Public Safety Committee

PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE November 13, 2018 A meeting of the Public Safety Committee was held this date beginning at 2:04 p.m., at 80 Broad Street, City Hall, Second Floor Conference Room Notice of this meeting was sent to all local news media. PRESENT Councilmember Shahid, Chair, Councilmember Seekings (by telephone) Councilmember Wagner, Councilmember Lewis, and Mayor Tecklenburg (arrived at 2:07 p.m.) Staff: Chief Reynolds, Steve Ruemelin, Rick Jerue, and Bethany Whitaker The meeting was opened with a moment of silence provided by Councilmember Lewis. Approval of Minutes On the motion of Councilmember Lewis, seconded by Councilmember Wagner, the Committee voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the October 22, 2018 meeting. An Ordinance to amend the Code of the City of Charleston, South Carolina, Chapter 21, to add a new Section 1 providing that a person who violates another Section of Chapter 21 with the intent to intimidate another person or persons in whole or in part because of the actual or perceived race, color, creed, religion, ancestry, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, physical or mental disability or national origin of the other person or persons is guilty of the separate offense of hate intimidation and shall be punished as provided in Section 1-16. Chief Reynolds stated that South Carolina was one of only four or five states in the Country that didn’t have a hate crime ordinance already. He believed that they should have an ordinance for a number of reasons, and that was why this ordinance was brought to them. There was a significant amount of hate in the Country, which in some instances manifested it’s way in victimization because of a number of different reasons. Some would argue that they already had laws on the books to deal with crime. He believed that they needed to recognize this as a problem in the communities and take a clear stand against hate and victimization/crime as it was related to hate. It was important to codify and document events that were hate based events, so that they had a record and had clarity on the issue. There had been a press release from the Anti-Defamation League, quoting some of the data that the FBI had released in 2017. The FBI had released that hate crimes in the United States had jumped 17% in 2017 and there was a 37% spike in crimes specifically targeting Jewish institutions. They had seen what had 1 happened in Pittsburgh because of hate and in Charleston a few years previous at Mother Emanuel. As a City, he thought they needed to take a stand against hate and have a level of solidarity because they knew that hate existed and it was something they needed to speak to. Steve Ruemelin stated that this was relayed to him through the Legal Department that this was something that the Mayor had an interest in and he had volunteered to take the lead. About the time that he had started working on it, Chief Reynolds was in touch with the Anti- Defamation League and they volunteered their help. He had worked with David Barkey, who was in Florida. Mr. Barkey had worked on these across the country and this was some of his language. They wanted to keep it fairly simple. It stated that if someone committed a crime such as an assault or damage to property, based upon the different characteristics, someone could be found guilty of a separate crime and could be punished on top of the underlying crime. It only applied to municipal ordinances, not to State Law. The hope was that the State would take notice and do something similar. The maximum penalty would be 30 days for the assault and 30 days for the hate crime. There was some difficulty in proving these, but social media was helping in some regard, because a lot of people who committed hate crimes liked to speak on social media about it. Councilmember Seekings said he thought this would pass constitutional muster and was enforceable. Mr. Ruemelin said that it had in many other jurisdictions. This wasn’t a sentencing enhancement. It was a separate crime, so the jury would have to find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the elements of the hate crime were met. Councilmember Lewis said it wasn’t a state statute, but under Home Rule, the City had the authority to do its own ordinance, so it would hold up in Court. Mr. Ruemelin said that was their opinion. Mayor Tecklenburg said that he fully supported this ordinance. It wasn’t in response to what had happened in Pittsburgh. They were already working on it when that happened. Although there was no State law, there was a Federal law similar to this. This allowed for the City to be able to pursue the reality of discrimination and hate related actions for simple assaults and other crimes. It gave them another tool in the toolbox to enforce and make clear that hate would not be accepted or tolerated without consequences in the City. Chairman Shahid stated that there was a 37% spike of hate crimes targeting Jewish individuals and institutions. This topic had not been addressed after Mother Emanuel, and he was surprised they hadn’t thought about it or address. There wasn’t a State Statute dealing with this. It had been in front of the General Assembly a few times and for whatever reasons, they had elected not to pass a hate crime ordinance. There had been several cases that they had in the City that they wanted prosecuted on a Federal level that had been declined. So, if they could not rely on their partners to pick up on this, that this gave the City’s police and 2 municipality the opportunity to charge and control the cases. That was important. He was surprised when they received this ordinance that they didn’t already have it. On the motion of Councilmember Lewis, seconded by Councilmember Wagner, the Committee voted unanimously to approve the above ordinance. Having no further business, the Committee adjourned at 2:15 p.m. Bethany Whitaker Council Secretary 3