Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CPB-1994-05-27 pf.ITy a!h! i Iranian I. �,�RATEO== CITY OF ITHACA COMMUNITY POLICE BOARD 120 EAST CLINTON STREET (607) 272-9973 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850-5689 EXTENSION 3W MINUTES: Ithaca Community Police Board PLACE: Second Floor Conference Room,City Hall TIME& DATE: May 27, 1994 at 2:30 p.m. PRESENT: Commissioners Lappin, Nelson, Sarachan, Teasley; Chief McEwen, Deputy Chief David Barnes, PBA President Gray, Alderperson Shenk, Doria Higgins,Alan Cohen. 1. Commissioner Sarachan called the meeting to order. 2. Approve Minutes of Meeting of April 22, 1994: The minutes of the April 22, 1994 meeting were approved. 3. Report from Common Council: Alderperson Shenk noted that Common Council is currently discussing the Traffic Task Force's recommendations. She also noted that her office (BOCES) is sponsoring a community workshop on June 8, 1994. Chief McEwen noted that Officers Finnerty and Gillern will be attending this workshop. 4. Comments from the Public: Doria Higgins spoke to the Ithaca Community Police Board regarding some recent memoranda from the Assistant City Attorney which has caused some confusion in the community regarding duties of City board members when they are presented with information (from members of the community) which may be relevant to a decision the board member may be dealing with regarding a public meeting or hearing. Ms. Higgins noted that the Ithaca Journal did a story on the first memo from Ms. Kennedy which gave the public a wrong perception and passed out a memo from Ms. Kennedy which supersedes her original memo (copy attached). Discussion followed. Chief McEwen noted that Ms. Kennedy's memo was discussed at the City staff meeting this morning, noting that her intentions were good but that the first memo was unfairly blown out of context. Discussion followed about how this memorandum pertained to the duties of the Community Police Board. Chief McEwen also noted that the City Charter designates the Community Police Board as an appeals board for taxi licenses. Alan Cohen read a statement (copy attached) regarding the current complaint process the Community Police Board follows. He felt this process lacks confidentiality which discourages people from voicing their concerns. Mr. Cohen suggested that the discussions between the commissioner and the complainant be tape recorded to guarantee confidentiality. Mr. Cohen also suggested that police officers be allowed to file complaints with the Community Police Board regarding problems they have on calls Community Police Board Meeting Minutes Page 2 May 27, 1994 which they feel could lead to a complaint against them. Mr. Cohen noted that on many occasions there is a time lapse between the time the incident occurs and when the complaint is filed. Discussion followed regarding Mr. Cohen's statement and suggestions. PBA President Gray felt that officers can't anticipate "complaints" when they go on calls. Alderperson Shenk noted that anyone can talk to a Community Police Board member informally, anytime, without anyone else present. She also noted that the Community Police Board and Mayor's Task Force have discussed and addressed many of the concerns that Mr. Cohen mentioned in his statement. Mr. Cohen also asked about the Sams' complaint which was briefly discussed. Mr. Cohen felt that if Ms. Sams' complaint was not formalized than it should not have been handled in the media the way it was. 5. Report of the Chief: Chief McEwen passed out an article from a Rochester newspaper written Rev. Natalie Alford encouraging the black church to reach out to the black youth. Chief McEwen noted that he and PBA President Gray met with Rita Linger from Community Dispute Resolution Center regarding the lay advocates training program. Chief McEwen noted that three training meetings have been scheduled for June and that he and Commissioner Seligmann will be speaking to the volunteers on June 16. 6. Comments from PBA President: Commissioner Sarachan congratulated PBA President Gray on his election to President of the Police Benevolent Association and offered him an open invitation to attend the Community Police Board meetings. PBA President Gray noted that he came to introduce himself to the Board and wanted to see how the Community Police Board meetings are run. 7. Old Business: The Community Police Board decided to discuss "A Guide To A Better Understanding Between You and the Ithaca Police Dept.", the Complaint Procedure form and review of the Community Police Board Complaint Forms for language barriers at a future meeting. The review of the 1993-1996 PBA contract was deleted with the suggestion that all Community Police Board members review it and if there are questions to contact the Chief. Commissioner Sarachan gave the Community Police Board a brief report on the by-laws meeting he had with City Attorney Chuck Guttman and Commissioner Teasley, noting that for the time being the Community Police Board has to abide by the open meeting laws. Commissioner Sarachan suggested that the Community Police Board discuss their thoughts for by-laws at a future meeting. Commissioner Lappin noted that the video tape that she and Commissioner Edmonds worked on will air on June 9, 1994 at 4 pm. Chief McEwen asked that he and PBA President Gray be allowed to view this tape before it is actually aired. 8. New Business: Commissioner Lappin suggested that the Community Police Board make a recommendation to Common Council to hire more officers. This will be discussed at the June meeting. 9. Adjournment: The next meeting of the Community Police Board is scheduled to be held on June 24, 1994 at 2:30 p.m. in the second floor conference room of City Hall. The Community Police Board adjourned into Executive Session at 4:05 p.m. CPB/lac attachments AS C :.rmn .1 r IFTT1:iT"'I ;o; CITY OF ITHACA 108 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 OFFICE OF TELEPHONE: (607)274.656-1 CITY ATTORNEY FAX: (607)272-73-3 MEMORANDUM TO: Chairs of Boards & Commissions FROM: Patricia M. Kennedy, Assistant City Attorn " 2"-,/ - DATE: May 16, 1994 RE: Clarification of my April 12 , 1994 Memo to Boards & Commissions As some of you may know, my April 12th memo on the decision making process for boards and commissions has sparked considerable controversy. Because some of the controversy may have been generated by confusion over the intended application of the proposed guidelines for decision making, I am sending out this second memo to supersede the first. The original question which was posed by a member of the Planning Board, was a request for some guidance for members of the board when a board member was provided with information or opinions relevant to a decision which the board member would be called upon to make outside of the public meeting or hearing context. The first piece of guidance is that not all decisions which board members make are the same. Members of the City's boards and commissions act in many different roles. They act as planners, advisors, regulators, legislators, and judges. They act singly or in subcommittees or in full meetings and what is considered appropriate for one type of role may be inappropriate when a board member is in a different role. 1 n -An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program' et Recycled Paper r ADJUDICATORY DECISION MAKING • I understood the original question to deal with the role of a board member when the board member is sitting as a "judge, " i.e. , when the board member will be called upon to vote on evidence presented to the board on some type of application. The boards which would generally sit in this kind of role, from time to time, are: 1. The Planning Board, when it hears from an applicant for site plan review, subdivision approval or when conducts an environmental assessment.1 2 . The Board of Zoning Appeal, when it hears application for variances, special permits or interpretations and when it conducts related environmental review. 3 . The Landmarks Preservation Commission, when it conducts a • hearing on whether a certificate of appropriateness should be issued, with any related environmental review, and when it sits to make findings of fact and recommendations on whether a particular structure should be designated for landmark status. 4 . The Building Code Board of Appeals, when it conducts hearings for people who disagree with the Building Commissioner's order to repair, remove or vacate a building. 5. The Housing Board of Review, when it sits to hear appeals for variances from orders of the Building Commissioner regarding housing code standards. 6. The Board of Fire Appeals, for people who wish to challenge a determination of the Chief of the Fire Department covering fire prevention regulations not included in the State Uniform Code. 7 . The Board of Public Works, when it hears appeals from billings, holds public hearings on street openings and closings, establishes sidewalk assessments and the like. 8 . The Common Council, when it hears appeals for denials of Commons Permits, certificates of appropriateness and the like. There may be other times when boards or commissions are sitting as judges that I have overlooked. The information which is presented 1 Environmental Assessment may come up for many boards, with the complexity of review dependent on the potential for environmental impact. 2 in the rest of this memorandum is intended to respond to board members-' questions and concerns about proper procedure when the board member is sitting in the capacity as judge and it is not intended to cover any other of the various possible roles for the board member. DUE PROCESS and PROPERTY INTERESTS What is at issue in each of the adjudicatory functions listed above is generally a determination on some kind of property interest by an applicant for some type of permit. The general legal concept involved for this kind of decision making is that individuals should not be deprived of some kind of property interest without some form of due process. The process that we are talking about is the hearing on the application for a permit, variance, or determination. General rules of due process are designed to guarantee that a party in such a situation will have a full and fair opportunity to be heard and that those in opposition to any application would likewise have a full and fair opportunity to be heard. A board' s decision on such a matter is supposed to be based on substantial evidence, in conformance with the law and neither arbitrary or capricious. Board members and courts which later review boards ' decisions should be in a position to know what evidence was reviewed and whether it is substantial enough to justify whatever result the board reaches. In addition to the substantial body of law which deals with these quasi-administrative or quasi-judicial decision-making processes, decisions of this kind are also governed by concepts taken from the State' s Open Meeting Law and from State and local ethics laws. The goals of all of these laws are to insure to the largest extent possible that the adjudicatory decision making process is fair, open, impartial, and supported by evidence relevant to the legal standards involved for the particular decision being made. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND BIAS A board member may and should decline to participate in a particular decision when the board member or someone in the board member' s family may be directly, and often financially, impacted by the decision. A board member might also decide not to participate in a particular decision when she feels so passionately about one view or another that she feels her ability to look at the evidence and make a fair and unbiased decision is affected by her strong feelings on the subject. Conflicts and bias are grounds on which board decisions can be overturned. 3 r ' OPENNESS IN THE PROCESS AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE Board members who are provided with information of a substantive nature outside of the public hearing process should make every effort to insure that the information they receive is placed in front of the full board. For example, if a board member receives a letter at home, a copy of the letter should be made a part of the file for the application so that everyone interested in the decision can see it. If a board member is given a particular type of information in a verbal way outside the hearing, the board member should disclose at the public hearing that they received information and describe the kind of information provided. The general idea of each of these guidelines is that all members of the board who are going to vote on a particular subject should have available to them the same information. The other goal is that if there are two or more sides to an issue being voted upon, individuals who represent or support the applicant and those who oppose any application should all be provided with the same information so that if there is a factual dispute, sufficient information can be put forward to the board members for a proper resolution of any factual dispute. STAFF INVOLVEMENT In the course of the discussion since the original memo, there have been several specific questions raised which we will attempt to answer here. The first question is whether and to what extent board members should be obtaining information from City staff members. The guidelines which are appropriate for members of the public are equally appropriate when considering information provided by or from City staff members. All information should be made available to everyone on the board. For example, if a board member decides that they need some particular guidance on a legal issue which appears likely to be involved in an upcoming decision, a board member could contact the City Attorney' s Office with the request for information. Whatever answer was provided should be provided by the City Attorney's Office to the entire board and made part of the record so that if someone took issue with the legal opinion and felt that it was not an appropriate standard, a contrary view could also be presented. A more frequent example is the procedural guidance or information provided by the Building Department for Board of Zoning Appeals members or the Planning Department for Planning Board members. Generally, it is the staff of each of those departments who assemble the material as it comes in for the application, determine the order on the calendar and the dates on which certain events will take place. Staff members in the Building Department, for example, take responsibility for circulating applications for zoning appeals to the Planning Board and to the 4 County Board as is required by law. Staff members in the Planning Department frequently serve as the routers of information as information is provided by the applicant or members of the public or other boards and commissions which is intended to reach the Planning Board or when Planning Board members in reviewing portions of an application, feel that additional information is required. As with the law office staff, the Planning Department staffs ' function is to provide procedural assistance and to collect and distribute data. All board members should have equal access to whatever information is provided and any board member who solicits particular types of information from staff members should take a role in insuring that both the request for information and the information resulting from the request is made available to the board. CONTACTS WITH THE PUBLIC, THE MEDIA AND APPLICANTS Another question which came up as a result of my previous memo is the extent to which board members should feel free to discuss what is going on with members of the public, applicants and/or the press. Since these hearings, which we are discussing, are all open meetings, I do not foresee a situation in which confidentiality of any kind would be an issue. There may be such a case, but it does not come to mind. There would certainly be no problem with any member of a board or commission describing the procedures which are involved in the board' s decision-making process or their own thinking on any question. The only problem that I can imagine from a board member discussing his or her view of the application in a public fashion prior to reaching a decision, is that if what the board member says indicates that the board member has prejudged the application before hearing all of the facts, such a prejudgment might serve as a basis for a post-decision legal challenge to the determination on the grounds of bias or lack of impartiality by whatever party is unhappy with the ultimate decision. WHAT CAN WE SAY? One person suggested that my previous memo would have the effect of a "gag" order and that board members would end up being rude to those with legitimate questions or concerns. I certainly did not intend either impact. What I would suggest is that board members encourage people with concerns or information to come to the relevant hearings or meetings and address the whole board. If a live appearance is out of the question, written comments should be sent in. If there are any other specific questions about the adjudicatory decision making process of boards or any other questions that you feel would help you in your role as a board member, please don't hesitate to ask. 5 Community Police Board Meeting 5/27/94 Statement by Alan Cohen Important work has been done in recent years to bring about better communication between the police department and the community. It is unfortunate that there exists a degree of public mistrust towards the police department. This mistrust is a reality that will never fully go away as many individuals are generally suspicious of authority and those who have it. Given these circumstances, it is important that an individual who wants to voice an informal complaint or a simple concern to a police commissioner should be able to do so with the knowledge that their identity will be kept confidential. This of course can not and should not apply in a formal complaint situation, as our system of justice guarantees us the right to confront our accuser. The way the complaint process is structured now, a police commissioner is unable to privately discuss with a citizen any concern or complaint about the department or any of its employees without a representative of the police department present. The lack of confidentiality in this process will discourage most people from voicing their concerns. The presence of a police official also serves to, whether intended or not, intimidate the complainant and further discourage the communication that we are trying to encourage in the first place. If the concern of the department rests in access to information or the ability to later corroborate a story, perhaps discussions between commissioners and complainants can be tape recorded. The individual would of course have to give consent, and would not have to identify themselves on tape to guarantee their confidentiality. It would seem a good compromise. The issues of confidentiality and communication affect both the general public and the police department, yet we seem to have forgotten one half of the equation. Encouraging citizen complaints or voicing of concerns can lead to a healthy discourse, and the responsibility for acting on these communications seems to fall on the police board. I do not understand how this can be fairly done when the police board is only hearing half the story. Yes, it is true that in a complaint situation the board gets to read the police report on the situation in question, but how often do these reports really give the true feeling for what transpired. Police officers are used to writing many reports as part of their responsibilities, and they learn to be concise and to the point. The report is written from a professional point of view, not a personal one, and the report reader is often deprived of knowing the full story from the officer's perspective. If an officer is later confronted with a complaint, he or she must rely on memory to give a more desciptive accounting of the incident in question. Pertinent facts about the incident might be forgotten because they were never included in the original report, and the police board will not hear the full story. The full story might also not be in the report of the incident in question, but in other reports of previous incidents. Some individuals might have a history of one type of behavior or another that would lead the police to handle any situation with this individual in an unorthodox way. How can the police board make a knowledgeable decision when it does not necessarily have all the facts. This leads me to my other recommendation. I propose that there be a confidential police officer complaint component of the present process. What I mean by a police complaint is that police officers should be able to file confidential complaints with the police board about citizens in the same manner that any member of the general public can file a formal or informal complaint about a police officer. If particular members of the general public verbally insult or otherwise harass police officers on a regular basis, the police board should know about it. If one of these individuals turns around and files a complaint against an officer, the police board will have that much more documented information at hand to make a more objective decision. Confidentiality is just as important in this situation. We are not talking about a government agency compiling secret files on its citizens; we are talking about a citizen oversight board that would function best and achieve greater results if all informal complaints were kept confidential, whether they were from police officers or from private citizens. Assuring a police officer or a private citizen confidentiality would give these individuals the freedom and confidence to file reports whenever they felt they were wronged, without worrying about any future repercussions. This would lead to better communication and ultimately better results. This could also open up other possibilities. For example, if an individual is found to always be at odds with the police department, they should be exposed to the same type of public interaction sensitivity training that police officers are required to take. Many citizens are ignorant when it comes to knowing how to act with the police, or they are insensitive to the responsibilities of a police officer. An individual's willingness to participate in this type of sensitivity training would give both their complaints and the entire process more credibility. Many people perceive the existing process as being onesided. Education and communication go both ways, and the public might require as much education on the police department as police officers might need about the general public. Let's level the playing field so to speak and involve all parties in the process. If we all tried to understand each other a little more than we do now, we would all get along together that much better. DEMOCRAT AND CHRONICLE, ROCHESTER, N.Y., SUNDAY, MARCH 20, 1994 13A SPEAKING . ....... READER ESSAYS just. an't those w Black church for what happened to their friend. _ So much more was needed. A summer institute Sad to say, this black church • •This month:More than 600 working on curbing violence. •must reach out didn't set into motion groundwork 9 9 attended "A The program will be held Jul 5- for changing the gun laws. - people P o9 July to black youth Unfortunately,it didn't open its �•j • ,„ Community's Response to 8 for junior-high and middle- doors to the community to address Y Urban Violence" held at Colgate school students:from July 11 to `^ # Rochester Divinity School March 14 for senior high students, By the Rev. Natalie Alford this gun law issue. �"^ g-1p aged 15 to 18. On the day of the girl's funeral,I j` g t was only a few years ago, recall that there were hundreds of \�j� ■This summer Local, regional ■For more information:Write to I before I came to Rochester.At youth present.After we returned to "' YY/ and national educators,youth the Rev. Natalie P. Alford at age 15,she was in the prime of the church from the cemetery,their s (\ counselors and church and Colgate Rochester Divinity her youthful life.She was a star initial question was not whether A( "' ----'''' -w+ community persons plan to School, 1100 S. Goodman St.. basketball player,a volunteer at the —friend would make it into teach courses on leadership for Rochester, NY 14606. • local hospital, she did well in her heaven. They asked: "Where did '"` 50 or more youth interested in course work,and she was also active they get the gun?" - in the church.She was what we call I'm sure that must have surprised v same fear that has us paralyzed, youth in finding solutions to these "a nice young lady." some church people, who were -.wow, 4 sr also? crises. One day, ready to give theological answers for ; In 1950,according to Dr.Jawanza The statistics show that African Col'rJUVtdl�ln, however, "why God let this happen." �/ ` Kunjufu,author of Countering the American youth are disproportion' 11 live NI she and her Too many youth are living Conspiracy to Destroy Black Boys, ately the victims of crime. There- boyfriend .- �► �'� . P Y Y Y Y AGENDA happily today, without peace and the greatest influences for youth fore,it will be the youth who have to were play- without the daily spiritual lifts that i - tt; were the home, the school, the work and struggle with us. With 1994 ing a den- sustain hope in this troubled world. , 1.*° 1 church, peer pressure and televi- their help, we will move from the gerous as ,. ---41,--- game: Rus- Many are trying to find happiness t +�i/ ll s sion. In 1993,they were peer pres- critical to the creative presence we without a sense of worthiness.Oth- sell" sure, rap,rou- t)1I ;. p, television, home and long for. COMBATING ere live their meager lives,die their E x school. The church came in sixth. We must continue to learn from VIOLENCE tette. It was deaths and lie in their graves with- �- , .! Why the shift? Could it be be- our past, but it's time for a new her turn. out ever experiencing the abundant s ," cause adults control the converse- person They rushed her to the hospi- life _ reality.After all,no one rson has tai.For hours,she lay in the emer- tions in church and don't allow our the only revolutionary answer. I strongly suggest we look again to As our youth gency room.Her mother and father, black church tradition for solo- M youth to talk about things that af- Yo fact their lives? say,it's time to the pastor and a few other clergy lions The black church must be willing "change the stood around. Blood, terror and a "` = - �.. sense of helplessness filled the Historically,the black communi- to wrap its arms around our youth flare. 0 room- ty often called on the black church, and help shape their leadership Rev. Alford Where was the church during this and rightfully so,to meet our moral, t� V \Vi styles. Many youth need personal is program �F horrible event? I remember asking and political crises. �v/ V V moral power, not programs; heal- manager of the the concerned adults: "What were When I was young, I remember ���I(( �/ Y Inge,not handouts;grace,not guns; National Re- we(the black church)going to do?" how powerful the black church was a a 4 and deliverance,not drugs. source Center The answer I got was: Officiate in promoting laws and addressing A , A A r It's simply not enough to involve for the Devel- ,N vts over the funeral services and pro- problems that threatened human is.,s..t sun.nn, our youth in educational and reli- opment of d, , ,t .1-,! vide a space for a repast after the rights. gious activities that will not have Ethical Lead- Afford funeral. Collectively, our African-Ameri- of Baptist, Methodist, Episcopal, Repeatedly,the youth told me they meaning or value. ership from Some of us counseled the youth can communities have all the neces- Roman Catholic, Pentecostal, etc. were not looking forward to their We must welcome a"sprouting- the Black Church Tradition,a non- during the hours that passed, en- eery ingredients to make these Before the recent winter school break because they were afraid. up"style into the traditional"press- profit organization established last couraging them not to give up and changes happen. break, I asked several high school They said there was too much time ing down"method.That means we Year at Colgate Rochester Divinity telling them they were not to blame We must look beyond the labels students what they planned to do. for things to go wrong.Isn't this the must invite, listen and hear our School.