CRB Advocates Plan Transparency Protest

Police accountability activists who successfully pushed for the creation of a Civilian Review Board with subpoena power earlier this year have criticized the mayor for not being clear and transparent about who she has nominated to serve on that body.

On Wednesday morning, a group called CRB Advocates issued a press release and a four-page statement announcing their dissatisfaction with the CRB nomination process to date and their plans to host a protest outside City Hall on July 22 at 5 p.m.

That will be an hour before the Aldermanic Affairs Committee plans to interview the 11 people Mayor Toni Harp has nominated to serve on the board, which will provide civilian review of police misconduct.

The CRB Advocates group include many of the activists who led the charge for a strengthened CRB ​“with teeth” before the alders ultimate vote on the matter in January. Some of the group’s members include police accountability activist Kerry Ellington, poet and playwrightAaron Jafferis, and Connecticut Bail Fund staffer Norm Clement.

“City officials are confident the CRB nomination process adhered to provisions of the adopted ordinance,” city spokesperson Laurence Grotheer told the Independent in response to the planned protest, ​“with every effort made to ensure equitable representation from every part of the city, with nominations from each Community Management Team.”

Below is the full press release and statement submitted by the CRB Advocates, followed by a June 28 press release from the mayor’s office regarding all of the names submitted by various community management teams of candidates interested in serving on the board.

Community Activists Demand Community Led Civilian Review Board, Call on Mayor, Board of Alders for Full Transparency on Nominations

New Haven, CT — Community organizations and activists that led the successful grassroots campaign to create a Civilian Review Board will hold a press conference and speakout on July 22.

In response to the Mayor’s recent nomination of 11 individuals to the CRB, the group has drafted a letter to both the Mayor and the Board of Alder’s that outlines critical failures with how the nomination process has been handled by city officials and calls for a real community led process.

Principally, the lack of clear communication and transparency from the Mayor’s office coupled with the nomination of a recently retired police officer represent gross violations of the intent and spirit of the ordinance that created a public body whose sole mission is police accountability.

The event will occur prior to the 6:00pm meeting of the Aldermanic Affairs Committee, at which the Committee will be discussing the Mayor’s nominations to the Civilian Review Board and the group will be submitting testimony during public comment.

WHEN: Monday, July 22, 2019 at 5:00pm
WHERE: New Haven City Hall — 165 Church St.
WHO: Names of organizations and any featured speakers

CRB Advocates Letter To Mayor And Board Of Alders, July 11, 2019

Dear Mayor Harp, Board President Walker-Myers, Majority Leader Furlow, and the New Haven Board of Alders,

We are New Haveners advocating for a strong and effective Civilian Review Board.

The Mayor’s Office has just undermined one of the CRB’s most basic purposes — transparency — by conducting a non-transparent CRB member nomination process.

Public trust in the CRB, and therefore in the police department it monitors, is entirely dependent on transparency, as stated in the Ordinance’s own preamble:

WHEREAS, public confidence in law enforcement is undermined by secret, non- transparent, and unaccountable police use of force and exercise of police powers generally.; and

WHEREAS, police departments generally conduct internal reviews of civilian complaints in secret proceedings.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED, the City of New Haven hereby enacts a Civilian Review Board, for the sole and exclusive purpose of assuring public confidence in the use of police powers in the City of New Haven by means of providing a mechanism for
fair, independent, complete, and transparent review of civilian complaints of alleged police misconduct.

The Mayor’s Office has set a dangerous and damaging precedent by violating this trust before the CRB even starts by engaging in a non-transparent selection process, including:

1. Dysfunctional communication about the CMT nomination process.
The Mayor’s Office, Alders, and Community Management Teams had divergent interpretations of their roles in the nomination process. When told some CMT chairs would pre-select their own neighborhood’s nominee rather than submitting all applicants to the Mayor like other CMT’s, the Mayor’s Office said that was out of their purview.

2. No transparency or communication about which names were actually received.
Because of the confusing application process, we asked the Mayor to make public a list of all applicants to ensure all those who applied were actually considered. The Mayor’s Office refused; as a result, at least one qualified (Latinx) applicant never received an acknowledgement or reply, and was never contacted by the Mayor’s Office. By the time the Mayor’s Office released a list of all applicants to The Independent (which The
Independent shared with us when we submitted this letter), it was too late: the Mayor’s deliberation process was finished, the applicant in question was not on the list, and the list was not shared with community advocates, CMT’s, or the applicants themselves.

3. No transparency about the Mayor’s criteria or selection process.
After a community-wide meeting with advocates and Community Management Team chairs, we suggested some criteria for nominees. The Mayor’s Office rejected this community-generated criteria, stating they had their own criteria they would not reveal.

4. Refusal to meet to give the public clarity around the Mayor’s criteria and process.
A meeting with CRB community advocates to ensure a transparent nomination process was scheduled for the week before the May 9 deadline for CMT’s to submit applicant names to the Mayor’s Office. The Mayor’s Office postponed the meeting, stating they’d schedule a new date shortly. When this didn’t happen, advocates followed up in May, and were assured that a meeting would happen by mid-June. In late June, just before the Mayor announced her picks, the Mayor’s Office finally scheduled a meeting: for August 29th, 4 months after the initially scheduled meeting and 2 months after her secret, non-transparent selection process was completed. The purpose of this meeting was to build public understanding and trust in a clear, effective and transparent CRB selection process. Pushing the meeting back 4 months ensured the opposite of this.

5. Sidestepping the intentions of the Ordinance’s membership recommendations.
The Mayor’s 11 picks include only 1 Latinx person, despite the Ordinance’s mandate that ​“The CRB shall be reflective of the city’s diversity.” Given New Haven’s large Latinx population and the fact that members of this community are disproportionately affected by police misconduct, the Mayor’s selections may undermine this community’s trust in the CRB, and therefore discourage its use.

The Ordinance also states ​“No member of the CRB shall be a current sworn officer of any police department or law enforcement entity.” The Mayor deliberately sidestepped the intent behind this requirement — to prevent police officers from policing themselves and their friends and colleagues on the force — by picking a police officer who retired just one year ago after 30 years as a West Haven officer and 11 years on the federal gang task force in New Haven! Robert Proto was Billy White’s codefendant in a civil rights violation case for which the city paid out. He undoubtedly knows many current sworn police officers intimately; this a blatant conflict of interest.

We are counting on you to begin the process of rebuilding trust and transparency in the CRB before the July 22nd Aldermanic Affairs committee meeting. If you are unable to do this, we must delay the confirmation process.

We ask that the Mayor’s Office:

1. Make public a list of the names of all CRB nominees received by the Mayor’s Office, and which CMT submitted them, to ensure that all applications were considered, and to determine whether certain applicants were ignored purposefully, or accidentally.

2. Make public the criteria and questions you used in selecting your 11 nominees.

3. Make public your reasons for selecting the 11 nominees, in order to build public confidence in your decisions.

4. Meet with community advocates before the July 22nd Aldermanic Affairs committee meeting, to fulfill your promise of clarity around your selection process.

5. Commit to meeting with community advocates, CMT leadership, and Alders to ensure a more clear and transparent nomination process in the future.

We ask that the Board of Alders:

1. Use the following community-generated criteria in your interviews of the Mayor’s selections:

a. Candidates have strong links to the community, particularly to overpoliced communities: POC, housing-unstable, youth. (The NYC CCRB taught us outreach is a critical responsibility of the CRB, to maintain credibility within the community and create legitimate channels for complaints)
b. Candidates are able to acknowledge police violence is real, and often racialized
c. Candidates have an awareness of systemic inequality and implicit bias
d. Candidates have strong communication and conflict resolution skills
e. Candidates may have lived experience with police misconduct

2. Make public other criteria you plan to use.

3. Meet with community advocates before the July 22nd Aldermanic Affairs committee meeting, to build clarity and transparency around your selection process.

At their 2019 Symposium on Oversight of Law Enforcement, New York City’s Civilian Complaint Review Board emphasized transparency and clear communication were the key issues determining whether the CCRB was trusted — and therefore used — by the community, or not. For all we know, you may be making great decisions about CRB membership, but if your decision-making process is not clear, transparent, and well-communicated to the public, the CRB will fail. Our communities cannot afford failure. Please act now.

Sincerely,
CRB community advocates

MAYOR HARP, CITY OFFICIALS RELEASE NAMES SUBMITTED FOR CRB CONSIDERATION

New Haven – Mayor Toni N. Harp and her staff today released the names submitted by Community Management Teams – or received directly from the public – to be considered for appointment to what will be the new incarnation of the city’s Citizens’ Review Board (CRB).

Most of those listed have since been interviewed as a function of the appointment process. Those appointed must also be confirmed by the Board of Alders.

“I’m grateful for the willingness of these residents to be considered, and then give their time, attention, and effort to the work of the new CRB, should they be appointed and approved by the Board of Alders,” Mayor Harp said. ​“New Haven is famous for the active engagement of its residents in civic affairs – and New Haven is a better city for their most-welcome community service.”

The City of New Haven has more than 40 boards and commissions on which residents are encouraged to serve and participate.

The CRB list is as follows:

Steve Hamm
Robert Proto
Mark Spencer
Chris Bernard
Robert Forman
Ryan A. Knox
Jayuan Carter
Wayne Hobbs
Mark Firla
Sharyn L. Grant
Elizabeth Larkin
Alex Taubes
Wendy Gramba
Iva L. Johnson
Samod C. Rankins
James Bhandary-Alexander
Emily Lorin
Andrew C. Giering
Paul Wallace
Caren M. Okakar
Richard Crouse
Ruth Henderson
Mark O’Ferral
Aaron Darden
Jewu Richardson
Ulusuf Shak
Miguel Pittman, Sr.
Linda Faye Wilson
Jean C. Jenkins
Nina Faucett
Howard Blau
Erica Garcia-Yang
Willie Newton
Anne Marie Rivera-Berrios
Lisa Milone
Arthur G. Kohloff