Speakers Testify on City Police Reform Legislation

Experts from law enforcement, academia and the legal arena spoke out in support of proposed police reform legislation at Pittsburgh Council Thursday. The post-agenda meeting centered on an ordinance drafted by Councilman Ricky Burgess that would require routine data collection by officers and law enforcement administrators. That data would include everything from routine traffic stops to incidents involving the use of force. The information would be published in an annual public report that would specify the make-up of the police force; any legal action against police officers; average response times; arrests by charge, race and gender by zone and specialized units; conviction rates and traffic stops as well as recruitment and retention. Vic Walczak, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania says in the 1990's Pittsburgh police were forced to abide by a consent decree that help bring the department in line. But he says he's sure the police union will come out against the legislation as hamstringing their operations, "that is demonstrably false because other police departments around the country do it, and the city of Pittsburgh police department has done it--they were forced to do it under the consent decree--and crime went down." Walczak says there's a perception in the black community that it is under siege, "and until and unless the city measures what their officers are doing and publicizes it, they can't credibly come out and say there's no problem." Wayne Babish, a former police officer and adjunct professor at the University of Pittsburgh supports the legislation and says over time, police officers will recognize its benefits, "a police chief would welcome and view this proposed legislation as an opportunity to communicate and collaborate with elected officials." Burgess' legislation was sparked by the alleged beating of Jordan Miles, a black high-school student, by white, plain-clothed police officers in Homewood in January 2010. An investigation into that incident is still pending.

Judge Rules Against CPRB

An Allegheny County judge has rejected a request by the Citizens Police Review Board to get information on police actions during the G20 Summit a year ago in Pittsburgh. Common Pleas Judge Stanton Wettick ruled that Pennsylvania law forbids Pittsburgh Police from turning over complete arrest reports to the review board.
The CPRB wants the documents to investigate allegations of police misconduct during the G20. Police officials had provided heavily redacted files to the review board but the board said that so much information was blacked out that it rendered the records useless.
Judge Wettick agreed with city attorneys who argued that Pennsylvania's Criminal History Record Information Act prohibited the full disclosure of certain records, except to other law enforcement agencies.

City Finds New Way to Delay CPRB Request

Despite saying that it would turn over all the requested documents, the City of Pittsburgh has once again argued that it cannot give the Citizen Police Review Board what it wants. The board has asked for arrest reports and other documents related to police staffing and assignments during the G20 Summit in September of 2009. The board says it needs the documents to do its job. The city has argued alternately in the past that the data would put national security at risk, that it would jeopardize its efforts to defend itself against litigation, and that the board is not entitled to the documents without a specific citizen complaint being filed. It turned over heavily redacted documents in May and last month said all documents would be forthcoming. Yesterday, the city went before Judge R. Stanton Wettick and argued that it could not hand over the documents due to state laws prohibiting the CPRB from seeing the information. CPRB attorney Hugh McGough says the city does not fall under the Criminal History Record Information Act because it operates under a home rule charter. In fact, he notes that the city’s solicitor under Mayor Tom Murphy specifically laid out tight privacy rules and procedures that should be used in freely handing over the documents. In past investigations the city has made the non-redacted document available to the CPRB without question. Judge Wettick has not set a time line for making a ruling on the city’s latest argument, but McGough points out that the judge took ten days to rule in the last instance.

Council Okays Police Review Board Nominees

After a more than 2 month battle between Pittsburgh Council and Mayor Luke Ravenstahl over the the Citizen Police Review Board (CPRB), the mayor won out with council confirming his 7 appointees. On June 18, the mayor re-appointed 2 members to the CPRB and named 5 new members. This action came the same day as board members were in Common Pleas Court asking a judge to force the city to turn over police records of arrests and policy planning regarding the G20 Summit. The board wanted the information to prepare for investigations into police misconduct during the summit.
The Ravenstahl Administration denied that the appointments were done in retaliation or to thwart the board's actions.
This led to debate over the mayor's nominees, the timing of the announcement and even the language in the city code regarding appointments to the board. Councilman Doug Shields says the code including procedures to replace a board member who resigned or died but did not clarify the process for appointing a replacement for a member whose term had expired. All six of the current members' terms have expired.
In the end, council passed a bill clarifying the nominating process and then approved the same 7 people the mayor had nominated earlier including 2 re-appointments: Richard Carrington and Deborah Walker; and 5 new members: Eugene Downing, Donna Kramer, Dianna O'Brien Martini, Leshonda Roberts and Deborah Whitfield.
It's uncertain if those 7 will be installed prior to the next court hearing over the police documents August 26.

Council Sends 9 Review Board Names to Mayor

Pittsburgh Council is moving toward resolving the dispute with Mayor Luke Ravenstahl over nominees to the Citizen Police Review Board (CPRB).
The board investigates allegations by citizens of police misconduct. Currently there are 6 members on the 7 member board...but all of their terms have expired and they continue to serve.
Councilman Doug Shields says it's been problematic to appoint new members because the city code does not account for succession appointments, only for inaugural appointments or a process if somebody resigns or dies. Shields says he would have preferred having council hold off on sending the 9 names to the mayor until they approved his measure clarifying the language on succession appointments. He says in the end the new appointees to the board will serve varying time periods because they will be succeeding current members whose terms expired at different times.
From the nine names that council is forwarding, the mayor will select 4 and then name three others of his choosing. These 3 can be from his own list or also be among council's suggestions.
The mayor will then send the 7 names back to council for final approval.
The 9 suggestions by council include 4 current CPRB members: Richard Carrington, Mary Jo Guercio, Marsha Hinton and Deborah Walker; plus Brett Caloia, John Detwiler, Eugene Downing, Donna Kramer and Deborah Whitfield.

CPRB Process Legislation on Hold

Pittsburgh City Council continues to grapple with a new ordinance to deal with the formation and ongoing population of the Pittsburgh Citizen Police Review Board. It was brought to the attention of the council this year that the enabling legislation passed a decade and a half ago did not adequately address the process of appointing new members and the rules under which the members would serve. Councilman Doug Shields introduced a lengthy bill that outlined everything from staggered terms and residency requirements to who names the members and when. Councilman Daniel Lavelle introduced similar legislation that included far fewer lines and mostly address the process of placing new members on the board. Council members are now in the process of merging those two bills and hashing out details such as what happens when the mayor does not make his/her appointments. Shields called Lavelle’s bill “poorly written” but Councilman Patrick Dowd came to his rescue saying Shields’ bill is needlessly over specific. The bills were held for one week while the two offices try to work out the differences. All members of the CPRB are serving under expired terms. Last month the mayor sent council a list of 5 new members and 2 reappointments, but council has refused to act until new governing legislation has been put in place. The partially combined bill does not define the term “vacant” as has been suggested by Shields, but it does layout a nearly ten-step timeline of letter writing and nominations to be followed every year. Ultimately Council would send nine names to the mayor (one from each councilmember) who would chose four names and then add three more members before sending the entire list back to council final approval.

Council Holds CPRB Names for a Week

Today, Pittsburgh Council voted to again hold consideration of the appointment of seven nominations for the Citizens Police Review Board until next Tuesday.

Mayor Luke Ravenstahl nominated five new members to the board last month and re-appointed two current ones, Richard Carrington and Deborah Walker.

Council will look at the nominations of Eugene Downing, Jr., Donna Kramer, Leshonda Roberts, Diana O’Brien Martini, and Deborah Whitfield on July 27th. Tomorrow, the body expects to take up legislation by Councilman Doug Shields that would amend the CPRB appointment process.

Shields’ proposal would clarify language in the city code to specify how the city should appoint successors to members whose terms expire. Shields says his legislation will only clear up the code’s language, and not challenge Ravenstahl’s nominations.

Community activist David Tessitor spoke in Council’s public comment segment. Tessitor suggests CPRB members involved in an important investigation be allowed to continue those inquiries even after their terms expire.

“They shall continue to hold their seats solely for the purpose of participating as a CPRB member in that major investigation, provided they continue to meet the qualifications of membership, and provided their continued participation is limited to the investigation,” says Tessitor.

Kenneth Miller of Point Breeze says Council should wait to act on any CPRB legislation until the administration releases the Office of Municipal Investigation report on the Jordan Miles incident early this year.

Miles, a student of Pittsburgh CAPA at the time, was beaten by three plain clothes officers in January.

CPRB Names Held By Council

After hours of debate (including a recess to call a member of the city law department) over Roberts Rules of Order and Council rules and customs, the Pittsburgh City Council put a three-week hold on the nominations of five Citizen’s Police Review Board members. The debate and vote comes at a time when the board, which has often been neglected in the past, has come under a microscope.

For years the CPRB has been complaining that it either did not have enough members to do its job or its members were all serving under expired terms. When the mayor submitted a list of names to the city council for review on the same day that the CPRB was arguing in court with the city solicitor the issue took on more importance. Not long after those nominations were announced a few members of Pittsburgh City Council noticed that the ordinance creating the board was so poorly written that it did not even fully outline how members should be appointed.

A long list of speakers spoke before council this morning asking members to halt the nomination process and preserve the power of the CPRB and the independence of the Council. The business portion of the meeting began with President Darlene Harris announcing that she was “holding” the bills naming five members of the board. Those members had been intervened by council last week but no vote was taken at that time. The meeting quickly devolved into name calling as members argued over the proper way to delay a vote on the nominations. Harris felt it was her prerogative to hold the nominations but others including Bill Peduto and Doug Shields argued that she did not have that power. They argued that only a majority vote of the council could delay the vote. Harris eventually allowed the names to be introduced and Councilman Daniel Lavelle moved to “postpone” a vote on the nominees until no later than July 27th. That will give the council time to deal with two amendments to the CPRB code.

CPRB Executive Director Elizabeth Pittinger says the board will continue to operate in the public’s best interest with or without the new members, but she says the actions of the mayor sent a clear message of his intent. Of the two names submitted by the mayor, two are current members and the rest would be new to the board. Of the five individuals interviewed by City Council, two are up for reappointment and the other three are nominated for appointment the first time. Members serve for a defined number of years but can serve any number of terms. Members who are not replaced or reappointed can continue to serve on the board.

Shields Wants to Table Mayor's Choices for CPRB

Pittsburgh Councilman Doug Shields says it's not a political battle between Council and Mayor Luke Ravenstahl "it's an obligation of council to amend the city code and offer a clear, consistent way to have appointees come before council and to replace members as they cycle off the board."
Shields is referring to the dispute between council and the mayor over the 7 nominations Ravenstahl made to the Citizen Police Review Board (CPRB) on June 18--the same day the administration was in court fighting efforts by the board to get access to police records regarding the G20 Summit. The mayor has denied allegations he was trying to thwart the board but said the 60 day timetable for acting on suggested nominations by council was nearing an end.
Ravenstahl nominated 5 new members and re-appointed 2 current ones. But Shields is asking council to table those nominations because the process of appointing members "is as clear as mud." Shields wants council to clarify the language in the city code before they act on any nominations to the CPRB. Shields says the code specified how the original board was to be constructed and the process to fill a vacancy when a member resigns, but he says there is no specific language on how to appoint successors to members whose terms expire. Currently, they remain until they are replaced, even a year or two later.
Shields says the problem is the mayor treated the appointments as if there were 7 vacancies and there was officially only one.
Shields says he doesn't want the CPRB's integrity challenged "so it can do its work and not worry about if a member was legitimately appointed or not."
Shields plans to introduce his bill Tuesday to clear up the nominating process. He says if council passes it, the mayor would be free to nominate the same 7 people as he did June 18.

CPRB and City Spar Over Redacted Documents

The Pittsburgh Citizen Police Review Board (CPRB) and the city will be back in court in August to make oral arguments as to why the heavily redacted documents given to the CPRB by the city do or do not meet a judge’s order to hand over materials needed to investigate police officers' actions during the G20 summit in September. At a contempt of court hearing today, CPRB lawyer Ward McGough argued that so much information was lined through that the documents are unusable. Paul Krepps, the attorney for the city, says if the information was not redacted the city could be in violation of privacy laws. The city also argued that releasing the data could in some cases jeopardize future operations. Along with arrest, incident, summons, subject resistance, and investigative reports, the board asked for operational documents such as the manual given to visiting officers and the insurance policy taken out by the city to cover the time around the G20. CPRB Executive Director Elizabeth Pittinger says because the information in the documents has been "blacked out" the board is unable to do its job. Pittinger notes that in other cases being investigated by the CPRB the city has handed over the documents without any redaction. The judge has given the city and the CPRB until August 26th to prepare for oral arguments. Between now and then there are several deadlines including a date to submit written arguments.

It has also been learned that the Pittsburgh City Council and the Mayor are submitting new names to fill the Citizen Police Review Board. The council and the mayor choose the seven-member board. All of the current members of the board are serving under expired terms. Some of them have been serving in that capacity for two years according to Pittinger. When asked to react to the submission of seven new names Pittinger said, “I think you would have to look upon it as a retaliatory act.”

Pittsburgh Mayoral spokesperson Joanna Doven says the approval of the board nominees on the same day as the court hearing was coincidental and in no way a retaliation. Doven says the 4 names from the council were submitted to the mayor 58 days ago and he had 60 days to review them and sign off on the nominations. Doven was also quick to point out that of the three nominations made by the mayor two are current CPRB members.

Police Review Board to Pursue Charges Against Harper

The Ravenstahl Administration and Pittsburgh City Council remain at odds with the Citizen Police Review Board (CPRB) over the board's attempt to force Police Chief Nate Harper to surrender police documents regarding the G20 summit last fall.

The board wants the papers to complete an investigation into the police department’s handling of the September 2009 summit. 188 people were arrested and according to the CPRB at least a dozen people filed complaints against police.
City Council this week passed a resolution urging the review board to "align" its pursuit of documents with the legal process of pending lawsuits.

City Council and Mayor Luke Ravenstahl say releasing the documents could put lawsuits involving the G20 Summit in jeopardy.

But CPRB Executive Director Beth Pittinger says that’s irrelevant – Harper is bound by a Common Pleas Court order to relinquish the documents. She says the city shouldn’t worry about the information leaking anyway:

“Their disclosure to us is not disclosed to the public. We’re bound to confidentiality in the ordinance with a long-standing agreement with the city regarding confidentiality. It’s not their place to decide what, and when, and where we get information.”

Pittinger says the CPRB will continue its attempt to find Harper in contempt of court. She says that would probably put daily fines of about $600 on the city until the documents are released to the board.

CPRB has a court date for that action on Friday.

Council holds "Miles" bills

Pittsburgh City Council members expressed legal concerns about the “Jordan Miles Public Safety Agenda” and then voted unanimously to hold the bills for three weeks. The members say they will use the time to seek an opinion from the city’s legal department before putting the legislation to vote.

Councilman Bill Peduto says the police force has been suggesting for years that cameras be mounted in police cars, but has been denied by the administration. He recounted the ways they said it would help the city.

“One: public acceptance of patrol practices, two: reduction in lawsuits, three: enhancement of officer safety, four: will provide evidence in court cases, and five: will increase the number of upheld citations,” says Peduto. “That wasn’t coming from the Citizen Police Review Board. That came from our Bureau of Police.”

Citizen Police Review Board member Beth Pittinger says the accreditation process is 70% complete, with a mock survey expected in December. She says the actual accreditation process could occur within six months of the mock investigation.

"Jordan Miles" Bills Debated in Council

Three members of the Pittsburgh Police department, two representative of the African American community and the Executive Director and Board Chair of the Citizen Police Review Board gathered in Pittsburgh City Council chambers today to give their input on a package of bills that may be more controversial for its name than for its content. The package of bills introduced by Councilman Ricky Burgess has been titled the “Jordan Miles Public Safety Reform Agenda.” Miles was the teenager beaten by police January 12th because undercover officers thought he was carrying a gun. Councilman Patrick Dowd says the case is still being investigated by more than one entity and the matter has not been resolved, so he is not ready to put the name on the five pieces of legislation. Councilman Burgess says if it weren’t for the Miles incident the council would not be debating the bills. He says he has never said the officers were guilty or not guilty, “What I have said is that this incident allows us the opportunity to go beyond it and begin to heal the relationship. What
I want to do is to embark on a process, not a single piece of legislation or five pieces of legislation, but a process.” Burgess says the bills are all aimed at helping to build trust between police and the community. Dowd counters that there is nothing in the legislation that would have prevented the confrontation between police and Miles. The bills deal with getting the police department accredited, putting video cameras in police cars, placing officers on administrative leave, requiring yearly reports from the chief of police and forcing the Citizen Police Review Board to investigate any case where a suspect is seriously injured or killed.

Pittsburgh Police Chief Nate Harper says the department is already 70% of the way to reaching all of the Pennsylvania Law Enforcement Accreditation Commission (PLEAC) standards. Officer Joe Seskey is leading the effort to reach all of the milestones. He says each standard takes time to reach. He says it is not just a matter of writing a new policy, there needs to be research on best practices, policy drafted, the union given a chance to respond, officers trained and equipment purchased and installed. The legislation calls for the accreditation to be in place by the end of the year. Seskey says a more realistic goal is for the department to have its “mock inspection” by the end of the year and then a final inspection a few months later. However, Seskey says as each accreditation standard is met it is implemented so the city is already seeing the benefits of the process.

The bill dealing with placing video cameras in all police cars calls for any new cruiser to be equipped with a camera and for the department to add camera’s to 20% of the remaining fleet each year. Pittsburgh Police Commander Linda Varone says all the cars in Zone 5 will be equipped by the end of next week. She notes it is not as easy as screwing a camera into each car. She says there needs to be software to deal with the data, procedures to handle the data as evidence and training given to each officer on how to use the cameras. Burgess says undercover cars will be the last to be outfitted. He says the hope is that new technologies will be available soon that will allow the cameras to be installed without tipping off the community to the fact that the unmarked car is a police vehicle.

The third bill calls for any officer involved in an incident that is handed over to the Office of Municipal Investigations to be placed on paid administrative leave. The City’s Law Department has apparently refused to take a stand on the bill, which has given some council members concern. Councilman Bill Peduto says he needs that review and then went one step further asking Burgess to change the bill to place the officers on desk duty rather than paid leave. The measure is very clear in noting that the move is in no way to be considered a punishment or a suspension.

The fourth bill requires the Pittsburgh Police chief to publish an annual report that would deal with issues as mundane as the number of officers on the force and the number of officers on disability leave, to more in-depth data such as arrests by charge, race and gender, listed by zone.

The final bill would force the Citizen Police Review Board to investigate any case where a suspect is seriously injured or killed. Board Executive Director Beth Pittinger says that is not currently something the board has to do but it would not pose much of a hardship because the board members are already launching such investigations.

Burgess says he will consider making changes to legislation before it is brought up for debate in committee.

CPRB Praises Judge Wettick's G20 Ruling

Elizabeth Pittinger, Executive Director of the CPRB, says Senior Common Pleas Judge Stanton Wettick's decision ordering the Bureau of Police to provide documents requested by the Citizen Police Review Board will enable the Board to do its job better. She says the May 1997 City Charter amendment establishing the CPRB charges it with looking at overall police policy as well as individual citizen complaints, but there's been a dispute about this with every administration.

Based on the information provided, the Board will issue a report on how police/citizen interaction was affected by law enforcement policies implemented during the G20, with the aim of being a useful planning tool for Pittsburgh or other cities hosting large national security events in the future.

The CPRB will continue investigating individual citizen complaints from the G20. Pittinger says most individual police officers, especially over the past 4 to 5 years, cooperate with CPRB investigations, though she believes the Fraternal Order of Police still advises members not to. She says the Board doesn't criticize any officer for exercising his or her 5th amendment rights, like any other citizen.