Citizen's Review Board

Wichita Citizen Review Board WSU Old Town Campus 238 N. Mead Wichita, KS 67202 March 22, 2018 4 p.m. Present: Doug Nolte, Shaun Rojas, Stephanie Luna, Tonja Sowder, Dennis Bender, Jay Fowler, Sharon Dickgrafe, Timothy Sims, Janet Miller, Robert Thompson, Barry Grissom? (on phone), Donte Martin Item 1: Call to Order Nolte called the meeting to order at approximately 4:02 p.m. Nolte introduced himself and stated he would be recording the meetings. He noted there was a quorum present and several alternates. He stated that Chief Ramsay would not be attending this meeting because of spring break. Chief planned to attend next month’s meeting and would like to get to know the board members and start a dialogue with them. Nolte reviewed the agenda and stated the public agenda was moved to the end of today’s meeting in order to get through the bylaws discussion first. Nolte stated that the next fourth Thursday is April 26; however the board could meet sooner and has flexibility on the recurrence of the meeting. This could be discussed during the bylaws review. Item 2: Approval of Minutes Nolte stated since this was the first regular meeting there were no minutes to approve. Item 3: Bylaws Discussion Article I Nolte stated that Section 2a refers to talking to media when they contact you. Board members will be visible to the community to talk about what the board is doing and will have regular contact with the public. There will be some things that will be closed/confidential. Sims suggested adding “and recruiting, with media and citizens in general”. It was agreed this would be added. Bender asked Nolte if he would consider it a role of the board to be on the panel for oral reviews of officers. Nolte responded not necessarily and he would not recommend to formalize it as a role. Bender noted it was helpful being on the panel to understand the life of an officer. Nolte explained that they want to a fresh citizen perspective for the candidate pool for the board. Fowler noted it may be beneficial for other board members to participate in the oral boards. Nolte agreed he would recommend it to the chief without formalizing it in the bylaws. Dickgrafe confirmed that it would be a recommendation to the Chief. Bender suggested to have the board name consistent throughout the bylaws. Nolte confirmed he would correct it. Wichita Citizen Review Board March 22, 2018 Page 1 of 7 Nolte stated Section 2d must remain “community advisory board” in the bylaws due to the statute. Sowder asked if the police would advise the board about police department policy changes. Nolte responded yes. Sowder asked if the board would approve all of those. Nolte responded the board would review and approve those that the Chief wants them to review. The board could review policy, and could recommend policy changes if they feel strongly about it. Sowder asked how the board would be advised of new policy. Nolte stated it could be an agenda item. Fowler suggested adding to Section 2e “or upon request of the board”. Sowder asked if Chief Ramsay could give the board a brief description of how policies are developed/reviewed/changed/implemented. Sims asked if the board could propose a policy recommendation. Nolte responded yes and it would be through an agenda item for the meeting. Article II Nolte asked if the board wanted to change the terms in Section 5 and when they would want terms to be effective. Sims stated he liked the effective date of March. He noted that the section does not reference alternates and asked if it should include them. Dickgrafe noted that the alternates are not voting members. She stated the current ordinance did not allow for alternates, but it could be amended if needed. Nolte noted that the term would expire in January 2020. Fowler stated that the terms need to be consistent with the ordinance, so they should be January 1 instead of March1. Article III Nolte noted that the ordinance recognizes a chairperson and a secretary. Sims asked who would conduct meetings in the absence of the chairperson. Nolte responded that the board may want to consider electing a vice – chairperson. They will change Section 1b to “vice-chairperson” and add Section 1c for “secretary”. Sims asked if that was an ordinance requirement. Nolte responded no. Sims recommended the chairperson should have a two (2) year term. Fowler responded that could not be done because of the controlling document, the ordinance. Nolte stated the board could possibly add an amendment to the ordinance later. For now, the board will leave the terms as one (1) year terms and look at proposing a change to two (2) year terms. Nolte noted that Section 5b (i) and (ii) now pertain to the vice-chairperson role. The board will add Section 5c for the secretary and (iii) will be secretary’s duties. Dickgrafe stated the secretary will have responsibility of taking minutes. Article IV Sowder stated that the replacement should come from the alternates. Nolte recommended removing Section 1 and making Section 2 the new Section 1. The board approved the recommendation. Wichita Citizen Review Board March 22, 2018 Page 2 of 7 Fowler noted that the Staff Liaison will notify the City Manager in Section 2 and should be changed. Nolte acknowledged the change. Article V Sowder asked what would be considered an unexcused absence in Section 2. Nolte responded it could be no communication between the Staff Liaison and the Board Member. Bender stated it would be a “no call, no show”. Fowler stated that the ordinance only states “two or more absences”. Sims suggested to remove “unexcused”. Dickgrafe suggested to also remove “failure to notify chair”. Fowler stated he would like to see the ordinance amended for excused absence and for the board to determine “excused”. Nolte noted it is a chore to change the ordinance. Sims asked if there was flexibility in meeting on the fourth Thursday. Nolte recommended the stick with the ordinance. The board approved. Bender noted in Section 3a and 3b that the ordinance states you have to complete the Citizens Police Academy (CPA). Nolte stated that a lot of the CPA is going on ride-alongs so you get a taste of what it would be like. SWAT and EOD also come to talk about what they do. They want CPA training so the board will understand what the department is doing. He stated the board will get training during regular meetings and that could count as a component. Fowler suggested the board leave Section 3a and 3b as is and ask if the board can do an equivalent to the CPA. Thompson noted that the board is meeting every fourth Thursday and the CPA is every Monday for 13 weeks for 3 hours. Bender stated he almost did not apply for the Citizens Review Board because of the CPA requirement. Nolte reminded the board that they have the ability to dictate what training should be if the ordinance is changed. He suggested to leave Section 3b as is but revise the ordinance to “or equivalent”. The board agreed. Article VI Sowder asked if Section 2 meant that she could not call a meeting since she is a board member. Dickgrafe responded yes. Nolte asked if Section 2 precludes the board from talking to the media. Dickgrafe responded she thought the intent was to show that you are not speaking for the board. She suggested the board may not want Section 2. Nolte asked if the board wished to remove Section 2. The board approved to remove Section 2. Sowder asked about Section 3 and how would the board know what could and could not be disclosed. Wichita Citizen Review Board March 22, 2018 Page 3 of 7 Nolte responded that any executive session should be considered private and confidential. He noted they would make sure the board was clear on what could be disclosed. Sims asked about Article 1 Section 2f regarding post discipline findings and if those were considered confidential. Nolte responded yes. Article VII Dickgrafe stated staff would try to clean up Section 1 because the board thought it was too vague. Nolte and the board agreed. Nolte stated he would send a bylaws draft to the board. Bender asked if per Section 2 the City Manager or Chief of Police had to give notice to call an additional meeting. Dickgrafe responded no, according to the bylaws. She stated with time sensitive issues a day or reasonable notice could be given. Kitchen noted that scheduling meetings on a monthly basis has the board more than in compliance because the bylaws state they must have quarterly meetings. Dickgrafe stated that is how the ordinance is written. Nolte suggested to leave the Section 2 as is. The board agreed. Nolte moved to Section 3 and asked the board how soon they wanted agendas before meetings. The board agreed on one week in advance of the meeting. Fowler stated that the Section 5 language was fine as is, however they need some procedures for public comment, maybe putting names on a list. Nolte noted that seemed appropriate so the chairperson knows who the public speaker will be. He asked if the board wanted to limit public speakers to 3 – 5 minutes. Rojas asked if there is a way to receive public comment other than email. Nolte responded that the board’s personal email and phone are not public. He suggested that if someone brings something to a board member, it could be brought up as an agenda item. Rojas asked if there would be a formal way to bring concerns to the board because he worries that the board is not going to be able to represent all of them. Fowler suggested adding a paragraph so the board could receive written comments via a dedicated email address and it would become part of the record. Nolte asked if his intent was to have the emails read at the meetings. Fowler responded the emails could be made available, but not read at the meetings. Nolte stated staff could capture emails, monitor them and make them available to the board. Sowder questioned if Police staff should be capturing and monitoring the emails. She asked how other boards take public comment. Dickgrafe responded that other boards take public comment in meetings, not via email. Martin noted that if the board desires a forum to receive public comment they have to decide what to do with the email because they cannot reply. Sowder noted that if the board cannot reply to emails, she would rather just receive public comment in the meeting. Nolte noted the board would have to control public comment at the meeting because if they open up the meeting to back and forth conversation, they could lose control of the meeting. Wichita Citizen Review Board March 22, 2018 Page 4 of 7 Miller suggested the board could set up an email address with an auto response “Thank you for your submission to the Citizen Review Board. Your comments will be sent to the board.” The emails could then be sent to the board and the citizen will not expect a response. Nolte stated that the board be clear on its expectations of taking email comments. After further discussion the board decided to leave Section 5 as is for now. Miller suggested the board may not have to have it in the bylaws. Article VIII Nolte noted that the quorum should be five (5), not four (4) as stated in the bylaws. Article VII Nolte referenced an email from Fowler regarding adding a Section 6 to Article VII about alternates. Sowder stated she thought the alternates should be allowed to comment. Fowler added that the board and alternates have spent time and effort as part of the board and should be allowed the opportunity to comment. All agreed. Nolte noted he would edit the bylaws with Dickgrafe and send to the board for review. He suggested the board could vote on the bylaws at the next meeting. The board approved. Item 4: Election of Chairperson Sims nominated Fowler as the Chairperson. Nolte asked if there were any other nominations. There were none. The vote was unanimous for Fowler. Nolte stated the board should wait until the next meeting to elect a vice-chairperson due to the bylaw revisions. Thompson nominated Luna as the secretary. Nolte asked if there were any other nominations. There were none. The vote was unanimous for Luna. Item 5: Mission Statement Nolte asked Luna if she wanted to table the Mission Statement discussion since the Chief wanted to discuss it at the next meeting. Luna responded they would wait for the Chief to discuss. Item 6: Staff Reports Nolte noted that the data he was presenting in the reports was from IA Pro which is a Professional Standards software. Blue Team is a component of IA Pro that allows officers to record incidents from the field any time they use force. It captures all pertinent information about the incident including exactly what was used – taser, mace, night stick, etc. In Professional Standards, IA Pro speaks to Blue Team. Professional Standards staff can see what is in IA Pro, but officers cannot. Information can originate in Blue Team and be moved into IA Pro. Sims asked if anyone had editing capabilities. Wichita Citizen Review Board March 22, 2018 Page 5 of 7 Nolte stated that the officer inputs incident information which is electronically forwarded to the supervisor. The supervisor can say that the information is incomplete and the officer may add information. Once the supervisor approves the report, it is no longer editable. It is then sent to IA Pro and will be reviewed and may be sent back for more information. It becomes an official record. Bender asked if the reports are generated by IA Pro. Nolte responded yes. Bender asked if there was human interaction on the data. Nolte responded no. PSB Complaints, PSB Investigations and PSB Statistics Nolte reviewed the internal investigations YTD report. He noted that the board would be reviewing these post disciplinary. Nolte reviewed the external complaints report and noted that this includes complaints coming from outside of the department. He noted that body worn cameras could account for the decrease in complaints in 2016 because they were able to see what actually was happening and were able to clear complaints Miller asked if it would be possible to have corresponding results from investigations. Nolte stated that internal investigations stay internal and external investigations stay external. Sims asked if the board would review both internal and external investigations. Nolte responded the board would likely see both. If there is misconduct, staff could be fired due to an internal investigation and the board will probably want to know about those. Nolte noted that in 2017 they had the ability to pull out complaints that were legitimate versus outlandish complaints in IA Pro. He noted that citizen contacts and citizen complaints go into IA Pro and are reviewed. Bender asked if contacts are different than complaints. Nolte responded yes and they are counted separately. Nolte stated that external investigations are subject to review post-discipline. The investigating agency is noted on the report because not all investigations are reviewed by the PSB. The board can call an executive session to discuss personnel matters. Fowler asked if there is a list of investigations that were resolved in past year - external and internal. Nolte responded yes. Sims asked Nolte to confirm that the board cannot go into executive session to discuss an open case. Nolte responded Sims was correct. He said the board could ask questions and he would share what he could. He stated he would give the board closed cases to review. Rojas asked if there was a law stating that they cannot do that or was it the union. Nolte responded there is an ordinance stating what can be released. All post-discipline cases can be reviewed. Fowler asked how long it usually takes to get to post-discipline. Nolte responded that it depends on the case. Rojas stated that is where the frustration lies because this is the way it is. It seems like the board will be looking at cases from a long time ago and suggesting changes for the future. Fowler asked how police would respond to a request from the board regarding an officer involved shooting. Nolte responded it would not an issue as long as they do not get to a specific open case. Wichita Citizen Review Board March 22, 2018 Page 6 of 7 Dickgrafe added that the board could talk in abstracts. Rojas asked if the board could take an open case and ask procedural questions and offer suggestions for transparency for the future. Sowder asked why the Chief would call an emergency meeting if the board cannot discuss open cases. Nolte responded those were good questions. He added that employees have rights of privacy and that is usually the biggest hurdle. They do not want to have a situation where they speak on something and it goes public and affects the ability to go forward with the case. Bender stated he could see the board asking questions about when an officer can use force, how the police department functions and how officers are trained. Nolte stated he would try to find a case to review that the board may recognize. He would also prep the Chief about the dialog the board wants about cases being reviewed. Item 7: Public Agenda Dave Cook – stated he has had an interest in trying to do something with use of force, but was not appointed to the board. He stated the board may want to be prepared to be a lightning rod for public and they might get blown away by the attention. Rojas asked if there was a policy on releasing criminal names. Nolte stated it was available online – Policy 706. Dickgrafe noted there are state laws and criminal history laws and all are discretionary withholding by the department. Nolte stated they could have the use of force instructor available for the board. Fowler stated that Barry Grissom might be interesting to have available to the board to talk with in person. He also noted that at the Saturday meeting, there was discussion about when the public approaches board members, they should be forwarded to Nolte. Fowler suggested that a protocol was needed in order to track and process requests/suggestions/concerns from the public. Item 8: New Business Rojas asked if there was something that prohibits the board from having a conversation. Fowler responded that they cannot have a quorum outside of the meeting. Rojas asked if the board could talk amongst themselves during a meeting. Dickgrafe responded yes, but minutes would be taken and discussion would be public. Fowler asked if the board was ok with April 26 as the next meeting date. All agreed the date was good. Fowler stated he would work out the time and location details and let the board know. Item 9: Adjourn Fowler made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Sims seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 5:58 p.m. Wichita Citizen Review Board March 22, 2018 Page 7 of 7