[CPRB] City of Urbana & Urbana Police Dept. reach 4-year agreement

[Esther Patt]

The CPRB would go into closed session for any discussion about a personnel matter.  So if resident x filed a complaint against officer y, yes that would be a closed session. 

All other work of the Board, including discussion about department policies, requests for data (e.g. to monitor racial profiling) would be in public. 

Under the Illinois Open Meetings Act, a public body can go into closed session for only 3 reasons: to discuss personnel, including union negotiations, to discuss property acquisition or to discuss potential or pending litigation. 

Esther 

---- Original message ----
>Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 11:13:58 -0800 (PST)
>From: Matthew Gladney <dj_matt_99 at yahoo.com>  
>Subject: Re: [CPRB] City of Urbana & Urbana Police Dept. reach 4-year agreement  
>To: Esther Patt <epatt at uiuc.edu>, "John W." <jbw292002 at gmail.com>, cprb at lists.chambana.net, C-U Citizens for Peace and Justice <announce at lists.communitycourtwatch.org>
>
>I'm curious about the confidentiality clause. Does
>this mean that CPRB meetings would be closed session?
>When and how does the confidentiality come into play?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Matthew Gladney
>
>
>--- Esther Patt <epatt at uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
>> Two of the three restrictions are already part of
>> the Citizen Police Review Board ordinance that the
>> task force forwarded to the council -- that the
>> police department will investigate any complaint
>> brought against an officer and the confidentiality
>> requirement for members of the Board.   
>> 
>> The only restriction that is different from the
>> proposed ordinance is the specific permission for
>> officers to refrain from appearing before the Board.
>>  However, we expected this would come out of
>> negotiations with Fraternal Order of Police because
>> it's provided for in the Police Officers' Bill of
>> Rights in Illinois.
>> 
>> Next step is to find out (after the first of the
>> year) when this will be back on the council agenda
>> and make sure supporters know so they can attend and
>> speak at council meeting.
>> 
>> Happy New Year,
>> Esther Patt  
>> 
>> ---- Original message ----
>> >Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:40:24 -0600
>> >From: "John W." <jbw292002 at gmail.com>  
>> >Subject: [CPRB] City of Urbana & Urbana Police
>> Dept. reach 4-year agreement  
>> >To: cprb at lists.chambana.net, C-U Citizens for Peace
>> and Justice <announce at lists.communitycourtwatch.org>
>> >
>> >	
>> >The story is in today's News-Gazette.  Here's what
>> the article has to say 
>> >about the Citizen Police Review Board:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >The contract includes a provision that the city
>> "may adopt and maintain a 
>> >civilian police review board."
>> >
>> >But the city also agreed in the contract that
>> police officers are not 
>> >required to appear before such a board and that any
>> appearance is optional.
>> >
>> >Other stipulations:
>> >
>> >* Any complaint brought against a police officer
>> shall be investigated by 
>> >the department in accordance with department
>> policy.
>> >
>> >* The results of the police investigation could be
>> shared with the civilian 
>> >police review board, but that board members "shall
>> maintain confidentiality 
>> >of any and all officer records, files and medical
>> information."
>> >
>> >The city council is considering creation of a
>> civilian police review board. 
>> >The issue was put on hold, however, during contract
>> negotiations.
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >CPRB mailing list
>> >CPRB at lists.chambana.net
>> >http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/cprb
>> _______________________________________________
>> CPRB mailing list
>> CPRB at lists.chambana.net
>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/cprb
>> 
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
>http://mail.yahoo.com