close
The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20170728040811/http://2politicaljunkies.blogspot.com/search/label/Citizen%20Police%20Review%20Board
What Fresh Hell Is This?
BERJAYA
Showing posts with label Citizen Police Review Board. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Citizen Police Review Board. Show all posts

July 6, 2010

Tales from City & County Council

Funny how every time I do a "Tales from...Council" post, I always imagine the headline should be in a font something like this.

Anyway, there's some good to report today.

First, no matter how Pittsburgh City Council got there, it's good that they decided to delay voting on Lil Mayor Luke Ravenstahl's Citizen Police Review Board nominations until they actually clarify the nomination process.

It's also a good thing that the Post-Gazette recognizes that City Council should have access to independent information (otherwise known as facts) regarding privatizing city-owned garages and meters:
None of which means City Council shouldn't go forward with its recently ordered study of leasing arranements. Council members need accurate, comprehensive information so that any parking lease they award won't turn out to be full of unpleasant surprises.
As for Allegheny County Council, here's an action item courtesy of The Pittsburgh Women's Blogging Society:

On July 21 at 5 p.m. Allegheny County Council will hold a PUBLIC HEARING for “comment regarding Marcellus Shale-related natural gas drilling within Allegheny County.“

We need as many people as possible to attend & comment.

To comment you must register by July 20th.

You can register online or download a registration form: www.alleghenycounty.us/council/meetings/comment.aspx


.

June 18, 2010

Friday Morning Massacre?

BERJAYA

Some of you may remember the "Thursday Morning Massacre." Should we be calling this the Friday Morning Massacre?

Via the Post-Gazette:
Mayor Ravenstahl is replacing five of seven Citizen Police Review Board members.

Mayoral spokeswoman Joanna Doven confirmed that the mayor is naming new members to the board, which is seeking documents from the Pittsburgh Police Bureau regarding the 2009 G-20 Summit. The group is in court this afternoon, seeking a contempt of court ruling against Chief Nate Harper.

Ms. Doven said that the sudden action had nothing to do with the board's actions regarding the G-20.

Uh-huh. Right.

She went on to add that "all the members' terms had expired."

But of course, Lil Mayor Luke has a pattern of letting members' terms expire so he can later remove them at will when they dare to go against his every wish.

And while Chris Potter has some doubts that Lil Mayor Luke can achieve his total destruction revamping of the Citizen Police Review Board, I have full faith that there are enough rubber stamps Pittsburgh City Councilors out there to make all Lukey's dreams come true!
.

March 4, 2010

All Charges Dismissed Against Jordan Miles But More Needs to be Done

Via the P-G:
A judge today dismissed all charges against Pittsburgh high school student Jordan Miles, who claims he was badly beaten by three police officers during his arrest in Homewood.
Miles was originally charged with walking while black aggravated assault and resisting arrest.

While it is of course great news that the charges have been dropped, more can and should be done while the Office of Municipal Investigations and the FBI investigate this case:

Training

Pittsburgh City Police have enrolled in the Pennsylvania Law Enforcement Accreditation Program but still haven't attained accredited status. Why?

And, speaking of training (and violence), back in 2007 when the Police Dept. was facing heat for promoting three offices with histories of domestic violence, the department was offered free (foundation-paid) training on domestic violence from David Thomas an expert on the subject at Johns Hopkins. I do not believe that they have ever availed themselves of this training.

Citizen Police Review Board

For all the great work they do, they seem to have no teeth.

Charles Hanlon, Fraternal Order of Police vice president, recently said of the board that they were biased by nature." With that sort of negative attitude, it shouldn't be surprising that their recommendations and queries are often ignored.

For example, when Sgt. Eugene Hlavac was accused of recklessly endangering a group of bicyclists and having anger management issues, the Brass rejected the CPRB's call that Hlavac "be suspended for seven days, undergo retraining and anger management, and possibly face prosecution by the district attorney." Hlavac was later fired after he dislocated his ex-girlfriend's jaw. He was also one of the three officers mentioned in the above promotion controversy.

One of the reasons the police cited in not following the CPRB's recommendations was that they came so late after the original incident. The CPRB complained at the time that, "It would be incumbent upon the city to facilitate an expedited release of documents from the Office of Municipal Investigations."

We see this foot-dragging behavior again with the CPRB being compelled to go to court to seek police records from the Group of 20 summit where charges of improper police conduct have been made.


It's hopefully clear to anyone reading this that there are systemic and global problems that go far beyond the Jordan Miles case.
.

December 22, 2009

Here We Go Again -- Pittsburgh Police and Domestic Violence

BERJAYA
Pittsburgh Police Sgt. Eugene Hlavac

"He will enjoy a wonderful Christmas dinner. She's going to drink hers through a straw..."
...... - Jeanne Clarke, National Organization for Women, after Sgt. Eugene Hlavac's preliminary hearing in downtown Municipal Court.

If Hlavac's name sounds familiar it's because many of you may recall the controversy which erupted back in June 2007 when three Pittsburgh City Police Officers (Cmdr. George T. Trosky, Lt. Charles Rodriguez, and Sgt. Eugene F. Hlavac) who had a history of domestic abuse run-ins were promoted by Police Chief Nate Harper with the approval of Mayor Luke Ravenstahl. The uproar from the promotions (mostly by advocates for women) led to Pittsburgh City Council passing legislation on domestic violence by police officers.

When Hlavac was originally promoted in 2007 he had had police called to his home for reports of loud arguments with the mother of his child, Lauren Noel Maughan. On Saturday he was charged with aggravated assault against Maughan:
According to the complaint, Ms. Maughan was late to pick up their son at Sgt. Hlavac's house in Greenfield Friday after her car broke down. When she arrived, she said she and Sgt. Hlavac, who was in uniform and preparing to leave for work, began arguing in front of his house, the complaint states. She said they scuffled briefly after he slapped her and she grabbed him, the complaint states.

Ms. Maughan said she was in pain and threatened to call the police, the complaint said. She said he took her cell phone and told her, "You're not doing this. You're not ruining my life," according to the complaint.

She said she left to go to the hospital after telling Sgt. Hlavac she would say she hurt her face in a fall.

According to the complaint, Sgt. Hlavac met her at Forbes Regional Hospital in Monroeville and told a doctor, "She's always getting hurt, she fell down her steps and tripped and may have hit her wall." The doctor determined that Ms. Maughan had partially dislocated her jaw, according to the complaint.
According to WTAE:
An emergency room doctor didn't believe the story, and eventually, the woman told police her injury was caused by Hlavac.
As of yesterday, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported:
Pittsburgh police officials have not determined whether to change a sergeant's work status following his weekend arrest for hitting his ex-girlfriend.
Apparently Hlavac is on vacation until January and "If there is discipline, he would be disciplined when he returned to work..."

Nice!

This does not seem to jib with Pennsylvania's Confidence in Law Enforcement Act which states:

23 Except in the case of a member of the Pennsylvania State
24 Police, a law enforcement officer charged with an offense that
25 would prohibit employment under section 3 shall be immediately
26 suspended from employment in law enforcement AS A LAW
27 ENFORCEMENT OFFICER until final disposition of the charge or
28 upon acceptance into a program of Accelerated Rehabilitative
29 Disposition, whichever occurs first.

What would constitute prohibition from employment? According to the City of Pittsburgh:
CRIMINAL HISTORY:
Conviction of a felony or serious misdemeanor is disqualifying unless applicant has been pardoned. Other behavior, which is incompatible with the duties and responsibilities of the position of Police Officer, may also be disqualifying.
Notice again, that suspension only requires being CHARGED and that the Confidence in Law Enforcement Act defines "serious misdemeanor" as being "A criminal offense for which more than one year in prison can be imposed as a punishment."

While Hlavac's charges were reduced today from aggravated assault (a felony) to simple assault (a misdemeanor), in PA a misdemeanor assault can still result in up to 2 years in prison.

So, I have to ask:

Why has Hlavac not been suspended?

Moreover, the legislation passed by Pittsburgh City Council states the following under "Supervisor Responsibilities":
(a) Supervisors shall be cognizant of and document any pattern of abusive behavior potentially indicative of domestic violence including, but not limited to the following:

i. Aggressiveness
a. Excessive and/or increased use of force on the job.
b. Stalking and inappropriate surveillance activities.
c. Unusually high incidences of physical altercations and verbal disputes.
d. Citizen and fellow officer complaints of unwarranted aggression and verbal abuse.
e. Inappropriate treatment of animals.
f. On-or off-duty officer injuries.
So between his promotion and his recent charges, has Hlavac had any, say, PROBLEMS like those listed above?

The answer is a big fat YES. From the Pittsburgh City Paper:
Hlavac has previously been faulted for his performance on the job as well: specifically, a series of arrests stemming from a 2006 bicyclist demonstration. When the city's police review board tried to question him about the matter, Hlavac tuned out the proceeding by playing an iPod loudly enough that others could hear it. The review board upheld complaints against Hlavac, but these were dismissed by police brass, who said they'd already disciplined him.
So there you have it -- a Pittsburgh police sergeant who has had the police called to his own home for loud arguments on multiple occasions; who has had the Citizen Police Review Board "recommended that [he] be suspended for seven days, undergo retraining and anger management, and possibly face prosecution by the district attorney" in 2006 (which never was followed through on); and who now stands accused of dislocating a women's jaw and charged with assault.

And, he's STILL not suspended.

What the hell?

Back in 2007 when Hlavac was promoted, the Pittsburgh Police asked us to trust their judgment:
Pittsburgh police on Thursday asked that city residents give three recently promoted officers a chance.

"I'm particularly asking women to look at what we've done in the past," Deputy Chief Paul Donaldson said at a late afternoon news conference. "We've worked for years with women and women's groups to protect women. You've trusted us before. We're asking you to trust us again."

[snip]

James Malloy, president of Fraternal Order of Police Fort Pitt Lodge No. 1, asked that people treat the officers fairly.

"It isn't like they're mashers, beating somebody's brains in," he said. "They're conscientious. They have good records. We have no issue whatsoever with this. They're not going to be brain surgeons.
No brains beaten in -- just a dislocated jaw.

[sigh]

The brass needs to listen to the Citizen Police Review Board this time:
"We want them to suspend him -- all of his police powers -- until such time as this is resolved," said Elizabeth Pittinger, executive director of the Citizen Police Review Board. "That is required under state law so they better do that. We expect that they will."

Damn Straight!


******************************************************************************

Related:

  • Jeanne Clark's tweets on todays' hearing here

  • "Women's group urges mayor to 'take action' against city officer" (P-G)

  • "[PA] Is the domestic abuse of Pittsburgh Police Sgt. Hvalac violent enough yet to be taken seriously?" (Behind the Blue Wall)

    .

  • October 6, 2009

    Dan Onorato: Sweet & Sour

    BERJAYA

    While Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato makes his run PA governor official today, he is not without his detractors.

    From Dan Onorato:
    I wanted you to be among the first to know that I am going to officially announce my candidacy for Governor with a three-day tour across Pennsylvania beginning Tuesday, October 6th.

    [snip]

    I believe that Pittsburgh's renaissance can be replicated across Pennsylvania. We can stimulate our economy by investing in green technology. We can put Pennsylvanians back to work by creating next-generation jobs in innovative fields. We can provide every child with a quality education by making college more affordable.

    But I can only do this with your support. I hope you can join me at one of my eight stops.

    DAY 1 - Tuesday, October 6 - Philadelphia, Harrisburg and Pittsburgh
    Philadelphia
    Philadelphia City Hall
    Second Floor
    Philadelphia, PA 19107
    9:30 AM

    Harrisburg
    Riverfront Park
    100 Block of South Front Street
    Harrisburg, PA 17101
    12:00 PM

    Pittsburgh
    IBEW Local 5 Hall
    5 Hot Metal Street
    Pittsburgh, PA 15203
    Doors open at 5:00 PM

    DAY 2 - Wednesday, October 7 - Johnstown, State College and Wilkes-Barre
    Johnstown
    The Pavilion
    Corner of Park Place & Main Street
    Johnstown, PA
    10:00 AM

    State College
    Penn State University
    HUB-Robeson Center
    Room 129A
    State College, PA
    12:00 PM

    Wilkes-Barre
    River Common
    North Union & North River Streets
    Wilkes-Barre, PA
    5:00 PM

    DAY 3 - Thursday, October 8 - Allentown and Erie
    Allentown

    Allentown Brew Works
    812 W. Hamilton Street
    Allentown, PA 18101
    12:00 PM

    Erie
    Perry Square Park
    Corner of South Park Row & Peach Street
    Erie, PA
    4:30 PM

    From Albert Petrarca:
    What: Peaceful Rally to Denounce Dan Onorato's candidacy for Governor of Pennsylvania
    When:
    Tuesday, October 6th, 2009
    Where: Outside IBEW Hall, 29th and Sydney (one block off Carson Street towards the river on Pittsburgh's Southside
    Time: 5:00 PM

    County Executive Dan Onorato and Mayor Luke Ravenstahl are the two leaders who presided over and sanctioned the imposition of a police state on the city of Pittsburgh during the G20.

    By announcing his candidacy for Governor this coming Tuesday, Mr. Onorato wants to extend his brutal and destructive leadership to all of Pennsylvania. A coalition of student and community groups will peacefully assemble outside the IBEW Hall on Pittsburgh's Southside to declare that Dan Onorato is neither morally nor politically fit to be Governor.

    In addition to trampling on our constitutional rights and violently repressing both protesters and non-protestors alike, Mr. Onorato has, in general, been disastrous for the people of Pittsburgh. He supported the costly and unnecessary North Shore tunnel to service the needs of sports franchise and casino owners while simultaneously raising fares and cutting service to city and county residents who depend on public transportation. While on city council, he was the most vocal opponent of the creation of the Citizen Police Review Board. In general, he has placed the interest of Corporate Pittsburgh above the needs of the people of Pittsburgh.

    In a democratic society, one of the means available to the people seeking accountability and justice is the electoral process. We are coming together to use this avenue of civic participation to see to it that Dan Onorato does not become Governor of Pennsylvania. Not in our city - Not in our state - Not in our name

    .

    June 22, 2009

    Three things you can do in the next two days

    TODAY:

    1. Call your PA state senator today about Sen. Eichelberger's outrageous statement that "We’re allowing them [gays] to exist."

    Here's a link to find your senator. More details on this story here.

    (Your calls and emails are working! We've got hits today on our original post from: Commonwealth of PA, PA Senate, and US Senate Sergeant at Arms. Please keep the pressure on!)

    TOMORROW:

    1. Attend The Citizens Police Review Board meeting (and the press conference) tomorrow.

    There are some very real issues being raised about how police respond to incidents of domestic violence spurred by the Donna Williams case. Details on this case here and here.

    Citizen Police Review Board Meeting
    June 23, 2009, 6:00 PM (Please attend the press conference at 5:30 PM before the meeting)
    Freedom Unlimited Building
    2201 Wylie Avenue
    Pittsburgh, PA 15219

    2. Attend the Pittsburgh Peace Vigil for Iran tomorrow.

    Date: Tuesday, June 23, 2009
    Time: 8:00-9:30 PM (dark)
    Location: Market Square, downtown Pittsburgh, PA

    This will be a quiet/silent show of support for the historic democratic movement now underway in Iran, and for those who have given their lives in the name of their cause. Please bring a flashlight.

    More details here.
    .

    June 16, 2009

    Follow-up to "Domestic Violence In Pittsburgh" Donna Williams Post

    If you haven't already, you can read the details of this case in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article.

    In my original post on this subject, I wrote the following:
    What's needed now is to find out if policies were violated/if new policies need to be put in place.
    Here are the three main issues:
    1. In the first reported incident of domestic violence why was there a 23-day delay between the time that Ms. Williams filed her complaint (Dec. 13, 2008) and the time that the police issued a warrant and filed a criminal complaint (January 5, 2009). What took so long?

    2. In April when Ms. Williams reported another more serious incident where she said she was held against her will, threatened with death, was chocked and bitten (and actually had photographs of her cheek with visible tooth marks on it) why did the police merely tell her to seek a PFA? Why did they not issue an arrest warrant for her assailant when the police have a Mandatory Arrest policy already in place?

    3. Police have two options when an alleged perpetrator is in the hospital: either rely on hospital security or assign police officers to 24-hour guard duty. Why did they choose to leave this in the hospital's hands? Was it a case of not wanting to spend the money on officers' overtime? There is currently no Police Department policy specifically for cases of domestic violence (when it could certainly be argued that the hospitalized perpetrator presents a danger to the community).
    Hopefully, these questions will be addressed at the next Citizen Police Review Board meeting.

    Again, you can attend this meeting and are urged to do so:

    Citizen Police Review Board Meeting
    June 23, 2009, 6:00 PM
    UPDATE: press conference at 5:30 PM
    Freedom Unlimited Building
    2201 Wylie Avenue
    Pittsburgh, PA 15219
    412-434-0922
    .

    June 10, 2009

    Domestic Violence In Pittsburgh: When you do everything right and the system still fails you

    From Sunday's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:
    The second time Robert L. Taylor beat Donna Williams, she had to bite off part of his finger to make him stop, according to court filings. By the time she escaped from what she called a weekend as his hostage, she was determined that her former boyfriend of three years wouldn't hurt her a third time.

    But Ms. Williams' subsequent visit to Pittsburgh's Zone 2 police station did not bring a swift end to her troubles, much as her 911 call after the first incident of abuse four months earlier brought only a respite. Decisions, errors and communication breakdowns in the courts and police combined to give Mr. Taylor five weeks of freedom and sentenced Ms. Williams to more than a month of fear.

    [snip]

    Ms. Williams' case is now the subject of a Citizen Police Review Board investigation. It comes two years after the Pittsburgh Police Bureau's sensitivity to domestic violence became an issue, with the promotions of three officers who had faced abuse allegations.
    We often see in cases of domestic violence people asking "why didn't she just leave," perhaps not realizing that the very act of leaving can be dangerous (A United States Department of Justice, National Crime Victim Survey revealed that the most dangerous time for a woman who is being abused is when she tries to leave).

    However in this case, Ms. Williams did everything "right." She repeatedly reported incidents to the police and utilized the courts. She tried to escape her abuser but the police and the courts failed her time and again.

    What's needed now is to find out if policies were violated/if new policies need to be put in place.

    Some may notice a familiar name in the P-G article: George Trosky. He was one of the three officers with a history of domestic violence charges who was promoted in 2007 by by Police Chief Nate Harper with the approval of Mayor Luke Ravenstahl. According to a P-G article at the time of his promotion, Trosky made an "unusually steep leap from detective to head of the Zone 2 operation" and had "incidents and allegations of violence and drunken driving."

    From Sunday's P-G article:
    In a typical year, Allegheny County sees upward of 10 domestic violence-related homicides, according to the Women's Center & Shelter of Greater Pittsburgh. For Ms. Williams, the danger level was about to rise, precisely because she had helped police to find Mr. Taylor, only to have them opt not to arrest him.

    On May 3, he called her from Mercy Hospital. "He was all crying that they were about to cut his finger off," due to an infection, she said. She called 911 to report his whereabouts. Police served him with the PFA there, but left him.

    According to Zone 2 Cmdr. George Trosky, a police supervisor "said to leave the guy there, because he was going to be in for a lengthy stay." Mercy Hospital security agreed to call the station when he was about to be discharged so police could arrest him.

    The bureau sometimes arrests a hospitalized person and posts an officer outside the room, paying overtime so an officer does not have to be pulled off the streets. The Citizen Police Review Board began investigating Ms. Williams' case after receiving an anonymous tip, purportedly written by someone in the police bureau, suggesting the zone didn't want to incur overtime costs.

    That expense did not factor into the decision not to guard Mr. Taylor, according to Cmdr. Trosky. He said the determination "was my supervisor's decision, and I'm going to stand by his decision," declining to explain how it jibes with bureau policy.

    [snip]

    In Ms. Williams' case, Cmdr. Trosky said the promised call from hospital security regarding Mr. Taylor's departure "never happened." Mercy spokeswoman Linda Ross, though, said the hospital's security department called Zone 2 at 8:32 p.m. on May 3, after Mr. Taylor left without doctor approval.
    Back in 2007, we closely followed the promotion of these officers and the subsequent legislation passed to deal with domestic violence by police officers. Some of you may recall that a coalition of groups was instrumental in setting new policies for the police. That same coalition is looking into the case of Ms. Williams. Here's a statement by them via Heather Arnet of The Women and Girls Foundation:
    The coalition of women’s serving agencies and advocacy agencies that coordinated the coalition led effort to develop an improved domestic violence policy for the City of Pittsburgh Police Department (in fall 2008), held a conference call to discuss the recent Domestic Violence case outlined in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article this weekend. The Women and Girls Foundation hosted the conference call and is serving as the convening agent for the coalition. Participants in the coalition include domestic and sexual assault agencies from throughout the region, and advocacy organizations like NOW, NCJW, B-PEP, Women and Girls Foundation, as well as supportive funding partners such as FISA Foundation. The coalition is having a follow up call to review information gathered throughout the case and discuss next steps re: recommendations for systemic improvements which would help prevent the communication breakdowns which occurred in this case and ultimately improve victim’s rights, supports, and services moving forward.
    For the record, I am on the list serve for this coalition and participated in the above mentioned conference call.

    What you can do:

    The Citizen Police Review Board will be reviewing this case at their upcoming meeting. You can attend.

    Citizen Police Review Board Meeting
    June 23, 2009, 6:00 PM
    Freedom Unlimited Building
    2201 Wylie Avenue
    Pittsburgh, PA 15219
    (412) 434-0922

    Let's not fail Ms. Williams -- or any other survivor of domestic violence -- one more time.
    .

    October 24, 2007

    Two Big Issues Before Pgh City Council

    First up: Back to the issue of city police and domestic violence.

    We published a copy of City Council President Doug Shields' bill (No. 2007-1797) on this issue here. Councilman Bill Peduto has been added as a sponsor of that bill, but he's also introduced amendments to it. Gloria Forouzan outlined the changes here as follows:

    "...compel the Police Bureau to refer all allegations of domestic violence by officers to the independent Citizen Police Review Board."

    "...bar the hiring or promotion of anyone subject to a PFA or criminal domestic violence investigation. "

    "...force officers who are subjects of criminal domestic violence investigations or protection from abuse orders to "surrender all firearms, including their primary service weapon, immediately"
    While the FOP has argued of the last measure that it "would be tantamount to taking away an officer's livelihood based on a mere accusation" it must be noted that this policy is 1) considered standard practice by the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the U.S. Military and 2) that an intimate partner must convince a judge that there is a threat of eminent danger before a PFA is issued (far from the accusation at the October 18th public hearing that cops will lose their guns over "shouting matches").

    Also as was mentioned by Jeanne Clark (Squirrel Hill Now) at that public hearing, it has been 114 days (on 10/18/07) since the Mayor and Police Chief had promoted three officers with histories of domestic abuse and not one concrete step has yet to be taken. She also held up a brochure released by the Mayor's Office on DV that appeared to be printed on an inkjet printer and she said was not widely distributed. She compared it to the large-format, four-color, professionally-printed Redd Up brochure (I will note here that, tellingly, the DV brochure was not plastered with Luke's images).

    What also came out at that public hearing was that the police response was to give verbal accounts of new policy changes -- nothing in writing still at this late date!

    An initial vote on the bill (and amendments) will be held on Wednesday, October 31st.

    (Previous posts on this issue here.)

    Second Issue: Gender Equity

    City Council President Doug Shields introduced a bill today (No. 2007-1845) that would approve the release of a Request for Proposal (RFP) from the city for a "A Comprehensive Study of Positions within Pittsburgh City Government" (see draft version here and a previous post by Dayvoe on this here).

    As stated in the RFP's introduction, the purpose of the study is "to include a focus on the general soundness of the current system and whether the system affords internal fairness and equity, without gender or other bias."

    Both Barbara L. Trant, Director of Personnel & Civil Service Commission for the City, and Heather Arnet, Executive Director of the Women and Girls Foundation, spoke to Pittsburgh City Council today about the study.

    It must be said that both Councilman Bodack and Councilman Motznik initially expressed doubts about the need for such a study with Bodack saying that he thought that the city's hiring and promotions system allowed "no room to exist" for gender inequities and Motznik saying that he wasn't ware of any problems.

    Ms. Arnet said that it was an "economic development" issue as a majority of college graduates are women and that demonstrating that Pittsburgh cares about gender equity in pay is a plus for keeping and attracting female professionals.

    Some interesting (or nauseating) facts came out during the discussion:

    Nationally, women make 81 cents to the dollar as compared to males. Statewide it's 73 cents while it's only 70 cents in the city of Pittsburgh.

    There are 3,440 city employees but, only 923 are female.
    Councilwoman Twanda Carlisle was blown away by the last figure and offered to help in any way she could in her last months on Council.

    Councilwoman Tonya Payne predicted that the study would also show a big disparity in terms of race regarding both hirings and salaries of City employees.

    An initial vote on this bill will also be held on Wednesday, October 31st.

    Now here's where YOU come in:

    Please lobby City Council on both bills and the Mayor's office on Bill No. 2007-1797.

    Again, I turn to one of Gloria's posts at The Pittsburgh Women's Blogging Society, this time for contact info:

    Mayor's Office
    Phone: 412-255-2626, Fax: 412-255-2687

    Len Bodack, Jr.
    len.bodack@city.pittsburgh.pa.us , Telephone: 412-255-2140, Fax: 412-255-2419

    Twanda Carlisle
    twanda.carlisle@city.pittsburgh.pa.us , Telephone: 412-255-2137, Fax: 412-255-8658

    Dan Deasy
    dan.deasy@city.pittsburgh.pa.us , Telephone: 412-255-8963, Fax: 412-255-2821

    Darlene Harris
    darlene.harris@city.pittsburgh.pa.us , Telephone: 412-255-2135, Fax: 412-255-2129

    Jeff Koch
    jeffrey.koch@city.pittsburgh.pa.us , Telephone: 412-255-2130, Fax: 412-255-8950

    Jim Motznik
    james.motznik@city.pittsburgh.pa.us , Telephone: 412-255-2131, Fax: 412-255-2821

    Tonya Payne
    tonya.payne@city.pittsburgh.pa.us , Telephone: 412-255-2134, Fax: 412-255-2821

    Bill Peduto
    bill.peduto@city.pittsburgh.pa.us , Telephone: 412-255-2133, Fax: 412-255-2821

    Doug Shields
    doug.shields@city.pittsburgh.pa.us , Phone: 412-255-8965, Fax: 412-255-2821
    You can also join others in lobbying Council members in person on both pieces of legislation on Tuesday, October 30th at City Council at 9:00 AM.

    UPDATE: Post-Gazette article: "Dispute over police with PFAs heats up"

    We hear tell that in today's City Paper the Mayor more or less blames foot-dragging on the DV issue on the women themselves. We'll be picking up our copy soon.
    .

    October 17, 2007

    Public Hearing Tomorrow on Pittsburgh Police & Domestic Violence Bill

    WHAT: Public Hearing - Bill No. 2007-1797
    WHEN: Thursday, October 18, 2007, 9:30 A.M.
    WHERE: Pittsburgh City Council Chambers, City-County Building, 414 Grant Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (Corner of Grant & Forbes, 5th Floor)

    There will be a public hearing tomorrow in Pittsburgh City Council Chambers on Bill No. 2007-1797 introduced by Council President Doug Shields on September 25, 2007.

    The bill was created to address the concerns originally caused by the promotion of three police officers with a history of domestic violence allegations on June 18.

    The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette identified 35 officers who have had protection-from-abuse orders taken out on them since 1992.

    The full text of the bill can be found at:
    http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dfjzkfgh_0d5cr7v

    Several women's and domestic violence groups (including Jeanne Clark of the National Organization for Women) were instrumental in making sure that the issue of police with domestic violence histories was addressed.

    However, Bill No. 2007-1797 has been met with some criticism.

    As is to be expected, the police union is not happy with it:
    Pittsburgh's police union charged yesterday that a proposed ordinance to address officer-involved domestic violence amounts to "police bashing" and "overkill."
    Meanwhile, not a few charge that the bill does not go far enough. From a September 26th P-G article:

    But Elizabeth Pittinger, executive director of the Citizen Police Review Board, said she found Mr. Shields' bill lacking.

    An effective ordinance "has to be more explicit in its expectation of employee conduct, and it has to be more explicit in the consequences," Ms. Pittinger said.

    Also lacking, she said, was language dealing with officers who are subjects of protection orders but have not been charged with crimes
    Gloria Forouzan, founder of Run, Baby, Run, is also quoted in that article, but you can read an extended version of her objections here at The Pittsburgh Women's Blogging Society (including this gem: "The ordinance assures us that the Police Bureau's brass will “strongly consider” not hiring people with abusive/violent tendencies. Wow, that's really reassuring. Are they kidding?").

    Additionally, a Post-Gazette editorial from the beginning of this month stated that the ordinance was a good start but "needs more work."

    Doug Shields has said that he considers the bill to be a first step and that there will be additional legislation.

    In other words: there's still loads to discuss on this issue which is why I urge all who can to attend the meeting tomorrow.

    And, if there's any question that domestic violence is violence -- is a crime and not just a family matter -- please take a look at the following remarkable and gut-wrenching 20/20 report which has as its centerpiece a video of an abuser who was crazy enough to have his 13 year-old son videotape him emotionally and then physically abusing his wife:



    UPDATE: You can call the City Clerk to testify at tomorrow's hearing at 412-255-2138. You can still speak for one minute (only) even if you don't sign up, but you'll be at the end of the line.

    October 9, 2007

    Competing Events

    While the Post-Gazette hosts their mayoral candidates' forum tonight:

    Pittsburgh Mayoral Candidates' Forum
    WHAT:
    Post-Gazette Mayoral Candidates' Forum
    WHEN: Tuesday, Oct. 9, from 7 to 8:30 p.m
    WHERE: Senator John Heinz History Center, Strip District. Please call 412-263-1541 to register.
    MORE INFO: (Will Mark DeSantis be required to leave again while Lukey is speaking? See for yourself! I can't -- I'll be working.) More at http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07261/818520-192.stm

    The Citizen Police Review Board will be hosting the following:

    Politics, Policing and Public Perception
    WHAT: Politics, Policing and Public Perception
    WHEN: Tuesday, Oct. 9, 6:00 PM - 9:00 PM
    WHERE: Duquesne University, Duquesne Union -- Rm. 613
    MORE INFO: For more info call 412-765-8023 http://www.city.pittsburgh.pa.us/cprb
    http://www.myspace.com/citizenpolicereviewboard

    Not competing (because they rescheduled so as not to conflict with the mayoral candidates' forum):

    Neighborhood Self Determination and the "One Hill" Controversy
    WHAT: A Discussion and Analysis of the Community Benefits Agreement Movement presented by the University of Pittsburgh, Department of Africana Studies
    WHEN: Wednesday, Oct. 10, 6:30 PM (seating begins at 6:00 PM)
    WHERE: Frick Fine Arts Building, 650 Schenley Drive on Pitt's campus (can be found in Oakland, across from the Carnegie Library, just off of Forbes Ave.)
    MORE INFO: More info can be found at the blog of Dr. Goddess.

    UPDATE: I forgot about one more competing event tonight:

    Governor Edward G. Rendell's The Tour to Insure
    WHAT: Governor Rendell's Town Hall Meeting about Pennsylvanians living without health insurance.
    WHEN: Tuesday, Oct. 9, 6:00 PM
    WHERE: FrickHill House Association's Kaufman Auditorium, 1835 Centre Ave, Pittsburgh, 15219
    MORE INFO: For more information, contact the Governor's Office of Health Care Reform at 412-565-5700.

    .

    June 26, 2007

    True to pattern, Lil Mayor Luke tries to run from another stupid mistake

    According to today's Trib, Post-Gazette, KDKA, WTAE (and likely elsewhere) Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl is claiming today:

    1) He's upset about the police promotion system -- particularly when it comes to promoting officers with histories of domestic violence.

    2) He somehow wasn't aware until today that there were three officers promoted who had domestic abuse run-ins. (Ravenstahl said he was not aware of domestic situations involving Lt. Charles Rodriguez and Sgt. Eugene Hlavac."I did not know of those individuals and their history or allegations that were out there, and I now do," Ravenstahl said. "I'm upset that I didn't know. And I let the chief know that he should have communicated that to me.")

    I think that PittGirl and Mac Booker covered his first claim very well.

    From The Burgh Blog:

    Tuesday, June 19:
    Mr. Ravenstahl approved the pick.

    “There are good times in careers and bad times in careers, and I think Cmdr. Trosky would be the first to acknowledge that,” the mayor said. “But this decision was made based on a 30-year portfolio, not based on one or two incidents … He’s had letters of commendation. He’s been Officer of the Month numerous times. Certainly the clearance rate in his work as a homicide detective, and his work there, has been admirable.”

    Tuesday, June 26:
    Following an hour-long meeting with police brass, Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl said today that the promotions last week of three police officers with domestic issues were “unacceptable” and that the procedures for approving upgrades in rank are “obsolete and unacceptable.” Ravenstahl said, “Sergeants and lieutenants are promoted now without the ability for the mayor to say yes or no, either way.”
    From Metroblogging Pittsburgh (but go there to read the whole post):

    So, he doesn't think that it is a problem, he supports and endorses Nate Harper's decisions, and he isn't going to talk about it. Until, that is, the Post-Gazette, the National Organization for Women, and the Citizen's Police Review Board make a stink about it. In that case, no more approval, no more endorsement, no more dismissing a history of violence both in uniform and out. It is "obsolete and unacceptable."
    And, the second claim?

    Again, it would seem that, at the very least, Luke isn't communicating with his Communications people very well. This is from last Friday:
    Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, who approved the promotions, could not be reached for comment. His spokeswoman, Joanna Doven, said the mayor would not discuss the promotions or their effects on women.

    "He's not going to talk about that," Doven said.
    I guess Doven didn't know that Lukey didn't even know that there was a problem with other officers and she was just speaking out of turn on his behalf.

    But why wasn't Ravenstahl aware?

    OK, we know that he's said that he doesn't read the blogs, but he says his Mom does. Maybe she could have pointed out the following posts to him:

    Blog Posts Prior to Today:
    6/25/07:
    http://2politicaljunkies.blogspot.com/2007/06/city-council-hearing-this-thursday-on.html
    http://pghwomenbloggers.blogspot.com/2007/06/city-council-hearing-this-thursday-on.html
    http://angrydrunkbureaucrat.blogspot.com/2007/06/flotsam-jetsam.html
    http://burghreport.blogspot.com/2007/06/search-your-feelings-you-know-it-to-be.html
    http://carbolicsmokeblog.blogspot.com/2007/06/police-detective-denied-promotion-due.html (mislabled as 6/26)

    6/24/07:
    http://agentska.blogspot.com/2007/06/officer-hlavac-wont-have-it.html

    6/23/07:
    http://burghreport.blogspot.com/2007/06/you-cant-make-this-up.html

    6/22/07:
    http://pghcomet.blogspot.com/2007/06/women-respond-to-police-promotions.html
    http://jonathanpotts.blogspot.com/2007/06/luke-w-ravenstahl.html

    6/21/07:
    http://pghcomet.blogspot.com/2007/06/dont-worry-your-pretty-little-head.html

    6/20/07:
    http://pghwomenbloggers.blogspot.com/2007/06/raise-your-hands-if-you-agree.html
    http://agentska.blogspot.com/2007/06/get-involved-kids.html

    So he's not a blog reader and Mommy didn't share, but I guess we're suppossed to believe that, like GW Bush, he also doesn't read newspapers and missed these stories:

    Post-Gazette:
    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07175/796461-192.stm 6/24
    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07173/796253-53.stm 6/22
    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07172/796142-100.stm 6/21
    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07172/795987-53.stm 6/21
    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07171/795544-53.stm 6/20

    Tribune-Review:
    http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/search/s_513819.html 6/22
    http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/search/s_513823.html 6/22

    So, not much of a reader, huh? Maybe he also missed the television coverage:

    WTAE:
    Go to http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/video/index.html and enter key word "trosky." You'll find stories on 6/20 and 6/25.

    WPXI:
    Go to http://www.wpxi.com/video/index.html and enter key word "trosky." You'll find stories on 6/20 and 6/21.

    PCNC:
    Discussion on Honsberger Live by host Chris Moore on 6/25.

    KDKA:
    Nothing showed up via keyword search prior to today.

    Guess we know what channel Luke watches, that is, when he can tear himself away from the Cartoon Network!

    UPDATE: Another good overview at The Burgh Report.
    .

    January 20, 2007

    More On Luke

    In today's P-G:
    The Pittsburgh police chief at the time of the 2005 handcuffing of now-Mayor Luke Ravenstahl said yesterday that the incident should've been documented and that the mayor erred by arguing with an officer and then not going public with the details sooner.
    But wait. Wasn't the "Pittsburgh police chief at the time of the 2005 handcuffing" Robert McNeilly? And isn't Robert McNeilly married to Catherine McNeilly? And doesn't Catherine McNeilly have a case pending against the city? So we can pretty much lump Chief McNeilly in with all the other politically motivated critics, right?

    Mayor Luke does:

    The mayor responded that former chief Robert W. McNeilly Jr.'s comments are proof that the rumors that long swirled around the Halloween handcuffing were a political smear campaign.

    "I made my comments yesterday that I think there are political people behind it," the mayor said, a day after giving his account of the incident. "I think some of those that came forward today just vindicate and validate my belief that this is politically motivated."

    But then again the mayor has a habit of labelling any criticism as "politically motivated." But let's take a look at what Chief McNeilly said:

    "In a high-profile situation, everybody up the chain of command should've been notified," he said. That is the case even if the officer is working a private security job, as was Officer Hoehn.

    "Some documentation should've been made," Chief McNeilly said.

    "If they released him, they should've explained why they [handcuffed him]." Otherwise, he said, "Ravenstahl could've made the accusation that he was falsely arrested. That's a criminal, as well as civil, issue."

    And the executive director of the Citizen Police Review Board agrees.
    "There should've, at minimum, been a field contact report," said Elizabeth C. Pittinger, executive director of the Citizen Police Review Board. "This guy was restrained. He identified himself as an official. ... Just by virtue of that, they should've made a note of it."
    As far as I know, Pittinger has none of the baggage that McNeilly (either McNeilly) has. That should at least dampen the sound of Luke's defenders as they shout "politically motivated!"

    The Trib's got the story too.

    Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl should have asked for an investigation into the police officer who handcuffed him before a 2005 Steelers game at Heinz Field, the city's former top cop said today.

    "Something strange was happening there. There was no documentation and no notification to superior officers. And no complaint about the officer's conduct," said former police Chief Robert W. McNeilly Jr. "This disappoints me. Any time you would have a public official put in handcuffs and detained, it should have made it up the chain of command."

    And:

    No complaints about the incident were made to the Citizens Police Review Board or the city Office of Municipal Investigations.

    "The way this was handled raises a lot of questions," said review board Executive Director Beth Pittinger. "Even if Ravenstahl was not told he was under arrest, he wasn't free to go. You would expect that since this situation involved a public official it would have generated some kind of report or paperwork. And as a public official, if Ravenstahl had a concern about the conduct of a police officer, there are places to go to lodge a complaint. But he didn't do that."

    I heard McNeilly say this on the radio yesterday:

    Chief McNeilly said he was speaking out not because he was sore about his wife's demotion, but because the mayor put him in a bad position by not confronting rumors of the incident when they began swirling after the distribution of an anonymous fax in October. Chief McNeilly said reporters contacted him months ago about the incident, and he told them it was "urban legend."

    "If he had been forthright with the media then, nobody would have come to me about it, and I wouldn't have looked like I didn't know what was going on," the chief said.
    He said on the radio that when he was questioned about the handcuffing incident, he gave the mayor "benefit of the doubt." See? This is what happens when an elected official misleads the public. Everyone under that official is then forced (either knowingly or not) to also mislead the public.

    This city deserves much much better.

    September 15, 2005

    Of Rats and Slots (and Stun Guns)

    RATS!

    I just cannot watch any more of that cyborg's Supreme Court confirmation hearing and since Kathy Griffin's "My Life on the D-list" is not yet broadcast 24 hours a day on Bravo, that's led me to spending a few hours with Pittsburgh's City Council (via the CITY channel).

    While 2 Political Junkies is a political blog (duh!) actually watching the broadcast of the city council meetings really is going above and beyond the call of most political junkies if only because you might stumble across one of those perennial losers candidate's umpteenth 3 minute speech as to why you should vote for them during the public comments portion of the meetings. There should be a warning flashed across the screen that viewing may cause bleeding from the eyes and ears.

    And the rest is often pretty dry stuff.

    But yesterday's meeting did produce a few fireworks.

    Pittsburgh has a rat problem. As a recent editorial in the Post-Gazette editorial noted:


    In 2003, the city had budgeted for six rodent control officers, but those positions were eliminated when the crunch came.

    Since then, stop-gap measures have been a notable failure. The Allegheny County Health Department recently gave free training in rodent control to six city workers, but only one ended up being certified by the state Department of Agriculture. As it stands, the city now makes no effort to control rodents in public spaces and the buildings and lots it owns.

    What to do? Well, Councilman Doug Shields proposed shifting $30,000 worth of unused funds in the Office of Municipal Investigations budget to hire a private company to handle the rodent problem.

    Sounds good, right?

    The problem came in when Councilman James Motznik argued that the matter should be considered next week. As the P-G put it Shields and Motznik then "bared their teeth in a minutes-long shouting match."

    What was highly amusing was when Shields proceeded to read the transcripts from moments earlier in the meeting to use Motznik's own words against him. That same day Motznik had chewed out two city workers claiming that they were failing to serve the public and putting up roadblocks instead of helping them.

    That's when Motznik really went ballistic, repeatedly yelling, "What bill are we on now!" as his own criticisms were used against him. Shields and Motznik then each claimed the other was playing games.

    When Shields and Motznik weren't enraged engaged, Councilwoman Twanda Carlisle said that she gets 50 calls a week complaining about rats and Councilman Bill Peduto said that waiting any longer on the rodent problem would be "ludicrous" and "ridiculous."

    So why all the fireworks over shifting money now rather than in a week? The P-G claims it's because there's a "flurry of behind-the-scenes finger pointing regarding its spending," that 'Motznik later said Shields "wants to grab his money for rodent control so he can vote 'no' next week" on other budget transfers' and that:


    The hallway outside council chamber is abuzz with talk of which members are over budget. An itemization of spending by each was not immediately available.

    Council members are sensitive to charges of overspending, since most are considered candidates to succeed Eugene Ricciardi as council president.

    Shields, Carlisle and Peduto all voted in favor of the shift, with Motznik voting 'no' and two members out of the room and one absent.

    SLOTS!

    When they weren't busy discussing our furry fanged friends, they also discussed such mundane matters as whether the city should OWN casinos (covered nicely at Pittsblog's "The Horror, The Horror" post) and when the police should be authorized with tasering citizens.

    STUN GUNS!

    The stun gun topic came up in the "Post Agenda." While the questioning of Chief Robert W. McNeilly Jr. about when and how much force should be used during group protests was somewhat monotonous, it might not have been so much so if McNeilly hadn't "declined to release those policies, saying sophisticated anarchist groups might use them against police."

    Let's just say that apparently the greatest threat to the police seems to be "the Internet." McNeilly repeatedly claimed that Internet communication led to a level of organization among protesters that is dangerous.

    Peduto brought in David Meieran, a civil liberties activist, and Elizabeth Pittinger, executive director of the Citizens Police Review Board, for some much needed balance to the presentation.

    Pittinger noted that, "police departments in some other cities post use-of-force policies on the Internet" and said, "Tell us what the rules are. That's just fair play."

    Meieran who was presented as having some expertise on tasers said, "It's only a matter of time before someone is killed by a taser." He further went on to comment that the larger problem was the "criminalization of dissent" in this country.
    __________________________________________
    Tags: