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.