Independent Police Review Division
Citizen Review Committee
Minutes: March 19, 2002
Called to Order at 5:35 pm
Members Present: Browning, Miggins, Alexander, Stone, Lopez, Pollard, Terrell, Shannon, Ueland
City Staff: Rosenthal, Rees
- Director's Report - Because of security implementation all persons in the City Hall after 5:30 pm must sign at the start of the meeting. If anyone comes after that time the sign in is in the 1st floor lobby. The crowd control exercise got mixed reviews. A motion to accept the committee appeal process protocol was made by Ueland and seconded by Terrell. There was no discussion and the members voted unanimously in favor. The Appeal Declination Protocol is in process.
- March 5, 2002 minutes were accepted with minor corrections.
- March 14, 2002 minutes were accepted with minor corrections.
- Chair Lopez reviewed the guidelines for the meeting and the appeal process. It was noted that appellants could allow their names to be used if they choose.
- Appeal 01-30
The IPR Director reviewed the IPR Report.
The appellant was present and discussed his point of view.
The officer was not present but was represented by K. Warren.
Lt. Bechard reviewed the IAD report.
CRC reviewers Terrell and Pollard discussed the case. They felt it was an issue for Risk Management. The committee as a whole felt the issue was better handled at Risk Management.
Appellant made a final statement.
IPR Director made his statement.
Attorney noted the standard of the review.
MOTION to accept the IAD finding was made by Pollard and seconded by Terrell.
There was no further discussion
Motion passed by a vote of 9-0.
Public input was given by D. Lane, D. Handelman, and M. Rooklidge
- Case Conference 01-10 Appellant and Officer B were notified but not present. Commander was present. Full discussion followed.
After hearing from the Bureau's command staff, MOTION was made by Alexander to hold the CRC's recommendation in abeyance until the Bureau has reevaluated its policies and procedures relating to the definition of a service complaint.
DISCUSSION: Changes in service complaint policy have not yet been implemented.
VOTE in favor: Browning, Miggins, Alexander, Stone, Lopez, Pollard, Terrell, Ueland
VOTE against: Shannon
Motion carried by a vote of 8-1.
- Pre-hearing Review
01-25 Reviewed by Miggins and Stone. They recommended further investigation to attempt to contact possible witnesses.
02-03 Reviewed by Browning and Ueland and discussed with the resulting MOTION to decline hearing made by Ueland and seconded by Browning,
VOTE in favor Browning, Miggins, Alexander, Stone, Pollard, Terrell, Shannon, Ueland (Lopez absent).
Motion carried 8-0.
02-05 Reviewed by Terrell and Alexander and discussed with the resulting MOTION to decline made by Alexander and seconded by Terrell.
VOTE in favor: Browning, Miggins, Alexander, Stone, Terrell, Shannon, Ueland
(Lopez and Pollard absent).
Motion carried 7-0
- Public input by Rooklidge, Lane, Handelman
*APPROVED April 16, 2002