NACOLEReview

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT OF LAW ENFORCEMENTwww.nacole.org Winter 2008

NACOLE IS PLEASED TO ANNOUNCEthat its 14th Annual Conference will beheld October 26-30th in Cincinnati,

Ohio. Speakers from throughout the UnitedStates and from other countries will addressand explore a wide range of issues surroundingcitizen oversight.

We are very fortunate to be working withCincinnati’s Citizen Complaint Authorityand its Director, Kenneth Glenn, whoseinvestigative staff have long and diversebackgrounds in law enforcement and the

criminal justice system, and whose seven-member civilian board represents a cross-sec-tion of the community. We will also draw onCincinnati’s experience as an agency thatgrew out of a Department of JusticeMemorandum of Understanding and aCollaborative Agreement. We are workingclosely with them to showcase our host citywith additionalevents outside ofthe normalschedule. Since

Cincinnati to Host 14thAnnual ConferenceOctober 26 - 30

THE “WATCHDOG”has emerged over theyears as the unofficial

mascot of citizen oversight. It’san image that makes sense forobvious reasons, but all thatbarking and snapping at theheels of wayward peace offi-cers is really only one way fora monitor to make a positivecontribution. The OIR modelis consciously a collaborativeone: independent lawyersworking with the Los AngelesCounty Sheriff’s Departmentto make sure that its ownreview systems are serving thepublic effectively. We bring an

outsider’s perspective toLASD’s internal investigations,decision-making, and systemic

Finding the Middle Ground: A CollaborativeApproach to Oversight in Los Angeles Countyby Stephen Connolly

� Author Stephen Connolly (left), and the director of the Office

of Independent Review, Michael Gennaco (right).

Please turn to“MiddleGround,” page 7

In this issue:1. Cincinnati to host 14th annual

conference1. Finding the middle ground2. Greetings from the president3. Policy recommendation

corner4. 2007 CACOLE conference

highlights4. CIT Philly: Addressing the

needs of the mentally ill5. NYPD’s “Stop & Frisk”

policies6. NACOLE San Jose re-cap

Please turn to“Cincinnati,”page 7

� An evening view of the Contemporary Art Center in

Cincinnati

2 NACOLE Review / Winter 2008

OfficersPresident: Eduardo I. Diaz,

Miami, FLPresident-elect: Philip K. Eure,

Washington, D.C.Secretary: Charles D. Reynolds,

Dover, NH

Treasurer: Richard Rosenthal,

Denver, CO

Past President: Pierce Murphy,

Boise, ID

Members at LargeKelvyn Anderson, Philadelphia, PA

Andre Birotte, Los Angeles, CA

Sam Pailca, Seattle, WA

Carol A. Scott, Concord, NC

Shirley Washington, New Haven, CT

Jayson Wechter, San Francisco, CA

Board of Directors

SOME OF YOU ALREADY KNOWthat the theme of my presidency is“growing the movement.” Because this

can only be done with team work, I am happyto report that your board of directors is full ofteam players who are willing to work hard,confronting all challenges with compassion andenergy.

Past-President Pierce Murphy made us proudby appearing as a representative of NACOLEon CNN with Anderson Cooper in October todiscuss recent videotaped instances of allegedpolice misconduct that had received nationalattention. President-Elect Phil Eure continuesto chair our Strategic Planning Committee andhas put an incredible amount of energy intothat role, preparing the groundwork forNACOLE to apply for grants that will allow theorganization to hire full time staff and help thepolice accountability movement grow in theU.S. Charlie Reynolds is a superb Secretarywho records everything, even the time we enter

the board conference call if we are a minutelate. And, our treasurer, Richard Rosenthal,keeps us current, paying our bills and investingwhat is left wisely.

Board members work hard on a variety of tasksand projects. Andre Birotte, serving as chair ofFinance Committee Chair, keeps his eagle eyeon our financial status, and also serves on theConference Committee. Kelvyn Anderson doesa remarkable job heading up ourCommunications Committee and maintainingour listserv and website. NACOLE is gearingup for the exciting unveiling of its significantlyredesigned website this winter.

The task of leading the Outreach Committee isperformed by Carol Scott, ably assisted by ournew board member, Shirley WayneWashington. Sam Pailca oversees the effort topublish this newsletter and co-chairs theProfessional Standards Committee with JaysonWechter, our newest board member andConference Committee Chair. What a team!

This group is supported by Cameron Smith, adedicated and hard working ConferenceCoordinator who supports the board in a num-ber of ways. We are fortunate to have her workfor the board and the membership, as Cameronconsistently goes above and beyond the call ofduty.

I can only serve as the president of NACOLEbecause of the incredible support I get from themembers of Miami-Dade County’s IndependentReview Panel. They also deserve recognitionfor all of the volunteer hours they put in andfor encouraging me to take on this charge.

Please take some time to contemplate how youcan help NACOLE grow the movement. Emailme your ideas! ( diaz@nacole.org )

Dr. Diaz is the president of NACOLE’s board of

directors. He is also the executive director of

the Miami-Dade County Independent Review

Panel.

Greetings From the Presidentby Dr. Eduardo I. Diaz

NACOLE Review / Winter 2008 3

ONE OF THE IMPORTANTfunctions of citizen oversight is to pro-vide police executives and elected offi-

cials with thoughtful proposals for policereform. Continuous improvement in policepolicy, as well as in training and supervisionthat support reform efforts, will enhance thedelivery of police services and reduce thelikelihood of injuries to citizens and policeofficers alike. Successful implementation ofnew policies can also build greater trustbetween law enforcement agencies and thecommunities they serve. Below are examplesof recent policy recommendations developedby oversight agencies in Boise, Seattle andWashington, D.C.

�� Boise, Idaho

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS AREpart of the community ombudsman’s

responsibilities in Boise. Many suchrecommendations flow from specificcomplaints incidents the office investigates, orfrom a cluster of cases. Others are the result ofa decision to study a particular police practice.

In 2006, the community ombudsman andBoise’s policechief decidedto study the useof Tasers (con-ducted energyweapons) byBoise officersand to looknationally forbestpractices. A teamof employees from both agencies joined togeth-er to analyze the data, research what otherswere doing, and offer recommendations.

As a result of this study, significantimprovements were made to the policy andprocedures governing the use of Tasers byBoise police officers, and to the training theyreceived. One significant change was toprohibit the use of tasers in instances notinvolving physical aggression or active physicalresistance, and to limit their use against highlyvulnerable persons such as the very young, theelderly, and pregnant women. In addition,policy now encourages officers to consider theuse of a Taser instead of deadly force whentime and circumstances permit.

For more information about this policyrecommendation and others issued by Boise’sOffice of Community Ombudsman, please visitthe agency’s website at:www.boiseombudsman.org

- Pierce Murphy

�� Seattle, Washington

SEATTLE’S OFFICE OF PROFESSIONALAccountability (OPA) has direct

responsibility for the investigation andmediation of citizen complaints, and issuesreports to the public each month on closed caseactivity and complaint statistics. From thebeginning, though, the OPA believed that thebest way to improve police practices andpolice-community relations was through policyreview and encouraging strong policesupervision.

In January 2007, OPA issued a report on use offorce complaints made over a three-yearperiod, 2003 through 2005. The purpose of thereview was to look for recurring themes andpatterns, and to identify opportunities forimprovements in policy, training, supervision,outreach and education.

The review of 268 force complaints identifiedseveral major findings: (1) a significant numberof complaints involving multiple officers; (2)few complaints involved substantial forceand/or injury; (3) escalation of incidents byofficers; (4) a rise in complaints in which noforce was reported by the officer; (5) a notablenumber of complaints of force while incustody; (6) a high proportion of complaintsabout force made by citizens of color; and (7)issues related to use of tasers.

The report outlined major recommendations inthe area of race and use of force, whichincluded a call for Seattle to releaseinformation about the study of traffic stops andsearches and for the city to develop a long-termresponse to issues involving race and policing.The report further outlined a series of proposalsrecommending development of a protocol thatcalls for an on-scene response by OPA tocritical incidents, noting that Seattle’s practiceof restricting the review of over 700 hundredforce incidents per year to the officer’s chain ofcommand had not resulted in a single instancewhere a reviewing commander had found apolicy violation, or referred an incident to OPAfor further investigation.

For more information about this policyrecommendation and others issued by Seattle’sOPA, please visit the agency’s website at:http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/police/opa/Default.htm

- Sam Pailca

�� Washington, D.C.

IN ADDITION TO INVESTIGATING,adjudicating and mediating citizen com-

plaints against the police, the District of

Columbia’s Office of Police Complaints (OPC)issues periodic recommendations for policereform.

In December 2005, the Metropolitan PoliceDepartment (MPD) released a study on racialand ethnic profiling in Washington, D.C. TheMPD study involved collecting pedestrian stopdata at five locations and gathering traffic stopdata at 20 sites in the nation’s capital.

In May 2006, OPC issued a report and set ofpolicy recommendation calling for a task forcemade upof com-munityrepre-senta-tives andofficialsfromMPDand OPC to follow up on issues raisedin theMPD study. MPD’s profiling study had found,among other things, that African-American andLatino pedestrians who walk in or near some ofthe city’s major tourist, shopping and entertain-ment areas risk being stopped at disproportion-ately high rates by police officers.

OPC proposed that MPD, with the input of thenew task force, review the Department’spolicies and practices in the areas of hiring,training, supervision, and outreach in order tocombat the practice or perception of biasedpolicing. OPC also urged that the task force becharged with assessing MPD’s anti-biasedpolicing policy. In response to OPC’s proposal,MPD has created a task force to examine theseissues, giving members of the District’s diversecommunities an important stake in reviewinglaw enforcement policies and practices thataffect fair policing.

For more information about this policyrecommendation and others issued by OPC,please visit the agency’s website atwww.policecomplaints.dc.gov.

- Phil Eure

Pierce Murphy is the community ombudsman forthe City of Boise. Sam Pailca, the former directorof Seattle’s Office of Professional Accountability,is a compliance investigations attorney with theMicrosoft Corporation. Phil Eure is executivedirector of the Office of Police Complaints inWashington, D.C.

Policy Recommendation CornerReform Efforts Can Lead to Better Policing, Greater Trust

� A standard issue Taser gun.

� Officers in D.C. line up for roll call.

4 NACOLE Review / Winter 2008

THE 2007 ANNUAL CONFERENCEof the Canadian Association for CivilianOversight of Law Enforcement

(CACOLE) was held in beautiful and historicHalifax, Nova Scotia, from October 10 - 12,2007. The program featured sessions on avariety of topics related to oversight of lawenforcement, and attracted participants fromeight other countries, including NACOLEpresident Eduardo Diaz from the U.S.

Over the past year, three importantpublic inquiries involving policeaccountability issues have taken placein Canada. One of these inquiries con-cerned the country’s national securitysystem. The other two public reviewscentered on events that had occurred inthe provinces of Ontario and BritishColumbia.

We were fortunate to have on our firstpanel two distinguished judges whoheaded those inquiries as well as a rep-resentative of the judge in the third

case. In a three-hour session, they described indetail their findings and the reasoning underly-ing their recommendations. Their reports arecritical to the further evolution of citizen over-sight in Canada, and sparked much discussionat the conference.

The conference also featured panels or speakerson choosing the appropriate dispute resolution

technique, First Nation oversight and theincreasing use of tasers. Other sessionsincluded a case study involving the wrongfuldismissal of a police officer, the perspective ofcomplainants in police misconduct cases, theEdmonton early intervention system andstandards of proof. We also devoted a half dayto international topics.

Delegates were treated to a dinnercruise aboard the tall ship “Silva,”adding a bit of maritime spice to a verysuccessful conference.

The 2008 annual CACOLE conferencewill be held in Regina, Saskatchewan,June 16 - 18, 2008. For more informa-tion about CACOLE and our upcomingconference, please visit our website atwww.cacole.ca.

Robert Mitchell, QC, is the president ofCACOLE’s board of directors. He isalso chair of the Saskatchewan PublicComplaints Commission.

2007 CACOLE Conference in HistoricHalifax, Nova ScotiaJune 2008 Gathering to be Held in Regina, Saskatchewanby Robert Mitchell, QC

�CACOLE President Robert Mitchell (right) pictured with twoconference attendees from Hong Kong.

IN THE WAKE OF A HIGHLYpublicized fatal incident involving Amtrakpolice and a mentally ill homeless man in

2000, the Philadelphia Police Departmentre-wrote its policy on police contact with thementally ill, emphasizing de-escalation andgreater cooperation between police, behavioralhealth agencies and the public.

The Police Advisory Commission supportedthis change in policy, and former commissionExecutive Director Hector Soto testified at aCity Council hearing in 2001 about complaintsfiled with the agency where mental healthissues were the overriding factor for policeresponse.

In 2004, the Commission joined police, behav-ioral health agencies and community groups ina full-blown effort to create a CrisisIntervention Training Program for PhiladelphiaPolice, modeled on the best practices of citiesaround the U.S. like Memphis, TN, andHouston, TX.

The vision of Crisis Intervention Training, orCIT, is the reduction of the risk of violence andharm for police and for people with behavioralhealth disorders through training, education andcollaboration among stakeholders.

Twenty to 25 percent of uniformed patrol copsfrom the East Division will complete a four-day training session that will teach them tech-niques to help relieve tense situations involvingpolice and people who have mental illnesses.

Feedback from the training indicatesPhiladelphia officers, like the CIT trained offi-cers in the Chicago Police Department, wereespecially moved by role-playing opportunitiesand frank testimony from mental health con-sumers and their families.

The Department also learned that choosingofficers for participation in the programthrough a volunteer system, rather than randomassignment, has resulted in a higher level ofinterest. The new CIT officers have becomeambassadors for the program, and spread the

word throughout the department.

The program also highlighted the need forchanges in behavioral health delivery systems,as more targeted responses by police and men-tal health workers frequently identify individu-als who have “fallen through the cracks.” Italso taught the importance of training for 911dispatchers who provide police with criticalfirst response information.

While Crisis Intervention Training is alreadywell-established best practice in many policeagencies around the U.S., simply replicatingexisting models is not enough. Marshaling thesupport, resources and political will necessaryto create or modify CIT in your jurisdictionrequires recognizing the unique local characterof laws impacting treatment and commitment,behavioral health facility resources and person-nel, and the experiences of mental health con-sumers and their families.

Crisis Intervention Training: Philadelphia Addressing the Needs of the Mentally Illby Kelvyn Anderson

Please turn to“CIT: Philly,” page 7

FROM 2002 TO 2006, THENew York City Police Departmentreported a five-fold increase in the

number of civilians stopped, questioned,and frisked, from just under 100,000 toover 500,000. The Civilian ComplaintReview Board saw a similar dramaticincrease in complaints stemming fromthese stops. While most analyses of thisdata have focused on racial disparities ofthose stopped, the fundamental questionof what has fueled the increase in stopshas yet to be answered.

Any examination of New York’s Stop andFrisk policy must note fundamentalchanges made in 2001 to a form calledthe UF-250 form, which the Departmentuses to document stops. The form initial-ly had a blank space in which officerswrote circumstances leading to stops andfrisks. After a 1999 study of over 125,000forms by the Office of the AttorneyGeneral found that only 61% of the rea-sons provided by officers met the legalstandard for conducting a stop, the formwas redesigned into a checkbox format.While the new form provides data that is easierto tabulate, officers are no longer required towrite individualized reasons for their stops.Since the information provided by the newform is more limited, CCRB investigations intowhether stops are justified have become evenmore important.

In its investigations, the CCRB substantiatesallegations of “frisk” and “search” asmisconduct twice as frequently as it does otherallegations (CCRB 2006 status report, p 94 and96). However, CCRB’s sustained findings areno guarantee of discipline. In fact, starting in2005, the NYPD began to systematicallydowngrade the discipline for stop, question,and frisk complaints, first by issuing officers“instructions” in cases similar to those in whichofficers had previously been given more seriouspenalties, and then by declining – at an

unprecedented rate - to penalize officers at allin these cases. The department has publiclystated that the CCRB has used faulty legalanalysis of what constitutes “reasonablesuspicion,” which the board vigorouslydisputes.

In a recent report, Greg Ridgeway of the RandCorporation noted that “NYPD’s CompStat(statistical analysis) focus gives officers astrong incentive to generate UF-250s,” since“{a}n officer’s UF-250 numbers suggestproductivity.” Such strong incentive to conductmore stops, however, could encourage officersto lower the legal threshold for stoppingsomeone. An emphasis on productivity stats,combined with the sharp decline in disciplinefor officers who conduct improper stops,appear to provide incentives for more frequentstops, even when the legal justification isquestionable. The dramatic increase in stops

appears to bear out this theory.

NYPD’s practice of rewarding the raw numberof stops as a productivity measure does nottake into account the results of the stops, i.e.,whether contraband was recovered or an arrestwas made, or neither. This emphasis on thenumbers can have adverse public safetyconsequences, since stopping large numbers ofpeople who turn out to be engaged in nounlawful activity erodes public trust in thepolice and may reduce cooperation with policeinvestigations. Productivity measures ought tobe carefully calibrated to measure officers’work without creating incentives for improperactions. Increased study can help determinebetter metrics for evaluating officers’stop-and-frisk practices.

Andrew Case is the spokesperson for New YorkCity’s Civilian Complaint Review Board.

NACOLE Review / Winter 2008 5

NYPD’s ‘Stop and Frisk’ PoliciesCCRB Says It’s Not by the Numbers

by Andrew Case

NACOLE SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES

NACOLE relies on sponsorships, in-kind donations and other support in addition to conference registration fees to produce

successful annual conferences. We encourage our members and supporters to consider this opportunity to help ensure the suc-

cess of the upcoming conference in Cincinnati.

Please contact Cameron Smith for more information about the benefits of sponsorship at CammeS@aol.com.

THE 2007 NACOLE CONFERENCE,“Transparency, Accountability,Integrity,” held in San Jose, California,

proved to be both a financial and popularsuccess, exceedingexpectations on all levels. Over300 participants attended, hailingfrom 26 states and 13 countries.

The 50% increase in attendeescan be attributed to many factors:the increase in citizen oversightagencies in the United States—several delegates attended fromnew and emerging oversightagencies; the large international delegation,inspired in part by the scheduling of a planningmeeting at the conference for the developmentof an international association of civilian; thestrong profes-sional develop-ment sessionsoffered in theconference agen-da; and theattractivelocation of theconference inSan Jose,offering greatweather, ameni-ties, and conven-ience for domes-tic and interna-tional flights.

The conferenceopened with anoversight updatepresented by Eduardo Diaz, informing thosegathered of news in the field – emerging USagencies, an overview of oversight organiza-tions around the world, and the movement toestablish an international association. NualaO’Loan presented her informative and movingfinal address as the Ombudsman of NorthernIreland, her message bringing home the abilityof oversight to make a difference in policing.Ms. O’Loan was presented a NACOLE“Outstanding Achievement in Oversight” awardfor her courageous and effective work. Theevening concluded with a reception welcomingattendees and celebrating the diversity of SanJose with Mexican Folkloric dancers andChinese Lion Dancers.

As in any gathering in which serious issues arediscussed from diverse perspectives, some

panels stimulated controversy. The panelentitled, “Shifting the Balance—Copley Pressand the Challenge to Oversight,” featuredoversight professionals and a police union

representative. While some delegatesquestioned the inclusion of young activists inthe “Community Voice for Law Enforcement

Oversight” panel,another praised thepanel for havingthe “most real”discussion ofissues he had seenat a NACOLEconference.

ACLU Executive DirectorAnthony Romero’sinspirational keynote luncheonspeech underscored theimportance of oversight inprotecting civil liberties, citingissues of concern throughoutthe United States. NACOLE “LegislativeChampion” awards were presented toCalifornia State legislators Senator GloriaRomero and Assembly Member Mark Lenoand to ACLU Police Practices Director MarkSchlossberg for their work on legislation torestore openness to citizen oversight agenciesin California forced behind closed doors as theresult of the Copley Press decision.

A few of the programmatic highlights of theconference included: panel discussions ofcritical incident rollout and review, oversight of

jails and prisons, mediation, oversight throughthe media, a panel discussion of police-trans-gender issues, as well as a full afternoon ofinternational presentations. The conference

featured training in investigativetopics such as use of force andexamining the credibility of wit-nesses, sessions pertinent tomembers of boards andcommissions, and a plenaryaddress by Police Chief RonDavis discussing his successfulwork to reach out to and workwith East Palo Alto’s diversecommunities to turn around the

city’s high homicide rate.

This year’s conference featured a HistoricalDowntown San Jose Treasure Hunt whichshowcased San Jose while challengingconference delegates to engage in a “workout”for the mind, think creatively and workcollaboratively to solve clues taking them tohistorically significant, but off-the-beaten-pathsites.

The general meeting attracted a record 301

NACOLE members. Eduardo Diaz was electedNACOLE President and Phil Eure President-Elect at the General Meeting. ShirleyWashington was elected as a board member atlarge.

Conference attendees embraced the four-dayagenda with exuberance and praise for thepresenters and conference organizers.

Barbara Attard is the independent policeauditor for the City of San Jose andpast-president of NACOLE.

NACOLE’s 13th Annual Conference in SanJose, CA Wins PraiseFour-Day Event Draws 300 Participantsby Barbara J. Attard

“The NACOLE Conference provided an excellentopportunity to learn, interact and dialogue withthose experienced in the field of civilian oversight,and I look forward to attending futureconferences.”

--Ruth Suber, member of Boston’s new CommunityOmbudsman Oversight Panel

�The winning team in a treasure hunt created especially forthe conference searches for clues leading to an overlooked

remnant of San Jose’s colorful past.

�View of downtown San Jose with conference site, FairmontHotel, pictured on the right.

6 NACOLE Review / Winter 2008

NACOLE Review / Winter 2008 7

reform, and try to strengthen them accordingly.

It’s an approach that offers the chance to prac-tice oversight from a middle vantage point –one that allows us to see both the public andthe Department more clearly than they, attimes, can see each other. Occasionally, a highprofile event provides a good example of thisphenomenon in action, and Los Angeles sawone such event in October of this year. A storyin the Los Angeles Times revealed that aparticular LASD patrol station had engaged ina series of “challenges” or contests in whichone police activity (arrests, car impounds,contacts with gang members) would becomethe focal point for a 24 hour period, anddeputies were encouraged to try outdoing eachother for the day.

The story captured quite a bit of attention, inpart because it provoked a vigorous split inpublic reaction. Many respondents praised theinitiative of the supervisor who planned theevents, and scoffed at critics by asking, “If youaren’t doing anything wrong, then what are youworried about?” Others, however – includingthose whose past experiences with the policeinclined them toward skepticism if not outrighthostility – saw the “challenges” as evidence ofa cavalier attitude toward the use of power andthe rights of individuals. Some wonderedfacetiously if future “contests” might include arace for uses of force, or even shootings.

Rather than digging in its heels, theDepartment worked with OIR to address thesituation in a thoughtful and constructivemanner. The Sheriff first personally directed animmediate stop to the “contests,” and theDepartment cooperated with OIR as it pulledthe records from the days in question toevaluate the actions that were taken. Thesubsequent review determined that the reality,as is often the case,fell somewhere between thetwo extremes. For example, the fact that theonly incentive was “bragging rights” defusedsome of the more troubling suspicions aboutdeputies cutting corners for all the wrongreasons. Moreover, though the arrests had beenthe most controversial aspect of the challenges,careful scrutiny of each by OIR supported theirlegitimacy.A number of officers mentioned toOIR along the way that comparable (thoughless formal) “contests” had been conductedthroughout law enforcement for generations –with no harm done. From their insiders’perspective, confident as they were in their owngood intentions, these officers found the pub-lic’s criticism to be overheated. Most, however,were also willing to acknowledge that the storyhad presented the Department in a bad light.They recognized that problematic perceptionscould easily emerge when the public has anyreason to doubt the judgment and motivation ofofficers in the field.

Much of the “watchdog” role in this case had

actually been performed by the reporters whofirst broke the story. Once the press attentionfell away, though, there was still useful work tobe done by the local oversight entity. In theweeks that followed this story, OIR had thechance to address some of the public criticism.The agency explained the checks and balancesthat exist and the remedial scrutiny that hadoccurred. Significantly, OIR pointed to itsindependent review of the arrests and otherpolice action that had taken place on the daysin question, and its independent assessment ofwhether the challenges had led to “bad arrests”or other violations of civil rights. Additionally,OIR persuaded the Sheriff to issue a formalmemorandum to his personnel indicating thedownsides of such “challenges” andemphasizing the importance of quality overquantity in police work.

Though the Department’s need to deal withhigh-profile controversies is usually limited toa handful of incidents each year, OIR’semphasis on facilitating communication andunderstanding between the Department and thepublic is an ongoing enterprise. When we findways – large or small – to sharpen LASD’sresponsiveness to public concerns or help putan event into a more balanced perspective, weconsider it a constructive and meaningful exer-cise of our oversight function.

Stephen Connolly is an attorney with the LosAngeles County Office of Independent Review.

“Middle Ground,” continued from page 1

The Role of Oversight Agencies

Public Relations & Advocacy – The publicmind is saturated with stories of sensationalfatal encounters involving police and thementally ill. Use hearings, communitymeetings, your agency’s website, editorials, etc,to dialogue with the public about CIT’s valueto officers and citizens. Engage and educateyour city council and state legislators, whomust be on board to support budget requestsand changes to mental health procedure law.

Data Collection & Analysis – Modify yoursystems to flag complaints, use of force andincident reports where mental illness is adominant factor, and systematically review theinformation with CIT team members. Map andgeo-code incidents to help identify where teamresources should be concentrated.

Policy Recommendations – Oversightagencies should consider formal recommenda-tion of the creation or strengthening of CIT

programs in their jurisdictions. CIT is anopportunity to contribute to real change,instead of just responding after the fact to trag-ic incidents such as shootings. In addition,ongoing community dialogue between police,social service agencies and consumers in meet-ings over CIT issues can create the bonds thatbuild trust among stakeholders and allow forfrank discussion without the usual rancor.

Kelvyn Anderson is the deputy director ofPhiladelphia’s Police Advisory Commission.

“CIT: Philly,” continued from page 4

1995 NACOLE has worked to provide allsegments of the oversight community with theopportunity to dialogue and exchangeinformation regarding citizen oversight of lawenforcement. This year’s Conference willcontinue this tradition by offering educationalpresentations, workshops and discussion

forums addressing the most pressing issues inoversight. We hope to offer an enhancedschedule that will include additional trainingtracks for those just entering the field and thosewishing to broaden their expertise and learnabout the most effective techniques and toolsemployed by other oversight agencies.

For further details regarding the conference andits content please visit www.nacole.orgthroughout the spring and summer for the mostup-to-date information.

We hope to see you in Cincinnati this fall!

“Cincinnati,” continued from page 1

NACOLE

638 E. Vermont Street

Indianapolis, IN 46202

The National Institute of Crime Prevention

Racially Biased Policing Training A program to facilitate fair and impartial policing

Las Vegas, NevadaApril 21-23, 2008 or July 14-16, 2008

Lorie Fridell, Ph.D., formerly with the Police Executive

Research Forum (PERF) and now with the University of South

Florida, will describe how agencies can and should

respond to the critical issues of racially biased policing

and the perceptions of its practice and how resident

stakeholders can facilitate responsible police actions.

The training is geared toward law enforcement executives,

command staff, and concerned stakeholders.

For information on this training go to:

www.nicp.net

This is a PAID ADVERTISEMENT