CPRB takes the spotlight amid controversy

From the courts to the city council chamber, the Citizens Police Review Board spent most of this… From the courts to the city council chamber, the Citizens Police Review Board spent most of this summer in the spotlight.

The Citizens Police Review Board began investigating claims of police misconduct directly after its establishment by a city referendum in 1997. During that time, the claims often attracted media and local attention, but this summer’s controversy involves board members.

Mayor Luke Ravenstahl swore in five new board members on Aug. 3: Donna Kramer,  Rev. Eugene Downing Jr., Diana O’Brien Martini, Deborah Whitfield and Leshonda Roberts, ending an almost two-month long controversy between the city council, the mayor’s office and the board.

Ravenstahl reappointed two board members: Richard Carrington and Deborah Walker.

The newest conflict began on June 18, when the CPRB was in court arguing a G-20 Summit-related case against the city. At the highpoint of the related media attention, Ravenstahl announced that he intended to replace five of the seven board members and reappoint two.

The mayors move angered board members and local citizens. Some suspect a connection between the board’s protracted court battle over police documents and the mayor’s decision. Some of the documents were public records.

Beth Pittinger, executive director of the board, said that the process of appointing new board members would be “tainted” by the mayor’s announcement.

“If [these events] happened in isolation of each other, it would be a different story,” she said.

Initially, the city’s attorneys claimed that the CPRB was allowed to investigate only individual complaints of police misconduct, and that a general investigation exceeded the board’s powers. They also argued that some documents could endanger national security if released.

Allegheny County Court judge R. Stanton Wettick refuted those claims and said that it was within the power of the CPRB to investigate police conduct without individual complaints.

The board does not have any punitive power. It makes recommendations to the mayor’s office and the chief of police’s office concerning police training and tactics.

While this article was being reported, the city had yet to elaborate on its opposition of the board’s investigation beyond the reasons presented at the original trial.

Following Wettick’s decision, the city provided more than 300 pages of redacted documents “covered in black magic marker,” said Pittinger.

Since then, the board has moved that the city, particularly police chief Nathan Harper, should be held in contempt, because the documents that the board received did not satisfy the subpoena.

The board also launched an investigation into the individual complaints that it received in relation to the G-20 Summit.

The court’s latest hearing in relation to the case was Aug. 20.

City Council also got into the mix in mid-June, passing a resolution that encouraged the CPRB to align its request for documents with those of the pending lawsuits or to wait until after the statute of limitations expired. Either solution could long delay the board’s investigation.

Both councilmen Bill Peduto and Doug Shields abstained on the vote, saying that council had no say in the board’s activities.

Shields said that city lawyers encouraged council to pass the resolution.

Councilman Patrick Dowd, who voted for the resolution, said that the document “suggested that it might be prudent to wait for the documents from the federal lawsuits.”

But, in relation to documents for the 14 sworn complaints that the board received, Dowd said “the city should comply in that matter.”

Shields was not sure why the city was so adverse to releasing the documents or why it tried to use a national security argument in its defense.

“What happened in Oakland that Friday night had nothing to do with national security,” Shields said.

The city’s insurance company has kept a firm lid on the documents. Members of council — basically the company’s clients, as the company was hired by the city — don’t have access to the documents, Shields said.

Pitt spokesman John Fedele said that Pitt handed over to the city all of its records related to the G-20 Summit last fall.

“This administration has taken an adverse position to the board,” Shields said, referring to the mayor’s office and other city offices.