[CUCPJ Announce] [CPRB] When to meet to discuss CPRB?

[John W.]

At 09:09 AM 12/30/2006, Esther Patt wrote:

>I think it would be a mistake for us to oppose the Citizen Police Review 
>Ordinance.  Criticizing the way it will be watered down is certainly 
>legitimate.  But saying it isn't worth it to even bother if the Board 
>can't hire an Independent Investigator is unwise.   Let's take a step back 
>and remember why we want a CPRB.
>
>Without some type of CPRB, every citizen complaint against the police 
>would be kept secret, as they are now. There would be zero oversight of 
>complaints and if the PD refused to accept complaints or otherwise 
>discouraged complainants from following through with a formal complaint, 
>there would be no monitoring of that happening.
>
>That's the basic problem that we started out to address: no one is 
>monitoring the way police handle citizen complaints other than the police 
>themselves.
>
>Even watered down, what we'd get from having a CPRB which we don't have 
>now are:
>
>- CPRB would be informed of every complaint filed against the police
>
>- Complainants could file their complaints with the Human Rights Officer 
>instead of the PD which will protect against people with legitimate 
>complaints being talked out of filing
>
>- There will be brochures and other promotional material inviting people 
>to file complaints -- all materials developed and approved by the CPRB, 
>not the police -- and these will be distributed widely in the community.
>
>- Police would have to report to CPRB the results of their internal 
>investigation of each complaint and what action, if any were taken against 
>an officer or officers for misconduct.  The Board would not have the 
>authority to overturn the Police Chief's decision but would have the 
>authority to appeal that decision to the Mayor.
>
>- CPRB would be able to track patterns of complaints against the same 
>officer or on the same beat or demographics of people filing complaints.
>
>- CPRB would be a standing body whose purpose would include studying 
>police department policies (independent of formal complaints or in 
>response to them) and making recommendations for changes.
>
>Let's not dismiss all of this as insignificant.  A judge has more 
>authority than a watchdog, but a watchdog is a valuable role -- and we 
>have no watchdog for the police now.  That's essentially what CPRB would be.
>
>Also, an important strategy issue is: if we trash Urbana for watering down 
>its CPRB, that will undermine our efforts to get Champaign to do create one.
>
>Let's talk more when we meet.   Are people free January 8 at 7:00 p.m. to 
>meet at IDF?
>
>Esther Patt


I'm fine with MONDAY, January 8 at 7pm, as far as I know now.

And you make some excellent points, Esther.  Prior to our meeting, would it 
be possible for you, or someone with some degree of authority, to talk with 
the mayor and get her view on just exactly what the police union contract 
implies in terms of the CPRB?  Could we maybe get a copy of the union 
contract, which should be available to the public?

I understood from Danielle's reply that the implications are far greater 
than just being unable to hire an independent investigator.  I understood 
her to mean that the CPRB could not take complaints or investigate them in 
any way, independently of the police department itself.

Taking your two points right here:

>- Police would have to report to CPRB the results of their internal 
>investigation of each complaint and what action, if any were taken against 
>an officer or officers for misconduct.  The Board would not have the 
>authority to overturn the Police Chief's decision but would have the 
>authority to appeal that decision to the Mayor.
>
>- CPRB would be able to track patterns of complaints against the same 
>officer or on the same beat or demographics of people filing complaints.

Here's my concern:  Say the police department receives a complaint against 
Officer Smith for police brutality, and they supposely investigate and 
determine that the complaint is unwarranted.  The CPRB inquires of the 
police department:

CPRB: Any complaints this month, Chief?
Chief: Well, we did have one, but we determined that it was unwarranted.
CPRB: Oh?  What was it about?
Chief: I'm not at liberty to say.  It was unwarranted, anyway.
CPRB: Who filed the complaint?
Chief: I'm not at liberty to say.
CPRB: May I ask which officer was involved in the complaint?
Chief: I'm not at liberty to say.

And so on.  What is the CPRB's recourse?  Where does it derive the 
authority to INDEPENDENTLY pursue the citizen complaint?  How does it go 
about getting the necessary facts INDEPENDENTLY of the police?  This is 
what we need to know.

As you say, I'm sure we'll talk about it when we meet.  But we need as much 
information as we can get.  Otherwise we'll just be speculating in the dark.

John Wason