HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-06-2001 Communication MEMORANDUM
POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
TO: City Council
FROM: Police Citizens Review Board
RE: Ordinance Change Recommendations
DATE: May 22, 2001
In an effort to facilitate the Council's examination of the PCRB, the
Board wishes to delineate its concerns and suggestions for changes to the
City Ordinance that created and governs the Board, Some of the changes
are procedural and are suggested in an effort to better facilitate the Board's
current practice with the ordinance. Other suggestions are intended to
enhance the Board's ability to examine the complaints brought before it by
citizens of iowa City, The Board wishes to clarify at the outset that these
suggestions are in no way intended to create any policy setting ability or to
establish any discipline authority over the Iowa City Police Department.
These recommended changes were unanimously approved y the Board at its
May 16 meeting.
1, Administrative Revisions
a. Several parts of the ordinance refer to "all complaints'
and "complaints" generally and do not differentiate
between formal complaints filed with the PCRB and
complaints filed directly with the Iowa City Police
Department. The Board supports the existence of the
two tracks as options for citizens to address complaints.
The ordinance needs to clarify, however, that the PCRB
will only monitor the outcome of formal complaints
lodged with the ICPD and will not be involved in the
process, examine the investigation or offer any finding
regarding the results of the internal investigation.
Currently the Board receives a quarterly report from the
Department stating very briefly the nature of the
complaint and whether it was sustained. The Board
includes these complaints in the statistics it compiles for
its annual report to the Council.
b, Suggested Revisions:
8-8-2 (C)(1)
Oversee a monitoring system for tracking receipt of all complaints lodged
against sworn police officers, either with the PCRB or with the ICPD.
8-8-2(C)(2)
Provide oversight of police investigations of PCRB complaints through review
of such investigations.
8-8-2(C)(3)
Provide the opportunity for a hearing to the police officer if the Board's
findings on the pCRB complaint are critical of the police officer.
8-8-2(C)(4)
Issue a final public report on each PCRB complaint to the City Council ...
8-8-2(K)
Investigation of all PCRB fer+ea~ complaints is mandatory duty ...
8-8-2(L)
In order to assure external accountability of the actions of the Police
Department, the results of investigations of all formal complaints filed
directly with the Police Department invcstigations shall be reviewed by the
Board and reported to the City Council in the Board's annual report to the
COunciL
8-8-2 (new sub-paragraph)
Citizens have the option of filing formal written complaints either with the
Police Department directly or with the Board. Although the Board will review
the final results of formal complaints filed with the Police Department, the
Board will not intervene in process. On a quarterly basis the Chief will
provide a report to the Board briefly describing the issues involved in any
complaints made directly with the Department, the date and time of the
alleged misconduct and how the complaint was resolved.
8-8-2(N)
The Board shall have ovcrsight authority to review police practices,
procedures, and written policies as those practices and procedures relate to
the Police Department's performance as a whole. The Board shall report
camc to thc City Council inoluding any rccommendod changc,~ their
recommendations, if any, to the Chief and the City Council.
2
2. Review Process:
The "reasonable basis" standard set forth in 8-8-7(B)(2)
provides a limited opportunity for the Board to review
investigations of police misconduct and very limited ability for
the Board to comment about issues raised in complaints. At
times the findings of the Chief have been a close call in the
opinion of the Beard, but the standard of review requires the
Board to sustain the findings. The standard allows
disagreement by the Board only if the conclusions of the Chief
are:
1. Unsupported by substantial evidence (8-8-7{B)(2)(a));
2. Unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious (8-8-7(B)(2)(b)); or
3. Contrary to policy, practice or law (8-8-7(B)(2)(c)).
Many of the complaints have raised concerns with the Board
and the Board believes the community would benefit if the
Board had a broader opportunity to raise those issues and
discuss them in their reports. The Board is not requesting that
the deferential standard be abandoned. The Board recognizes
the expertise of the Chief and the City Manager.
The Board suggests that the review standard be made more
simple and clear to allow the Board to agree or disagree with
the Chief's findings and separately to agree or disagree with
comments made by the Chief with regard to the findings. This
would provide the Board with some latitude to comment on
their observations or concerns. Complaints are rarely clear cut.
An officer's behavior often may not rise to the level of
misconduct, but other aspects of the situation may merit
comment.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input regarding these
matters.
cc: City Attorney