HomeMy WebLinkAboutCitizen Review Board - Minutes - 09/12/2007Citizen Review Board Meeting T� a
CIC Room, City Hall � RIGINQL
September 12, 2007
Present: Dennis Baker, Anne Berry, Harry Edwards, Dave Evans, Jim Dubler, Chris
Kahler, Glenn Strunk
Excused Absence: None
Staff: Lt. Jim Broderick, Assistant City Attorney Greg Tempel, and Angelina Sanchez -
Sprague, Recorder.
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 by Chair Harry Edwards.
Minutes:
Approval of minutes from the August 15`h minutes was tabled until the October 10`h
meeting.
Harry Edwards made a motion to approve Case LVII-2007-003 Subcommittee
minutes. Dave Evans seconded the motion. There was no discussion and the
motion passed 3:0.
Voice Mail Reports:
• CRB Voice Mail Message Report. Harry reported that on September 10, he
found a message from Josh Zaffos of The Rocky Mountain Chronicle on the
CRB line. He left his home phone number in Mr. Zappa's voice mailbox today.
As late as 4:50 p.m. today there were no other messages.
Jim Broderick reported that he had also been in contact with Mr. Zaffos. Mr.
Zaffos is interested in making an open records request on a variety of topics
related to internal investigations and CRB reviews and had some general
questions concerning CRB process and procedure that were answered.
• Bias Policing Voice Mail Report. Jim Broderick said there were no messages in
the Bias Policing voice mailbox as of September 12".
Public Input: Elaine Boni of the Human Relations Commission was present.
New Business:
Annual Board Recruitment Process -Reminder. Jim Broderick distributed information on
the City Clerk's Office annual Board & Commission recruitment process. City Council is
seeking applications to fill vacancies on several volunteer boards and commissions
through September 281h. Applications will be accepted for all boards and commissions
and will be kept on file to fill future vacancies that may occur in 2008. Interviews will be
held during October and November for boards and commissions with current vacancies.
CSU PD Authority -Inquiry by Jim Dubler. Jim Dubler asked for information on what
authority did CSU Police Department operate and how do they interact with Fort Collins
Police Services. The questions arose because of the recent motorcycle pursuit on City
streets in which there was a fatality. Jim Broderick provided the responses to the
following questions as well as providing the numerous citations of statutory authority that
might be applicable.
Q: What authority establishes their charge?
A: CSU PD officers are commissioned by the State of Colorado and are certified to
enforce State laws. There is an intergovernmental agreement between CSU and
the City of Fort Collins which allows for a collaborative work relationship that
draws on the resources of the two agencies as needed.
Q: Do the CSU officers receive the same training at the FCPD officers?
A: CSU officers are trained and certified to State of Colorado Police Officer
Standards and Training requirements. There is some joint training but there is no
on -going coordinated effort. They have trained together in the past in the area of
riot control --mobile field force training.
Q: Do CSU police routinely patrol off campus?
A: Yes, when asked by FCPD but it is not a day-to-day occurrence. Based on
recent agreements that were prompted by a campus diversion program there can
be some activity on the perimeter of the campus.
Q: Do CSU PD officers have authority to stop citizens and issue citations off
campus?
A: Yes, as requested above or under the doctrine of fresh pursuit. Also CSU has
representation on a multi -jurisdictional drug task force and when acting in that
capacity there are no jurisdictional boundaries.
Q: Do they share the same dispatch facilities?
A: No, CSU has their own dispatch center. When directed they can share a mutual
channel.
Q: At the request of the father of the recent fatality, can a review of the incident
come to the CRB?
A: Chief Yarborough, CSUPD, would have to request that review of the CRB.
Pending Cases:
Jim Broderick provided information on the different type of incidents currently being used
in the new IA software.
Incident Reporting from the field is an upcoming component of the system and
will have a unique incident number specific to reportable incidents such Use of
Force, pursuits, accidents, etc.
Level I Level II
PC=Performance complaint
The new system automatically assigns the case number to the specific incident. For
example the system allows for the 2007-001 designator to be applicable to PC.L1 or LII.
Case IC2007-001 (aka 2007-005) Will be heard by subcommittee tonight.
Dennis Baker is the Chair with subcommittee members Glenn Strunk, Jim Dubler, and
alternate Chris Kahler.
Case L112007-005. Subcommittee members were chosen at the August meeting. IA
work completion is awaiting Russ Reed's return. Glenn Strunk is the Chair with
subcommittee members Dave Evans, Anne Berry, and alternate Dennis Baker.
Old Business
None.
Adjournment: Dave Evans moved to adjourn the meeting. Dennis Baker
seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 6:40 p.m.
Next Meeting: Wednesday, October 10, 2007, 6 p.m., Council Conference Room, City
Hall West
(, w,
Chair r
10 / l i o Z 00-1
1) ORIGINAL
Citizen Review Board Subcommittee Meeting Minutes
Case Number IA 2007-05 or IC 2007-001
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Council Information Center, City Hall West
Present: Dennis A. Baker, Subcommittee Chairperson; Glenn Strunk,
Subcommittee Vice Chairperson; Jim Dubler, Subcommittee Member;
Chris Kahler, Subcommittee Alternate Member; Greg Tempel, Senior
Assistant City Attorney; and Lt. Jim Broderick, Fort Collins Police
Services.
Call to Dennis Baker called the meeting to order at 6:48 P.M.
Order:
Glenn Strunk made a motion to allow CRB member, Anne Berry, for the
purposes of training to be able to sit in on executive session. It was
seconded by Jim Dubler and approved by a vote of 3-0.
Case No. Dr. Baker advised that, "pursuant to the provisions of Section 2-138 et
LIIA 2007-05 seq. of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, the Citizen Review Board
Subcommittee will undertake a review of an internal affairs administrative
investigation conducted by the Office of Police Services, Case No. IA-
2007-05, relating to alleged violation of General Directive (A2),
"Expectations of Individuals and Organization Conduct."
Dr. Baker noted there were citizens present. Their names are:
• Officer Andrew Leslie, Fort Collins Police Services
• Ms. Tricia Turk
They were provided opportunity to speak to the subcommittee, but
declined except that Officer Leslie requested the subcommittee consider
the investigation of the complaint against him in open session. Greg
Tempel clarified that Officer Leslie could request open session
consideration, but under certain circumstances the subcommittee could
still choose to go into executive session. All were reminded that the
minutes will be a document available to the public. Officer Leslie
repeated his preference for open session consideration.
Dr. Baker asked Lt. Broderick if the multiple occasions on which Officer
Leslie had entered the front yard of Mrs. Wright's home to retrieve the
dogs, apparently without disapproval from Mrs. Wright, established a
precedent to be considered in balance with the trespass summons he
received for going to her front door in April, 2007.
Lt. Broderick said that was a consideration but that the internal affairs
review really focused more narrowly on whether Officer Leslie's conduct
on the date in question constituted a trespass violation, and that it was
determined to have been such a violation.
Mr. Kahler questioned Attorney Tempel about implied consent relative to
prior occasions on which Officer Leslie was allowed to enter the front
yard property of Mrs. Wright. Mr. Tempel replied that those prior
occasions could have created implied consent, but such consent is usually
considered revoked upon a subsequent direct request by the homeowner to
cease coming onto their property.
Dr. Baker asked Officer Leslie how recently prior to the date on which he
was issued the summons in question had he had visitation with the two
dogs.
Officer Leslie replied that it was time for him to have the dogs again
Dr. Baker asked Officer Leslie if he felt in the course of the internal affairs
investigation he was given an opportunity to tell his side of the story and if
he felt he was understood. He declined to answer the question. Lt.
Broderick offered to step out of the room if it would make a difference for
Officer Leslie, but Leslie said he did not intend to respond further.
Mr. Kahler referenced the dismissal of charges against Officer Leslie by
the office of the District Attorney. He questioned the significance of that
action and of reference made by Assistant District Attorney Cliff Riedel to
Officer Leslie's behavior saying there was "no breach of the peace."
Lt. Broderick responded that the D.A. did not want to take this case before
a jury, but noted that Mr. Riedel also stated there was probable cause to
believe Leslie committed the offense of third degree criminal trespass.
Mr. Tempel added that the D.A. has the burden of proof at trial of "beyond
a reasonable doubt."
Mr. Baker noted that his personal summation of this investigation had two
key points: The first is the police services internal directive that police are
held to a higher standard of conduct when it comes to compliance with the
law. Mr. Baker expressed he felt comfortable with that expectation. The
second point was the narrow focus of the investigation through which the
actual infraction was singled out of a history of back -and -forth positioning
over the custody of the dogs, and also without credit for the fact that
Officer Leslie rang the door bell a few times, then left, even though he was
certain Mrs. Wright was home and that it was his turn to have the dogs.
Mr. Tempel read from city statutes about the charge to the Citizen Review
Board.
Mr. Dubler asked if the higher standard clause is in police services policy.
Mr. Broderick replied that it is in policy and speaks specifically to that
issue.
Mr. Dubler said it seems petty to him, but we are here to decide if the
investigation was appropriate and complete.
Mr. Strunk added, however, that the committee also needed to speak as
citizens, again noting that Officer Leslie had on multiple prior occasions
gone onto the property without apparent angst.
Mr. Dubler made a motion that the subcommittee accepts the investigation
as complete and that we concur with the findings of sustained in the
allegation of General Directive (A-2) Expectations of Individuals and
Organization Conduct. The motion was seconded by Mr. Strunk. On a
voice vote of the three voting subcommittee members the motion passed,
3-0.
Mr. Baker stated that the subcommittee has the option of adding
observations or other comment pertaining to the matter before them if they
choose. Mr. Dubler made a motion which with considerable discussion
and word -choosing by the subcommittee members evolved as follows:
"We don't disagree with policy that police should be held to a higher
standard, but we find this infraction to be minor."
The motion was seconded by Mr. Strunk and passed by a 3-0 voice vote.
Mr. Strunk made a motion to adjourn. It was seconded by Mr. Dubler.
Dr. Baker adjourned the subcommittee at 7:45 P.M.
Respectfully submitted
Dennis A. Baker
AgprC)OCA 6-1 S;\ACO�A �jrrc rnew�ZcrS
Inv—, C.2 �� (� �� ryC vv� e