Our Next Meeting: 1730 hours August 5, 2004 GPOA Office 241 Summit Ave. All members are encouraged to attend. Message from the President July 2004 Newsletter Newsletter Archive Legistation Benefits Membership Officers/Board Articles Your Rights IUPA NCCOPS GPD Calibre Press Membership Application Home Check Email Web Administrator

..Serving the Officers who Serve the People. The President's Message 2000 Greetings. To start off the newsletter, I ask that any member who has not received an invitation to the Policemen’s Ball to please contact the GPOA office immediately if you wish to attend. The Policemen’s Ball will be held May 18th at 7:00 pm at the Airport Marriott. If you have not received your invitation, we probably have an old address for you. Please contact us any time your personal information (address, telephone number, assignment) changes so that you wont miss out on important mailings! I want to report that Craig, Jason and I met with Chief White and discussed several issues. We spoke of the below-mentioned legislation. We also spoke to him of problems encountered by officers who were injured in the line of duty. We spoke about how officers were having trouble with the City and Key Risk Management on Worker’s Compensation claims. We also mentioned that some officers had possibly missed promotions or transfers, because their application letters had been lost in the process. A solution may be forthcoming. We spoke of the proposed PO III and PO IV positions. As of now, it is still in the GPD’s 2001-2002 Budget Proposal. The problem is, with the State’s Budget shortfall, it now has a 50/ 50 chance of being removed by the City Manager or the city’s bean counters. We also told Chief White we appreciated the way the Police Department had handled the death and memorial service for Chris Beane. We also advised Chief White that we hoped a similar occurrence would never happen again, but should it, the GPOA would be willing to again set up a memorial account for incoming contributions to the officer’s survivors. On Thursday, June 7th, at our regular GPOA Board meeting, 1730hrs, we will be taking nominations for President, Vice President and Secretary/ Treasurer of the Greensboro Police Officer’s Association. Please plan to attend. We attended the International Union Police Association’s annual conference in Washington DC. Craig Hewlett will have a more complete report. We met with our federal legislators, or representatives of their staff, about five pending bills that would impact the law enforcement family. See Craig’s legislative article in this issue for more information about these bills and how they could possibly affect you. Locally, let me tell you what the City Council and the politicians have done concerning the Police-Citizen Review Board issue. Grab a seat, I hope you can stay with me on this. This may take awhile to read. On June 6th, 2000, a motion was made by Councilwoman Johnson for a Police-Citizen Review Board. The motion was voted down. Then Mayor Holliday proposed a nine point motion with point nine being a change in state personnel laws to open our personnel files to the Human Relation’s Complaint Review Committee or a complainant in a complaint investigation. This failed for lack of a second. Then Councilman Perkins made a motion that had three parts. (1) The complaint process would receive greater publicity. (2) Complaints could be made to both the Human Relations Commission or the police department with the police department still investigating the complaints on police officers. And (3) the Human Relations Commission will report back to the Council on the complaints investigated. This passed on a 6-3 vote and became city policy. Life went on and I believed the City Council had heard our concerns and had acted on them. Foolish me. I had continued to monitor the agenda items and had read the minutes of the Council meetings since that time and had not seen any further discussion on a Police-Citizen Review Board. In January 2001, I attended a meeting, held in the Council chambers, of the Guilford County Delegation to the North Carolina General Assembly. In attendance were Representatives Adams, Boyd- McIntyre, Jeffus, Jarrell, Culp, Bowie and Blust. Senator Martin attended as well. I attended this meeting to introduced myself to our legislators and to ask for their support on the upcoming bill for a 25-year retirement. While waiting to speak, I heard Mayor Holliday ask the Guilford County delegates for support in a proposed change in state law concerning a police officer’s personnel files. The next day I began trying to find out when the Council had made this decision. The City Clerk’s office confirmed that no discussion had been made in any Council meeting since that time. She even sent me a copy of the last meeting minutes in which this was discussed, June 6th, 2000. I called city attorney Linda Miles’ office to ask her for any information about the proposed change was met with, “She’s in a meeting and will get back to you.” A later visit to her office was acknowledged with an email stating, “Send me your address and I’ll send it to you.” I did. She didn’t. Then on February 6th, 2001, I attended the City Council meeting and spoke on behalf of our members. On the agenda, was the proposal to the Guilford County Delegation. I told the Council that first, I really didn’t know how to respond to their proposal since I had not received a copy that I had requested from the City Attorney’s Office. I then stated our members were against any change in State law to open any of our personnel files. I asked when was the Council going to tell the officers that the officer’s files were being opened to the public and when had the Council discussed this proposal. I stated that rank-and-file officers should not be treated differently than other city employees since the city doesn’t want to treat us differently, on our request, on other issues such as pay. I was told that the Council had talked about the proposed change in Council briefings not normally attended by citizens and that we were being treated differently because of the greater opportunity of harm to public trust. I was told that this would “add creditability to the complaint process.” I stated this would not add credibility to a process that some individuals, a very small group, found suspect and always would unless they had control of the process. The Council voted unanimously to approve the proposal to the Guilford County Delegation. Back room politics at its best. On February 8th, the GPOA finally received the requested proposal along with an apology by way of our General Counsel, Bill Hill. Attorney Miles refuses to speak with me but will speak with Bill. Attorney Miles knows we oppose this proposal because she was in attendance when I spoke to the Council on February 6th. Bill has also told her we are opposed. On February 14th, Jason, Bill Hill and I traveled to Raleigh to attend a meeting of the Guilford Delegation to ask them not to support this proposal. This was their first meeting of the new session. The proposal was not on the Delegation’s agenda so we did not speak, but we did have a moment to make our pitch to Senator Kay Hagan, the Vice-Chairwoman of the Delegation. She told us she would like to hear our position because she prefers to hear both sides of an issue before she made a decision on the proposal. We left Raleigh believing this would happen. On March 1st, I emailed each of the Guilford Delegation’s members asking them not to support the Council’s proposal. It was then that I found out Representatives Adams, Bowie, Boyd- McIntyre, Jeffus and Jarrell of Guilford County along with Representative Womble of Forsyth County had entered House Bill 423 to change state personnel laws to give access of a complaint’s findings to the Human Relations Commission’s Complaint Review Committee. Should these CRC members release this personal information it would be a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $500. The bill has been referred to the House Subcommittee on Highways and Law Enforcement chaired by Representative Andrew Dedmon and vice-chaired by Representative Joe Kiser. I have since called Representative Dedmon’s and Representative Kiser’s office repeatedly, to inquire when they would discuss H 423 and to offer our opposition to this bill. We had planned to attend their Subcommittee meeting on H 423. Then, on March 8th, I learned that Senator Kay Hagan had entered SB 388 in the Senate with no co- sponsors. This bill has been shelved at this time. So much for Senator Hagan hearing both sides of the issue before making a decision. The GPOA has also requested the support of the State PBA in opposing H 423. On March 11th, PBA State President John Midgette met with Representative Adams and advised her that the PBA was joining the GPOA in opposing H 423. On March 27th, I met with NC State AFL-CIO President James Andrews. I advised Mr. Andrews of our concerns and opposition to both bills. Mr. Andrews stated he had attended a Local Government Subcommittee meeting March 22nd and that Representative Adams had spoke concerning H 423. He stated Representative Adams was asked if she knew of any opposition to H 423 and she said she knew of no opposition. Mr. Andrews stated also in attendance was an attorney with the City of Greensboro who he believed to be Linda Miles. The Subcommittee of Local Government then voted to support H 423. This Subcommittee is chaired by none other than Representative Jarrell, and the member who asked Representative Adams the question was Representative Womble, both co- sponsors of H 423. I asked when the bill had changed Subcommittees and how could it have been moved. I found out that the bill had changed on March 12th, and it would only have been moved with the approval of the primary sponsor, Representative Adams. Obliviously, Representative Adams, after speaking with John Midgette on the 11th, understood the growing opposition and had it moved on the 12th to her friend’s subcommittee. Representative Adams failed to recall the opposition and Attorney Miles failed to correct her. Then, as on cue, Senator Hagan had her shelved bill, SB 388, assigned to the Senate Judiciary II Subcommittee, you guessed it, in which she is the Chairwoman. Politics at its best... or worst. We don’t support H 423 or SB 388 because (1) that by opening any of our personnel file, a Court could rule that it’s all or none and since they are already open, allow access to it all. (2) We know the present law allows the City Manager to open our personnel file, with concurrence by the City Council, to maintain “public confidence” in the city. (3) We believe that should the City Council or City Administration lose creditability in the complaint process, they can correct it with the Chief of Police. (4) We believe this allows for a broad- brush approach to complaints, grouping excessive force complaints with rudeness complaints. Then it allows review, of those complaints, by individuals who have not or do not follow guidelines for membership on the Complaint Review Committee. We have been told by City Officials that this piece of legislation is in the best interest of the officers, a fair compromise to avoid a formation of a review board. I am hesitant when the City starts implementing change without telling their employees and while attempting to fast track this law through the General Assembly. Honestly, this would not be a bad law change if I believed it would end the review board issue. Or, if I thought there would not be someone appointed, with a radical or suspect opinion of the present compliant process. Or, if I believed the members of the Complaint Review Board would be extremely hesitant to release the complaint file to the general public or press. In reality, I believe this is just ammunition for a small radical group to gather support for a review board and there will be controversial individuals appointed to this board. I further believe that once on the CRB, they would not hesitate, even under a threat of being charged with a misdemeanor and fine, to leak information to further their cause. In a recent article on Mayor Holliday in the News & Record astounded me. The article spoke of his willingness to meet with both sides of an issue before choosing his position. The article specifically cited his work during the Police-Citizen Review Board issue and his meeting with both sides. I don’t know which officers he met with but I haven’t spoke with any officer who he had consulted prior to him taking a position. I hope all officers will remember these Council Members, Representatives and Senator’s statements and actions when they come asking for votes. The GPOA will keep you advised on this piece of proposed legislation. I told you to have a seat, that it was a long explanation. Lastly, please attend our meetings on the first Thursday of the month, 1730 hrs. We need you to be there. Stay safe, Eddy Summers President - Greensboro Police Officers Association Editor’s Note: Despite our best efforts, the bill was passed into law on April 17th. Remember this next time you go to vote. We will definitely be publishing a list of legislator’s who have shown themselves to be anti-law enforcement during the upcoming elections. We STRONGLY urge you to send a message and vote against them. Greensboro Police Officer's Association 241 Summit Avenue Greensboro, NC 27401-3005 Phone: 336-274-9595 | Fax: 336-370-9462 2002-2003 Copyright Reserved