Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-26-1999 Articles0 • Page 9A OPI 10n Tuesday, Jan. 19, Iowa City Press -Citizen 1999 Our view Council cuts heart out of police board John Watson was fight on two counts. First, there was "no com- ,11ing reason for immediate dction." Second, new rules approved by the Iowa City Council do compromise the intent of the board on which Watson serves. Watson is co-chairman of the Police Citizens Review Board. And he is right. We will go further. The City Council has dealt a death blow to the board. With its recent action, there is no need for the board to continue to exist. What is so terrible? It isn't really that complicated. The board has been oper- ating under rules of its own making. The council thought that was a little too haphaz- ard and wanted to formally establish rules of its making. Considering the nature of the board, that's not neces- sarily bad. The police board as established as a reaction w the police shooting of local artist and businessman Eric Shaw. Shaw died, need- lessly, when police were investigating an open door late at night at his business. The board was to be an independent body, able to look into complaints against police by civilians. It would have no power to punish police officers or take any action at all against them. But it could track complaints and give civilians at least the feeling that their views counted. That's serious stuff. Fairly specific rules — perhaps dic- tated by the council — aren't necessarily out of line, But the council has stepped across the line. There was concern from the beginning that the board would be meaningless, because it had no power. It couldn't compel officers to come before it. It couldn't punish officers. Much of its work would be in secret. Still, it wasn't doing badly, considering the road The issue: ■ Council decides Police board shouldn't get names of officers in complaints filed by civil- ians. We suggest: ■ This is the end. With this decision, there no longer is any need for police board to contin- ue. blocks. The board and the coun- cil, though, butted heads on a critical issue: Should the board at least have the names of officers mentioned in complaints? Yes, said the board, otherwise how could it track complaints? No, decided the council. Even worse, the council said there was no time for discussion. No time for real debate. The decision had to be made. Now. No, it didn't. And, yes, the board did need the names of officers. So did the public. Police officers, remem- ber, are public employees of the most visible type. They carry guns. The have the power to save lives or take lives. Under rules established by the council, we have no way of knowing what offi- cers have invited complaints against them or whether the complaints are deemed valid, Of what use is the police board now? None. Let's end the charade and admit we never were very serious about this experi- ment in public accountabili- ty. Let's eliminate the Police Citizens Review Board. There was doubt about it all along, anyway. Now, there's no more doubt. The City Council has taken away any possibility of the board being of use to res- idents. So get rid of it. -Letters to e Editor -Display and Classified Advertising -Subscription Info -DI S aff Copyright 1996 The Daily Iowan. Coovrieht 1996 Associated Press. TUESDAY January 19, 1999 While you were away ... * A blizzard and changes in police board procedures ring in the new year for Iowa City. By Steven Cook The Daily Iowan While students were away from the UI during their month -long winter hibernation, events in Iowa City ground on. Here's a short list of what you may have missed: Review of police board procedure Procedural changes designed to remove an adversarial atmosphere at Police Citizens Review Board hearings were approved by the Iowa City City Council on Jan. 12 over objections from police -board members. The major change bars complainants from a hearing designed to give accused officers the chance to defend themselves. Previously, complainants could attend the meeting and ask the officer questions. A joint city council -police board meeting is scheduled for Feb. 11. Board Chairwoman Leah Cohen said she had hoped the council would delay action on the changes until that meeting. "We felt it was a normal process to do it all together rather than doing it in pieces," she said. After its creation a year and a half ago, the board formed its own operating procedures; the council had yet to approve these procedures. Having both the complainant and officer at the meeting would cause an adversarial atmosphere, City Attorney Eleanor Dilkes has said. Opponents of the change have said barring the complainants from the hearing removes them from a hearing they should be involved in. I of 3 1119199 10.01 AM Police traffic stops :should be monitored A few years, ago, the, Mary- land State Police issued a direc- tive to its officers..The memo advised patrolmen to begin focusing their attention on black males who traveled east on Highway 68 — pulling them over and questioning them to determine whether they were drug suspects. And sure enough, between 1994 and 1997, blacks made up 80 percent of the people whose vehi- cles were stopped and searched — even though blacks accounted for Conyers only 18 per- cent of the people who used Highway 68. Fair? Of course not. And stop- ping people for DWB — driving while black — is also a violation of the Constitution's 4th Amendment. But there's nothing to suggest that the attitudes that give rise to such practices are unique to Maryland. In fact, there's every reason to believe that blacks are routinely targeted by many police agencies throughout the nation — and that's why U.S. Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., ;plans to introduce legislation that will force law enforcement officials- to begin - keeping records on the race of everyone they pull over. This bill won approval in the House last year, but later died in a Senate com- mittee. Conyers' bill deserves approval — but it should not be passed simply to give organiza- tions like the ACLU a weapon to use in class-action lawsuits against law enforcementagen- cies. Rather, it should be passed to force these agencies to begin collecting information that has a legitimate law enforcement purpose. Just as an analysis of traffic stops by location can reveal pat- terns and trends that are of great help to police administra- tors,the analysis of racial fac- tors could be of assistance, too. And since many police agencies now equip squad cars with on- board computers, recording the race of individuals — at least for the two years required under Conyers'bill — wouldn't be a time-consuming chore for overworked officers. At the very least, the data would pinpoint those jurisdic- tions where DWB is considered a criminal offense. And identi- fying the full scope of this prob- lem is the first step toward a solution. HUMAN RIGHTS Lawyer's Fight Against Rogue Cop Becomes Crusade for Human Rights AN JONES was fresh out of Yale Law School when he decided to drop everything to seek punish- ment of a policeman accused of beating two men to death. In the process, he de- veloped an innovative system to deter police brutality that is attracting atten- tion nationwide. Mr. Jones, now 30, says his crusade began after he read about Aaron Wil- liams, a petty thief who had died while being arrested in San Francisco in 1995. According to newspaper accounts, mem- bers of the police department shot pep- per spray into Mr. Williams's mouth, gagged him, and threw him face -down in the back of a police vehicle. The lead arresting officer was Marc Andaya, whom Mr. Jones hadjust tussled with in court, where the policeman was accused of shooting to death an unarmed, black mental patient who was in his custody. Mr. Jones lost an appeals -court battle to persuade the courts to try Mr. Andaya for the murder, but when he saw that another death had occurred on Mr. An- days's watch, he realized that his fight had not ended. "I decided right then and there that I was going to put my entire life on hold and do whatever it took to make sure that this officer never did anything like this again" Mr. Jones gave up a job he had begun with the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights to focus on fighting Mr. Andaya, who says he did nothing wrong to either of the men he arrested. For two years, Mr. Jones led an effort to remove Mr. Andaya from the police force by organiz- ing protests, making the officer's record public, and detailing how he failed to follow police procedures. In 1997, the San Francisco Police Commission fired Mr. Andaya—largely in response to Mr. Jones' perseverance. During his battle, Mr. Jones started a hotline, Bay Area Policewatch, so that Purpose: Established in 1996 by Van Jones, a lawyer, to provide le- gal aid and other assistance to vic- tims of police misconduct in Cali- fornia's Bay Area. The center re- cently opened an affiliate to do similar work in New York City. Finances: The group expects to bring in $300,000 this year, main- ly from foundations, corporations, and individuals. Address: 1230 Market Street, No. 409, San Francisco 94102; (415) 951-4844; e-mail hamanrts@ella hakercenter.org. World -Wide Wee site: http:lwww. ettahakementer.org people who believe they have suffered from police misconduct have a place to call with their complaints. Lawyers and volunteer law -school students man the hotline phones to provide advice to call- ers, make referrals to other lawyers, and offer to listen to people who feel they have nowhere else to turn. Information from the calls is plugged into a computer data base, which is con- sidered one of the first of its kind in the country to be run by a citizens' group. While police departments or courts typi- cally keep track of cases of police mis- conduct, they generally do not include information about complaints that did not make it to the courts or police offi- cers who were found to be "not guilty" at trial. Such information can be crucial, however, in cases like that of Mr. An - days. In 1996, Mr. Jones established the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights in San Francisco to house Policewatch, do advocacy work for victims of police mis- conduc"nd to run legal -service pro- grams. During the next five years, he hopes to create a Bay Area Prisonwatch, Immigration and Naturalization Serv- ice Watch, and Hatewatch to help peo- ple who suffer abuse at the hands of le- gal authorities, racists, homophobes, or others. Attracting Attention Human -rights leaders around the country are watching Mr. Jones' prog- ress. Gerald Le Melle, a deputy executive director at Amnesty International USA, which recently recruited Mr. Jones to serve as a spokesman on police brutal- ity, says that Mr. Jones and his organi- zation stand apart from the "ragtag groups of people running around with video cameras" that have cropped up af- ter the highly publicized videotape of Rodney Kings beating by Los Angeles police officers. "He has recognized that the less infor- mation there is and the more isolated people are on the issue, the less effective and less protected they can be," Mr. Le Melle says. During its first two years, the Ella Baker Center —which is named for the civil-rights crusader —relied on income that Mr. Jones received from a two-year fellowship from Echoing Green, a New York foundation that supports young leaders with innovative ideas. Today, the center operates on a $300,000 annual budget and has five full-time staff members. Last year, Mr. Jones won a Reebok International Human Rights Award in honor of his work. He put the $25,000 award into starting New York Po- licewatch, an East Coast version of Bay Area Policewatch; it now has two full- time employees. "It was important to teat our model against the biggest, hard- est police force in the world," he says. While the prestige of the Reebok Award has helped attract new donors, Mr. Janes —like many young non-profit leaders today —wants to find a way to keep his group afloat without relying so heavily on day -today fund raising. His dream is to build an endowment that can sustain the group on interest from investments. "What I wake up thinking every morning is 'endow- ment,'" he says. He plans to make appeals for endow- ment gifts to black and Hispanic ath- letes and entertainers, whom he be- lieves will understand from personal ex- perience why his charity exists. All too often, he says, they come under suspi- cion from law -enforcement officials no matter how big their paychecks have become. "You have these situations where these millionaire African -Americans and Latinos drive their fancy cars in their neighborhoods and then find themselves under arrest, face down on the sidewalk," he says. - Mr. Jones notes that with his com- ments, he does not mean to imply that he is opposed to police officers in general or in the growth in the size of police forces. But, he says, "Police officers are city employees just like bus drivers or school teachers. They're not saints; they're not superheroes. They're city employees, and they make mistakes." "We're just trying to fight the bad guys," he says. ­SUSAN GRAY (�1'1lian Oyerz,- o � � o NACOLE 3 r `Volume `I Summer 1998 In This Issue: All About NACOLE ........ 2 Board of Directors ........ 2 Agency Spotlight ........ 3 Around the Country in Citizen Review ............. 4 Report on the Third Annual inference ................ 3 Talkin' about the 1997 Conference ................. 5 Goals and Benefits of the Conference ................ 6 Conference Registration ...... 7 NACOLE Membership Information ................ 6 The NACOLE Review is a publication of the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement. For information, suggestions, and/or additional copies contact Clyde B. Davis, Treasurer and Editor, NACOLE P.O. Box 1110 Lanham, Maryland 20703. Phone: (301) 731-5808 Fax: (301) 794-0264 National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT NACOLE 1997 "Advancing the Blueprint for Change" Another NACOLE Conference has come and gone and we are making progress in our efforts to Advance the Blueprint for Citizens' Review of Law Enforcement. After a review of the conference comment forms, I am impressed with the candid nature of the comments and the response to the work of NACOLE for the short time we have been together. I would like to thank all of the participants for their effort in making the 1997 NACOLE Conference something special. It is inspiring to see the formation of this organization with the interest and the cohesiveness of its membership as we move forward in this struggle. There are allies in our communities, but they are hard to find. We must actively seek out and recruit these people into our ranks to create a climate by which we can mount a national movement for Citizens' Review throughout every town, burg and hamlet in the United States. If there is a police or law enforcement agency with jurisdiction for any geographical area in this country, there must also be some form of official, effective and discernible Citizens' Review for that police agency to be responsive to its citizenry. It has been made quite clear that we must continue to "evolve" and "involve" if we are to exist as a balance between a free and open society and a society which has lost the ability to provide citizens with freedom and justice for all. Our 1998 NACOLE Conference, "Citizen Oversight: Strategies for Aduancement, Enhancement and Survival" will be held in Indianapolis, Indiana from October 11-14. The Conference Hotel will be the OMNI Severin Hotel located in the heart of the downtown area. You will receive conference materials in the near future. The 1997 conference transcript is available and should be a welcomed addition to your growing arsenal of information. If there is a need for additional transcripts, please contact NACOLE and we will process the request as soon as possible. The cost for the transcripts is $65 (includes shipping and handling). I look forward to the 1998 Indy Conference and again working to advance one of the most important and critical issues of the 21st century, Citizens' Review. Brian C. Reeder President, NACOLE flational Ass datlon ror Oud fan ouesight of Law Enforcement ALL ABOUT NACOLE WOLF Beginnings In 1993, several members of the U.S. delegation to the International Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (IACOLE) conference in Cambridge, Massachusetts met to discuss issues of mutual concern relating to civilian oversight within the United States. The focus of this meeting was to form a national organization that would address the specific needs of civilians organized for law enforcement oversight. At the 1994 IACOLE conference in Orlando, Florida, meetings were held with the U.S. attendees to the conference. Several teleconferences were held during the year to discuss issues related to the creation of a national organization. In April 1995, a -1oup of individuals met in Landover, Maryland and approved the articles of incorporation and preliminary bylaws. On May 16, 1995, the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE) was approved as the official name of the organization. As NACOLE continues its work, the membership recognizes that the relationship between police and community continues to be one of the most critical social issues facing this country, particularly police behavior toward minority communities. The number of civilian oversight agencies in this country has increased significantly in recent years. About 71 of the nation's 100 largest cities have citizen review mechanisms. In 1996 and 1997. NACOLE assisted NACOLE Strives To... O Facilitate and involve the community as a true partner in community policing; O Provide for the establishment, development, education, and technical assistance of/for the civilian oversight of law enforcement; O Develop a national forum to promote the idea of civilian review. Establish a clearinghouse of information and become the provider of technical assistance for emerging citizens review agencies; Provide continuing education opportunities for practitioners of citizens' review. Develop an extensive library of research materials and publications for use in the field of civilian review; O Encourage the highest ethical standards in organizations which oversee law enforcement; O Educate the public by developing mechanisms to enhance police and community relations, educate law enforcement agencies and encourage law enforcement to respond with sensitivity to citizens' complaints; and O Encourage full racial and ethnic representation and participation in this organization and the agencies overseen by its members. over 20 cities in establishing civilian oversight systems. NACOLE recognizes that the majority of law enforcement officers strive, often under dangerous and demanding circumstances, to carry out their duties in a restrained, lawful and professional manner. However, the United States continues to have a growing crisis of police misconduct. Citizens want to feet secure that police officers are in the community to serve and protect all the citizens of that community. We believe that citizens have a right to be assured that adequate mechanisms are available to review and investigate questionable or unacceptable actions of law enforcement officers. National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement NACOLE Board of Directors BRIAN C..REEDER, President Indianapolis, IN HELEN MARIE I-Fwls, Vice President Minneapolis, MN LARNA SPEARMAN, Secretary Indianapolis, IN CLYDE B. DAMS, Treasurer Lanham, MD DONALD CASIMERE, MEMBER Richmond, CA .TAMES JOHNSON, MEMBER Cincinnati, OH MALVINA G. MONTEIRO, MEMBER Cambridge, MA K. FELICIA DAvis, MEMBER Syracuse, NY SUE QUINN San Diego, CA National Asswiauon for Ciuilian Ouenight of Law Enrolre ent 'Yew Direction For San Diego County's Citizens' Law Enforcement Review Board by John Parker In May of 1997, 1 took a major step in my second career and became the second permanent Executive Officer of the Citizens' Law Enforcement Review Board in San Diego County, better known as CLERB. This was not an easy step, since I would be leaving the relative security of my Civil Service protected position as Chief Investigator of San Francisco's Office of Citizen Complaints (OCC), just after that agency implemented a new city charter and mandated a full staffing consisting of one OCC line investigator for every 150 SFPD officers. This meant that fifteen investigators would be handling work previously handled by eight. Because of my long-time law . nforcement background, 1 was expected to ride into town and bring about instant changes in the confidence level of CLERB. Things didn't go quite as expected. Taking this position in May, just before the county carved up it's budget pie, was tough. The days entailed setting up meetings with members of the Board of Supervisors, but many calls went unanswered. There were initial meetings with some of their staff members, but there would be no meetings with any of the County Supervisors before budget deliberations, except for a few chance meetings in the hallways of the Administration Building. An intense lobbying effort against CLERB was being waged by the Deputy Sheriffs' Association, as well as past negative comments about CLERB made by a very opular elected sheriff. The first major success was in meetings with the Sheriff's Department's command staff. They learned that I was not some Flaming radical from San Francisco with an agenda to thwart law enforcement's ability to carry out it's crime fighting role. The message that threw them was that the Review Board stood behind the concept of strong but professional law enforcement, fully accountable to the citizens of San Diego County. They learned that I understood the law enforcement culture and intended to be a straight shooter when dealing with the complexities of civilian oversight of their department. The primary agenda was to improve the County's law enforcement services to the public in a manner that is consistent with the protection of the rights of citizens and peace officers alike. Initially, CLERB's staffing included an executive officer, two special investigators, and a clerical staff of two. Staff hiring began in January 1992 with the executive officer. Fifteen complaints had already been riled through the end of 1991; 78 cases were filed in 1992; 111 cases in 1993; 182 cases in 1994; 236 cases in 1995; and 247 cases in 1996. Staff was reduced by one investigator and both clerical positions in August 1995. We are currently exploring ways of getting around the constant court challenges yet respecting the state law -mandated confidentiality rights of deputies when their testimony is sought by CLERB. FYI Note: John Parker retired from the Oakland (California) Police Department in 1990, after nearly 22 years of service. His uniformed police experience includes Patrol/Field Training Officer; Special Operations Diuision/Helicopter Pilot (CPD); and SWAT sharpshooter. As an investigator, he served in Vice Crimes and Narcotics and Internal Affairs. Upon his retirement from OPD, Mr. Parker took a position as Senior Investigator with the Office of Citizen Complaints in San Francisco, rising to become Chief Investigator and serving for extended periods as that agency's acting Director. He left in 1997 to become Executive Office of CLERB. National Association fa' Civilian Oumig�ht of taw Enfom�ement AROUND THE COUNTRY IN CITIZEN REVIEW Sonoma County Center for Peace and Justice SSonoma County, California has been working toward Vestablishing a Civilian Review board in response to nine police -related deaths in two years. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and the California State Advisory Committee held a public hearing in Sonoma County in February 1998, to investigate police -community relations and will release a report within 6 months. We have been compiling information about existing review boards around the United States to educate the public about what police oversight is. Our local daily paperjust released two cover stories about Civilian Review Boards in the Bay Area. To date, no elected official has spoken out publicly about this issue. Our work continues... Visit our web site at www.peacentresonic.net Elisabeth Anderson 01 Idaho Concerns he Concerned Citizens for Police Accountability (CCPA), Inc. was formed in Boise, Idaho on September 4, 1997 in the wake of two separate controversial shootings which killed Ryan Hennessey, age 20, and Justin Atkinson, age 21. John and Patricia Billington, stepfather and mother of Ryan Hennessey formed the organization shortly after they attended a NCOPA, National Coalition for Police Accountability (NCOPA) Conference looking for answers for their concerns on police accountability and whether such a thing existed. What they discovered was that there are many organizations across the nation already working in the field of police accountability through citizen review of law administration and the promotion of progressive law enforcement. In the fall of 1997, Boise topped the charts in the nation in regard to fatal police shootings with two more questionable shootings in October which killed two brothers from Pennsylvania, Doug and Craig Brodrick, as well as Officer Mark Stall. The CCPA and ACLU of Idaho immediately took the opportunity to invite Boise officials to attend the NACOLE conference which did an excellent job in its presentation of civilian review, Boise officials opted for an ombudsman instead of the much debated citizen review committee. The projected date for the ombudsman position to be filled is in June 1998. Meanwhile, the CCPA remains dedicated to its efforts to promote the implementation of an empowered civilian review board for the city of Boise. Visit our web site at www.ccpa/idaho.com Patricia Billington, Assistant Director, CCPA Challenges in Syracuse The Citizen Review Board (CRB) of Syracuse has faced tremendous opposition since its creation by local ordinance in 1993. The board became operational in early 1994, and has since then been inundated with legal challenges from the Police Benevolent Association (PBA) of Syracuse. At present the PBA has been able to secure a temporary injunction against the Board's subpoena power. In March 1998, a dramatic court case unfolded that did not involve the CRB directly, but its verdict has positive affects/effects for the Board. A former police officer sued the Syracuse police Department, one lieutenant, one deputy chief, and the Chief on the grounds that he was reiterated against (fired) as a result of his testifying before the CRB under subpoena. After 2 1/2 years a jury finally rendered a verdict. The officer was awarded more than $800,000,00 in back pay, with punitive damages assessed against the lieutenant and deputy chief. Currently, the CRB is in the midst of budget hearings, and faces the real possibility that its part-time investigator position will be cut. There has been murmuring in the Community that the CRB would be cut in its entirety. The City Council has not yet voted, and while it is hoped that cutting the CRB in its entirety will not be considered, the loss of the part-time investor position is devastating to the Board's ability to independently review cases of police misconduct. It's a struggle, considering the many challenges to the CRE's existence and frustrating episodes at the strategic foot dragging of the police litigation; the CRB has adopted the motto of the "Little Engine that Could, I think we (CRB) can!" K. Felicia Davis Citizen Reuiew Board of Syracuse, New York National Assodatlon for Ciuitian Oue ight of Law Enfamement NACOLE `97 Conference Fact Sheet o rATES REPRESENTED Arizona (1) California (55) Colorado (4) Idaho (6) Hawaii (6) Indiana (3) Massachusetts (1) Maryland (1) Michigan (4) Minnesota (4) Missouri (1) Nebraska (1) New York (4) North Carolina (4) Ohio (1) Oregon (4) Pennsylvania (4) Texas (1) Utah (1) ORGANIZATIONS REPRESENTED: TOTAL NUMBER— 44 TOTAL MEMBERS— 65 NUMBER REGISTERED— 106 TOTAL ATTENDEES— 135 KEY ISSUES OF INTEREST: ■ Determining what has not worked with other oversight agencies and identifying potential solutions for implementation. ■ Establishing a civilian review board clearinghouse (web page). ■ Establishing an oversight newsletter, articles, chat room. ■ Establishing NACOLE as a support organization for emerging oversight agencies. ■ Establishing regional and state oversight meetings and associations. ■ Learning to differentiate between large vs. small city issues and solutions. ■ Identifying a list of potential speakers and trainers for future conferences. ■ Identifying different models of oversight agencies to increase communication and sharing. ■ Establishing an auditing process within civilian oversight. ■ Increasing community input in connection with the review process and recommendations regarding police policy matters. ■ Learn about different enabling legislation establishing oversight agencies. ■ Networking with other agencies to receive updates on different issues. ■ Pepper spray usage vs. other alternatives. ■ Promoting NACOLE as the premier organization for national oversight issues. Talkin' About the 1997 Conference "In a word, the NACOLE annual conference was inspirational. The NACOLE conference provides both structured and informal opportunities to learn from the successes and frustrations of fellow civilian review professionals and advocates. Because we often toil away in relative isolation from one another, the importance of these opportunities cannot be overestimated. Whether the resulting inspiration takes the form of a new substantive proposal on a particular problem orjust a more general sense -roptimism that challenges affecting to field can be overcome, the by product of the NACOLE conference is the same a more effective group of civilian review professionals and institutions and a rejuvenated movement. " John Crew Police Practices Project Director ACLU of Northern California "The NACOLE Conference was an enlightening experience. Learning about civilian oversight agencies in other states was interesting, to say the least. In particular, I was uplifted to hear that Pittsburgh was successful in establishing its "Citizen Police Review Board," despite much opposition. It is clear that there is still much work to be done to bridge the gap between police and citizens, but I am encouraged. I plan to attend the next NACOLE conference and hope to see more police personnel participation in NACOLE." Ursula K. Henry Detroit Board of Police Commissioners "The NACOLE Conference was a great opportunity for activists, law enforcement officers, board members and scholars to exchange ideas and Learn more about civilian review and its role in improving police - community relations. Will Gonzalez, Fxecutive Director Police -Barrio Relations Project • • :rence Location 'OmM Severin Hotel 40 Vkst Jackson Place Indianapolis, IN 46225 Tel: (317) 634-3664 Fax: (317) 687-3619 The room rate is $109 for single or double occupancy (excluding state and local taxes). These rates will be available for 30 days before the conference. Indianapolis International Airport is 10 minutes away from the hotel. Transportation from the airport is available through Indy Connections for $8 per person each way, or by private taxi service for about $15-$20 each way. The Omni Severin is located in the heart of the city's downtown business, entertainment and cultural district Its central location affords convenient access via the hotel's sky walk to the Circle Centre Mall and the RCA Dome with over 100 stores, several restaurants and bars, a movie theater. The Indianapolis Children's Museum and Indy 500 Speed Way and Museum are also nearby. Conference Goals Conference participants will learn how to: a Network with city and state agencies to promote civilian oversight and police accountability reform processes. it Define what communities need to know when establishing a civilian oversight system, change existing review mechanisms and what accomplishments can be expected in the short and long term in any jurisdiction. ■ Explain the types of resistance used to derail or co-opt any form of civilian oversight system and effective strategies for countering that resistance. ■ Discuss what a community can expect to gain from a functioning civilian review process, and how citizen review agencies are effective in reductions of municipal liability suits. Conference Benefits ■ Exposure to critical law enforcement issues shaping our future. t Opportunities to undertake new roles in civilian oversight nationally and locally. ■ Opportunities to meet and share ideas with leaders in the civilian oversight field. ■ Membership in a fast-growing national network of civilian oversight and law enforcement leaders across the United States. ■ Development of essential skills to involve the community as a partner in community policing. ■ Extensive national dialogue between law enforcement personnel, citizens and civilian oversight practitioners. Who Should Attend Participants in this conference may be Civilian Oversight Agency Personnel; Police Commissioners/Chiefs; Law Enforcement Agency Personnel (sworn and non -sworn); Police Union Representatives; Internal Affairs Staff; Social Service Agencies; Federal, State, and Local Officials; Special Interest Groups; Communities interested in creating Civilian Review boards; Volunteers, Colleges, Universities and Students. The general public is also invited. Registration Fees Regular and organizational members $250; associate and non-members $300. Late registration: regular and organization members $300; associate and non-members $350. 1998 Conference Theme: "Citizen Oversight: Strategies for Advancement, Enhancement and Survival" Mallon! Assoclatlon for Civilian Cumight of taw Enforcement AACOLE Membership Information Sustaining Members are organizations and individuals who wish to make tax deductible contributions to further the goals and principles of NACOLE. Fee: $500 (Minimum Donation) Organizational Members are Agencies or Boards who provide civilian oversight of law enforcement by legislative or executive mandate. These agencies will receive one transferable regular membership and associate memberships for the remaining members of the Board. Fee: $300 QcHo (�vilan Over oS/4 o MCO3 ��1T�0 Regular Members are individuals who are not sworn law enforcement officers but who work or have worked for agencies that are mandated by legislative or executive authority to investigate or review complaints against law enforcement officers. Fee: $150 Associate Members are individuals concerned with the oversight of law enforcement. These members shall be able to participate in all NACOLE activities, including serving on committees, but are ineligible to vote or serve as officers. Fee: $100 National Association for Ciu Return Address: NACOLE Student Members are individuals who are full-time students and are concerned with the oversight of law enforcement. Student members will be able to serve on committees but are ineligible to vote or serve as officers. Fee: $25 Membership expires one year from receipt of dues and is renewable at current membership rates. For more information call Clyde B. Dauis, at (301) 731-5808. P.O. Box 1110 LANHAM, MARYLAND 20703 F((11ek,,9AJ � �ou�/} Xc-?V-11. 1%1C1