[Peace-discuss] Police Review Board before Urb. Cty Council TONIGHT!

[John W.]

At 11:53 AM 7/10/2006, Brian Dolinar wrote:

>Hello all.
>
>Please help us show the public support for a Police Review Board in Urbana.
>The issue is going before the Urbana City Council tonight at 7pm.
>They meet at 400 S. Vine St., across from Lincoln Square.
>
>We have been working for 2 years to get this board.
>We insist that it be an independent board with power to subpoena.
>The Police Union is trying to undermine the independence of the board
>by placing a police officer on it.
>
>The police cannot police the police.
>
>For instance, why did Officer Hediger of the Urbana Police Dept. fail
>to collect any evidence in Sunnycrest Apt. 203, although he visited
>the apartment complex twice on Aug 24, 2004?  This information may have
>proved, or disproved, the allegations against Patrick Thompson.
>Did he already believe Patrick Thompson was guilty?
>
>Peace, BD
>
>--
>Brian Dolinar, Ph.D.
>204 S. Lynn St.
>Champaign, IL 61820
>briandolinar at gmail.com


I tremble to say anything at all here, but feel that I must weigh in with 
just a word of caution.

I've been working on this issue for over FIVE years, Brian, and have a 
bulging briefcase full of research and paperwork to prove it.  I'm not sure 
where you've been, since I've never seen you at a meeting of the Coalition 
for Citizen Police Review.  But perhaps we didn't publicize our existence 
well enough.  And this is surely no time to be territorial.  We've all 
supported this concept of citizen police review in our various ways, and we 
will all benefit from it.  It's time to pull together, with wisdom.

The mayor of Urbana is in support of a CPRB that is effective, as are at 
least four and possibly five of the seven city council members.  It is 
Mayor Prussing who appointed the task force which has recently rendered its 
report, and she and a few others attended the annual meeting of NACOLE 
(National Association for Citizen Oversight of Law Enforcement) down in 
Florida a few months ago.  She was actually one of the original members of 
the Coalition for Citizen Police Review, back in 2001.  The task force 
was/is comprised mainly of people who are supportive of a CPRB, but at the 
same time there was a serious attempt to assure that no constituency went 
unrepresented.

We of the Coalition met with the mayor (past and present), all seven of the 
council members (both past and present), and the police chief and his 
assistant Mike Bily, who is now the Chief or at least acting Chief, I'm not 
sure.  We tried but were unsuccessful in meeting with the president of the 
police union.

We had developed a proposal and a model ordinance, which called for each 
city council member to nominate three possible candidates from his/her ward 
for the CPRB.  The mayor would then choose one of the three nominees from 
each ward.

In our proposed model there were no law enforcement officials, past or 
present, on the CPRB.  But there are other possible models, not only 
hypothetically but in practice around the country.  In one - Lansing, 
Michigan I think it is - there's a police officer on the CPRB, but s/he is 
counterbalanced by representatives from several minority groups and other 
special constituencies.

In no successful model of the CPRB anywhere in the country is there an 
instance where law enforcement officials comprise anywhere near a voting 
majority of the CPRB.  It's natural for the police union to want to be 
represented on the CPRB.  But it's important to bear in mind that this 
representative, should it come to that, would have only one vote and would 
essentially be there in an advisory capacity.  It's also important to bear 
in mind that a CPRB can be truly successful in a community ONLY if ALL 
segments of the community - including the police - support it because they 
feel that they have a vested interest and some input into it.

I encourage all of you to go to these meetings, speak your minds, make your 
voices heard.  But please don't sabotage the process by being belligerent 
in "demanding" this and that, and by bringing in examples that are only 
tangentially relevant to the process of creating a CPRB.  Yes, the Patrick 
Thompson case in general, and Officer Hediger's performance in particular, 
may well be one that the CPRB would look into if there WAS a CPRB.  But the 
meeting tonight is only one in a long series of meetings whose purpose is 
to give birth to a CPRB.  I assure you that, very much like the gestation 
and birth experience, the process is working as it should, albeit slowly, 
at least so far.  Let us work together to monitor the process with all the 
means at our disposal.  But let us be careful not to abort the process 
through haste or hyperbole.  Let us be wise in insisting that the CPRB have 
certain necessary features, such as subpoena power.  But let us also 
exercise wisdom in being willing to compromise where compromise will not 
jeopardize the essential functioning of the CPRB, and indeed where an 
unwillingness to compromise might jeopardize the very creation of a CPRB.

I'm sorry I'm weighing in on this so late.  I wasn't even aware that the 
Urbana City Council would be considering the task force's report 
tonight.  :-(  I CAN assure you that no final action will be taken tonight.

Sincerely and respectfully,

John Wason