Markeshia Ricks Photo
Ellington leads the crowd in a chant as Alder Marchand looks on.
Policy-accountability activists once again convinced the Board of Alders to hold off on voting for the creation of a civilian review board (CRB) without subpoena power.
That was the upshot of alders’ last bi-monthly meeting of the year, where supporters of a CRB with investigative powers packed the aldermanic chambers at City Hall Monday night.
Just before the meeting Alders Richard Furlow and David Reyes Jr., the majority leader and deputy majority leader, respectively, announced to those had gathered in the second-floor atrium in preparation for the meeting what had been announced during an earlier public caucus — that the CRB ordinance would not be voted on.
It’s the second time this month alders have held off on voting on the matter. (Read about the first time here.) They have struggled since 2013 to fulfill the mandate of a 2013 ballot referendum to create a new CRB that has teeth.
“We thanked everyone for their work and effort,” Reyes said. “And they thanked us. We wanted them to know that we’re listening to them closely and thinking about this.”
Furlow: Alders hear “loud and clear.”
Furlow echoed those sentiments saying, “We want this to be the best CRB that it can be.” He said alders would take more time to review the many amendments that alders have proposed to the ordinance.
“We hear them loud and clear,” he added.
Alders Steve Winter, Darryl Brackeen, Kenneth Reveiz and Hacibey Catalbasoglu have worked on various amendments that would among other things clarify giving the CRB subpoena power and that it is an independent agency of city government. Alder Charles Decker also drafted an amendment proposal. (Read more on that below; and click here to read amendments proposed by Winter.)
The decision by alder leadership to not vote came after a flurry of negotiations that happened in the wake of a protest at City Hall, where advocates ultimately secured a meeting with Mayor Toni Harp and eventually Board of Alders leadership. Advocates, concerned that alder leaders were not committing to subpoena power for the CRB, also made a strategic push to garner support in Board President Tyisha Walker-Meyer’ Ward 23 and Westville Alder Adam Marchand’s Ward 25. Both alders had said publically that they had not heard from constituents about the CRB.
Strong CRB advocates are seeking five major changes to the proposal, to:
• Grant “independent investigatory power including subpoena power, ability to compel witnesses and produce evidence. The CRB should also hire qualified investigators without ties to the police department.”
• Grant “power to make disciplinary recommendations to the Chief of Police and to recommend grand jury investigations and an independent prosecutor. The police department and CRB should agree on a ‘disciplinary matrix’ for police misconduct.”
• Draw CRB members “from community organizations and having no ties to the police department or police union.”
• Offer “transparency through the collecting and reporting of data on civilian complaints against the police.
• Provide “necessary resources.”
Just to be sure that alders did indeed hear them Monday as Furlow and Reyes indicated, the supporters took up a song that had been written about CRB and police accountability and the need for a board with “teeth.”
“We know you’re afraid the police may sue. We can see it in the law you write, ” Malcolm Welfare sang. “But without subpoena power, its teeth, its truth — it’s the people who’ll bear the bite.”
Contributed photo
A sign created by Elm City Montessori students.
The singing created some tension for the board, as President Walker-Myers sought to start the meeting by recognizing the boys and coaches of the Elm City Pride Baseball Association, a nonprofit geared toward youth baseball for their winning 16 – 5 season. Ultimately the singing stopped and everyone in the chambers cheered on the team.
After the meeting, advocates chanted and sang, pressing alders who were preparing to leave chambers to stay and listen to their concerns.
“What do want? Subpoena power! When do we want it? Now!” they chanted.
Some alders, like Marchand and Fair Haven’s Kenneth Reveiz, stayed through the duration of the after-meeting chanting, ultimately garnering the advocates’ applause and thanks. Marchand said he stayed because he’s “been on both sides of protest and I wanted to hear them out.”
Walker-Myers stayed briefly but left when some advocates began to chant, “Tyisha Walker-Meyers doesn’t care.” (Organizer Kerry Ellington asked people not to chant that given board leadership has met with them.)
Jones.
Emma Jones, who has been working on creating a CRB for over 20 years, said she was happy that alders chose to hold off on voting and was hopeful that alders would be willing to meet with advocates before their next opportunity to vote on the matter in January.
Ellington said that advocates would like to see alders table the vote until they are clear about whether the CRB can have subpoena power. Supporters of the strong CRB have legal opinions, including one from the city’s Corporation Counsel John Rose that affirms investigative authority can be vested in such a body. Some alders have indicated that they believe that granting subpoena power might conflict with state law or violate the state’s constitution, though they’ve not provided any documentation to that effect.
Alders preparing to head home.
“We find this conflicting,” Ellington said. “On the one end, the board president has said she is not clear whether the civilian review board can have subpoena power or not. On the other end, the public has been told it’s a violation but there hasn’t been a specific state statute cited or the opinion
of whatever legal counsel that is informing the board.”
Ellington said advocates, who she said are New Haven taxpayers, not protesters, are encouraged and excited about the work that alders have put forth on amendments because they have been beneficial to ensuring a stronger CRB. But advocates want to work more collaboratively with alders to answer the question of subpoena power before alders move forward with a vote pointing out that the ACLU has issued opinions favoring a CRB with subpoena power.
“We’re asking alders to delay their vote until the entire community is clear on the question of subpoena power,” she said.
An Inside Job
Hacibey Catalbasoglu
A illustration of how the complaint process would work for a new CRB based on an amendment from Alder Catlbasoglu.
Alders Winter, Brackeen and Reveiz have drafted amendments that look like they would address the concerns that strong CRB supporters have pushed for including making sure that complaints go to the CRB and the New Haven police internal affairs at the same time. Those amendments have been drafted onto Decker’s proposal. But it remains to be seen whether they’ve convinced their colleagues to support those changes.
In a memo to Board colleagues Winter said the amendments would:
• Allow for subpoena power, unless barred by state law.
• Extend the prohibition on serving on the CRB to police officer’s family members and police union employees.
• Clarify that the CRB is not part of the Commission of Equal Opportunities.
• Specify that CRB reports break down demographic and geographic information and by the officer who is the subject of the complaint.
• Clarify that any officer may be called before the CRB.
Hit the play buttons below to watch Facebook live coverage of the meeting.
And this version from Travis Carbonella.
Is there not like, a lawyer someone can ask about the legality of subpoena power for the CRB?