OLEAN — A lawyer representing the city’s police unions told city leaders Tuesday that “options for challenges” would be considered if a civilian review board is put in place as written.
The Common Council hosted a public hearing Tuesday on Local Law No. 02-2022, which would establish a seven-person civilian review board to oversee the decisions rendered in complaints of police misconduct after more than a year of discussions and revisions. Originally set for a public hearing and vote, Council President John Crawford, D-Ward 5, noted that several spelling mistakes mean that the law would need to be updated, put back up for another public hearing, and likely be voted on in early September.
The only person to speak at the hearing was Christine Caputo Granich, associate general counsel for Council 82, which represents the city’s patrol and command units with two local unions. She noted that if the CRB plan is passed as written, the local unions “will certainly be addressing their options for challenges.”
Not only do technical issues — such as headings and references — need to be corrected, she said, but the role of the CRB in police discipline would open the city to litigation.
“Any involvement in the CRB violates the city charter and collective bargaining agreements,” she said, adding that “a veiled attempt to allow the CRB to affect discipline — that cannot go unchallenged.”
As drafted, the law would give the CRB power to investigate complaints from the public, as well as review disciplinary actions taken by the police chief and mayor, offering feedback after the decision is rendered. The board would also review the complaint process to improve the system, issue recommendations to city leaders on procedures, and assist with public outreach and reporting.
That oversight is poorly worded, Granich said, and could even be interpreted as having oversight over all policies and procedures in city government.
The unions are also concerned over records access, storage and security; keeping officers anonymous to the CRB; and limiting what body camera footage the board can view, Granich said.
According to state Supreme Court records from Ontario County, Granich was the lead attorney for Council 82 in a legal challenge against the city of Geneva’s police review board. In April, Justice Craig Doran ruled that the law was invalid and enjoined the city from implementing it. The city council declined to appeal the decision, but several former board members filed to appeal the case in May. A plan for a new committee was rejected by the council in July.
Common Council members took issue with some of Granich’s comments.
“We’ve spent months on this,” said Linda Witte, D-Ward 1, taking offense to Granich’s insinuation the law was “rushed” through after more than a year of debate. While accepting criticism of the law from a technical standpoint, “I’m glad they did (offer feedback)… but I’m a little disappointed they weren’t here months ago.”
Vernon Robinson, I-Ward 6, who led the push to develop the review board and was one of three aldermen who helped draft it, noted that the law was specifically tailored to not interfere with the legal authority of the mayor and police chief to punish misconduct.
“I’m just going to chalk that up as a bias — which is understandable, (Granich is) there to represent their clients. I get it, I understand it,” he said. “But I don’t believe that we’re doing anything that’s going to hurt our Olean Police Department. I think it can help our Olean Police Department and help our city.”
“I feel the goal of this is getting lost — this is a way for transparency to occur so that our residents and our police feel connected and respected,” said Sonya McCall, D-Ward 4. “This is meant to help … to prevent things that have happened in other cities and towns.”
Paul Gonzalez, D-Ward 3, said he was concerned that “we’ve had so many eyes on this” including several lawyers, that mistakes and issues over headings and references are still appearing. However, he noted that the CRB has less power than the planning board or zoning board of appeals, and those boards are not in violation of the city charter.
First recommended by the city Police Reform and Reinvention Collaborative in March 2021, the council began drafting legislation in mid-August 2021 after being presented plans from the local police unions and the PRRC. The PRRC proposed a large board that would directly oversee and if necessary punish police misconduct claims, have its own legal staff and subpoena powers, and oversee its own budget.
The union proposal would have focused on advising policy and procedure changes, as well as outreach — with no role in investigations of misconduct. In their multiple drafts of the legislation over the past year, aldermen have taken a middle road between the two, focusing on review of investigations after the fact while providing feedback to the police chief and mayor.
