The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-22-2012 Police Citizens Review BoardMEMORANDUM POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City DATE: February 16, 2012 TO: PCRB Members FROM: Kellie Tuttle RE: Board Packet for meeting on February 22, 2012 Enclosed please find the following documents for your review and comment at the next board meeting: • Agenda for 02/22/12 • Minutes of the meeting on 01/10/12 • ICPD Use of Force Report — September 2011 • ICPD Use of Force Report — October 2011 • ICPD Department Memo #12 -04 (September- October 2011 Use of Force Review) • Complaint Deadlines • PCRB Office Contacts — January • Correspondence distributed at 1/10/12 meeting from Annie Tucker • Correspondence distributed at 1/10/12 meeting from Royceann Porter Other resources available: National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement NACOLE provides information regarding civilian oversight in law enforcement nation wide. For more information see: www.NACOLE.org AGENDA POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD February 22, 2012 — 5:30 P.M. HELLING CONFERENCE ROOM 410 E. Washington Street ITEM NO.1 CALL TO ORDER and ROLL CALL ITEM NO. 2 CONSIDER MOTION ADOPTING CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED • Minutes of the meeting on 01/10/12 • ICPD Use of Force Report— September 2011 • ICPD Use of Force Report —October 2011 • ICPD Department Memo #12 -04 (September- October 2011 Use of Force Review) ITEM NO. 3 OLD BUSINESS Community Forum ITEM NO. 4 NEW BUSINESS • Correspondence distributed at 1/10/12 meeting from Annie Tucker • Correspondence distributed at 1/10/12 meeting from Royceann Porter ITEM NO. 5 PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEM NO. 6 BOARD INFORMATION ITEM NO. 7 STAFF INFORMATION ITEM NO. 8 CONSIDER MOTION TO ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION based on Section 21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22 -7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. ITEM NO. 9 TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS • March 21, 2012, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Room • April 10, 2012, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Room • April 17, 2012, 7:00 PM, Iowa City Public Library — Room A (Community Forum) • May 8, 2012, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Room ITEM NO.10 ADJOURNMENT DRAFT POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES — January 10, 2012 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Donald King called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Melissa Jensen, Peter Jochimsen, Royceann Porter, Joseph Treloar MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Staff Kellie Tuttle and Catherine Pugh STAFF ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Captain Rick Wyss of the ICPD; Caroline Dieterle, Charles Eastham, and Marian Coleman Public. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL None CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Jochimsen and seconded by Treloar to adopt the consent calendar as presented or amended. Minutes of the meeting on 11/16/11 • ICPD Use of Force Report — July 2011 ICPD Use of Force Report —August 2011 ICPD Department Memo #11 -40 (July- August 2011 Use of Force Review) ICPD Quarterly Summary Report (Quarter 4 and all Quarters) IAIR /PCRB,2011 Motion carried, 5/0. Motion by Porter, seconded by Jensen to accept additional correspondence by Annie Tucker, which was handed out at the meeting. Motion carried, 5/0. Motion by Treloar, seconded by Porter to add correspondence to the next meeting agenda for discussion. Motion carried, 5/0. OLD BUSINESS Board Packet Distribution — Tuttle had emailed the Board the meeting packet in a PDF file and also hard copy. All Board members, with the exception of Jochimsen who would still like hardcopy distribution, agreed that this was acceptable for packet distribution with the exception of confidential material which would still be mailed hardcopy. January 10, 2012 Page 2 NEW BUSINESS PUBLIC DISCUSSION BOARD INFORMATION STAFF INFORMATION EXECUTIVE SESSION Community Forum — The Board discussed ideas for the topic of the forum and agreed that some clarification of the Board name should be discussed and Pugh also agreed to give an overview of the Review Process and the purview of the Board. Dieterle inquired about childcare during the meeting. Tuttle said she would look into it but did not know what the City's position would be because of liability issues, staffing, space, etc. It was suggested by Treloar and Porter that an outside group could be asked to do it. Tuttle will check with the City Attorney's office and report back to the Board at the next meeting. Dieterle asked the Board what had happened with the comprehensive review of the ordinance, by -laws, and standard operating procedures that the Board had been working on and stated those might be good items for discussion at the forum. King responded that for the time being those items have been tabled. Coleman commented on how she believed there was some confusion regarding the name of the Board and thought some clarification would help citizens. Dieterle also suggested looking at changing the name of the Board. None. None. Porter read and handed out a statement that she prepared. Moved by Jochimsen, seconded by Jensen to accept correspondence from Porter which was read and handed out at the meeting. Motion carried, 4/0, Porter abstaining. Motion by Treloar, seconded by Jensen to add correspondence to the next meeting agenda for discussion. Motion carried, 4/0, Porter abstaining. Tuttle informed Board members that several new items had been added to the PCRB webpage. A link to the Board packets is now available, all forum summaries and annual reports are now assessable on the website, and the public complaint reports are also being added. Motion by Jochimsen and seconded by Treloar to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22 -7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of PCRB January 10, 2012 Page 3 government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 5/0. Open session adjourned at 6:02 P.M. (Porter left executive session due to a conflict of interest — 6:04 P.M.) REGULAR SESSION Returned to open session at 6:21 P.M. Motion by Jochimsen, seconded by Treloar to set the level of review for PCRB Complaint #11 -02 to 8- 8- 7(13)(1)(a), on the record with no additional investigation. Motion carried, 4/0, Porter abstaining. Motion by Jochimsen, seconded by Jensen to request a 30 -day extension for PCRB Complaint #11 -02, due to timelines and scheduling. Motion carried, 4/0, Porter abstaining. TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change) • February 14, 2012, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm (Moved to 2/22/12) • February 22, 2012, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm • March 13, 2012, 5:30 PM. Helling Conference Rm (Moved to 3/21/12) • March 21, 2012, 5:30 PM. Helling Conference Rm • April 10, 2012, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Room • April 17, 2012, 7:00 PM, Iowa City Public Library — Rm A (Community Forum) Motion by Treloar, seconded by Porter to move the February 14th meeting to Wednesday, February 22nd and to move the March 13th meeting to Wednesday, March 21St due to timelines and scheduling. Motion carried, 5/0. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Jensen, seconded by Treloar. Motion carried, 5/0. Meeting adjourned at 6:27 P.M. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2012 (Meeting Date) NAME TERM EXP. 1 /10 Melissa Jensen 9/1/12 X Donald King 9/1/15 X Joseph Treloar 9/1/13 X Peter Jochimsen 9/1/13 X Royceann Porter 9/1/12 X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting - -- = Not a Member IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT USE OF FORCE REPORT September 2011 Ofc # Date Inc # Incident Force Used 32 09 -25 2011- Subject arrest a resistive and assaultive subject for public 18,40 09 -01 23265 Out w /Subject Officers used hands -on and take down 8 09 -23 24622 Intoxicated techniques to arrest a combative and assaultive 12 09 -28 24862 Subject subject. 40 09 -05 23450 Loud Party Officer deployed a taser at a subject armed with a knife who was actively cutting his (subject) wrist. 48,61 09 -06 23503 Stolen Vehicle Officers used hands -on control techniques to arrest a resistive subject who had just stolen a vehicle. 6,64, 09 -14 24008 Suicidal Subject Officers used hands -on control and take down 24 techniques to control a physical resistive subject who was threatening suicide. 39 09 -16 24079 Juvenile Officer pulled on a resistive juvenile's backpack Complaint to remove the juvenile from blocking a bus in the street. 8,56, 09 -17 24253 Burglary Officers used hands -on control and take down 40 techniques to control a physical resistive subject during arrest. 9 09 -18 24270 Fight Officer deployed a chemical weapon (O.C.) on a two subjects engaged in a physical fight. 44,12, 09 -27 24513 Traffic Stop Officers displayed a sidearm and used hands -on 38 control techniques to take a fleeing subject into custody. 52,9, 09 -23 24545 Intoxicated Officers used hands -on control techniques to 32 09 -25 24742 Subject arrest a resistive and assaultive subject for public intoxication. 8 09 -23 24622 Intoxicated Officer used hands -on and take down control 12 09 -28 24862 Subject techniques to control a subject who became Complaint physically resistive during arrest. 57 09 -25 24742 Fight Officer used hands -on and take down control techniques to stop an assaultive subject who was advancing on the officer. 57 09 -25 24742 Fight Officer used hands -on and take down control techniques to arrest who had attempted tq flee and assault the officer. ' 12 09 -28 24862 Juvenile Officer used hands -on and take 5;wn t niquejj Complaint to control and handcuff a physieally xes +s€ive,; juvenile. - c 3 IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT USE OF FORCE REPORT October 2011 Ofc # Date Inc # Incident Force Used 2011- 45 10 -01 25024 Intoxicated Officer used hands -on control and take down Subject techniques to affect an arrest on a physically resistive and fleeing subject. 66 10 -07 25422 Intoxicated Officer used hands -on control and take down Subject techniques to affect an arrest on a physically resistive and fleeing subject. 55 10 -09 25528 Suspicious Officers used hands -on control and take down Activity techniques to control a physically resistive subject during a narcotics arrest. 20 10 -11 25613 Weapons Officer used hands -on control techniques and Offense displayed a sidearm on a subject armed with a knife and refusing to comply with officer commands. 6,40 10 -12 25679 Robbery Officers displayed a firearm, a taser, and used hands -on control techniques to stop a subject in the area after a robbery occurred and then to control the subject when he became resistive during arrest when it was found there was an arrest warrant for him. 18 10 -23 26326 Fight in Officer deployed a taser on a subject actively Progress involved in a physical fight. 7 10 -23 26327 Fight in Officer deployed a taser and used hands -on Progress control techniques on a subject actively involved in a physical fight. 2 10 -29 26698 Welfare Check Officer used hands -on control and take down techniques to stop a suicidal subject from grabbing a knife. 5,66 10 -29 26694 Juvenile Officers used hands -on control techniques and Complaints handcuffs to control a combative juvenile. 8 10 -30 26764 Suspicious Officer used hands -on control and take down Activity techniques to stop a fleeing and resistive subject. E TO: FROM: RE: DATE: DEPARTMENT MEMO #12 -04 Chief Hargadine Captain R. D. Wyss September- October 2011 Use of Force Review 12 January 2012 The "Use of Force Review Committee" met on 12 January, 2012. It was composed of Captain Wyss, Sgt. Hurd and Sgt. D. Brotherton. For the review of submitted reports in September, 22 Officers were involved in 12 separate incidents requiring use of force involving 15 individuals. In October, 12 Officers were involved in 10 separate incidents requiring use of force involving 10 individuals. No training or safety issues were identified. All issues or concerns were identified and addressed at previous levels of review. Officers are reminded that the "Type of Incident" refers to the original call for service. As a further clarification on the documentation of injuries, the suspect and officer injury check boxes on the front of the form refer only to injuries that are directly related to the use of force. Pre - existing injuries or injuries not related to the use of force should be noted in the narrative. Of the incidents reviewed over the two month period, 3 Officers had drawn sidearm or displayed weapons in response to 3 separate incidents that required a display of weapon response. OC was deployed during one incident, a Taser was discharged on 3 occasions, and on one occasion a Taser was displayed which resulted in compliance without deployment. There was one pursuit involving 3 officers. Of the 22 incidents reviewed, 6 suspects and 4 Officers sustained superficial injuries as a result of the use of force. Please contact me if you have any questions. ..., El Copy: City Manager, PCRB, Watch Commanders, Review Committee °— February 22, 2012 Mtg Packet PCRB COMPLAINT DEADLINES PCRB Complaint #11 -02 Filed: 09/28/11 Chief's Report due (90days): 12/27/11 Chief's Report filed: 12/21/11 PCRB Mtg #1 (Review & Assign) 01/10/12 PCRB Mtg #2 (Review) 02/22/12 PCRB Report due (45days): 02/04/12 30 -day Extension Request: 03/02/12 PCRB Complaint #11 -03 Filed: 11/04/11 Chief's Report due (90days): 02/02/12 Chief's Report filed: 01/27/12 PCRB Mtg #1 (Review & Assign) 02/22/12 PCRB Mtg #2 (Review) ? ? / ? ? / ?? PCRB Report due (45days): 03/12/12 PCRB MEETING SCHEDULE March 21, 2012 April 10, 2012 April 17, 2012 — Community Forum May 8, 2012 POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD OFFICE CONTACTS January 2012 Date Description 1 -26 Man called regarding incident 2 years ago. Informed him of the 90 day timeline and referred him to the police department. Annie Tucker 1425 Oaklawn Ave. L Iowa City, IA 52245 January 10, 2012 To the Members of the Iowa City PCRB: �6)112- h �. First, I apologize for not being able to attend your meeting in person. I am the director of a local nonprofit and our board meetings are the second Tuesday of the month at 5 pm in North Liberty. I do not get back to Iowa City after the meetings until at least 6:45 pm. So, as a member of the community, I am writing you, since I will not be able to attend your meeting. would like to speak about a specific case: I am very surprised and disappointed about the board's decision in the Royceann Porter case. I sat through the trial May 19, 2011. In court, the magistrate heard the all of the City's witnesses, including a Saddlebrook staffperson, a retired librarian who lives across from the Saddlebrook clubhouse (the site of Ms. Porter's daughter's birthday party), the youth at the party who started the fight, and an investigator with the Police Department. When asked whether Ms. Porter provided alcohol, the youth said, "No, Ms. Porter doesn't drink." The City used an attorney from Cedar Rapids because the city attorneys were not involved. I am not sure of the reason for that, but the board may want to inquire. Once all the City's witnesses had spoken and both attorneys were done with them, the magistrate immediately acquitted Royceann Porter on a directed verdict, meaning without hearing from her witnesses. The City brought forward everything they had re: the charges against Ms. Porter, and apparently it was not sufficient to the support the charges in court. I found that very interesting. 1 would also like to focus on the board name and process. I propose that the board and the City consider changing the name of the board. The board is a citizen's board established to review complaints against the police. Most other cities use the name Citizen's Police Review Board, because the citizens are reviewing the police. I think a name change would make sense, both with the intent and grammatically. I also propose that we consider implementing a different process for reviewing citizen complaints against the police. Right now, all complaints against the police department go to the police department for investigation. 1 think this can be a deterrent to people who would like to file a complaint. I also think that it could undermine the perception of the credibility of the complaint process and findings because of a concern about a potential conflict of interest. am not at all implying that the investigations or decisions themselves are in any way compromised. I am saying that people could perceive that they are. And perceptions influence what people think and do. There are other models. I was curious about how those work, so I spoke with Ms. Beth Pittinger, the Executive Director of the Pittsburgh Independent Citizen's Police Review Board, which was created as an independent agency. They have three paid city employees who do the investigations and a board of volunteers that reviews their findings. (Of course, they are a far larger metropolitan area. I am not suggesting we need three investigators.) The PICPRB has investigatory and subpoena power and the power to hold public hearings, where the public can observe the trying of a complaint in front of three of their board members. Ms. Pittinger said this structure intentionally puts the review process in the public view unlike police investigations, which are internal and not public. She said an internal process can raise suspicion about the objectivity and impartiality of a process or decisions and doesn't promote trust or improve community relations. We definitely want a process that promotes trust and improves community relations. I imagine that is why the PCRB was established. She referred me to the National Association of Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement. Their website is NACOLE.org She said it provides lots of information about different models in different cities. She encouraged anyone from Iowa City to contact her with questions at beth.pittinger @pittsburghpa.Rov or at 412 - 765 -8023. I encourage the board and the City Council set up a committee to review the current PCRB name and process. It is usual to review any program after it has been up and running for a number of years: there may be new relevant information to consider. Although I am not able to attend our PCRB meetings, I would be glad to work on a committee to review Iowa City's current process for citizen's review of complaints about the police and our options. I look forward to hearing from the board and the City Council. Sincerely, Annie Tucker cc: Iowa City Mayor Matt Hayek Iowa City City Council Members CJ P'M.J °b-7 rNj January 10th, 2012 TO: Police Citizen Review Board City Manager Iowa City Council Members Matt Hyatt Human Rights Commission Attorney Ray Scheetz From: Royceann Porter Re: Rebuttal of PCRB Complaint # 11 -01 2 FILED JAN 10 2012 I am a member in good standing with the Iowa City PCRB. During the time that I have been on this Board, I have felt as if I have made a contribution to the Iowa City Community. I had come to believe that the good folks on this board are truly interested in providing community members with a alternative to resolving problems without litigation. While on the board I had an experience that prompted me to file complaint with the PCRB. As a member of that board, I was expecting fair, reasonable and respectful treatment. However, I soon learned that my action to file a complaint made me and outsider who troubled the waters of PCRB Board and the Police Department. I followed the procedures and policies that drive the PCRB's decision making. One of the statements that caught my attention in the guidelines was the fact that it stated that personal knowledge is required to make a fair and equitable determination about a complaint. It also stated that without direct involvement information will be rendered as second hand. It is my sincere belief that the fact that the Johnson County Judge issued a "Directed Verdict of Acquittal" which mean that I did not have to present evidence in my own case and this was not taken into consideration by the PCRB. The PCRB should have reviewed the evidence and the results of the case. PCRB went into closed session and begin to "interrogate" me. I didn't think that this was not a good outcome in terms that I felt I wasn't heard and respected by the PCRB. I believed that the charges were retaliatory. Here I am, a person whom have been called on for collateral collaboration from the Iowa City Police Department for my help with the youth in our community and yet when I needed help this is what I get. I felt like the PCRB was adversarial towards me and I felt revictimized in the process. It is disappointing and scary that we, the PCRB are charged as a Board to thoroughly review and follow up on any discrepencies in the investigative report. It is my opinion that there were some retaliation on the part of the police because I questioned some of the procedures being used and requested their badge numbers to report them to their police chief. There were a sequence of events in my opinion that led to the involvement of my employer at Four Oaks. It is no doubt in my mind that there was an effort of the part of police officers to get additional charges filed against me and there was an attempt of the part of some officers to solicit untrue statements from students at the school about alcohol and guns. Students were interviewed without parent consent and that is a violation of school board policy and parents did lodge a complaint at a public school board meeting. Because the PCRB can conduct their own investigation, it is amazing to me that this was not made clear simply by asking a few questions that these events did happened. The most difficult thing for me to believe is that in a court of law in our own community with our own judge, the evidence that was presented in court was totally disregarded. I do not want to take much more of your time as I could because I did take the time to review all of the evidence and could indeed share with you many more confusing points. I also would like to say that at this time I am willing to suffer the disappointment that I have felt at the the hands of some of my fello board members. However, I stand here before you tonight with my dignity still in tact and a willingness to work even harder for equity and fairness for all and to help make the PCRB Board one that citizen's in the Iowa City Community can depend on and trust. Thank you for your time. Royceann Porter Fit .E 4, k —I JAN 10 7012