[CPRB] info packets to Urbana City Council members
Ricky Baldwin
baldwinricky at yahoo.com
Thu Jul 21 10:49:47 CDT 2005
Hi Folks-
As we discussed at the meeting Tuesday, here are the
documents Jen sent to all Urbana City Council members.
They are also all online at CPRB's website, by the
way, if you prefer.
Again, they should have all received these by now,
with a brief cover letter. Frankly, though, I'd avoid
getting into a detailed phone conversation about
these. That's the purpose of meeting with them face
to face with 2-3 of us there.
Thanks again for a great meeting! See you soon-
Ricky
328-3037
Coalition for Citizen Police Review
P.O. Box 184, Urbana, IL 61803-0184
Citizen Police Review Board - Proposal
What is the proposed Citizen Police Review Board?
A citizen police review or oversight board is an
impartial body, independent of the police department
itself, that is empowered to receive and investigate
citizen complaints against police officers, and to
perform other oversight functions.
In the case of specific complaints, the proposed
board will investigate the complaints, make findings,
and recommend disciplinary action to the Chief of
Police and to other appropriate government officials.
The board will also evaluate patterns of complaints,
as well as police policies and procedures, and
recommend policy changes as deemed necessary or
desirable.
Finally, the board will issue periodic reports to the
community documenting the police department's
responsiveness to its recommendations, as well as
statistical breakdowns with regard to such things as
types of complaints, findings, location by district,
and the number of officers with a history of multiple
complaints.
Why is a Citizen Police Review Board needed?
The police department of a community is arguably the
most important of the municipal services. The police
are certainly the most visible of any of the
government agencies, interacting with citizens more
directly and more intensively than any other branch of
government. Given the extent of the powers delegated
to police officers by law, and the pressures under
which they are frequently required to function, any
abuse of those powers necessarily results in more
serious consequences for the individual citizen and
for the community as a whole. It is vital that the
police department be a trustworthy and respected
organization.
Historically, complaints against police officers have
been investigated and evaluated by the police
department itself. This process is inherently flawed
both in theory and in practice. It tends to discourage
citizen input and to promote secrecy, both of which
run counter to accepted notions of democracy. As a
consequence, many citizens lack confidence that the
police can serve as an effective check on their own
behavior.
The latter part of the twentieth century gave rise to
a groundswell of grassroots community initiatives to
create independent citizen police review or oversight
boards, whose purpose was to review complaints
regarding police behavior and policies, and to make
disciplinary and policy recommendations on the basis
of citizen input.
We share the belief that, under current law, the most
effective means of ensuring police accountability to
the public, and fostering a positive police-community
relationship, is an impartial oversight board composed
of citizens from all neighborhoods and walks of life.
We further believe that such a board is totally
consistent with and supportive of the Urbana Police
Department's own mission statement, which includes the
following:
“We pledge to help create a safer environment in
which to live, work, and recreate through problem
solving and collaboration with our citizens.”
“The public should have input into policy development
which directly impacts quality of life.”
Are such Citizen Police Review Boards effective?
A number of studies have examined the effectiveness of
various models of citizen police review boards. In
general, the success of an oversight board has been
found to be contingent on the degree of its true
independence from the police department, the measure
of genuine commitment to its success on the part of
all interested parties in the community, and the depth
of public trust in its effectiveness.
The board must also have a mandate to make policy
recommendations, so that it is involved in structural
reform and not merely in the discipline of individual
officers.
Our proposed model addresses and incorporates all of
these factors.
What are some of the features of the proposed Citizen
Police Review Board?
Seven unpaid Board members, one from each ward in the
city.
Training for Board members in police department
policies and procedures.
Offices located outside the environs of the police
department itself.
Paid staff and supplies sufficient for intake and
initial review of citizen complaints, and other
associated administrative functions.
Funding adequate for proper investigation of
complaints, including the hiring of an independent
investigator on an ad hoc basis as the Board deems
necessary.
Subpoena power to compel witness testimony, to be used
as the Board deems necessary.
A mediation option available for use in lieu of a full
Board investigation of a citizen complaint.
How will members of the Board be selected?
We propose a Board consisting of seven unpaid citizen
members, with one member from each of the City of
Urbana's seven wards. Each City Council member would
nominate three candidates from his or her own ward,
and the mayor would then appoint one of the three
nominated candidates from each ward. The nomination
process would be an open one, with structures in place
to ensure that any citizen can apply to be considered
for nomination by his or her City Council
representative. Candidates for nomination would not be
city employees or law enforcement personnel.
The members of the Board would choose their own
chairperson, and promulgate their own rules of
procedure in accordance with their legislative
mandate.
How will the Board be funded?
The Board would be funded with tax revenue from the
general operating budget of the city.
We anticipate, and it has been demonstrated in other
cities, that the expense of the proposed Board would
be offset at least in part by fiscal savings elsewhere
in the budget.
For one thing, the burden on the police department's
internal affairs investigation division could be
eased, with resulting cost savings.
We would also expect a reduction in the cost to the
city of civil litigation against the police, as
increased accountability to the public should result
in less misconduct by police and fewer lawsuits filed
by citizens. Moreover, cities that show due diligence
in working to increase police accountability are less
likely to be found negligent when faced with a civil
suit.
To whom will the Board be accountable?
The Board would be created by municipal ordinance as a
separate office within the city government. It would
be accountable to the City Council, to whom is
delegated the power of legislative and budgetary
authority. Ultimately, the Board would be accountable
to the citizens of Urbana, who elect the members of
the City Council.
------------------------------------
Websites for more info
http://www.prairienet.org/cprb/ - Champaign-Urbana,
IL
http://NACOLE.org/models_of_civilian_oversight.htm
National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law
Enforcement
http://www.aclu.org/library/fighting_police_abuse.html
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles1/nij/184430.txt U.S.
Dept. of Justice
http://www.hrw.org/reports98/police/uspo87.htm Human
Rights Watch
http://www.policepolicy.org/Civilian%20Review%20Mechanisms.htm
“Civilian Review Models Across the Nation”
http://mediafilter.org/caq/Caq55.CopsVscr.html
Covert Action Quarterly
http://www.ci.mpls.mn.us/citywork/other/cpra.html
Minneapolis, MN
http://www.rdrop.com/~pjw/proposal/contents.html
Portland, OR
http://www.nyclu.org/fiveyears.html New York City,
NY
http://www.pressdemo.com/polandpub/polandpubgate.html
Northern CA
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/prc/ Berkeley, CA
http://www.cjjohns.com/c_law/police_civil.html
Tallahassee, FL
http://www.city.pittsburgh.pa.us/cprb Pittsburgh,
PA
http://www.ci.lansing.mi.us/depts/clerk/balqg97.html
Lansing, MI
http://www.news-record.com/news/local/report.html
Greensboro, NC
http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/cm/cprb/cprb.html
Santa Cruz, CA
------------------------------
Draft of CPRB Ordinance - 12/09/02
Ordinance Establishing a Citizen Police Review Board
for the City of Urbana
ARTICLE I. CITIZEN POLICE REVIEW BOARD
Section 1. Establishment and Purpose
The Citizen Police Review Board (CPRB) is hereby
established to:
a. Ensure the Police Department is responsive to
community needs
b. Investigate claims of inappropriate conduct by
sworn police officers
c. Provide an independent process for responding to
citizen complaints
d. Add a citizen perspective to the evaluation of
these complaints, and
e. Contribute to timely, fair and objective review of
citizen complaints.
CPRB is established with the recognition that all
people in the City of Urbana deserve protection of
their human and civil rights and respect for their
fundamental dignity as human beings. Further, the CPRB
shall provide fair treatment to and protect the rights
of police officers.
Section 2. Appointment of the CPRB
The CPRB shall consist of seven (7) members, one from
each ward.
Each alderman/alderwoman shall nominate a candidate
from his/her ward for one seat on the CPRB. The mayor
shall appoint the members with the advice and consent
of the city council. If the mayor does not appoint a
nominee or the nominee is not approved by the city
council, the nominating alderman/alderwoman shall
nominate additional candidates for the position until
one is appointed.
The CPRB shall elect its Chairman and Vice Chairman.
Section 3. Term of Service
The term of each member of the CPRB shall be three (3)
years.
Members shall continue to serve until their successor
has been appointed, and completed a program of
orientation.
Section 4. Qualification of Members
Members of the CPRB shall:
Be qualified voters of the City of Urbana.
Not be employees of the City of Urbana.
Possess a reputation for fairness, integrity and
responsibility and have demonstrated an active
interest in public affairs and service.
Not be an employee of, contracted by, or have any
official affiliation with any law enforcement agency.
The City Council shall endeavor to reflect community
diversity in its appointments including income level,
ethnicity, age, gender, and experience.
Section 5. Training and Orientation of Citizen Police
Review Board Members
The City Council shall adopt written standards for
orientation of appointees and continuing training of
all CPRB members. Completion of the orientation
program is required before a member is seated.
Section 6. Member Responsibilities.
Members shall:
Maintain absolute confidentiality with respect to
confidential or privileged information they receive
and maintain a thorough knowledge of the legal
protection accorded to police records, including
penalties imposed for violations.
Obey all laws respecting individuals' rights of
privacy, and confidentiality of records.
Excuse themselves from participating in the review of
any complaint in which they have a personal,
professional, or financial conflict of interest.
Conduct themselves at all times in a manner that will
maintain public confidence in the fairness,
impartiality and integrity of the CPRB, and refrain
from making any prejudicial comments with respect to
complainants or police officers.
Participate in orientation and training programs
referred to in Section 9.
Violation of these responsibilities by a member may be
considered grounds for immediate removal of that
member by a majority vote of the city council.
Section 7. Quorum
A majority of the currently appointed CPRB members
shall constitute a quorum.
Section 8. Bylaws, Rules, Records
The CPRB shall adopt rules and bylaws for the
transaction of CPRB affairs.
The CPRB shall have access to case-specific records
and files as it deems necessary to conduct its
affairs. Such documents include, but may not be
limited to, complaints and supporting documents
provided by complainants, police reports,
incident-related documents such as schedules, dispatch
tapes and transcriptions, citations, video recordings,
and photographs; records of interviews with
complainants, employees, and witnesses; and external
documents such as medical records, expert opinions,
and receipts.
Section 9. Reports
The CPRB may review and make recommendations to the
City Council regarding Police Department policies and
practices.
The CPRB shall, at least annually, report to the City
Council. The report shall contain statistics and
summaries of citizen complaints, including a
comparison of the CPRB's findings and conclusions with
the actions taken by the Chief of Police.
ARTICLE II. COMPLAINT PROCEDURES, INVESTIGATION AND
MEDIATION.
Section 10. Filing Complaints.
Complaints concerning police conduct may be submitted
to the CPRB, the Police Department, or an agent
designated by the CPRB as provided in this section.
Complaints shall be lodged in writing using a CPRB
created Citizen Complaint Form and signed by the
complainant;
Complaints received shall be forwarded to the Police
Department and the CPRB within two working days.
Complaints received in forms other than that specified
in (a) above (for example, by telephone or in person),
shall be forwarded to the CPRB for the CPRB's
information only;
Complaints must be filed within one year of the date
of the incident giving rise to the complaint.
Any inquiry or contact regarding an incident made by a
citizen to the Police Department or CPRB shall be
considered a potential complaint, and shall be
followed up by a designee of the CPRB. The CPRB shall
not accept complaints concerning incidents predating
the effective date of this ordinance.
Section 11. Mediation Notice.
Upon receiving a complaint, the CPRB shall notify the
complainant of a mediation option and invite the
complainant to submit the complaint to mediation.
Section 12. Mediation Process.
Requests for mediation may be submitted in writing by
the complainant or the police officer(s) at any time
in the review process. Mediation shall proceed as
promptly as possible;
Mediation may proceed only upon agreement of both
parties;
Mediation shall be conducted at no cost to the
complainant or officer(s) by trained or experienced
mediators from among a list selected by the City or a
conflict resolution program retained by the City;
Mediators shall conduct mediation sessions with
officers and complainants at times and places agreed
upon by the parties. Where these mediation sessions
result in resolution of the dispute, the mediator
shall inform the CPRB and Chief of Police in writing
within five working days. Terms of the resolution may
be reported to the CPRB and the Chief of Police only
upon the express written approval of the parties;
In conducting the mediation, the mediator may suggest
avenues toward resolution but may not impose an
outcome on the parties;
Mediation sessions shall be closed to the public.
Matters discussed shall be confidential unless both
parties agree otherwise as part of a written mediation
settlement;
Section 13. Review of Complaints.
Where mediation is not used or fails to resolve the
complaint, review of the complaint shall proceed as
provided in this section.
At the conclusion of the Internal Affairs
investigation, the Internal Affairs report prepared
for the Chief of Police shall be submitted to the CPRB
within five working days;
After review and deliberation of the Internal Affairs
report, the CPRB shall:
1. report its written findings and conclusions to the
Chief of Police, or
2. obtain further case-specific information from the
Chief of Police, including written materials, audio or
video tapes, and related documents, or
3. request that the Chief of Police conduct further
investigation, or
4. give notice and hold a hearing to gather evidence,
or
5. conduct an investigation with the services of an
independent investigator. Independent investigators
shall have access to the same information to which the
CPRB shall have access;
If the CPRB fails to act within the time periods
specified in Section 15, the complaint file shall be
returned to the Chief of Police without a finding;
The CPRB Chair may assign a member or committee to
review the Internal Affairs report for each complaint
and make a recommendation that the CPRB take one of
the actions enumerated in subsection (b) above;
Affected officers, and complainants, to the extent
permitted by law, shall receive copies of CPRB reports
to the Police Department, and of the CPRB's requests
for information.
Section 14. Early Investigation.
The CPRB may investigate a complaint through an
independent investigator prior to conclusion of any
Internal Affairs investigation. The Police Department,
and affected officers, shall be notified of a decision
to conduct an early investigation. The independent
investigator's report shall be submitted in writing to
the CPRB and the Police Chief. The CPRB shall base its
findings and conclusions on review of the Internal
Affairs report and the independent investigator's
report.
Section 15. Timing of Review.
The review process shall be concluded:
within thirty (30) days of receiving the Internal
Affairs report if the CPRB finds that no further
proceedings are needed pursuant to Section 13(b)(1);
within sixty (60) days of receiving the Internal
Affairs report if the CPRB determines that further
proceedings are needed pursuant to sections 13(b)(2),
13(b)(3), and 13(b)(4);
within a period determined by the CPRB if further
investigation by an independent investigator is
conducted pursuant to section 13(b)(5).
ARTICLE III. ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT
Section 16. Findings and Conclusions.
At the conclusion of each review, the CPRB shall
render one of the following findings based on the
preponderance of the evidence:
Unfounded, Where the review shows that the act or acts
complained of did not occur or were misconstrued.
Exonerated, Where the acts which provide the basis for
the complaint occurred, but the review shows such acts
were proper.
Not Sustained, Where the review fails to disclose
sufficient facts to prove or disprove the allegation
made in the complaint.
Sustained, Where the review discloses sufficient facts
to prove the allegations made in the complaint.
No Finding, Where, for example, the complainant failed
to produce information to further the investigation;
the complainant withdrew the complaint; or the
complainant is unavailable to clarify the complaint.
Mediated, Where the complaint is resolved by
mediation.
Section 17. Report to the Police.
At the conclusion of its review, the CPRB shall
forward its written findings and conclusions to the
Chief of Police and to affected officers and, to the
extent permitted by law, to the complainants. The
Chief of Police shall report the Chiefs findings,
conclusions, and actions taken to the CPRB. To the
extent permitted by law, the Chief shall also inform
the complainant of the disposition of the complaint.
Section 18. Meetings.
The CPRB shall hold its first meeting within thirty
(30) days after a quorum of its members has completed
the orientation program. At that meeting, the CPRB
shall fix the time and place for its regularly
scheduled meetings;
CPRB meetings shall be open to the public except when
closed as provided in section (d);
The CPRB may conduct both public and closed meetings
as allowed or required by law;
A meeting shall be closed when the CPRB discusses any
case-specific confidential information which may not
lawfully be disclosed.
The Chief of Police shall designate a representative
from the Police Department to attend meetings of the
CPRB and to provide information to the CPRB.
Section 19. Hearings.
Hearings to obtain evidence concerning complaints
shall be open to the public unless a request to close
the hearing is made by either the complainant or the
officer(s). Such a request may be made at any time
prior to or during the hearing. Upon hearing such a
request, the CPRB shall close the hearing to the
public unless the CPRB finds that a closed hearing
would deny substantial justice to either the
complainant or the officer(s). In making that finding,
the CPRB shall consider the nature of the charge, the
age of witnesses, privacy rights of the affected
parties, the sensitivity of the anticipated evidence,
threats of violence or retribution to a witness, the
likelihood of receiving candid and complete evidence
if the hearing is open, and the need to afford each
side a fair hearing. All public meetings of the CPRB
shall be recorded, and made available on request.
Section 20. Conduct of Hearings.
In conducting a hearing, the CPRB shall have the power
to:
1. Subpoena witnesses, and case-specific records and
tangible evidence;
2. Administer oaths;
3. Take testimony;
4. Exclude witnesses;
Witnesses shall be questioned only by members of the
CPRB;
At the commencement and conclusion of the evidentiary
phase of the hearing the complainant and officer(s)
may make statements;
The entire hearing on a single complaint shall be
concluded on a single occasion unless the CPRB
determines otherwise based on good cause. The Board
may discontinue its investigation into a complaint for
lack of interest if the complainant fails to attend
the hearing;
Anyone disrupting a hearing will be removed from the
premises;
At least five (5) days' advance written notice of a
hearing shall be provided to all interested parties.
Section 21. Suspension of Proceedings.
The City Council may suspend the CPRB review of any
complaint where a separate criminal investigation is
underway or where a civil action against the City is
threatened, underway or pending. Upon the conclusion
of such separate proceedings, the CPRB may resume or
undertake its review.
Section 22. Information Sharing.
The CPRB shall forward to the Chief of Police any new
case-specific information it obtains, during the
course of an investigation, concerning an incident or
practice subject to a citizen complaint. Similarly,
during the course of a CPRB investigation, the Chief
of Police shall forward to the CPRB in writing any new
case-specific information the Chief obtains after the
Internal Affairs investigation has been concluded and
submitted to the CPRB concerning an incident or police
practice subject to a citizen complaint.
Section 23. Severability.
If any provision or part thereof of this article, or
application thereof to any person or circumstance, is
held invalid, the remainder of the article and the
application of the provision, or part thereof, to
other persons not similarly situated or to other
circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
###
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
More information about the CPRB
mailing list