubby/We re disagreeing. Council/(All talking). Thornberry/When does the complainant get a final answer that he can disagree with? Norton/A final answer? Thornberry/That he can disagree with. He is- I do not agree with what happened to me. So I file a complaint. I do not agree with the investigation. All right, then they are going to re-investigate or whatever if they feel like it. They don't have to re- investigate, I don't want to. Norton/But they may. Thornberry/But they may but they don't have to. Wait a minute. Then the citizen, the complainant, gets the final judgment of what happened to the officer. I don't agree. Norton/There I don't know where they- They go to the City Manager as far as I know at that point. Thornberry/They still can't get confirmation as to their disagreement with the- They were wronged, they were- Norton/I don't know where they go then. Council (All talking). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 26 Thornberry/Then what do they do? Norton/City Manager or the court, I don't know where. Council/(All talking.) Nov/We are talking over each other. Thornberry/How many times does this complainant get to say I have been wronged and I don't agree with what is going on? How many times in the process? Norton/In answer to you, They get, in my judgment, they get one at the point where they see the internal report. Thornberry/The first one is the complaint. Norton/The complaint but I don't think that is the end of it as Dee has suggested. When they see the police report, sans sanctions- That when they see that report, they may say for God sake, you didn't talk to Y. Okay, so that is some aspects- Then you get to make a question there and the Board gets to decide whether to review that or not. Whether to pursue that or not and how. By a vote they can pursue it in many ways. Or they could say to hell with it, we are not going to pursue it. Then the process proceeds down to an end and at the point the final thing comes out, the citizen has an appeal, I guess, to the City Manager, maybe to the courts. I don't know. Baker/You got that period between recommendation and imposition. That is the period where the disagreement with the discipline is expressed if they want to express it. Now the question is where do they express that. I keep going back to send it right to the City Manager who has not bought into the- Has not signed off of the imposition yet. Norton/Yeah, the Chief doesn't impose his sanction when that report comes forward. Baker/You still got to get- Norton/The sanctions are drained but not imposed if any or non-imposed, whatever. Baker/I would assume that Steve and R. J. might disagree. This represents only a reasonably accurate trauscription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 27 Woito/Dee, you are giving the citizens like three bites at the apple and I thought the Board was suppose to be acting as- Thornberry/A review. Woito/As sort of looking things over. Norton/Where does the citizen get three bites? Woito/You have given them a bite for the complaint to the Board and then they get input into the Chief's report and then they get- Actually four. Then they get another appeal to the Board and then they get an appeal to the City Manager. Norton/No, they don't. You added the last one. They only get one in my judgment. They review the internal report. That is the whole point as Dave says. It will be useful for the council to focus on situations in which a citizen who is unhappy with the Police Chief's recommendation to file an appeal to the Board. The Board makes a recommendation and the Board and the PC either agree or disagree. In other words, that is the bite that seems to me is the most crucial and I don't regard the complaint as a bite. Thornberry/Of course it is. That is the biggest bite of all. Kubby/But the asking of questions I don't think is a bite because it may just be a question that was overlooked or a perspective that was overlooked. It doesn't mean that they are going to disagree with the outcome of the investigation. It is just saying I think some things are missing here that is important because they haven't seen the outcome yet. Woito/But that would be handled- Nov/Before the (can't hear). of discipline? Woito/That would be handled by the Board. Council/(All talking). Woito/That would be handled by the Board in either I or II. Kubby/Right but that is another place where you were counting as a bite and I don't think it is a bite. I think that is information clarification. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 28 Nov/Oh well, let's not define bites and information as two different things, please. Kubby/I mean the police officer certainly has a chance and if we are counting, 'then how many times does the police officer get to have their perspective listened to. I mean- Lehman/Looks like one time to me. Council (All talking). Woito/They have a lot of protection. Norton/They have a grievance committee, they have got Civil Service. Thornberry/That is after the thing is all done, though. During this whole process, they are interviewed up there under the Chief's report, right. I mean during the Police Department's investigation, information is gathered from that officer. Norton/I think he might also be able to, in my judgment, would be that they would also be able to ask the Board to look further. I don't know. I am worried about that because there is a grievance system already set up. Nov/Well, okay, Larry. Thornberry/Well, If you are talking about a level playing field, then you know, don't overload the complainant. Norton/Right. Nov/Okay, you two, you have had your say. Larry, you had something else to say? Baker/No. Nov/Okay. I thought I heard a voice and I- Kubby/One of the reasons that the appeal process somewhere in here was put in is out of fairness because the police officer, if disciplined and if disagreed, has an appeal process and there was no place in some of our original documents for the citizen to have an appeal. And that is why it was put in and I think it is a real important parallel process, even if it can't be the same body that it be a similar process. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 29 Woito/Well, can we clarify. Are there four of you who want the citizen to be able to comment on the Police Chief's report before it goes to the Board for additional investigation? NoWNo. Baker/At the same time. Nov/At the same time it can go to both except that the Board would receive both parts. The citizen would receive only the investigation part. Woito/The bifurcation. Nov/Correct. Kubby/I want to see what that looks like. Norton/I do, too. Woito/Okay. And then from there you want the final arbiter to be Steve? Baker/Yes. Woito/As an appeal. Baker/Yes. Norton/I don't know how else? Council/(All talking). Kubby/Back to the Board, the way we have got it written down. Council/(All talking). Baker/Once the citizen buys into the, you know, here are the facts of the case. I agree to that. All right, conduct or no misconduct. Then the discipline is announced based upon an agreed police report, an investigative report, between officer and citizen, department. The discipline is announced and the citizen doesn't like the discipline based up on the report they have already bought into. Then they don't take it back to the Board. They take it to Steve. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 30 Nov/I can see them coming to the Board somewhere in between because the investigative report was not as thorough as they might have liked. They thought that such and such occurred this way and the officers report didn't say the way I believe it occurred. I can understand appealing to the Board on the investigation. Kubby/Yes, that is part of what- Norton/We all agree with that. Nov/Some kind of a cross discussion. I don't want to wait until after discipline to- Norton/We are just saying there will be that final appeal though. Woito/Okay, the citizen gets a- There will be two reports from the Chief, one will be factual citizen allegations, redacted for any confidential information. the other one will deal with discipline. The citizen will get the factual rendition from the Chief and have an appeal fight of the facts to the Board? Baker/They get it at the same time the Board does. Kubby/The officer should get it at the same time, too, that same report. Nov/And the officer can also- Baker/The officer also can ask for an amended report. Nov/Yeah, right, that is what I am trying to say. Thornberry/If the complainant says it happened this way and the officer says it happened this way. Chances are it happened the third way anyway. You know. But if the complainant gets a chance to go to the Board and say hey, wait a minute, it didn't happen the way the officer said it did, it happened the way I said it did and officer doesn't have a chance to defend his statements. There is something wrong. Woito/If it goes to the Board and you have the Board deciding to give - to take evidence, take additional evidence. They can take additional evidence from both the complainant and the police officer. Then you are into, on a simple majority vote, they decide to take additional evidence. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 31 Norton/They could take it themselves. They could say look, we want to talk to X and X and X. Kubby/It is up to the Board as to who they speak with. Norton/They could ask the Department to do it all together, too. Woito/Right. Nov/Give the Board the option to talk to people themselves or to just refer it back to the internal investigator and say why didn't you ask this question. Woito/Okay. Kubby/So really at that point there is three choices. The Board ask the questions themselves, they ask the Police Department to ask the questions or they can vote to hire outside investigators. There is really three choices at that point. Woito/So basically we are into B. Only we have gotten to B slightly differently. Norton/Yes, that is true because- Woito/There are several other lines there and you still want investigation, internal, external, all of those are on a simple majority vote of the Board to do those. Kubby/Yes. Baker/But did we talk about the external investigation being narrowed and focused only to particular incidence like death or bodily injury? Kubby/Not for supplemental. Only for concurrent. Norton/No, these are supplemental. Baker/Okay. Norton/I thought they were but I thought they could work just from the record or they could ask the PD for additional information on investigation, you have to give additional time. Or they may initiate their own investigation. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 32 Woito/Right. All those options are available under - You can combine A and B. I mean they could do it on the record, they could do additional. The only difference will be there will be citizen input here. Norton/And there will be different time lines and everybody has to be- It gets complicated there. Woito/Are we all in agreement on that? Thornberry/How would the officer know that the citizen was not satisfied with the Police Department's investigation? Woito/We will have to let the officer know that. Norton/A copy to him. Thornberry/Okay. I just want a level playing field is all. Norton/I am very sensitive to that, Dean. I agree with you entirely. Woito/And the rest of the- The citizen, after the Board decides to do additional investigation or to hold hearings, there will be no further appeals by the citizen to the City Manager. Right. Thornberry/There is someplace that it has got to end. When you get a grade from a class, you can appeal that grade to a certain level and then they say- Council/(All talking). Kubby/Before you say okay to that- Nov/I don't see everybody agreeing on that one. Kubby/I thought we were talking about after the Board has made its comments to the Chief, and the Chief has made a determination but has not imposed, that the citizen can disagree and go to the City Manager. The City Manager then makes the determination and that is the end of it for our solution of the City of Iowa City process. Woito/So we are back to I, only we have altered this step here. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 33 Norton/Yes, the Board sees it once and then it goes onto the Chief and he grinds it up. Nov/What we are saying, I think, is that all of the investigative report appeal should go to the Board, should go to the Police Chief, should be refined before a discipline is imposed. And an appeal of discipline and only discipline goes to the City manager because all of the other questions has been answered through the Board. Thomberry/The discipline goes the City Manager? Nov/The appeal of the discipline because only the Police Chief and the City Manager can impose the discipline. The Board cannot. Thornberry/That is correct but why would the citizen have any input as to the- Woito/No but the Board is going to be reviewing the Police Chief' s recommendations, right, on discipline. Thornberry/And so what can they do? Woito/They are going to do what I think you envisioned all along is comment. Norton/Yeah, they comment on that. Kubby/Then the citizen also has a chance to comment to the Manager if they want. Norton/That is later, isn't it? Kubby/Yes. Lehman/Well, the citizen can do that irrespective of this ordinance or any other one. They can disapprove of the discipline. Kubby/I know but if it is part of the process, it should be laid out so people know what the beginning of the process is and what the end of the process is even if it ends up being redundant in terms of the last thing of any citizen can go the City Manager. Woito/I will have to think about the bifurcation and how it ends. Norton/You have to clarify something for me and that is I only see the Board seeing this thing once. I do not see the Board involved twice. Where is their second involvement? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 34 Nov/Why do you see them twice? Norton/What? Nov/Where did we get twice? Norton/I thought they only saw it once and I heard Karen say she thought they saw it twice. Kubby/I think it is once when they originally see the report and then the citizen gets a hold of them and says these things need to be reviewed. Norton/Okay. Council (All talking). Baker/I is a short or long process, but it is one process. Norton/It is really once because they are going to see it for sure but they also might see it along with an appeal. Kubby/But it might be two different days. Norton/They will see it first and then they wait five days to see if an appeal comes in. Kubby/Right and they may see it again because they decide on their own volition even without an appeal from the citizen that they want more information. Baker/The Board gets the report. When the report is sent to the Board, a copy of the factual part is sent to the citizen and the citizen is told that the Board will consider this on such and such a date. If you would like to comment, disagree, whatever, you need to do it at that time. And then the Board may- Norton/All one step basically. Nov/I think that just telling the citizen it is on the agenda at that time means that it is an open meeting and they may or may not choose to comment. Baker/Make it clear in the instructions that that is their option. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 35 Kubby/The ordinance has to specifically outline what they're able to do at that point, what they have the right to do in that process at that point. It can't just be notify them it is on the agenda, we have got to- Nov/No, you tell them that if they want to change anything, if they want to question anything, they must do it at that point. It is sort of speak now or forever hold your piece. Norton/That is right. That is their appeal window. Vanderhoef/They either agree with the written report or you disagree with it and you make your own comments. Kubby/Right and that is what we have talked about all along. Norton/That is right. Kubby/I mean we are calling- Norton/I think the new thing is this bifurcation and that might help if it worked. I think that is an interesting possibility. Larry, to separate them. Nov/Linda, will you think about separating. Woito/Yes, I will have to think about that. Nov/Because if we do not separate, we don't give this report to the citizen until after it has been through the Review Board. Woito/Right. Okay, I will think about bifurcation. Norton/Do you want initial? Nov/It sounds to me as if the supplemental #1 is closest to what we agree on? Woito/Yes, sounds like it. Nov/Except for the separation of the two reports. Woito/Right. This represents only a reasonably accurate trauscription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 36 Lehman/Naomi, I am sure this probably isn't the popular opinion but I really think that the citizen should be able to appeal based on the outcome of the investigation, not on the discipline. I think the Chief and I think the City Manager and, for that matter, the Review Board after some experience will be far more capable of commenting on whether or not the discipline was appropriate. I really think the complainant should not be encouraged to complain or appeal to the City Manager based on discipline. Thornberry/I think the operative word there, based on what you said, was right or not right. That the review of the Chief's discipline was, not is going to be. I mean I don't see that the Board, their one aspect that the Chief may tap into like he does with Dale then as opposed to Steve, Linda and Personnel to see about discipline of a specific officer for a specific incident. I am sure he does that before he metes out his discipline. AT least we have been told that is the process. I don't- In addition now, he will also get the Board's recommendation, right? But it is still his decision and if the Board disagrees with his decision- Lehman/They can tell him so. Norton/That is just for him and the CM to deal with. Nov/They could not necessarily say I disagree. They may have a conversation and they may persuade each other. Kubby/Right, so the Chief makes a determination before it is final. Are there four people who want to allow the citizen to know what that pretty final or final but not imposed outcome is and that they can go to the City Manager? Thornberry/I don't think that is their responsibility. Council/(All talking). Baker/It just says you have five days. It goes to the City Manager on such and such, the City Manager will make a final determination on X date. If you would like to comment before hand- Kubby/But the PCRB or the citizen can go to the City Manager. Baker/Sure. Norton/I would like to be sure that we are- Pardon me, Karen. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of tile Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 37 Kubby/I am not hearing, are there four votes for that? Nov/I hear only two at this point. Baker/What? Norton/Let me make sure what you are wanting four votes for. Thornberry/I don't want the citizen to say no, I think they should have three days off. No, I don't think so. Norton/What are you making the four votes for again? Baker/They can say that now. Thornberry/Hell, they say it in the Press Citizen. Norton/Oh, yeah. Baker/We are missing the point here. Thornberry/I don't think he should be involved in the disciplinary process of the officer. Baker/All we are doing is clarifying a right that they already have. Norton/Yeah. Thornberry/He can say that in his complaint if that is what he wants to do. Kubby/Although, what we are doing is saying that we will not impose discipline unless until they have had that five days in which to do the thing that they already have the right to do. Council (All talking). Baker/Is that fair policy? The Chief makes the report, the City Manger has got five days to agree or disagree and in the mean time, the citizen, if they wa~nt to contact the City Manager, they can. Norton/Is that present policy? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 38 Baker/The fact that a citizen can go to the City Manager and complain is clearly present policy. Norton/No. But do they know the punishment issue before they go. I guess I am not quite clear what you wanted to say here. Baker/I doubt it. But- Norton/I don't think they do. Kubby/That is the question that Linda- Woito/They shouldn't know. It is not public. Baker/Because by the time it is announced, it is already- Steve has already bought into it. Woito/Right, that is right. Kubby/So you are saying that the citizen cannot have any influence before discipline is imposed or is it before it is announced. Thornberry/Any what? Norton/Any influence. Thornberry/Influence or- Woito/I mean they can have influence before it is imposed. In this whole process they can have- Kubby/How is this working then in your I? Citizen. Citizen requests additional review by City Manager. That is about outcome. Woito/That is before the discipline is imposed. Kubby/Yes, that is what I am suggesting. That is what I thought we had clearly agreed on before. Thornberry/But it has been decided on. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 39 Kubby/It has been decided but it hasn't been imposed. If the citizen is persuasive, things can change. The citizen may not- Norton/Let me ask Steve- Arkins/You have to confirm that discipline by the time it gets to me because if it gets to my office, I have the final authority on discipline, the officer needs to know because the officer has the right to appeal to the Civil Service Commission. You know we have got to end it somewhere whether it is me or- It has got to be ended. The officer said I don't like this discipline, this is a done deal, I am going to Civil Service. Norton/What about the citizen? Atkins/The citizen just needs to be informed. Woito/Well, that is obviously why I prefer to not have as much as citizen input on the beginning because of the confidentiality for the police officer. Vanderhoef/The only time that the discipline will get as far as Steve, as I understand it, is if the PCRB and the Chief are recommending two different things. Norton/Even if they agreed, it would have to go to him. Vanderhoef/It still ends up going there but otherwise, if there is an agreement- Atkins/In theory, I could disagree with both. Woito/Right. Vanderhoef/Yes. Atkins/That could occur. Vanderhoef/But then that conversation is between you and the Chief. Atkins/Yes. Vanderhoef/(Can't hear). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 40 Woito/Can I ask, Larry, can I ask you a question about your bifurcation? Let's say that the Board gets the information, the factual information that the citizen has received and the disciplinary information that the Chief has given them and they concur with the Chief that X discipline should be imposed. It is then announced do you all agree that you want five days for the citizen to comment to Steve on the discipline? Norton/If the officer has time. Baker/I don't want them going back to the citizen Review Board. Norton/No. Woito/No, definitely, right. Atkins/There must be a time frame. Baker/There must be a time frame. Atkins/IfI am to be removed from the process. Now, I confirm the discipline long before any other appeal. But in this more highly structured process, if I am going to be an appeal, I need to be removed from it because- Woito/That is why I took you out. Atkins/I understand what you did because I have to confirm that so the officer knows for sure what the level of discipline is so they know for sure what they are going to appeal. So does the citizen. Also keeping in mind that the Civil Service Commission can over-turn the whole bunch of us and add more to or take away from. Kubby/Where does that happen. Does that happen at B or does that happen at the end? Atkins/I think it happens at the end. If you offer the opportunity- Norton/At the very end. Atkins/Offer the opportunity for appeal. Woito/At the end. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 41 Baker/At the end. Norton/That is fine. Nov/Now, if this is appealed by the police officer to the Civil'Service Commission that is an open hearing. Does the citizen who doesn't agree with this appeal, have a chance to say something? Woito/Yes. Nov/Okay, they can come with a final time at a Civil Service appeal. Atkins/In theory again- Woito/Depends upon what the prosecutor which is the Police Chief and my office or the police officer's attorney. Atkins/In theory the citizen request additional review by the City Manager, that is fine. Then I impose the discipline. Somewhere in there the officer can appeal the decision through the grievance process as well as Civil Service. Woito/Right. Correct. Atkins/So we still need- You need to end this process somewhere so other reviews that they are entitled to are triggered. Kubby/That is the end. Once they have appealed to you and you make the final determination. Atkins/Then I make the call. Then the officer, the citizen, everyone is aware of what the level of discipline will be. I am done. The officer has a choice of Civil Service Commission. I assume the citizen has the choice to litigate. Woito/They always have a choice to litigate. Kubby/The question that I am still unclear is when in the process does the officer and the citizen finally get information about outcome? Norton/E.g. sanctions. Woito/Final outcome? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 42 Kubby/About outcome- final determination of outcome but before imposition. Atkins/I think what you just said, Karen. It is the final report is the outcome unless it is appealed. Woito/Right. Atkins/If it is appealed, it is up for grabs. Baker/ Okay but I am assuming that because we have said the citizen Review Board makes their comment or review back to the Police Chief about the discipline, the citizen is informed of the recommended discipline. The citizen has five days to comment to the City Manager. I am assuming that the police officer also has five days, gets the disciplinary report at the same time and says Mr. City Manager, I also disagree with this. Atkins/The issue of final report, I am assuming it is a public document. Baker/I mean the officer has appealed beyond you but he has an equivalent appeal with you along with the citizen. Atkins/I mean with the issuance with a final report by this Board, it becomes a public document. So, therefore, they all need to know at the same time. Woito/Well, that is an interesting question. That is not entirely true. I want- Norton/I want to understand the final report because I thought the Board commented on that before the final report. The final report comes from the Chief, doesn't it? Woito/ This is something from Minnesota that I think I am going to be working off of. It says public data Minnesota has an open records law that is similar to Iowa's. Theirs is codified, ours is based on case law. But they're relatively similar. So what I am looking at this is the information that I will- We can eventually see as being available to the public. The name and address of the complainant when the complaint is filed. Only the Board will get the actual complaint. That will be confidential. This whole process from A up to B- I am sorry, from the complaint up to the Chief's report is confidential. The name and rank of the officer who has been cited in the complaint will be a public record. Baker/(Can't hear). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 43 Woito/This is from the time of filing. Baker/(Can't hear). Kubby/At the time of the original complaint is made. This is in Minnesota. Woito/Yes. Norton/The level of detail here is getting beyond me I am afraid. I don't know where we are going with this. Woito/The status of a complaint- The process from the time the complaints filed until the Police Chief finishes his investigation in terms of overall confidentiality of personnel records. The police officer is entitled to have that information kept confidential except for these particular facts. The fact that a complaint was filed, the name of a complainant, the officer's rank, the status of the complaint as it moves through the process. Baker/Is that true now under our law? Woito/Basically our Iowa law pretty much tracks this except when you get down to E. I still haven't figured that out. Baker/All of those complaints that were filed previously with the Police Department, the ten, twelve, whatever that number was were always public record? Woito/I don't know how R. J. treated those. Winklehake/(Can't hear). We had not treated those as public record, Woito/But the fact that they had been filed would be treated as a public record. Norton/(Can't hear). Baker/But the name, rank, and job description of the officer on any complaint, regardless of the eventual outcome, is public record. Woito/It can be, yes. Baker/Does it have to be? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 44 Woito/No, I guess that is up to you all. Kubby/It matters what kind of reporting we want. Woito/Yeah. And you may let the Board decide that. Thornberry/What do you mean? Kubby/It means do we want to have statistics about every complaint that is made which I would say yes. But we also need to know statistics about the output. Thornberry/Well, statistics I don't think is a problem. The record will be there. But the question is should it be made public right away? Woito/I mean, you don't have to make this public. Baker/Okay. Woito/This is a- In terms of external accountability, I sort of assume that most of you would want as much of this to be public as possible at the beginning, knowing full well that much of the investigation is going to be confidential until you get to the end. Baker/What happens is a complaint is filed against an officer. It hits the paper the next day. 45 days, 70 days later it is resolved. It is not a story. Norton/Nothing happens. But that is the way with the arrests, you know. You want to get arrested for drunk driving, they haven't established it yet but your arrest record is right there. Baker/A complaint and an arrest are two different things. Norton/Well. Woito/This wouldn't- We don't have to follow this. This is one model of somebody- Minneapolis has done this and I don't mind plagiarizing from other lawyers. Thornberry/I don't think it needs to be public at this point. Woito/We don't need to deal in this detail. And I will think about bifurcation. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 45 Kubby/I have some other issues. Woito/Sarah is gone. Yes. Kubby/I have a couple of other issues. I am looking at the May 13 memo that has both your explanatory memo attached- Woito/May? Kubby/I am sorry, March 13. Woito/Yes. Kubby/And I can't remember- I am looking at page 7, #9. Thornberry/I have got March 14, February 11, I got March 27. Kubby/It is the thick one, does that help. Norton/I got it. Nov/One of the thick ones. Council/(All talking). Kubby/March 13, page 7. Thornberry/Page 7? Kubby/I am looking at- Woito/Believe it or not, I don't have it with me. Kubby/Okay, you don't need it for what I am going to ask. Woito/I remember that stuff. Kubby/What did we- In our discussions from today, I am assuming that we are deciding that a member of the PCRB will not be part of the internal investigation team. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB Nov/I think we decided that last time. Kubby/Okay, I was unclear. That is why I wanted to ask. Norton/It is good to understand how it works. Kubby/Okay. Woito/I think that is correct. Kubby/Second question is I know in the ordinance language it says that someone directly affected by an incident can make a complaint which I am assuming either means an incident happened- I was a player, I was an eyewitness because you are directly affected. Or the parent or guardian of someone who was directly affected. Isn't that in the language of the ordinance? Woito/Yes. Kubby/One of the things that we had talked about at one point is could someone who has credible knowledge of an incident make a complaint? Thornberry/I don't think so. My sister told me that this happened. Kubby/That is what I am asking. Thornberry/I don't think so. That is second hand knowledge. Woito/The way I have it written now, I don't believe that that would be a complaint but my overall intent and encouragement is to accept all complaints and let the process sort them out. So if you want to broaden this, that is fine. Nov/It was my understanding that we did not agree to broaden it to that extent. Kubby/So that if you have credible information or belief but you are not directly affected or a parent or guardian of someone who was directly affected, you cannot make a complaint? Norton/Suppose the complainant is incapacitated by the incident. Nov/Well, then they will have a guardian. page 46 This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 47 Woito/The way I have written it, their designated representative has authority to do that. Kubby/Okay, all right. I am looking now on page 9 at the issues under//16 which is who is going to comprise the Board and it talks at the bottom, at the last of that, and in the ordinance it mentions that all Board members shall attend the Citizen Police Academy and do a ride along. I think those are two really good things but they are both ways that the Board becomes familiar with the process from the perspective of the Police Department and I think it is not enough. And I think there are at least two other kinds of- three other kinds of training that I think could probably all happen at once. One would be diversity training. Another one would be some training in conflict resolution and listening skills that are not provided by the Police Department, those training's. I think they need some outside so that they don't become too enveloped by the Police Department. These other things I think are really important and should not be- Norton/I don't want to make them have to go to school. Thornberry/Well, let's get them a Ph.D. Norton/Yeah, right, get a Ph.D. to get on here. Kubby/These things can be done incrementally. They don't have to be done all at once. I am not talking about sending them to a five week institute. I am talking about maybe a eight hour training that would save them a lot. It would streamline the process, I believe, if those- Vanderhoef/Streamline what process? Kubby/In them dealing with citizens, taking complaints. Thornberry/We don't have to do that to be on the city council. Kubby/It would probably really help us streamline what we do by having listening skills, diversity training and some conflict resolution. Norton/I just think that is just a little- I don't know. It seems to me a put down of the citizens and I kind of would find that tough to say to a person you are going to have to go through X, Y, and Z. Kubby/Well, you are saying that already and the only training that is being outlined comes from the Police Department which I think does not give the air of independence. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 48 Those things we are talking about, I think, are vital for them to understand how police work. Thomberry/You don't think they will have independence to be on the Board because they don't do these things. Nov/We need to say where this training will come from. You do have something in mind? Kubby/No. But my biggest point here is that all the training that is mandated after you become a Board member should not solely come from the Police Department. Nov/All right, how about if we- Kubby/That is my biggest point. These are just suggestions for other kinds of training. I personally think would be helpful. Norton/We might encourage that but I don't know whether I want to demand it. I just find it- Kubby/Are you going to demand a ride along and demand the Citizen Police Academy. Norton/I am a little bit reluctant to that, too. I just encourage it but I am not sure I want to demand it. Nov/Okay. Well, how about if we do not include training as part of an ordinance. Woito/Take it out.. Nov/And this kind of specificity. We just say our Legal Department will provide training and then as a matter of rules or by-laws, this group will decide the training that they feel is essential. Thornberry/Or may provide the training. I mean if they want training in a certain area, they can request it and it will be approved. Nov/I just don't know that it has to be part of an ordinance. Specifically the Police Academy and the ride along. I think the City Attorney will provide training or something similar to that and then the Board will have a way to consult with that person and make a joint decision and put their rules in order without putting it in the ordinance. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 49 Kubby/We need to have the facts that there will be some training offer as part of the ordinance. Nov/I see there is no harm in saying that there will be training provided. I see no harm in saying that but I just don't agree with the specifics. Norton/Available, yes. Woito/I had already written that word down, Larry. Nov/What was it, Larry? Baker/Available. Woito/Board training available. Nov/Training available is good and I would like as much discretion in terms of by-laws and rules of behavior that we can give them. Woito/Yes, take a lot of the ordinance out and let the Board put it in the by-laws which you will have to approve anyway. Nov/I believe we should not tie their hands too tight. Woito/Okay. Norton/Do you want to look at original jurisdiction? Thornberry/As in- Kubby/I noticed two different places in the draPt of the ordinance from the March 13 packet that in one place the Board, in terms of the standard they were looking at was preponderance of the evidence and at one time, in another place, we talked about reasonable basis. And I think it is important for us to- Once we finalize the process, we also need to clarify what'the standard is. Thornberry/I think that would be in their by-laws that we would review once they get that done. Kubby/Isn't that a huge policy question about what level of standard they will use to- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 50 Baker/Is there a level of standard that the Chief has to use to justify the discipline or come to a conclusion about conduct or misconduct? Woito/Not specific in Iowa but generally it is the administrative rule. What a reasonably prudent police officer would do to conduct their business using due diligence and common sense. Kubby/Whatever is the wording(can't hear). It is just in the body of the ordinance there are two different standards. Woito/Well, it is going to depend on whether the Board is reviewing the Police Chief's investigation in which case I recommend the administrative review of what a reasonable police officer would have considered. If you are going to give independent investigative authority, then it would probably be preponderance of the evidence. Kubby/Does that include the supplemental investigative powers that we have agreed on or only concurrent? Because some of it could be external to supplemental. Woito/Yes. It could be a mixture. Kubby/So we need to still think about- CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 96-60 SIDE I Woito/More likely than not to have happened. Atkins/What is clear and convincing? Woito/That is a higher standard that- Atkins/That is what I saw on a couple of those ordinances. Woito/After reviewing 15 ordinances I went back to preponderance of the evidence. Atkins/I just remember reading clear and convincing. Kubby/So I guess I would like- Once we get another flow chart that- Woito/Bifurcates. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 51 Norton/That we can understand, yeah. Kubby/The reflects the decision that we made. I would like to talk about this issue again and if there is going to be different standards, where in the different levels. Woito/Okay. Baker/Are we anywhere close to having a rough rough draft ordinance that we can have a p.h. on? Woito/I think so. Council/(All talking). Baker/Knowing that it is very rough, the what the public sees- Most of the time the ordinance is very close to what they are going to be. Norton/I think we ought to be one more step myself to look at what comes out of this because it is still pretty confusing to us to try to- Every time we come back together we are not quite in the pace we thought we were. Nov/I am afraid for us to come back together once more. I think we ought to say that we have agreed on this supplement I or additional whatever we are calling it and have a p.h. and see what else can be added afterwards. Kubby/But we need to make sure that we are all understanding what it is we are putting out to the public. Norton/We got to look at it once more. Kubby/I think we need to glance at it once more before we put it out. Norton/Particularly this bifurcation thing because Dave makes a big point in his comments and I understand them. That the Board ought to be able to comment on the sanctions proposed and that assumes this bifurcation thing will work. Thornberry/Comment yes but make a decision, no. Norton/No, no, no, I understand that but I mean (can't hear) because he said that is the only way (can't hear). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 52 Thornberry/I am just saying- Norton/He said that is one of the fine ways you fine tune- Nov/Do I hear us saying the same thing again and again? Stop. Vanderhoef/What I have a request for is with the flow chart that there would be a corresponding description of this, by number, at say at the Police Department stage. This is what happens here. Step//2, Chief s report. Woito/I did a narrative but I just decided to- You were being buried in paperwork. I decided to just go with the chart. We can flush out the narrative. Vanderhoef/(Can't hear). Need to go to the public, then the public is going to need a narrative and I think we should be cleaning up a narrative to put out with it. Woito/Okay. Nov/Can we have a narrative for discussion next time and set a p.h. for the following time? Does that sound reasonable? Atkins/Can I offer a comment on the p.h.? My impression on a p.h. would be that folks will come to the microphone and I am not so sure would critique the proposal but question what does this mean, what does that mean. While it may make it a little longer, would it be worthwhile to have some sort of an informal session. I prefer Linda doing it. Maybe like at the library some evening. Walk through what this thing is all about. So folks at least, when they came to the microphone, I don't like that element and here is why. Because I am afraid a p.h. right now is going to be not a whole lot different than what you have been going through the last few sessions. Norton/Only worse. Atkins/That they will pose uninformed questions and I think we need to inform before you have a p.h. I don't know how to do it. Kubby/The input will be more valuable if people understand the process. Atkins/You want a critique. Let them understand what is going on so they can say I don't like that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 53 Nov/We need a strong narrative before you have a public comment and it really is not- Atkins/My point is the flow chart, the narrative, all of those things. But some sort of an informal session and I think I would prefer having someone like Linda do it some evening. Make it open to the public. I am Linda, I am going to walk you through how this thing is intended to work. And then we can announce council will be setting a p.h. I just think it might be a lot easier. Norton/That is a good idea. Woito/That makes sense. Nov/And you want this at the library rather than here? Atkins/Oh no. I am just saying I think some pre-meeting before a p.h. would be helpful to everybody. Thornberry/The library would be good. Atkins/Well, whatever, we will worry about that. Woito/They have the cable system all set up there, don't they? Atkins/Yeah. Kubby/I have another issue or two I want to ask. In the latest version of the ordinance it seems like the attorney is being given a lot of responsibility. The attorney who is part of the Review Board is given a lot of responsibility and power. It may be how things are written or changed because (can't hear). Nov/What page are you on? Kubby/I am looking at the ordinance, page 14. Norton/We can't do that. Woito/I don't think I intended that. Kubby/Okay because it just says it shall be the exclusive responsibility of the Board's chair or the Board member attorney or staff attorney to determine the order and conduct of any p.h. held under the ordinance. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April $, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 54 Woito/I gave you three options. Kubby/Prighr. Norton/You can't put that burden on a volunteer. Woito/Pick one. Kubby/I am just concerned (can't hear) power as well as responsibility. Woito/You would prefer the Board's hired attorney. Kubby/If it is at that point, yeah. Woito/Or just the Board's chair. I am totally indifferent about that. I pulled it out of an ordinance that I read. Kubby/I don't know what should be. Norton/I want to find out where we are on the original jurisdiction. Is that still a viable topic? Are we going to have any such thing under extreme circumstances or whatever? Woito/I have my overhead. Anyone who wants to talk about it. Kubby/A parallel investigation. Nov/Whether or not we give them jurisdiction to conduct an investigation parallel to whatever is going on in the internal investigation. Kuhby/If we restricted it only to cases of death or serious injury which can be legally defined, I think it would be very very rarely used and that should be an option. Norton/It is what Dave suggests too and I feel like it would be fairly rare and should be fairly rare. But it ought to be an option, I think, even though I don't quite understand how it would work. It would be doing two sets of investigation parallel but only rarely. Nov/It would be not easy. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 55 Thornberry/No, absolutely not. It is not a investigative Board. Norton/Just supplementary, in other words. They might be doing some investigation on their own later. Thornberry/Later but to in concert. Vanderhoef/What would concern me with that, Dee, would be the fact that there wouldn't be the possibility lots of times to get the information at the same time as the internal investigation is going on and then whether you could get to the principal people and get testimony from them at that same time would be fairly doubtful. Kubby/First don't we agree whether we would like that or not and then it is Linda's job to figure if it can happen and if the logistics can work out to make it happen. I don't think those details should stop us from saying- Woito/ I don't have any trouble with- It can happen legally and it can happen logistically. It is going to take a lot of employee time of people being tracked down and being interviewed. There is no doubt about it, this is going to cost money and time. Thornberry/I don't think the PCRB should take the place of the DCI. That is what I am hearing in some instances that it is just going to be another investigative body and I just didn't think that that was what we were setting up here. Norton/It certainly is (can't hear). I don't know how but everybody- I don't know. I am torn on this one as I was last time because some people think that power to take it up on an emergency or heavy duty cases might be appropriate to have even though you might not like it most of the time. Maybe a few times it will be necessary. Woito/Maybe go back- Take out the subject matter and go back to a 5-7 vote. Vanderhoef/Take out the subject matter? What are you- Woito/Death or serious injury. Just take that out. That they could take it- The Board could take up a matter that they felt strongly about on a 5-7 vote. Nov/Or a 6~7 vote. Woito/Or a 6-7 vote or a 7-7 vote. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 56 Norton/To reinforce the principles of super-majorities that are by and large bad, as I tell the Governor. Woito/Well, but in some ways you are at least giving the Board the power to do what they think is important. Kubby/And it is part of that independence. Part of that external accountability. Woito/Would they have voted on a 6-7 vote to take up the Shaw matter? Probably yes. Thomberry/Then we are creating a DCI. Woito/No. Lehman/No. Woito/No, the DCI- Well, with all due respect. Thornberry/Then it is not a Review Board. Woito/Dean, the DCI investigates criminal matters. This Board cannot step their toe into criminal matters. It is forbidden. Thornberry/All right, instead of DCI, it is civil. Norton/Parallel to the police investigation. Woito/It would be parallel to the police investigation, internal affairs. Thornberry/But we are not creating an internal affairs investigative body. Woito/Well, that is up to you. Kubby/Some of us would like that function in these extreme cases to have some external accountability in that manner, Thornberry/I think, perhaps, the- Kubby/And you disagree, that is fine. I understand that you don't want to do that duplication. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 57 Nov/Karen, let him finish. Have you finished? Okay. I have another question on this. If we take this case as our example and we have already the DCI involved, it appeared to me that what the Police Department did was review the testimony as the DCI had taken it. Did they take separate testimony. And if they did, were they going to then allow a private investigator to get a third recording of the same officer explaining the same event? Woito/Unlikely. Vanderhoef/That is exactly what I was saying. Woito/It would depend on whether the officer wanted to cooperate or not. Nov/And whether the officer's lawyer wanted to cooperate or not. Woito/Even more problematical, correct. Norton/It is very difficult, the mechanics. Nov/So even if we said in the case of death or serious injury caused by a Police Department employee, it still could be a situation where it didn't happen. Vanderhoef/That is right. Norton/It is very tough. Woito/It is your Board. You can give it the power you want to give it. Nov/We can give it the power but we also have to understand that though they have accepted the power to designate that investigation, there will be others who say no. Woito/They would eventually be able to get information after the criminal matter was resolved. Nov/True but that would be a little ways down the road. Kubby/That is true for the Police Department's internal investigation. They didn't get the DCI report from some of the testimony. We still haven't seen some of that. Nov/But they get some of the DCI interview of police officers. This represents only a reasonably accurate trauscription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 58 Kubby/And the PCRB may have that same privilege. Norton/And they did some of their own, didn't they. Thornberry/Why have three investigations. Nov/Because it is seen as external accountability. Thornberry/Then the Board should review the police interviews and procedures after they did it. To have a concurrent on-going investigation, they are going to be trampling over each other. You have got the Police Department doing an investigation. You got the DCI doing an investigation. You have got the Review Board doing an investigation. Kubby/It just matters what level of independence in these serious cases you want to give the authority- Thornberry/No, no. They will have the independence. They can say hey Police Department, we think you did a good job on your investigation. Kubby/I don't believe that the PCRB getting the police investigation is independent. That for most of the cases that is going to be very sufficient. Thornberry/I think the Review Board does not need to be an investigative body. Norton/In serious cases and on a majority vote, they can proceed further than that. They can decide to do their own investigation later. The only point is do it concurrently in the first three weeks after the event. That is where everybody is going to be stepping on each other. I don't understand quite how that would work myself. That is all I am asking. Nov/I still have a question about whether or not it would work. Vanderhoef/I doubt it. Kubby/But if we don't say that take it out of the logistics and say that it is a value that we hold. We ask Linda to say what would the logistics look like. She brings it back to us to say yea or nay. If we don't give her the direction to do that, we don't know is it possible. That that is not where we are at yet. We are making a policy decision This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 59 to see if it could happen. I guess I would like to know, are there other people who would like to see- Woito/Larry. Baker/The power. Thornberry/I think it would be easier to give the Board- Nov/Microphone, Larry. Thornberry/Additional responsibility and authority as opposed to taking some away when we are seeing that maybe they are overstepping their bounds or getting in everybody's way. I think it is easier to give more as opposed to- Starting out with you got everything. Well, then we are going to start taking some things away. I don't think that will happen. Baker/ Two things are going to happen. One, it may be determined that logistically it can't be done. And two, there may be a situation where bodily harm, death, where the Board says no, we are not interesting in pursuing a separate one. There may be a police shooting, officer accidentally kills somebody. There on the face of it doesn't seem to be the same concern that was expressed in the Eric Shaw shooting and the Board says we don't need to pursue this at this time. Thornberry/I think the DCI would be involved almost immediately on the death of a person from being shot. Kubby/For a criminal investigation? Thornberry/So you have already got two that are going on already. Baker/One of your functions, the abstract function of the PCRB, is public confidence in the Police Department and police protection, city personnel. Thornberry/It would be the review process then that the citizen would look at. Council/(All talking). Baker/It may be that the public, we can argue about the definition later, the public wants something done and the PCRB is the vehicle that they want it done in a more timely fashion. I am just saying that I don't think- The times that it is actually This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 60 going to happen will be very rare but they ought to have the authority, the option to pursue that. Norton/6 out of 7? Baker/There was a very unique circumstances that they feel- Norton/5 out of 7? Council/(All talking). Thornberry/I don't think they should have that power. Nov/Serious injury or death. Thornberry/Serious injury or death is going to be a criminal investigation anyway. Norton/Not necessarily. Nov/Yes, he is right. It is very likely it will be a criminal investigation. Norton/I don't know. Dave, what do you- I don't know. I would like- Council/(All talking). Nov/This isn't Dave's decision. Norton/Can we clarify it or do we have to decide this minute? Nov/I think that we would like to- At least I think I hear four people saying let's at least consider this option. Let's consider it on death or serious injury issues and 6 out of 7. Norton/5. Kubby/5 out of 7. Vanderhoef/6 out of 7. Nov/6 out of 7 is what I thought I heard most of the time here. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 61 Kubby/5. Norton/6 is ridiculous. Thornberry/It is not ridiculous. They shouldn't even have the power to do it. Norton/I may be where you are, Dean. I just want to get it drafted and see what it looks like. Thornberry/Why in the world would you say 5 out of 7 if you don't think this should- Norton/Because I think even if we have this, it ought to be a rare event and that ought to be taken- Thornberry/That rare event would be DCI anywhere. You are going to have three investigations going on the same time. Kubby/We are not convincing each other on this. Nov/Okay folks, I hear- Woito/You already have a draft, Dee. Nov/I hear three 5's. Woito/Of my concurrent. Nov/Say something, Ernie. Lehman/There is one other situation where I think it might be viable and that is at the request of the Police Chief and the City manager. Then I don't think that would even require a vote. There may be situations where R. J. and Steve really feel that this situation is grave enough and serious enough that we would like something done right now and I think under those circumstances they should have the power to go ahead and do it. Kubby/Well, there are definitely four people who want to see something and we need to argue about whether it is a simple 5 or 6 out of 7. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 62 Norton/Let me ask one last. Does this preclude the possibilities that in extreme circumstances, the police might invite somebody from the PCRB to sit in on their investigation? Thornberry/Jesus. Woito/No. Nov/I think we dropped that one. Lehman/I think we dropped that one. Thornberry/I think if we start getting into any and every eventuality, we are going to sit here all day. Kubby/The one thing that we haven't thought about is we talked about an appeal process for a sworn officer and an appeal process, so to speak, for the complainant. But there is no appeal process for the CSO who cannot go to the Civil Service Commission and I would like the CSO to be able to go to the City manager in the same process that the complainant can go to the City Manager so that they have a parallel place to go. Woito/Actually my pitch to you was going to be to take the CSOs out. I think if you are concerned about police misconduct, that we ought to be focusing on the serious problems which are the sworn officers. Kubby/How do we, because we are getting more and more CSO officers every year and that there may be some legitimate concerns about behavior. It may not be about use of deadly force. But it could be about some other behaviors, about rudeness, about intimidation. How do we then- The public doesn't view, I don't believe, that much difference between the two. Woito/They don't carry guns. That is a big difference. Kubby/But if we need to have CSOs to have additional training so that their behavior is what we are deeming as appropriate, how do we assess that there is a problem? Woito/I would like to know- R. J., are you getting a lot of complaints about CSOs? Winklehake/No. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 63 Council/(All talking). Nov/Okay, in general, if you have a complaint about the CSO, do you apply discipline and do they appeal? Winklehake/If we apply discipline, they have a grievance procedure that they can go through. They don't have the Civil Service Commission but they do have the normal grievance procedure they have for the AFSCME contract people. Woito/They are under AFSCME. They are civilians. Nov/For example, somebody decided to complain to you about the behavior ofa CSO, how many times have they appealed? Do they otten appeal? Do they seldom appeal? Winklehake/How many times have the CSOs appealed? Nov/Yeah. Winklehake/I can't think of any. Nov/Okay, thank you. Arkins/I have not had a CSO grievance. Dale, I don't recall one. Nov/That answers a question. Thornberry/Does a CSO write a parking ticket? Winklehake/Yes. Thornberry/Did they write a speeding ticket? Winklehake/No. Kubby/They are still interacting with the public and in a police manner with a uniform. Woito/Yes, with a uniform and with a marked police car. Nov/And we have excluded parking. We have said there are other avenues of' appeal. This Board does not appeal parking. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 64 Baker/Can a CSO arrest anybody? Woito/No, they have no arrest powers because they are not sworn officers. Thornberry/A citizen can make a citizens arrest. I guess it would be the same. Norton/But if there were a complaint of some kind behavior during a parking arrest, they can certainly get- Thornberry/There is not a parking arrest, I believe. Woito/They cannot arrest. Baker/Can we just say yes or no, CSOs in or out? Woito/I would prefer CSOs be taken out but it is your call. Baker/I would say in. Kubby/In. Thornberry/Out. Vanderhoef/Out. Nov/Let's leave it out. We could always add it. Woito/Okay. Nov/I think I hear four outs. Kubby/Who are they? Norton/I am an out. Thornberry/I am a out. Nov/One, two, three, four, five. Okay, five. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897 April 8, 1997 Council Work Session-PCRB page 65 Woito/Okay. So I do another schematic with a bifurcation and do a narrative and another ordinance draft. Or do I wait. Nov/Yes, an ordinance form and as simple as possible, please. Thornberry/One thing that we did not talk about that we said we were going to talk about the last time, Karen, was- Karen- Nov/Karen. Kubby/(Can't hear). Thornberry/There was one thing that we decided that we were going to talk about this time that we talked about last time and we didn't come to a conclusion was it was their power of requiring somebody to testify. Karr/Do you want this on the record or are we done? Are we adjourned or not? Thornberry/We are done. Karr/I just can't tell if you want it on. Nov/I would like us to agree to be done in which I didn't think we agreed to. Kubby/Well then Dean's question needs to be brought up at the next time we talk about this. Nov/Okay. Okay. Are we done? Thank you. Adjourned: 6:05 PM This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of April 8, 1997 WS040897