Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-08-1998 Communication POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street iowa City IA 52240-1826 (319)356-5413 November 19, 1998 R. J. Winkelhake, Chief of Police Iowa City Police Department 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City IA 52240 Dear Chief Winkelhake: This is to confirm our telephone conversation on November 18 regarding your presentation on the Special Crimes Action Team at a PCRB forum which was scheduled for December 1, 1998. Because the City Council expressed interest in attending the PCRB forum at the Broadway Neighborhood Center, or to watch it on cablecast, the Board has postponed the forum from December 1 to a later date, as yet undetermined. For rescheduling purposes, I will be informing the Board at their next meeting on December 8 of your availability on January 19. I will be in contact with you again after the December 8 meeting. Thank you for your continuing cooperation in scheduling this forum. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Sandy Bauer, Assistant Police Citizens Review Board cc: PCRB v/' November 17, 1998 Council Work Session Page 1 November 17, 1998 Council Work Session PCRB Insert DRAFT .PCRB 98-126 S2 Lehman/Eleanor- Dilkes/You got the memo. I am not going to go through in detail the recommendations that we made because they are all pretty clearly stated there. I guess what I would be looking for from you is some indication of whether you are generally receptive to the suggestions that we make and if so, we need to talk about the timing of it as stated at the end oftbe memo. We would recommend, if you are going to make some of the changes or all of the ch~ang~es that we recommend to the procedures, that there be a deferral until the 15 of December which would allow you to consider the ordinance change that is necessary on the 1'~ and then collapse on the 1 $~' and approve the procedures. I can answer any specific questions. Kubby/I guess I liked some of them... Not sure that I agree with others. For example, why the complainant, page 1 .... Of the guidelines. That I don't understand the complainant would not be allowed to be at the meeting where they were deciding whether or not to dismiss it because of the timing issue of jurisdiction issue. Dilkes/...We recoguize the PCRB's .... eoneem in allowing the complainant an opportunity to comment if it looks like a dismissal is appropriate because it is untimely or because it is not against a sworn police officer. On the other hand, I think the way the PCRB had set that procedure up made it very likely that at a forum sanctioned by the PCRB, there would be open discussion about the merits of the ease and I don't think that is consistent with the way they have been operating or the way they are intended to operate. Kubby/... concern is that not everyone has good written skills that may be complaining .... Is there a way to allow that verbal argument with controlling the content of the argument? .... Dilkes/I think that is one possibility... I think that would be a very difficult thing to do. Holeeeld Once confidentiality is breached, you can't put it back. The idea of allowing written material to be submitted in the form of documentation.., that can back up what the timing issue was or who the officer involved is, is genuinely the type of evidence that would be looked at .... It is not an unusual thing .... Kubby/There could be some educational bias here that I am concerned about.... People who are not lawyers that are complainants.... Not determined on education or literacy .... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City coancil meeting of November 17, 1998 WSl11798 Novemb~ 17, 1998 Council Work Session Page 2 Holecekd ....Even if something is summarily dismissed, the Board will have the opportunity to ask for that investigation to go forward as well as the complaint process going through the informal procedure with the Police Department as well. Kubby/ Dilkes/ Holeeek/The PCRB can't but if the nature of the complaint that I think involves serious allegation, I can insure you that it would be investigated. Dilkes/In fact, when this issue initially came up and I talked to Doug Russell about it, there was some .... indication that the Board wanted the complaint that appeared to be untimely sent to them before it was sent to the Police Department so that they could make a determination .... I was not at all comfortable with that .... Kubby/Where is the PCRB on that question hearing your concerns? .... We haven't really gotten anything in writing f~om the PCRB about what is their reaction. Dilkes/....We didn't confer with them when they drafted their procedures .... Our recommendation is if you plan to make changes or it is likely that you are going to, that you then send that back to the PCRB for comments. Lehman/This will be sent to them for comments? Diikes/This assuming that you concur. Holeeek/Whatever portions that you do concur with, send back to them for their c, onunents. Thomberry/Or eny changes. Lehman/Right. Norton/...are we done with the one about the decision about not to take it? Kubby/I don't know. Does anyone else have concerns about how the complainant may not be able to express themselves very well? Dilkes/I did want to say one more thing... Somethnes timing issues seem sort of like a cut and dry kind of thing .... That is not at all the case sometimes and that is why there is a real concern that in order to talk about the timing stuff, you are going to have to talk about the facts.... Number of options... Ir'the PCRB thought a Thi~ represents only a reasonably accurate tran~crlption of the Iowa City councit meeting of November 17, 1998 WSl11798 November 17, 1998 Council Work Session Page 3 discussion of the facts or an investigation of the facts, yes, they could proceed as they normally do. Kubby/I would much rather err on the side of letting people express themselves in whatever form they felt most competent to based on literacy, education level, and personal style. If that means an additional executive session so that confidentiality isn't breached, I have, personally, no problem with that on the timing issue .... Norton/If they are told it is untimely, then they can come in an executive session and explain .... Kubby/Right, if they appear in person, it becomes an executive session or they can do it Diikes/I don't know if the complainant would be appearing in an executive session. What I am suggesting that if it appeared fi.om the correspondence fi.om the complainant that there were additional fact investigations or fact inquiries that needed to be made, then one of the options available to the PCRB would be to discuss that in close session. Or if they didn't think they could make a decision on the timeliness issue, they could defer it pending an investigation in accordance with their normal procedures. Norton/...You want them to be able to do it orally, right? Holecek/And I think what we are having to do here is weigh the possibility of erring on the side of the complainant not being able to express themselves in a written form against the possibility of having the officers and the facts of the case litigated in a very premature fashion when you are talking about a timing issue. And I think .... we have come down on the side of the balance being that it should err toward the officer at this premature stage because there are other forms that it can be continually pursued in by the complainant. This may not be that forum .... Kubby/I guess ! would like to send this one back to the PCRB to say is there another way that the balance is a little closer than what we are ta!lc_ing about .... Vanderhoet7 But they can go and make their complaint at the police anytime .... That is a place where they can do it verbally in privacy .... Kubby/But it negates the whole affect of why we have the PCRB .... Norton/It is not as good as going through the PCRB, I agree. Kubby/At this point I would like to get four votes to send it to PCRB to say talk about this.., and recommend .... This represems only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 17, 1998 WSl11798 November 17, 1998 Council Work Sessi~ ~ge 4 Vanderhoeff I think that will happen anyway.., they will talk about any changes that we make._ We will hear fi.om them if they come up with another idea .... Norton/But they want that called out specially .... Vanderhoef/ Holecek/I do want to rniterate that there are only two issues before the PCRB at this stage: Was it filed within 60 days and does it involve a sworn police officer. They are very narrow issues to be decided by what type of factual discussion would occur in open session in exploring the question is why we have come down onthe balancing being- Kubby/I understand the rationale .... Champion/What is your concern, Karen? Kubby/I am concerned because of education levels, literacy and learning disabilities and styles of communication, that the written form that the complainant has who argue their case about not having their case dismissed because of timeliness .... That they aren't able to make their case articulately .... Sometimes for people the ve~oal option is much more effective .... Dilkes/We said in the memo we had basically identified what the competing interests were and suggested that this was one way of resolving it and do come down more [none way and not in the other and I think they should have the opportunity to suggest other possibilities. Lehman/And I would suspect they will. Kubby/So in here .... There was, in the annual report, it talked about going from 60 days to 90 days and I didn't necessarily see that here .... Dilkes/Back up here for a minute. That would be an ordinance change... Norton/...I am not sure I understand the electronic meeting thing... You can have electronic meeting as long as you- Dilkes/...This was actually an issue that did come up with the PCRB and I did talk to Doug about it and there is an Attorney General's opinion that pretty much says what we have said in there. Basically the open meetings law says that in order to have an electronic meeting, you have to make a finding that a meeting in person is unnecessary or impossible or something along those lines. The Attorney General This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 17, 1998 WSl11798 November !?, 1998 Council Work Session Page has said that electronic meeting means when a participation electronically is necessary for a quorum, then you have got to meet that standard .... Kubby/Except in one of the paragraphs it says if it is necessary for a quorum and the other one says if it is not necessary for a quorum. Dilkes/That is because one is a electronic meeting where you have to meet that standard and two, whether participation is necessary is determined by the rules of the body and they are saying they are going'to allow that. Norton/One of them is an electronic meeting, the other one is electronic participation in a meeting. Dilkes/Correct. (All talking). Thornberry/! read in the paper the other day where the PCRB did not asree with the £mdings of the Police Department.... It named the officer. Holeceld I think the report may have named the officer .... Thomberry/ Holecek/The complainant had the ability just as like, for instance, under Iowa Civil Rights Commission complaints. The persons who are party ~o it are not constrained from discussing it. Lehman/The first complaint we ever had was that way. Thomberry/I was under the impression that the PCRB was to review the Police Depamnent's investigation and to take complaints that the people didn't necessary want to take to the Police Department. That was a pretty small purview. It wasn't all encompassing .... Seems like they would like- Lehman/Dean, we are going to discuss this, I think, at more length. I think all we are going to talk about here are the proposed revisions .... Thomberry/One of the proposed changes is to eliminate the sunset clause. Is that right? Lehman/No, I don't think so. Holecek/There is within this information, there is one ordinance change that we are proposing and we are proposing the standard operating procedures to be amended This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 17, 1998 WSl11798 November 17, 1998 Council Work Session Page 6 to dovetail with that as well. There is one ordinance change that we are proposing and that is the participation of the complainant in the name clearing hearing .... Just that the SOP follows the ordinance. Vanderhoet~ I have a question about keeping the confidentiality aider a complainant has identified the police officer.... Reports... with this identifying number .... Suppose to keep the person's identity secret, it s~ms to me then that we need to change identifying numbers ..... Holeceld ...not the same number for each officer each time Vanderhoef/ Kubby/When we do that.., if there is a perception it the community that one particular officer is rude, it doesn't mean that they get disciplined for that but that maybe they get additional training and how can we track that. Holecold We can track that internally without creating prejudicial bias .... Kubby/Because if it is not sustained, there is still that percept/on and there needs to be some focus .... a trend over time... Thomberry/ Lehman/...We are able to do that internally now .... Thomberry/It is not working too well if the article in the paper .... Norton/ Holecek/There was a blurp in the paper, Dean, that said that they were able to identify the officer through a prev/ous report where the complainant had named the officer and the identifying numbers were the same. Vanderhoeff Dilkes/We had been concerned about the numbering anyway and that clinched it .... Kubby/I wanted to 8o back to the ordinance... When there is a name clearing hearing and the officer goes to the hearing and says whatever tho/said, how does the complainant ever get to respond? .... Dilkes/Well that is not contemplated in the ordinance at all. I mean the PCRB takes a complaint, does its investigation now and there is no opportunity for response by This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 17, 1998 WSl11798 November 17, 1998 Council Work Session Page 7 the complainant. In other words, there is no adversarial proceeding contemplated by this ordinance. Kubby/... didn't the PCRB allow previously the complainant to be at the name clearing hearing?...'. Dilkes/They are making that suggestion but we believe that is probably principally based on the ordinance which we believe to be defective. Kubby/ Holecek/The whole idea of name clearing hearing is to protect the due process property fight of the officer. It is not to create an adversarial forum .... Kubby/If the PCRB wants that forum, then we need to add some other section or talk about that. Dilkes/It would be much more than a section. It would be a total re-write of the ordinance. Champion/I don't think we want to do that. Dilkes/There is a way that the complainant could be afforded an opportunity to respond and that would be because the PCRB has the right to interview the complainant .... Kubby/Can they disclose what is said in the name clearing hearing to the complainant in an interview? Dilkes/Yes, they can. Thomberry/Does the PCRB investigate every complaint that is given to them? Holeceld Generally they review a synopsis of the Chief of Police after the internal affairs investigation. Thomberry/That is what I thought it was supposed to be .... Kart/...clarify something... That is once the report is received.... The PCRB has levels of investigation that they could initiate or contemplate and they state that very clearly what their steps are going to be and they could be a multiple of steps... They could initiate investigation. Thomberry/ This represents only a reasonably accurate transerlptlOn of the lows City Council meeting of November 17, 1998 WSl11798 November 17, 1998 Council Work Session Page 8 Norton/ Karr/But they can hire an independent investigation. Norton/ Kubby/...My question.... Was adding the complainants presence at the name clearing hearing just based on tilting to be consistent on how it was written in the ordinance or was it because you wanted to allow that face to face response? John Watson/(Can't hear). Karr/He may have to step to the table. Watson / My recollection is we felt we needed to be consistent with the ordinance. That we didn't have a choice .... Kubby/It wasn't really that you wanted them to have face to ~ response time. Holecek/...they were tn]lng to be mieto the ordinance and we are takin~ it s step further saying the ordinance is effective in that manner .... Norton/Will we get a proposed ordinance change? Holecek/...7 - 8 words that get struck out .... Vanderhoef/What was the timeline on doing this? Diikes/Tomorrow niffht you would defer approval of the standard operatin8 procedures until December 15. Do the first reading of the ordinance on December 1 and collapse.the second and third on the 15. Holecek/Hopefully that would also give you time- Give the PCRB time to review our sul~sested chanses and report back to you as well .... Kubby/When we do that ordinance change about the name clearing hearing, will we also look at the 90 versus 60 days issue? Dilkes/Well, the ordinance changes that have been- that the PCRB has made proposals about and I think staff has some recommendations and I know it sounds like there has been some discussion that you had among yourselves, will not I~ done at that time beeanse I amieipate that will involve a lot of discussion. We feel the need to make this change so we can get procedures in place .... This represents only a reasonably nccura~ transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 17, 1998 WSl11798 November 17, 1998 Council Work Session Page 9 Norton/I understood.., schedule a session where the council talk with PCRB about issue they raised in their annual report .... Kind of review the first year and where we are at, fight? Lehman/I was suggesting- I really think council needs to evaluate where we are compared to where we thought we were going to be... We can do that, based on our conversations, then schedule a meeting with the PCRB if we wish or we may choose not to.... It would be a good time.., to have a short discussion.... Our impression of the first year.... I think it would be good.., very candid discussion .... Holecek/We foresee the initial ordinance change that we are proposing to remove the complainant from the name cleating hearing process and pass the SOPs as something that needs to be done fairly quickly in order to take away the defect in the ordinance. But the other things .... Lehman/This is something we need to do quickly. Holecek/And that is why we are requesting that funeline. Lehman/Right, Norton/We should digest that first before we do it in company with the PCRB. Lehman/I think so .... Dilkes/In terms of scheduling again, if we schedule the bigger discussion for the 15t~, that is a little soon it seems to me. I am also concerned I don't want to get messed up with the SOPs .... (~l uaking). Hol~eek/We do find this is erifiead and we would like to have this ~dressed as soon as possible .... Norton/We didn't think about the workload on this committee among other things. Oh, boy. Kubby/It may be that special discussions happens at their meeting and we go to them .... Norton/If they s~nd us an annual report, we need to respond. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 17, 1998 WSl11798 No~mmber 17, 1998 Council Work Session Page 10 Lehman/ARer the first of the year we will set a time when we can discuss the philosophies. Do we have other questions for Sarah or Eleanor?. Champion/ Lehman/...you are suggesting that this be done in a very timely fashion. Dilkes/Two sections in the ordinance that will be amended and it is basically removing the complainant from the name clearing hearing process. Lehman/So we are going to defer this until- Dilkes/And you will see that red line ordinance on your agenda for December 1n, the changes and first reading. Atldns/Eleanor, John and I were just...process question. Watson/Our next regular meeting is the 8* of December. Does that give us time to comment on the changes in order for you to consider them on the 15~h? Lehman/Actually we are talking about considering them on the l~ and 2ad and 3~ reading on- Dilkes/On the 1n we are only considering the ordinance change removing the complainant from the name clearing hearing process. The SOPs won't be reconsidered again until the 15~. Kart/Can I make a suggestion perhaps? I think the answer to that is very dependent on how much time PCRB wishes to research and take reviewing the information. What we may wish to do is leave it at the $~. We have got first reading anyway. If PCRB wishes to request more time, they certainly could. What that would mean is we wouldn't collapse the second reading or pass and adopt. We would just simply suggested the accelerated schedule so it matched, right? So I think we could still move ahead with the ordinance but not pass and adopt until at~er we got the recommendation back. Lehman/So we will defer this to the 1'? Karr/No, you will defer this to the 15~ because you can't pass it until the ordinance is ready. You will give first reading to the ordinance. Dilkes/The shortage track would be the 15th depending upon .... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 17, 1998 WSl11798 November 17, 1998 Council Work Session' Page 11 Kan'/PCRB would have ample opportunity then with your scheduling also. Did that make sense? Thomberry/Either to defer or not collal~se. Kart/You wouldn't collaps~ if you didn't have the recommendation. Lehman/All right. Thank you, ladies .... Norton/ Vanderho~t7 Oh, I have just a couple of things about the forum thai is scheduled the I'~ of Dec~mber. I would like to request that it b~ on tel~ision ..... educational session.... Important... on television.., will educate the entire oommunity ..... Lehman/We could film it without tdevising it. Vand~rho~t/ Lehman/ Kubby/There am some other r~asons why the ?CRB doesn't want all of their forums to be videotaped.... We could e~tainly videotape the educational part of it and not the forum part of it. Dilkes/I would suggest you make that r~luest to the chair of the ?CRB .... Vanderhoeff Are other p~ople okay with that? O'Donnell/Who is going to this forum? Vm~lerhoeff Somed~ing el~ .... The forum was not going to have legal counsel there .... I have b~m tlfinking ~oout the importane~ about being r~l clear about what is h.-gal and what isn't leg~! anti ~tue~ti~ our public anti so forth. I would f~l a whole lot bgtt~r ill.al counsel was at that forum .... Holee~ld I had a disemssion with Doug Russell today about that very issue.... He dm note that it is a public forum where the Board is not n~e~sarily conducting business by motion, ~¢. However it is still a me~ing that does ne~l to be run in a certain d~comm .... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 17, 1998 WSl11798 November 1'7, 1998 Council Work Session Page 12 Dilkes/I think we left it that we were going to talk about it and get back to Doug tomorrow .... Sometimes things come up that require a response .... Vanderhoel7 Holeeek/Net effect of really wanting Doug to be there is that he can't be scheduled for the 1~. So the meeting would have to be rescbeduled if we were going to require him to be there .... Vanderboe47 December 1 .... I would like to see a big turnout for the public education pan of this forum .... Kubby/I think i~ is fine .... (All talking). Kubby/ VanderhoelY Lehman/Thank you .... This t~presents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meetinl: of November 17, 1998 WSl11798 FORM 1 DEPARTMENT ADJUSTMENTS FY00 Ac' ~vity #: 11150 Division: Police Citizen Review Prepared by: MARIAN KARR Department Head Signature: ~'~? ~. ~ Acct Finance Dept/Div Total # Account Name Proj. Adjust. Req. 6120 Permanent Part Time 15,812 0 15,812 6310 Fica 1,210 0 1,210 6320 Ipers 909 0 909 6420 Life Insurance 52 0 52 7110 Office Supplies 298 0 298 7120 "Books, Magazines, Newspapers 0 100 100 Justification: research materials 7140 Minor Off Equip/furn 139 0 139 7153 Misc. Peripherals 130 0 130 71 Printer Ribbons 28 0 28 7324 Office Equip Rep Mat 522 0 522 8122 Attorney Services 4,263 2,237 6,500 Justification: let quarter expense $1667. Previous 12 month $8736. 8221 Postage 0 300 300 Justification: public hearing/forum notices 8223 Couriers 17 0 17 8319 Travel 0 250 250 Justification: SEE FORM 2 8340 Meals (non-travel) 96 0 96 8824 I.e.-micro Cmptr Chg 1,640 0 1,640 8825 I.s.-cmptr Repl Chgb 990 0 990 8841 Supply Room Chgbacks 244 0 244 FORM 1 DEPARTMENT ADJUSTMENTS FY00 Act 'vity #: 11150 Division: Police Citizen Review Prepared by: MARIAN KARR Department Head Signature: ~.~ ~. ~ Acct Finance Dept/Div Total ~ Account Name Proj . Adjust. Req. 8842 Print Shop Services 159 91 250 Justification: flyers, brochures, forms. 8843 Photocopying Chgback 504 0 504 8847 Mail Chargebacks 416 0 416 TOTALS FOR FORM 1: 27,429 2,978 30,407 FORM 2 TRAVEL COSTS FY00 Activity #: 11150 Division: Police Citizen Review Provide a detailed listing of all travel costs by purpose and location. Indicate the staff position intended to attend. This should include all travel costs, registrations, tuitions and training fees. Education/Travel Description Cost Position 001 Conference or training 250 Board or staff TOTAL NUMBER OF REQUESTS: 1 TOTAL DOLLAR AMOUNT REQUESTED: 250 Nov.mb¢;t 10, 1!)98 ~O..-, '~.;'_ 'i/'~'".' BY FAX AND REGULAR MAIL AItomey ;11 [ aw 221 1/2 E. Washington St. CITY OF I0 W,~ CITY Iowa City, IA 52240 Re: PCRB Mee[in9 Agenda for November 10. 1998 Dear Per your request during our tetephone discussion, this fetter will se~e to set foAh n~y under~tandin9 o[ [ho n~[ure o[ Chie[ Winkelhake's padlcipa~ion in tonight's PCRB meeting. Fit.st. whik~, it is tit:ar that this meeting will bo open to the public, based on Chief Winkelhake's communications with the Board it is his understanding that he wi, be making a presentation to Ihe Board tin Ih(., (;tJrr(;nl tluildin§ 5(;;-)r(;h policy and answer questions from the Board regarding lh~;~! policy. Chief Winkelhake has not been notified Ilia[ this is a public forurn and thus has nol prup~]ro~l [o (li:~cus's or debate this policy wilh rnembers of the public. Second. itl reviewing the agenda, I note that the Board has included as a separale item "discussion wifll Chief or Polic, e R.J. Winkelhake regarding the issue of data collection on tral'fic stops." It is my understanding that Chief Winkelhake responded to lhe Board's request for his inpu~ on this item in previous correspondence, and thai the Chief will likely reiterale Ibis re.spot,se [o Ihe Board on this issue. Please [eel free Io call me ii' you have any questions, Eleanor M Dilkos City Attorney Su~uh Holecek, First Assistant City Attorney Stevu Atkin~, City Manager R. J, Winkelhake. Chie¢ of Police Marian Ka., City Clerk CITY OF lO WA CITY Sef,t by PAX and l-{(:gutar Mail L)ougla5 ~. I,~us'~ell, ALtornoy at Law (~Q [~X~7 221 ~ E. Wa,shing[on St. Iowa City, iA 52240 FAX: (Jlg) 3,d-6409 ICe: PCRB D(;ar D(~u.g: AS I holed during ()ur recent lelephone conversation one of the changes to the PCRB procedures that I will be recommending is that the Board's legal counsel at,end all meetings of tl~c Board. My marne to the Council. a copy of which you should receive with this leUer, explains my reas()rm I(, this r(,:cJmmer~daLion. II is rny und(;rsl;-,~ding thai the PCRB has sclleduled a public forum at tl~o Broadway Neighborl~ood Center on December 1, 1998 and that the topic on the agenda is the Police D(;pam,c,.nt'.~ Special Crimes Action Team (SCAT). I understand that you are unable to be pres(;nl al Ih;)[ met:ling. Cc)fmi:~tent with my recommendation to II~e Council, I d'o not believe it prudent for the PCRB to be withoul representation at that meeting and suggest that Ihe Board consido~ rescheduling its meeting until you can be available. Plea:me c.311 il you h;.~ve any questions. V~)) truly yours. Eleanor M [')ilkes City A lorney cc Sl~.ve Alki~'~s, ~ity Manager R.J. Winkelh:-]ke. Police Chief Sarah Hol(x:(~k. First Assistant City Attorney POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City IA 52240-1826 (319) 356-5413 Mayor Ernest W. Lehman 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Mayor and Council Members: At our meeting of November 10, 1998, the Police Citizens Review Board unanimously voted to request an extension of the 30-day reporting deadline according to Section 1 of Ordinance No. 97-3792 for PCRB Complaint #98-17. At the request of the Police Department for additional time, we are requesting an extension of: · PCRB #98-17 - Report presently is due November 19, 1998 Extension request - Report would be due December 18, 1998 The Board appreciates your prompt consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Leah Cohen, Chair Police Citizens Review Board - ~O,~A CIT'y, IOI~A MEMORANDUM TO: Leah Cohen, PCRB Chairperson FROM: R.J. Winkelhake, Chief of Police ~{J'/ RE: TRAINING MANUALS DATE: November 10, 1998 Attached are seve___.,n copies of the Iowa City Police Department's Field Training and Evaluation Program. The manual was revised in March 1997.