HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-12-2000 Minutes POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES - August 8, 2000
CALL TO ORDER Chair J. Watson called the meeting to order at 7:00
P.M.
ATTENDANCE Board members present: L. Cohen, P. Farrant, P,
Hoffey, and J. Watson. Board member absent: J.
Stratton. Staff present: Legal Counsel C. Pugh and
PCRB Assistant S. Bauer. Chief RJ Winkelhake was also
in attendance.
CONSENT
CALENDAR Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by L. Cohen to
remove "c" from the consent calendar to discuss
separately. Motion carried, 4/0, Stratton absent.
Motion by L. Cohen and seconded by P. Hoffe¥ to adopt
the Consent Calendar:
a. Minutes of 7/18/00 meeting
b. 7/19/00 Memorandum from Chief re Internal Investigation Log
d ICPD General Order - Off-Duty Conduct: Powers of Arrest
e ICPD Use of Force Report - April 2000
f ICPD Release: Traffic Stop Demographics
g ICPD July Training Report
h ICPD Training Newsletter
ICPD Training Bulletin 01-01 (WT 00-49)
ICPD Training Bulletin 01-04 (WT 01-03)
k ICPD Training Bulletin 01-04 (WT 01-08)
ICPD Training Bulletin 01-05 (WT 01-01)
m ICPD Training Bulletin 01-0a6 (WT 01-O6)
Motion carried, 4/0, Stratton absent.
c. ICPD General Order - Body Armor
P. Hoffey questioned who provides the body armor. The
Chief stated the City of Iowa City purchases it. Hoffey,
noting that body armor is optional, asked why it was not
made mandatory and if there is a liability factor involved,
The Chief stated that the Justice Department standards
and the accreditation standards allow for either
mandatory or optional. If optional, officers are required
to have the body armor in their vehicle. Following
discussion within the department and review by the legal
department, the decision was to make body armor
optional but they must have it in their vehicle.
Hoffey stated it's a tremendous safety factor for the
police officer to wear the body armor, which transcends
to the citizen as well; if the officer is safe, then there is
more protection to the citizen. If the officer does not
wear the body armor, obviously that officer isn't as safe
as he or she could be. This is a concern, but not a
criticism. Hoffey acknowledges that body armor is
uncomfortable, especially in the summer.
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL None
DISCUSSION WITH
CHIEF WlNKEHAKE The Board discussed with Chief Winkelhake
the PCRB recommendation to the Chief in PCRB Public
Report #99-08, and the Chief's response for clarification.
One of the allegations in #99-08 was that an officer
made inappropriate comments to the press regarding the
incident that was subject to the complaint. The Board's
Report found that the officer's remarks to the press
appeared to be within the guidelines set out in the Policy
Manual of the Iowa City Police Department, Section
402.3 RESPONSIBILITY OF OFFICERS TO SUPPLY
INFORMATION. However, the Board did add a comment
about the policy: "It is the Board's opinion that Section
402.3 of the ICPD Policy Manual is too broad. We agree
with the basic premise that police officials should be
responsive to requests for information from the public
and the news media. However, we recommend that the
policy be changed to 1) permit the Chief to designate a
primary spokesperson for the Department for issues or
incidents that are potentially sensitive or high profile; and
2) more clearly restrict the release of information that is
not factual in nature."
Regarding the designated spokesperson, Watson stated
this is an accepted practice for crisis communication
regarding issues or events that could be high profile,
controversial or litigious, A spokesperson should be
designated and that person be the sole spokesperson for
the incident. Watson further stated this is also
recommended by media as the best and fastest way to
get full and accurate information to the public. Which
incidents are considered to be high profile, controversial
or litigious is a judgment call. Watson reiterated the
Board's recommendation that one spokesperson be
designated for that particular incident.
Watson explained the ~factual in nature" part came out of
a comment made by the officer in the press that seemed
to impeach the credibility of the complainant. It is the
Board's feeling that this type of statement can be
prejudicial, It's the Board's recommendation that an
officer not give an opinion, especially if it seems critical
of a citizen or impeaches their credibility.
P. Hoffey clarified that the basis for the concern is that
sometimes a comment may be an opinion rather than a
fact.
Chief Winkelhake said the department has a full-time
officer who acts as spokesperson to the media, but that
person is only available 40 hours. He therefore
encourages other officers and supervisors to speak to the
media. "We don't have anything to hide, so we
encourage the [officers] to talk to the media."
A discussion followed regarding the particular statement
made by the officer in PCRB Complaint #99-08, which, to
the Board, clearly indicated that the officer believed that
the complainant was lying. The Board feels that kind of
statement about a citizen's statement in the press
doesn't need to be said.
The Chief informed the Board that the policy regarding
media would be reviewed in September. Representatives
from the media will be involved in the review, as well as
the department's supervisors and officers and the legal
department. The issue of having one spokesperson will be
addressed, but the Chief stated, "Quite frankly, I'm not
inclined to restrict it to just one person."
Watson requested that the Board be allowed to review
the policy, however the Chief said the decision would be
made within the department. He will follow the same
procedure he has followed previously in sending General
Orders to the Board.
Hoffey reiterated that the intent of the Board is not to
restrict information to the media. Whatever information
is released should be accurate and factual.
SOP Chief Winkelhake recommended that when the Board
holds a name-clearing hearing, it inform the officer more
specifically what the issue(s) is for the basis of a
potential criticism. He stated his motivation for
requesting this is that officers routinely don't seem to
take part in the name-clearing hearings. After the fact,
the officer involved in PCRB Complaint #99-09 said if he
had known what the issue was, he would have gone to
the name-clearing hearing.
Legal Counsel C. Pugh reported on her discussion with
Assistant City Attorney S. Holecek about this issue, The
procedure now is that the officer is notified that there will
be a comment in a report critical of some aspect of that
officer's behavior or some aspect of the case. They are
not notified of the specific criticism until the actual
hearing. If that procedure were to change, it would
require a change in the SOP. The Board cannot be
compelled to change its procedures. If it does change an
SOP, it must be approved by the City Council.
Legal counsel suggested that the Board discuss this issue
and decide what it wants to do. It needs to come up with
a balance in protecting the officer's interest in preparing
them [for the hearing], and the Board's interest in
conducting their full investigation and satisfying the
questions that arise for the Board.
P. Farrant stated the officers have routinely declined to
come to name-clearing hearing. She doesn't feel the
Board should alter its procedure so the officer will be
enticed to come to a name-clearing hearing.
Chief Winkelhake stated his personal opinion is that he'd
like to see the officers come to the Board's name-clearing
hearings.
4
P. Hoffey explained there are several things that
complicate the matter. One is that the Board is not able
to view the officer's statement, so it really doesn't know
what the officer has to say. Additionally, the failure of
officers to appear at the name-clearing hearing further
complicates this. However, Hoffey agrees that if the
Board has a criticism of an officer, and it's not in one of
the allegations by the complainant, then the officer
should be advised of that and given the opportunity to
respond to it.
Chief Winkelhake stated that he has informed his
investigators that the first thing they do is find out what
the actual allegations are in a complaint. He also
suggested that if there is a question the Board has
regarding the officer, that maybe the investigator would
know the answer.
Legal counsel suggested the Board make a few
suggestions as to what it thinks could be a solution to
this and have some further discussion. The first step is
to decide whether it is in the Board's interest to change
the SOP.
Chair Watson directed staff to include this issue on the
next agenda; staff was also directed to include a copy of
the SOP on name-clearing hearings and the form letters in
the next agenda packet.
VIDEOTAPE The draft of "Purpose of PCRB Video" was discussed and
amended to include the word "origin" in the first bullet
under intent.
When production is started, the Board will appoint a
liaison. Watson will prepare a final draft to forward to
Bob Hardy.
ICPD PPP The Board discussed possible ICPD police, procedures
and practices it wishes to review. At the regular PCRB
meeting in September and October, a presentation will be
made by:
· Officer Sid Jackson to speak about the training he
received at the Southern Police Institute and report on
his project regarding racial profiling;
· Officer Jim Steffen to speak about his FBI training.
Other issues the Board would like to schedule for ICPD
presentations include:
· Review of the new media policy
· Review one year data on traffic stop demographics
· Update by Sgt. Hurd on the accreditation process.
NEW BUSINESS None
OLD BUSINESS None
PUBLIC DISCUSSION Council member I. Pfab acknowledged his appreciation
of the Board and stated he has a more realistic
understanding of the restraints and limitations the Board
has.
MEETING SCHEDULE
· Special Meeting August 22, 2000 (J. Stratton will be
absent.) CANCELLED
· Regular Meeting September 12, 2000
· Special Meeting September 26, 2000
· Regular Meeting October 10, 2000
· Special Meeting October 24, 2000
BOARD
INFORMATION J. Watson - expressed his thanks to P. Farrant for
preparing the Annual Report in his absence.
STAFF
INFORMATION None
EXECUTIVE
SESSION Chair removed Item 13 from the agenda.
ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by L. Cohen and seconded by P.
Hoffey. Motion carried, 4/0, Stratton absent. Meeting
adjourned at 8:15 P.M.
POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES - August 17, 2000
CALL TO ORDER Chair J. Watson called the meeting to order at 9:00
A.M.
ATTENDANCE Board members present: L. Cohen, P. Farrant, P~
Hoffey, and J. Watson, Board member absent: J.
Stratton. Staff present: Legal Counsel C. Pugh and
PCRB Assistant S, Bauer. Sgt. B. Campbell and Chief RJ
Winkelhake were also in attendance.
RESPONSE TO
EDITORIAL Board members reviewed the Iowa City Press Cit/zen
editorial of 8/14/00, together with a draft response
prepared by J. Watson. Watson distributed copies of his
e-mail correspondence with J. Baldwin of the P.C. The
board discussed alterations to the response, following
which a motion was made by P. Farrant to approve the
proposed response to the Press Citizen editorial, as
amended, as a guest editorial that represents the opinions
of this board. Motion carried, 4/0, Stratton absent.
Sgt. Campbell, ICPD public information officer, stated he
would be called in if a high-profile incident happened,
regardless of the hour., The general practice of the ICPD
is that officers do not comment on high profile cases,
although they are not directed to do so.
ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by P. Hoffey and seconded by P.
Farrant. Motion carried, 4/0, Stratton absent. Meeting
adjourned at 10:00 A.M.