Loading...
06/30/2003 - Minutes �.Y • • Salt Lake City Police Civilian Review Board AGENDA City& County Building—Room 118 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah Monday, June 30,2003 at 5:00 p.m. I. Convene Meeting of Salt Lake City Police Civilian Review Board II. Introductions—Teddi Velarde III. Approval of Minutes of June 9, 2003 Meeting IV. Schedule for Next Meeting and Future Meetings V. New Business a. Discussion of Investigation of Complaints from Within the Police Department—Chief Scott Atkinson b. Policies and Procedures i. Board Ethics Policy ii. Request for a Review of the Police Chiefs Final Decision iii. Procedure for Assigning Board Members to Panels iv. Board Panel Procedures for a Request for an Investigation v. Criteria for Deciding Whether to Initiate an Investigation When Requested by a Citizen vi. Procedural issue: Board Meeting Attendance Telephonically "In accordance with State Statute, City Ordinance and Police Civilian Review Board Policy, one or more Board Members may be connected via speakerphone." VI.Adjourn On the 26th day of June I personally emailed a copy of the foregoing notice to the Mayor and City Council and posted copies of the same in conspicuous view at the following times and locations within the City& County Building, 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah: 1. At 5:00 p.m. in the City Recorder's Office, Room 415; and • • 2. At 5:00 p.m. in the Newsroom, Room 315 3. At 5:00 p.m. outside the City Council Chambers, Room 315 Investigator A sound system for the hearing impaired is available and headphone can be obtained for all public meetings upon four hours advance notice. Arrangements can be made for sign language interpreters; please allow 72 hours advance notice. Large type and#2 Braille agendas are available upon 72 hours advance notice. Final action may be taken and/or adopted concerning any item on this agenda. After 5:00 p.m. please enter the City& County Building through the east entrance. Accessible route is located on the east side of the building. • • • Minutes for the Salt Lake City Police Civilian Review Board held Monday, June 30, 2003 at 5:00 p.m. in Room 326, City Council Office, City County Building, 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City,Utah. In Attendance: Board Members: Brent Ward, Adrian R. Autry, Daniel Levin, Masood Ul- Hasan, Nancy Appleby, Paula Wolfe, Ramona Gonzales, Claudia O'Grady, Nisa Sisneros, Teddi Velardei and Scott McCoy. Investigator: Linda Hamilton Robyn Stanczyk: Administrative Assistant Police Board Advisor: Dean Carr Deputy City Recorder: Christine Meeker Assistant Police Chief Scott Atkins Police Union David Rasmussen Police Captain Ken Pearce I. The meeting convened at 5: 07 p.m. Chair Brent Ward presided. II. Introductions: Mr. Ward welcomed Ms. Teddi Velarde to the board. He asked her to tell the board about her background. Ms. Velarde said she was retired but had worked for the Salvation Army in adult rehabilitation, for the State of Utah in mental health and had been a psychotherapist. She said she wanted to contribute to the community. III. Approval of Minutes of June 9, 2003. Mr. Ward asked if anyone objected to approving the minutes. Mr. McCoy said he was in attendance for the vote regarding minutes and wanted the minutes corrected to reflect that. No members of the board objected to the correction. Mr. McCoy moved and Mr. Levin seconded to approve the minutes of the Civilian Review Board meeting with corrections held June 9, 2003, which motion carried, all members voted aye. IV. Schedule for Next Meeting and Future Meetings: Ms. Hamilton said the best date for everyone to meet was the second Monday of each month. She said eventually the Civilian Review Board (CRB) would meet quarterly. She said holidays celebrated on Monday could cause scheduling problems. Mr. Ward said the next meeting date would be Monday, August 11, 2003. Mr. Levin said he would be out of town but would give input before he left. V. New Business: a. Discussion On Investigation of Complaints from within the Police Department. Chief Scott Atkinson explained that if a complaint was made by one officer against another officer the complaint went to the Internal Affairs Division. He 03 - 1 • • said Internal Affairs would then interview the officer and any witnesses, gather information and then forward everything to the Captain for review. Ms. Hamilton suggested the board have a policy to investigate only those complaints coming from within the Police Department that involved or used force. A discussion was held regarding reviewing internal complaints. Mr. McCoy said he felt the board's mandate was to provide an opportunity for citizens to have a second look at a problem. Mr. Ward asked board members if ordinary types of complaints against one officer from another should or should not come before the CRB. Mr. Levin said any excessive force would automatically be referred to the CRB. He said he felt the CRB was a forum for citizen complaints and concerns. Ms. Hamilton said the issue was the ordinance stated that the investigator must be notified of everything. She suggested sending CRB members an inquiry as to which complaints should be investigated. She said this would be for category one complaints only,which were the serious complaints and included use of force. Mr. Ward asked for the definition of a category one complaint. Ms. Hamilton referred to a draft of the Investigative Procedures. She said Page 2 included category one and category two complaints. Mr. Ward said category one complaints originating from within the department would automatically be sent to the CRB for consideration and the investigator would exercise discretion regarding category two complaints originating within the department to determine what should be sent to CRB. Ms Hamilton said she would bring the board a written policy at the next meeting. b. Policies and Procedures i. Board Ethics Policy Mr. Ward explained a potential problem regarding the original proposed policy. He said the policy suggested that a board member would have to recuse themselves from considering a complaint if they had met or spoken to an officer. A discussion was held regarding the wording of the policy. Mr. Ward said there were two different approaches: 1)to try to specify everything in the rule and 2) to leave it to the individual to decide. Ms. Ward moved and Ms. Gonzales seconded to adopt the following wording for Board Ethics 2(C) "that if in any matter that comes before the board, a member of the board determines that his or her impartiality in the matter might reasonably be questioned then that board member shall recuse him or herself', which motion carried, all members voted aye. ii. Request for a review of the Police Chiefs final decision. 03 -2 • • Ms. Hamilton reviewed the policy. She referred to Item 2.22 (D) regarding original request for review. She said a complainant would get one chance to have the complaint filed with the CRB but if the request for review moved to the CRB from internal affairs, the complainant could also request a hearing by the CRB. Ms. Hamilton said a minor change needed to be made to 5.5 of the amended ordinance. She said contacting the Internal Affairs Unit would be removed from the policy and the Police Chief would contact the Internal Affairs Unit. Ms. Appleby moved and Mr. McCoy seconded to amend the Request for a review of the Police Chiefs final decision Section 5.5 removing contacting the Internal Affairs Unit; and changing Section 3.1 to read Criteria for consideration on accepting request for review,which motion carried, all members voted aye. iii. Procedure for assigning board members to panels. Ms. Hamilton reviewed the procedure. Mr. Ward requested that Item F include using the randomizer when a substitute board member was needed to accomplish a reasonably equitable distribution. Ms. Hamilton suggested that wording in Item G "or has knowledge of either the complaint or the subject office. Any Board member selected for a panel in which any person known to the board member through a business, personal, or family relationship is involved shall immediately make such a conflict known to the Chair"be removed to be consistent with the ethics policy and a sentence be added to read"as defined by the board's ethics policy". • Ms. O'Grady moved and Mr. Levin seconded to accept the procedure for assigning board members to panels,which motion carried, all members voted aye. iv. Board panel procedures for a request for an investigation when requested by a citizen. Ms. Hamilton reviewed the policy. A discussion was held with regard to the panel's communication with complainant and other panel members. The wording "Panel members shall confine their discussions regarding the substance and merits of a complaint to office panel meetings"to be inserted in Number 4, Communication. Ms. Hamilton reviewed Number 5, Timeframe. She said conveying the panel's recommendations to the Police Chief within 75 days of the receipt filing of the complaint with the Police Department was not possible due to lack of resources in Internal Affairs. A decision to convey the panel's recommendations to the Police Chief within 30 calendar days after the Internal Affairs investigation is completed was made. A discussion was held regarding the chain of custody of investigation files and reports. Ms. Hamilton said at an informal discussion a policy for this was discussed. She said she would put it into a formal policy. She suggested one copy of a file or report to be kept in her office to be used by members. 03 -3 i • • Ms. O'Grady moved and Mr. Levin seconded to accept the procedure and policy with changes discussed,which motion carried, all members voted aye. v. Criteria for deciding whether to initiate an investigation requested by a citizen. Ms. Hamilton suggested changing the word Criteria in the title to Consideration. Mr. Ward asked that the wording "complaints that did not involve excessive force" be added to the title. Mr. Levin proposed changing Item B (2)(a)by moving the word "alleged"to read Egregiousness of the Police Officer alleged behavior. He also proposed changing the wording in B (2)(e) to the behavior complained of appears to be part of a pattern of complaints through the entire Department f in a specific geographic area. He proposed the wording in title of B (2) be "The criteria to be used by the investigator in formulating a recommendation includes but is not limited to. Mr. McCoy suggested changing the title to read "Considerations to be used in deciding whether to initiate an investigation of a citizen's complaint not involving excessive force." Mr. Levin moved and Ms. O'Grady seconded to adopt the policy with suggested changes,which motion carried, all members voted aye. vi. Procedural issue: Board Meeting Attendance Telephonically. Mr. McCoy moved and Ms. Appleby seconded to adopt a Board Meeting Attendance Telephonically policy,which motion carried, all members voted aye. Mr. Carr noted that in the Board Ethics policy talking to the Police Advisor was omitted. All members were in favor of adding this. Ms. O'Grady moved and Mr. Ul-Hasan seconded to adjourn the meeting, which motion carried, all members voted aye. • The meeting adjourned at 6:31 p.m. Civilian Review Board Chair Deputy City Recorder. 03 - 4 • • 4 Minutes for the Salt Lake City Police Civilian Review Board held Monday, June 30, 2003 at 5:00 p.m. in Room 326, City Council Office, City County Building, 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah. In Attendance: Board Members: Brent Ward, Adrian R. Autry, Daniel Levin, Masood Ul- Hasan, Nancy Appleby, Paula Wolfe, Ramona Gonzales, Claudia O'Grady, Nisa Sisneros, Teddi Velardei and Scott McCoy. Investigator: Linda Hamilton Robyn Stanczyk: Administrative Assistant Police Board Advisor: Dean Carr Deputy City Recorder: Christine Meeker Assistant Police Chief Scott Atkins Police Union David Rasmussen Police Captain Ken Pearce I. The meeting convened at 5: 07 p.m. Chair Brent Ward presided. II. Introductions: Mr. Ward welcomed Ms. Teddi Velarde to the board. He asked her to tell the board about her background. Ms. Velarde said she was retired but had worked for the Salvation Army in adult rehabilitation, for the State of Utah in mental health and had been a psychotherapist. She said she wanted to contribute to the community. III. Approval of Minutes of June 9, 2003. Mr. Ward asked if anyone objected to approving the minutes. Mr. McCoy said he was in attendance for the vote regarding minutes and wanted the minutes corrected to reflect that. No members of the board objected to the correction. Mr. McCoy moved and Mr. Levin seconded to approve the minutes of the Civilian Review Board meeting with corrections held June 9, 2003, which motion carried, all members voted aye. IV. Schedule for Next Meeting and Future Meetings: Ms. Hamilton said the best date for everyone to meet was the second Monday of each month. She said eventually the Civilian Review Board (CRB) would meet quarterly. She said holidays celebrated on Monday could cause scheduling problems. Mr. Ward said the next meeting date would be Monday, August 11, 2003. Mr. Levin said he would be out of town but would give input before he left. V. New Business: a. Discussion On Investigation of Complaints from within the Police Department. Chief Scott Atkinson explained that if a complaint was made by one officer against another officer the complaint went to the Internal Affairs Division. He 03 - 1 • i Ms. Hamilton reviewed the policy. She referred to Item 2.22 (D) regarding original request for review. She said a complainant would get one chance to have the complaint filed with the CRB but if the request for review moved to the CRB from internal affairs, the complainant could also request a hearing by the CRB. Ms. Hamilton said a minor change needed to be made to 5.5 of the amended ordinance. She said contacting the Internal Affairs Unit would be removed from the policy and the Police Chief would contact the Internal Affairs Unit. Ms. Appleby moved and Mr. McCoy seconded to amend the Request for a review of the Police Chiefs final decision Section 5.5 removing contacting the Internal Affairs Unit; and changing Section 3.1 to read Criteria for consideration on accepting request for review, which motion carried, all members voted aye. iii. Procedure for assigning board members to panels. Ms. Hamilton reviewed the procedure. Mr. Ward requested that Item F include using the randomizer when a substitute board member was needed to accomplish a reasonably equitable distribution. Ms. Hamilton suggested that wording in Item G "or has knowledge of either the complaint or the subject office. Any Board member selected for a panel in which any person known to the board member through a business, personal, or family relationship is involved shall immediately make such a conflict known to the Chair" be removed to be consistent with the ethics policy and a sentence be added to read "as defined by the board's ethics policy': Ms. O'Grady moved and Mr. Levin seconded to accept the procedure for assigning board members to panels, which motion carried, all members voted aye. iv. Board panel procedures for a request for an investigation when requested by a citizen. Ms. Hamilton reviewed the policy. A discussion was held with regard to the panel's communication with complainant and other panel members. The wording "Panel members shall confine their discussions regarding the substance and merits of a complaint to office panel meetings"to be inserted in Number 4, Communication. Ms. Hamilton reviewed Number 5, Timeframe. She said conveying the panel's recommendations to the Police Chief within 75 days of the receipt filing of the complaint with the Police Department was not possible due to lack of resources in Internal Affairs. A decision to convey the panel's recommendations to the Police Chief within 30 calendar days after the Internal Affairs investigation is completed was made. A discussion was held regarding the chain of custody of investigation files and reports. Ms. I-Iamilton said at an informal discussion a policy for this was discussed. She said she woulti'put it into a faunal policy. She suggested one copy of a file or report to be kept in her'office to be used by members. 03 - 3 • • 4. 03 - 5 • • -- Witt C n Rz. ev-Boar Paned .- -R > t ot_an i.w aiion - =- 1. Responsibilities It is the responsibility of Board panels, comprised of five members assigned randomly: A. To receive and review the investigations of the Police Civilian Review Board Investigator and the Internal Affairs Unit. B. To meet with the Board Investigator to discuss the case. C. To direct the Investigator to conduct additional investigation, if necessary. D. To make a determination whether a complaint is unfounded, sustained, or the officer is exonerated, or no determination is possible. E. To make a recommendations to the police chief regarding 1. Training 2. Discipline 3. No discipline 4. Any other recommendations deemed appropriate by a majority of the Board panel. F. To make recommendations to the full Board regarding possible recommendations for changes in Police Department policies and procedures. 2. Access to Information Board panel members will have access to all information made available to the Investigator and Internal Affairs, including but not limited to: A. All police reports B. All written correspondence, including electronic correspondence C. Physical evidence D. Photographs E. Tape recordings of interviews with officer(s) and witnesses F. Witness statements G. Officer statements H. Officers' complaint histories, after the panel has made a final decision that the complaint is either sustained or no determination is possible. I. Any other information that has arisen that is pertinent to the case. 3F- Method of dir ginf€nnati n Oe fth 1 : - ice-pro - a A. Tl elate na1 Affairsfile holfOtkig t Adlithiiitrat fs-o . 1s1 ± loiiv + t ,t the 1 • • Administrator's rifficticonference area anti review it=there.-.Thi'Case_f.le will liat leave-thee Administrator's office/conference' at ytirrie: B� WinBOard_panel Meniherateneive offineencoMplaint history,it Will -prided the Admi at ?s tiee,tattoo a panel meet ng is held the-ianel meeting;is:heldiin t AdmiMstrator' : erence arm the complaint hi Cory: ill:l r��1. -�n leave_t conferencearm=__:Tf thedie-pangtmeming isheld els the :_it l-1 th ae pOnsibiili Dare AdinitiiStratO,V: pies=ofthethe-roMplainth tom;retti .t mto hisiher office and`shred them. 4. Communication A. Panel members must not have any communication with the complainant, witnesses, or the officer(s) against whom the allegation has been made. B. Panel members shall confine their discussion regarding the substance and merits of a complaint to official panel meetings. 5. Timeframe The panels will attempt, whenever possible, to convey their recommendations to the Police Chief within 30 calendar days of the completion of the Internal Affairs Investigation. Chair Date 2 • • Police-CivilianiReviewv Board Procedure - [Conducting Full Meetings Pursuant to the Civilian Review Board Ordinance (Chapter 2.72)the Civilian Review Board will meet at least every three months. The Board may also hold additional meetings, as directed by the Mayor, or a majority of the City Council, or the Board Chair, or by a Majority of the Board. 1. Time and Place of Meetings Board agendas will be emailed to the Mayor's and City Council's Office at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. Board Agendas stating the time and place of all Board meetings shall be posted in the following public places at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. A. City Recorder's Office B. Outside the City Council Chambers(room 315) C. In the Newsroom (room 315) Media representatives will receive electronic copies of agendas, as requested. 2.. Election of Chair and Vice Chair A3 First ikiard�eetirg- I. ThelWestigater will_request a Board Member to:serve'asttempc rary-Chair cf thefuttffietiting of theCiVillan:Review-Board1 suchlime dining thoritstIgcnda that a Chair ias l -electedby t .Eaard.. 2- The nary Cheir Will i r nominations-fur a- ,and_will-mire ref ea : ee_w ther s/he is Willing to vie. 3. Meth* ill read=_the nes-of the mated for Chan°who-have e iiti ig lei*** 4 -Therhaif,will then present',the nattieS-ofeach nainineelikliiiihially and request=a. !i- 1. teof l those: i hing.136 zeliet t t:Wiv/l al as Mh 5Thenntninee with the most votes will-become the new Chair:I 6. _A has-a new ir1 as-been elected, helsbe=will conduct the meeting and Will follow the'same procedure in electiig the ViceChair_ .:All SubseeMeeings: 1. During the last Board meeting in any calendar year, the Investigator will put on the agenda nominations for Chair and Vice Chair. 2. The Chair will ask Board Members for nominations for Chair and Vice Chair. 1 • 3. The Board Chair, or his/her designee, will be responsible for contacting all nominees to determine their ability and willingness to serve in the office for which they have been nominated. 4. The Chair will read the names of those nominated for Chair who have expressed a willingness to serve. 5. The Chair will then present the names of each nominee individually and request a roll call vote of all those wishing to elect that individual as Chair. 6. The nominee with the most votes will be the new Chair. 7. As soon as a new Chair has been elected, he/she will conduct the meeting and will follow the same procedure in electing the Vice Chair. 3. Information to Board Members A. The Investigator shall provide an agenda and a one page summary of all investigations completed since the last Board meeting, along with recommendations made, to all Board Members at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. Information shall be provided further in advance of the meeting where practicable. B. The names of officers and complainants will not be included in the information provided to the Board. C. Each investigation summary will be assigned a Civilian Review Board (CRB) number. D. Information will also be provided on all information entered in to the"early warning system" data base since the last Board meeting. 4. Conducting Meeting The Chair shall conduct all Board meetings. In the Chair's absence the Vice Chair will conduct meetings. The Chair will call the meeting to order no earlier than the time specified on the posted agenda. The iris ifto y. =wider s procedure to make suit sad motions Offitoparticipate inviet.liscussiotiof specifloissue un ss to do-so would di t_ ie egeetis e_fun :ot . Any:mod member-may obj however, arlif*Sot Olattho Viltiiitztempwoily delegate ist er cb i r nsibOities to th Did-member while=lie' is making€ ding motions or - - nAzd cuskioi. The order of business for full Board meetings will be as follows: I. Overview presentation by Investigator on investigations completed since last meeting. Questions by any Board members will be entertained. II. Overview presentation by Investigator on"early warning system," including any apparent trends. Questions by any Board Members will be entertained. III. Presentation by Investigator on any recommended changes in Police Department policies or procedures. Questions by any Board Members will be entertained. 2 i • • IV. Board discussion regarding any cases audited, early warning system, and/or recommendations to Police Department. V. Presentation of draft report to Mayor. VI. Board direction to Investigator for any required follow up and preparation of report to Mayor VII. Discussion of other Board business. VIII. Adjournment 5. Convening a Special Meeting A. It is the responsibility of the Mayor, Board Chair, or Executive Director of the City Council to notify the Investigator of the desire for a special meeting and the proposed time and location. B. The Investigator will then notify the Chair, unless he/she is requesting the meeting, and all Board Members either by telephone or electronically at least three days prior to the proposed meeting. C. The Chair and Board Members are responsible for notifying the Investigator by telephone or electronically of their availability for the meeting within 24 hours of being notified by the Investigator of the proposed meeting. b. Rules for Board Members A. Members will not speak in meetings until they have been recognized by the Chair. B. Members will not interrupt another Board Member when that other Board Member has been recognized by the Chair. C. At the Chair's discretion he/she may open the Board meeting to discussion among Members that does not require recognition by the Chair. D. Members will not interact during meetings with any members of the public or media in attendance. E. Members will not direct comments or questions to any members of the public or media in attendance. F. Members will always treat each other, the Board Police Advisor, and the Investigator with civility. G. The Chair is responsible for the orderly conduct of each Board meeting. The Chair is specifically authorized to order any member of the public or media to leave the meeting to end disruptive behavior. H. The Chair of a specific meeting is precluded from making or seconding a motion. If the Chair wishes to make a motion or second a motion, he she should temporarily delegate the responsibility for conducting the meeting to the Vice Chair or another Board member. 7. Public and/or Media Rules A. The public and media may attend all Board and Board Panel meeting, except executive sessions. 3 • • B. The public and media are prohibited from speaking to the Chair, Board Members, or the Investigator during Board Meetings. C. The public and media are prohibited from making comments not directed to the Chair, Board Members, or Investigator during the meeting. 4 • • Police Civilian Review Board—_Re€luest for'a Boar+'Review of the=- Police Chiefs Decision _ = =_ Responsible City Agency: Management Services Key Words: Police, civilian review, investigation, discipline, decision 1. General 1.1 Salt Lake City's ordinance 2.72 provides that a person who has previously filed a complaint with the Police Department alleging police misconduct and who is dissatisfied with the Police Chief's final decision is entitled to request a review of the Police Chiefs decision by the Police Civilian Review Board. The purpose of this rule is to provide information to the public regarding the process used to request a review of the Police Chiefs final decisions. 2. Process to Request a Review of the Police Chiefs Final Disciplinary Decision 2.1 The request for review must be filed within 30 days of the person's receipt of the decision of the Police Chief. 2.2 The only exceptions to the 30 day restriction are: A. Severe illness or injury of the complainant rendering him/her incapable of filing a request for review. B. The complainant has been out of the State for more than 30 days since the Chief's decision was communicated. C. The complainant asserts that new information or witnesses are now available that were not available within 30 days of the receipt of the decision of the Police Chief. It it the �of the_Board that*Wilt€only entertain an= ser-tton= - - - - itn -- . --. ,. � _- new� iz�ciri ter_ _ t�ssas tin from each c6inpls nant D. The original complaint was filed since January 1, 2001 and there was no functioning Police Civilian Review Board when the Police Chief issued his/her final decisions. 2.3 A written request for review may be made by in person by contacting the Board's Administrator by mail at 451 South State, room 512, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 or telephone(535-7230). ; It -at_the liaatifs=sole disOittion to decide whetherer to wept a reqOgatibr review and difeet the Administratorto cow a review. 1 ' • 3t I oard's Standard of Review for Requests Cenaideration for Decision on A pting or Denim-Request for Review A _lithe complainant had previously filed- complaint on the-same-issue with.the CMMihan1 the ektentto:Viihith thePtilice Chiefs f decision i€si;tent_with; or=diverges from, the Board's recommendifiott =.:.T -efBoar`d's- Lion ofthe t ors .r � p � -� esa �eprevious investigation, C he.apparent-egregiousness-of the o icer's alleged_conduct comparedsid the n -actin lin by the Police Chi f I). Tl of i plai nt alleges:new evidence©r witnesses are availahle. -_ e=appearance o a pattern-in.disciipl nary actions for-speci0c individuals, di tisions, or anageiner t-levels. F.-=- he= ar a Of a-pattern yin disciplinaryaction based_en=tthe alleged vie hn's-ethnicity, cat Qna1 rigins race;telig o;-se al€ entationf-disability, ore. G.4.0tner;"factors relevant to the-specific case at the_ of the Board Chem.- 4. Administrator's Report 4.1 The Administrator will review all documentation of the previous investigation(s). 4.2 Based on the review, the Administrator will provide a report to a Board panel and recommend whether the panel should make a recommendation to the Police Chief that the case be reopened. 5. Panel's Actions/Authority 5.1 The panel must reach a conclusion within 75 days of receiving the Administrator's report. 5.2 The panel may request the Police Chief to reopen the case. 5.3 The Police Chief has final decision making authority on the reopening or final closing of cases. 5.4 If the Board disagrees with the Police Chief's decision, the Board may advise the Mayor and Police Chief of that disagreement in writing. 2 S I 5.5 After reaching its final conclusion, the Board will provide a written report regarding the matter to the complainant, the Mayor, and the Police Chief. Current Reference: Salt Lake City Code 2.72 Effective Date: Mayor's Signature Date 3 • DRAFT Draft Civilian Review Board Policy Board Ethics 1. All Members of the Civilian Review Board shall be subject to and bound by the provisions of the City's conflict of interest ordinance, Chapter 2.44, or its successor. Any violations of the provisions of Chapter 2.44 or its successor shall be grounds for removal from office. 2. Additionally, the Board has adopted the following ethics rules. A. Board Members will not discuss the specifics of any case with any individual other than other Board Members, the Investigator,the Police Chief or his/her designee, the Internal Affairs Unit, the Mayor or his or her designee, or the Office of the City Attorney. B. Board Members will declare any conflict of interest regarding specific cases being reviewed or any other Board business. C. Board members will recuse themselves from Board panels if they personally or professionally, or their immediate family personally or professionally, have knowledge of either the complainant or the officer(s) against whom the allegation. D. No more than six Board Members, including the Chair, will meet informally to discuss Board related issues or information. E. The Board Chair, Police Advisor and Investigator should always be invited to any informal meetings. F. Board Members will not make direct or indirect contact with any complainants or any police officers. G. No statements will be made to media other than those that have appeared on the agenda of a full Board meeting, with a majority of Board members in attendance voting in favor of releasing a statement to the media. Conducting Full Boar Draft dMeetings Civilian Review Board Procedure DRAFT Pursuant to the Civilian Review Board Ordinance(Chapter 2.72)the Civilian Review Board will meet at least every three months. The Board may also hold additional meetings,as directed by the Mayor,or a majority of the City Council,or the Board Chair, or by a Majority of the Board. 1. Time and Place of Meetings Board agendas will be emailed to the Mayor's and City Council's Office at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. Board Agendas stating the time and place of all Board meetings shall be posted in the following public places at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. A. City Recorder's Office B. Outside the City Council Chambers(room 315) C. In the Newsroom(room 315) Media representatives will receive electronic copies of agendas,as requested. 2.. Election of Chair and Vice Chair A. First Board Meeting: 1. The Investigator will request a Board Member to serve as temporary Chair of the first meeting of the Civilian Review Board until such time during the first agenda that a Chair has been elected by the Board. 2. The temporary Chair will call for nominations for a Chair,and will inquire of each nominee whether s/he is willing to serve. 3. The Chair will read the names of those nominated for Chair who have expressed a willingness to serve. 4. The Chair will then present the names of each nominee individually and request a roll call vote of all those wishing to elect that individual as Chair. 5. The nominee with the most votes will become the new Chair. 6. As soon as a new Chair has been elected,he/she will conduct the meeting and will follow the same procedure in electing the Vice Chair. B. All Subsequent Meetings: 1. During the last Board meeting in any calendar year,the Investigator will put on the agenda nominations for Chair and Vice Chair. 2. The Chair will ask Board Members for nominations for Chair and Vice Chair. • • Lel Fit tei FT Police Civilian Review Board Procedure for Referring Malicious or False or Frivolous Complaints to the City Prosecutor Responsible City Agency: Management Services Key Words: Malicious, knowingly, complaint, police officer, damage 1. General The Police Civilian Review Board investigates allegations of misconduct by police officers. In order to protect police officers from false, malicious, and/or frivolous complaints filed with the Police Civilian Review Board,the ordinance also provides that any person who knowingly files a complaint that is frivolous, malicious or false is guilty of a Class C misdemeanor. Additionally, it provides that any person knowingly filing a false, malicious or frivolous complaint is liable for all costs and expenses incurred in investigating the complaint. The purpose of this rule is to provide information to the public on the consequences of filing a malicious, false, or frivolous complaint against a police officer with the Police Civilian Review Board. A complaint will only be covered by this rule if the complainant knows or should have known that the complaint is false and/or frivolous or is made with malice in an attempt to damage a police officer. 2. Process for Determining Whether a Complaint is Malicious, False, and/or Frivolous 3.1 Once the Board Investigator has reached a conclusion that a complaint is malicious, false, and/or frivolous, and that the complainant knew or should have known the allegations were false and/or frivolous or made maliciously with the intent to damage a police officer, the Investigator will make a recommendation to a Board panel that the complainant filing the malicious, false, and/pr frivolous complaint be referred to the City Prosecutor with a recommendation for prosecution. 3.2 In formulating the recommendation the Investigator will consider the following: A. Whether any evidence was generated during the investigation that supported the facts of the allegation. B. Whether there were other witness(es) whose statement(s) either controvert or support complainant's allegations. C. Whether the complainant appeared to make the complaint in an attempt to coerce the police officer. D. Whether the complainant knew or should have known the complaint was false. • 7.0.., RAFT E. Whether the complainant knew or should have known that the police officer was acting within police policy. F. Complainant's complaint history with the Police Department. 3. Actions of the Panel 4.1 If the Board panel determines that a complaint was malicious, false, and/or frivolous, the chair of the panel will contact the Board Chair. 4.2 If the Board Chair agrees that a complaint was frivolous, he/she will direct the Investigator to prepare a summary report for the City Prosecutor, containing the following elements. A. The allegation of the complainant. B. A brief summary of the facts yielded by the investigation that were not supportive of the allegation. C. A brief summary of the facts yielded by the investigation that did support the allegation, if any. D. The reason(s) the Board believes the complaint was malicious, false or frivolous. E. Recommendation for prosecution. 4.3 Once the report is approved by the Board Chair, it will be sent to the City Prosecutor with a copy going to the complainant,the Police Chief, the Internal Affairs Unit, and the officer involved. 4.4 The Board Chair will then instruct the Investigator to dismiss the complaint and provide notice and advice to the complainant,the Police Chief, the Internal Affairs Unit, and the officer involved that the complaint has been referred to the City Prosecutor. DRAFT 4.5 The City Prosecutor will determine whether it is appropriate to file criminal charges and/or whether to attempt to secure reimbursement for costs incurred conducting the investigation. Current Reference: Salt Lake City Code 2.72 Effective Date: Mayor's Signature Date DRAFTDraft Civilian Review Board Policy Attendance Policy for Civilian Review Board Members Whereas Members consider the work of the Civilian Review Board to be of the highest importance, it is critical that all members of the Board participate fully in carrying out the Board's responsibilities. Members must be available and willing to attend meetings of the full Board and to serve on panels reviewing specific investigations. As a result, it is deemed appropriate to adopt a policy regarding attendance of Board members. 1. Responsibilities A. It is the responsibility of the Board Investigator to maintain attendance records and notify the Chair of any breach of the attendance policy. B. It is the responsibility of the Chair to report any such violation to the Mayor along with a recommendation that the Mayor remove that member from the Board. 2. Policy a. The Chair will recommend the removal of Board members who miss more than two meetings of the whole Board in any calendar year, unless the absence is caused by a long-term illness or injury. This policy will not apply when the absence(s) were from special meetings for which there was not at least one week notice. b. The Chair will recommend the removal of Board members who decline to serve on three panels reviewing specific cases in any calendar year, unless caused by illness, injury, or a conflict of interest.