HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-13-1998 Communication ANNUAL REPORT
OF THE
POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD
September 10, 1997 to September 30, 1998
GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES
The Police Citizens Review Board was created by Ordinance No.
97-3792 of the City of Iowa City on July 15, 1997.
The Board was established to assure that investigations into claims of police
misconduct are conducted in a manner which is fair, thorough and accurate
and to assist the Police Chief, the City Manager and the City Council in
evaluating the overall performance of the Police Department as a whole by
having it review the Police Department's investigation into complaints. The
Board is also required to maintain a central registry of complaints and to
provide an annual report setting forth the numbers, types and disposition of
complaints of police misconduct. To achieve these purposes, the Board shall
comply with Chapter 8 of the Iowa City Code, the Board's By-Laws, and the
Police Citizens Review Board's Standard Operating Procedures and
Guidelines.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998
PCRB (Board) Establishment
Five Board members were selected by the City Council for staggered terms
and took office on September 1, 1997. An administrative assistant was
hired through the City Clerk's Office to provide support with administrative
and clerical duties. In compliance with the ordinance creating the Board, an
independent legal counsel was hired on September 25, 1997 to furnish legal
advice and guidance. The City Clerk afforded initial assistance, which was
vital during the early period of Board familiarization with procedural rules and
regulations.
Beginning in Septe. mber 1997, all Board members and the administrative
assistant attended the Iowa City Citizens Police Academy for a twelve-week
program to better understand police policies, procedures and practices.
The Board began its schedule of business meetings on September 10, 1997.
PCRB Annual Ropo~ '97-'98/10/[3//8- l
PCRB By-Laws
By-Laws governing the conduct of the Police Citizens Review Board were
drafted by Board members and staff in October and November 1997, and
adopted November 6, 1997. The City Council approved the By-Laws on
December 4, 1997.
Standard Operatin.q Procedures and Guidelines
The Standard Operating Procedures & Guidelines for the Police Citizens
Review Board were approved by the Board on September 15, 1998. The
document covers procedures for the complaint process, formal mediation
guidelines, protocol of the Board meetings, the complaint review process,
the process of the review of police policies, procedures and practices, and
the content of the annual report which is submitted to the City Council. The
Standard Operating Procedures and Guidelines have been forwarded to the
City Council for approval.
Public Forum
The ordinance provides that the Board may hold general informational
hearings concerning Iowa City Police Department practices, procedures or
written policies, and such hearings will be public. On July 14, 1998, the
Board held its first Community Forum at the Iowa City Public Library, which
was attended by nearly seventy persons. Of that number, sixteen chose to
address the Board with comments regarding police department activities.
The Board also received written correspondence from eight individuals. A
second public hearing is scheduled for October 27, 1998 at the Newman
Center.
Various issues raised at the Forum have hell'ed the Board to determine its
direction in bringing forth police policy matters for further study and public
discussion at regular monthly meetings. Professor David Baldus, University
of Iowa, College of Law, appeared before the Board on September 8, 1998
to discuss methodologies in the development of studies of police issues such
as (1) use of force and (2) age and race-based traffic stops. The Board plans
to proceed with further study of these issues.
Board Meetings
The second Tuesday of each month was selected by the Board for its
regularly scheduled meetings. Special meetings may be called by the
chairperson or shall be called by the Chairperson or Vice Chairperson at the
request of three or more members.
PCRB Pamtud Report '97-'98110/13//8-2
Due to the number and complexity of the complaints which have been or are
now before the Board, and the additional time sometimes necessary for more
information to be received from the police department, the Board decided to
schedule special meetings for every Tuesday of each month through the end
of 1998, for which a regular meeting was not already scheduled.
During its first year of operation, the Board has held forty-three regular and
special meetings generally averaging two to three hours in length. This
number does not include the twelve evening sessions at the Iowa City
Citizens Police Academy.
Im...proving Access:
The Board believes the complaint process must be simple, understandable
and accessible for the system of citizen review of the Police Department to
work, and for the Board, the City Council and the community to receive a
clear picture of the actions of Iowa City police officers. To that end, the
Board has:
Revised the complaint form to make it simpler;
2, Created a PCRB brochure to help educate the citizens;
3, Established standard operating procedures and guidelines;
4. Established medication procedures and guidelines;
5. Prepared form letters to facilitate regular correspondence;
6. Agreed to accept written correspondence regarding Iowa City
Police Department policies, procedures and practices, including
anonymous correspondence;
7. Recommended that the City Council change the period in which
complaints may be filed from 60 days to 90 days from the
event complained of.
Complaints Received: Types and Number of Allegations
A numbering system for complaints was adopted using the last two digits of
the calendar year and the number of the complaint in the order received. For
example, the first complaint received in 1997 would be designated 97-1.
The Board received twenty-four complaints, seven in 1997 and seventeen
to-date in 1998. The Board has issued its public report on nineteen of these
complaints, and five complaints are pending. The following data is based on
the nineteen complaints for which the Board has completed its review.
There are twenty-two types of allegations as listed on the citizen complaint
forms. A complainant may make several allegations on a single complaint
form so that the sum total of allegations is not necessarily the same as the
total of complaints actually reviewed by the Board.
P~RB Annual Re~rt '97-'98/10/13//8-3
Harassment 15
Denial of Human Rights 5
Verbal Abuse/Profanity/Slander 4
Violation of Civil Rights (videotaping) 4
Denial to Live in Peace 4
Excessive Force 3
Malicious Prosecution 3
Illegal Stop without Probable Cause 2
Property Damage 2
Attempt to Incite 2
Inappropriate response to a citizen complaint 1
Improper/Unlawful Search/Seizure 1
Unlawful arrest 1
Improper/Unlawful Search/Seizure 1
Abuse of Power 1
Trespassing 1
Failure to Forward/Respond to
Written Correspondence 1
Illegal Investigation 1
Unreasonable Traffic Stop 1
Officer Misidentified Himself 1
Considered Improper to Take Breath Test 1
Not Allowed to Take Medication 1
Improper Procedure 1
56
Complaint Resolutions
Complaints of misconduct of police officers are investigated by the police
department. The Police Chief submits the results of the investigation
{Chief's Report) to the Board indicating whether the allegations are sustained
or not sustained. If the complaint is against the Police Chief, the City
Manager conducts the investigation and submits the report.
Upon receipt of the Chief's or City Manager's Report, the Board reviews it
and the citizen's complaint. After review, the Board finds the allegations are
sustained or not sustained and forwards its report to the City Council with
copies to the Police Chief, the officers involved, the City Manager and the
complainant. Of the fifty-six allegations listed in the nineteen citizen
complaints, one was sustained and the remainder were not sustained.
Recommendations for improvement in police policy, procedure or conduct
were made in five of the Board's reports to the City Council. Two of the
I'CPJ3 Armual R~po~t '97-'951t0/13//8-4
recommendations were contained in the reports by the Police Chief and three
were the result of the Board's review.
PCRB # 97-1 The Police Chief expressed the intention to
(1) include as part of routine training the
recommendation that officers need, whenever
possible, to inform other officers of the cause of a
particular pursuit, and (2) to train supervisors and
others dealing directly with the public in the
appropriate objective manner to take complaints
from the public.
PCRB #97-2 The Police Chief recommended that the officer
involved should not have repeated what she heard
without personal knowledge. The Chief said this
was corrected through counseling and training.
PCRB #97-4
and #97-6 The Board recommended: "The Department may
wish to consider the preparation of a guideline or
policy clarifying under what circumstances
videotaping is necessary or appropriate."
PCRB #97-5 The Board recommended: "The Department might
consider further clarifying the policies and
procedures governing the arrest and transport of
persons cited for public intoxication. The
Department should seek assurance that persons
released to the custody of the Johnson County Jail
routinely receive adequate and appropriate
treatment."
Name Clearing Hearings
The Board is required by ordinance to not issue a report, which is critical of
the sworn officer's conduct until after a "name clearing hearing" has been
held, consistent with constitutional due process law. The Board is required
to give notice of such hearing to both the police officer and the complainant
so that they may testify before the Board and present additional relevant
evidence.
During the course of the year, the Board scheduled two name-clearing
hearings. One was held with the officer in attendance, and the other was
not held because the officer did not attend.
PCRB A~nual Report '97-'95/10/13//8-5
Mediation
Formal mediation is available to the complainant and police officer at any
stage of the process until the Board adopts its public report; the request for
mediation must be consented to by all parties involved. During the period
covering this report, mediation was requested seven times, none of which
was completed, because:
complainant chose not to follow through, or
complainant withdrew from the process, or
· request came after the Board completed its review.
Mediation was requested by the individual who filed complaints in
#9%2, #97-3, #97-7, #98-2, #98-5, #98-8, and #98-9.
Level of Review
The Board decides, by a simple majority vote, the level of review to give
each Police Chief's or City Manager's report and the Board may select one or
more of any of the six levels of review in the City Code. For this reason, the
number of levels of review does not correspond to the number of complaints
filed with the Board. Decisions regarding levels of review were as follows:
Level a - 10 On the record with no additional investigation.
Level b - 3 Interview/meet with complainant.
Level c - I Interview/meet with named officer.
Level d - 4 Request additional investigation by the Police Chief or
City Manager, or request police assistance in the
Board's own investigation.
Level e - 6 Performance by Board of its own additional
investigation.
Level f- 0 Hire independent investigators.
Requests for Extension of Time
The Board's report to the City Council must be completed within thirty (30)
calendar days of receipt of the Chief's or City Manager's report. The City
Council has the authority to grant requests for extensions to this deadline
when good cause is shown. The Board requested extensions of time on five
(5) complaints for the following reasons:
· The Board did not have process and procedure in place.
· The complainant expressed an interest in mediation.
PCRB Annual Repoa '97.'9g/10/13//8-6
· One individual filed several reports in a short period of time. To
give adequate attention to each complaint, the Board needed
further time.
· Additional information was being requested from other sources.
Complaint Histories of Police Officers
The City ordinance responsible for establishing the Police Citizens Review
Board requires that the annual report shall not include the names of the
complainants or officers involved in complaints which were not sustained,
and shall otherwise be in a form which protects the confidentiality of all the
parties while providing the public with information on the overall
performance of the police department. In an early meeting the Board
decided it did not wish to use the names of officers or complainants in cases
where the complaint was sustained. For this purpose, all officers, with the
exception of the Police Chief, have been assigned number codes by the
department. The number in the left-hand column isthe number code of the
officer, and the numbers on the right-hand column are the numbers of the
complaints in which the officer's conduct was complained of.
Number Code Complaint
of Officer Number
950828 #97-1
710416 #97-1
970414 #97-2
780911 #97-3, #97-4, #97~6, #98-8, #98-9
970309 #97-5
900129 #97-7, #98-13
970308 #97-7
950829 #98-1, #98-8, #98-9, #98-15
670916 #98-1, #98-8, #98-9
880919 #98-1, #98-2, #98-8, #98-9
830701 #98-6
770411 - #98-6, #98-9
780912 #98-7
950830 #98-8, #98-9
890327 #98-13
970106 #98-15
891023 - #98-15
The Police Chief (no assigned number) was named in four complaints -
#98-3, #98-4, #98-5, and #98-7.
PCP~ Annual Repo~ '97-'98/10/13//8-7
DEMOGRAPHICS:
The following demographic information provides information from the 1 g
complaints for which the Board has submitted its report to the City Council
(1 2 complaints are from one complainant, who answered demographic
information only once). Because demographic information is provided
voluntarily, we have incomplete information to report. Of the nineteen
complaints, eight complainants provided some demographic information.
Age:
Under 21 - 1 complainant
Over 21 - 18 complainants (1 complainant over 21 filed 12 of these)
Color:
White - 18 complainants (1 white complainant flied 12 of these)
Unknown - 1 complainant
National Origin:
US - 1 individual who filed 12 complaints
Unknown - 7
Gender Identity:
Male - 12 (I male filed all of these)
Unknown - 7
Sex:
Male - 15 (12 complaints were filed by 1 male)
Female 4
Sexual Orientation:
Heterosexual - 13 (one heterosexual flied 12 complaints)
Unknown 6
Marital Status:
Married * 13 (1 married individual filed 12 of these)
Unknown 6
Mental Disability:
Yes 1
No - 13 (1 complainant filed 12 of these complaints)
Unknown - 5
Physical Disability:
No - 14 (1 complainant filed 12 complaints)
Unknown - 5
Raliglon:
Unknown - 19
Race:
White/Asian 1
Unknown - 18
PCRB A~nual Repo~l '97.'98110113//8-~
Some of the demographic information reported was not necessarily provided
in the demographic area of the complaint form, but rather from the first page
of the complaint form which identifies the complainant.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ORDINANCE CHANGES:
1. Section 8-8-3 D provides "All complaints must be filed with the Board
or the Iowa City Police Department within sixty (60) days of the
alleged misconduct."
The Board recommends that the City Council amend Section 8-8-3 D
to allow more time for the filing of complaints to read as follows, "All
complaints must be filed with the Board or the Iowa City Police
Department within ninety (90) days of the alleged misconduct."
2. Section 8-8-7 B(6) provides, "The Board's Report to the City Council
shall be completed within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of the
Chief's or City Manager's Report."
The Board recommends that the City Council amend Section
8-8-7 B(6) to allow more time for the Board to complete its
investigations and reports and to make it unnecessary to request
extensions of the current deadline as often as in the past. The
amended Section 8-8-7 B(6) should read, "The Board's Report to the
City Council shall be completed within forty-five (45) calendar days of
receipt of the chief's or city Manager's Report."
CONCERNS OF THE BOARD:
1. There now exist two distinct methods for a person to file a complaint
about the Iowa City Police Department. The first is to fill out an ICPD
complaint form and file it with the ICPD. These complaints do not
come to the PCRB for review. The second is to fill out a PCRB
complaint form and file it with either the ICPD or the PCRB. These
complaints do come to the PCRB for action.
Both forms are available at the ICPD; which form is given to a
complainant or filled out and filed, is completely outside the control of
the PCRB.
The PCRB has no knowledge of how many complaints are filed on the
ICPD forms, and so has an incomplete picture of the number of
complaints filed concerning the ICPD. Accordingly, its annual report
to the City Council must be presumed to be incomplete and may be
misleading as to the overall number of complaints about the ICPD.
I'CRB Annual Report '97-'98/101131~-9
The PCRB will be better able to determine the pattern of allegations of
police misconduct and to more accurately fulfill its duty to report to
the City Council if a procedure is implemented to give the PCRB
access to the total number of complaints filed, whether on an ICPD or
a PCRB complaint form.
2. The ordinance imposes very limited authority on the P(~RB. The PCRB
does not review complaints; it reviews the Police Chief's investigation
of those complaints. The ordinance requires that review to be
deferential. The PCRB can only recommend changes in the Chief's
reports if it concludes that those findings are unsupported by
substantial evidence; am unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious, or are
contrary to law. The PCRB has some concerns about its ability to
review complaints in light of community standards given its deferential
standard of review. The PCRB will continue to monitor this situation.
3. The Board believes it is important to receive adequate information
from the Police Department's investigation to allow it to track the
allegations of misconduct concerning particular (individual) officers.
To this end, it attempts to chart this information in its own reports to
the City Council, The Board considers it essential that it continue to
receive detailed reports from the Chief identifying officers by code
number. This information will assist the Board in assessing the
credibility of witnesses in cases where patterns of behavior are
evident.
PLANS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999
1. Continue systematic review of Police Department policies, procedures
and practices.
2. Continue to investigate complaints and issue public reports to the City
Council.
3. Continue to hold community forums, including forums at neighborhood
centers and schools, to identify community standards and concerns.
4. Continue to review the ordinance establishing the PCRB, and consider
recommendations to the City Council for modification.
COMMISSION MEMBERS
Paul Hoffey, Chairperson
Leah Cohen, Vice-Chairperson
Patricia Farrant
Margaret Raymond
John Watson
PCRB Asmual Report '97-'98/10/13//8.1 0