Albany's Community Police Review Board is looking to add a third investigator and get a boost from the Common Council to help move cases forward.
The panel has had difficulty flexing its muscle as an organization dedicated to reviewing complaints and conducting independent investigations into incidents of alleged misconduct by city police officers.
Last week Board chair Nairobi Vives testified at a Common Council Public Safety Committee hearing. She aired frustrations over red tape and technical difficulties she says are preventing the board from carrying out its mission as defined under Local Law J, including authority to discipline officers, subpoena power, and access to police body camera video. Vives says not being able to conveniently access police video has hindered the board's work.
"The statute envisions like a 30-day turnaround for a full investigation," Vives said. "That is certainly not happening on the APD side. So we've asked for at least 30 days, when you're doing an investigation, our investigators need to be able to look back to information they've seen once they are weighing all the evidence. And right now they say that they will remove the link and allow them to be able to come back, but that 'renewal' never happens in any sort of orderly fashion. It takes time, it takes dozens of emails to get it to work. And they could just grant the entire time that we need in the first place. And just not to limit our investigators' time to seven days, when they themselves are not sticking to 30, even 60 days to turn around a case. We've got a backlog of cases. It's just unrealistic."
Board member Antoinette Santos says such investigations should be completed within 45 to 60 days.
"So if we have to keep requesting for the same tape, the same review of these body worn camera footage and we're waiting for days for it to come, you're pushing the 60 days. It limits us and if we do find an infraction against an officer or an APD staff member, it limits the time in which we can incur these infractions," said Santos.
Public Safety Committee Chair Tom Hoey says interpretation of Local Law J continues to be a sticking point.
"The police union advised their officers not to answer the [CPRB] subpoenas. Because the way that it reads right now, is if they come and they get subpoenaed to come in to testify, they cannot take the Fifth Amendment," Hoey said. "And that's their understanding. And that's why the union lawyer advised them not to come. They did let the CPRB know that, that a week ahead of time, I've seen the letter that was sent, saying that we're advising our officers not to come and do not hold this meeting. But the CPRB attorneys did hold the meeting, and said they didn't show up. So there's a lack of understanding. And I'm trying to get everybody into the same room so we can discuss it."
Hoey says the board is making progress but concedes its 100-case backlog is daunting.
The board has issued a Request For Proposal for an investigator to "conduct thorough investigations of alleged misconduct by officers of the Albany Police Department." This investigator would join two others, one a private investigator based in New Jersey and the other an “investigations and consulting” firm, T&M, which operates out of New York City.
CPRB members will address a Wednesday night Common Council caucus, and the board has scheduled a Thursday evening meeting to discuss FOIL requests.
