The Police Advisory Board and the CRB: an analysis
[Please note that the author wrote this piece five years ago. Much has changed. And absolutely nothing has changed. #BLM This report is in no way definitive. Also, observe how the D&C wrote about a 2% sustain rate in October 1995.]
A comparative analysis of the Police Advisory Board and the Civilian Review Board and a 52-year history of police accountability efforts in Rochester, NY
This analysis was written by Ted Forsyth of Enough Is Enough, on March 12, 2015 for the independent civilian review board committee of the Rochester Coalition for Police Reform. Enough Is Enough is an organizational member in the coalition. The analysis was expanded and updated on July 22, 2015. It was written for use by the coalition, its allies, and partners. This version is not for mass publication.
Abstract
This is a history of police accountability efforts in Rochester, NY over the course of 52 years as well as a comparative analysis between the Police Advisory Board (PAB) from 1963 and the Civilian Review Board (CRB) from 1992. This history and comparative analysis includes the salient features of each system, the history between the end of the PAB and the start of the CRB, and concludes with some suggestions on how to move forward with an independent civilian review board. My perspective is informed by my work as an independent journalist and activist. I am for abolition of the police and meaningful justice. I am opposed to corruption, abuse, brutality, and cosmetic changes to systems that offer no justice. For the people of Rochester, NY, justice has been fleeting when it has come to police violence, regardless of whether it's 1963, 1992, or 2015.
Read the report here:
Keyoni Adams tells her story of police violence
On November 17, 2017, Keyoni Adams was arrested during a domestic dispute. This is her story detailing her experience of being abused and beaten by members of the Rochester Police Department and deputies in the Monroe County Jail. Please be advised that her story is graphic and disturbing.
She was released on November 20, 2017. Ms. Adams pleaded to a conditional discharge. Since then, she has been harassed by the Rochester Police Department.
This interview was conducted on March 28, 2018.
Enough is enough!
Related: It’s not over for Benny Warr | City Council Candidate Forum on Police Accountability from 2017 | David Vann v. the system
Keyoni Adams
Judge on gun case: no body-worn camera footage, no probable cause, case dismissed
A frustrated and angry Supreme Court Justice dismissed a gun-involved assault case when both officers on the scene could not produce body-worn camera footage of the moments preceding the arrest.
On July 24, 2019, around 6:30pm, Rochester Police Department (RPD) officers Michael Mortillaro and Jeremy Lindauer, II were driving down the 200 block of Weyle Street in Rochester, NY, which is a part of their beat, and observed “a group of five to six males sitting in law chairs on the front yard and on the sidewalk area,” according to a suppression hearing transcript from November 21, 2019. Based on their knowledge of the “area,” they believed “some sort of drug sales [were] going on at that time.”
The original reporting and update, done by 13WHAM, indicated that Treiquan Hawkins “pulled a loaded gun on [the officers] and they fought to gain control of it” after officers approached the men and asked for identification.
Court papers, on cross-examination of officer Mortillaro, indicate a different situation entirely: there was no probable cause for officers to approach the men and no body-worn camera footage to back-up the officers’ claims.
Read the November 21, 2019 suppression hearing transcript:
Paul A. Gerrieri (representing the defendant) is asking the questions. RPD officer Michael Mortillaro is answering them.
Q. In essence, Officer Lindauer was interacting with my client [Mr. Hawkins], and my client walked away from him?
A. That is incorrect.
Q. He was talking with him, right? What did my client do?
A. He began to run.
Q. So, he runs away. He hadn’t committed a crime, right?
A. Not at that time.
Q. So, in essence, you guys chase after him without him having committed a crime, right?
Ms. Catalano [the prosecutor]: Objection.
Mr. Guerrieri: I think it goes to the heart of the matter.
The Court [Supreme Court Justice Thomas E. Moran]: I’m going to overrule. I want to hear the answer. Go ahead.
A. We were investigating the odor of marijuana being five, six males. We don’t know which male had marijuana on them.
Q. You never posted up the street to see whether or not someone was dealing drugs there?
A. Correct. Because when you do that, a lot of times dealers will have lookouts and tip people off, and they will leave the area before we can get to them.
Q. You stated you don’t know what individual, if anyone, had marijuana, correct?
A. Correct. That was part of our investigation.
Q. At that point, Mr. Hawkins hadn’t committed a crime, right?
A. No, he did not.
Ms. Catalano: Objection.
The Court: Overruled. Let him answer. What was the answer?
The Witness: No, he did not commit a crime at that time.
Officer Mortillaro then testified that his body-worn camera was in its docking station in the patrol car before he and his partner exited the vehicle. According to the transcript, the officers removed their cameras and put them in the docking stations in their vehicles in order to log and file other, earlier encounters caught on tape in order to reduce paperwork at the end of the day. When officers dock their cameras, the cameras shut off. Neither officer Mortillaro nor Lindauer checked to make sure their cameras were on when they exited the vehicle to confont the men sitting in their lawn chairs.
At this point, Justice Moran excused the witness but asked him to stay in the room. He went on to explain to Mr. Hawkins that the charges against him were very serious but that he found himself in a “difficult position.”
He told Mr. Hawkins that he was an ex-cop and, as a judge, he had seen “a lot of gun cases.” He went on to state that he was seeing “a pattern that I find deplorable.”
“In this case, there are two officers involved in this case that are integral to determining what the probable cause was, and low and behold, both of them can’t provide body-worn camera. I have had it. That’s enough,” court papers stated. “My ruling is this. There was no probable cause. Your case is dismissed unless the people want to do something about it in the future.”
When Ms. Catalano pressed and insinuated that Justice Moran didn’t believe the officers, the transcript reads:
“I can’t today take his truthful and accurate Officer Mortillaro’s testimony because I have seen a pattern of behavior that is coming from the Rochester Police Department that indicates that there is some kind of situation going on involving the body-worn cameras. In the last couple of cases we have had a consistent problem in cases involving apprehensions where all of a sudden the body-worn camera doesn’t work, and it’s happening all the time.”
Because of this, Justice Moran couldn't "find truthful and accurate” the testimony given at the hearing.
The case of Mr. Hawkins raises some disturbing questions: how many other cases are similar to this one? How many officers have committed some kind of body-worn camera misconduct? Why doesn’t the RPD’s body-worn camera program include consequences for violations of policy? Why isn’t there a clean reporting requirement where the officer has to write their report before viewing the footage (unlike the current policy, see page 12)? And finally, why aren’t officers like Mortillaro and Landauer held accountable by being charged with perjury and prosecuted appropriately? (These questions don’t even get to the Freedom of Information Law issues! (see 1 and 2).)
The RPD must act now and reform its body-worn camera policies and hold problematic officers accountable. The RPD could modify its current body-worn camera policy so that officers would have to write an initial report without viewing the video and then write an addendum following review (see part 5 on clean reporting). Officers should be prohibited from viewing footage before they write their initial reports; this needs to be changed in the current RPD body-worn camera policy. Violations of the policy should have consequences spelled out and enforced promptly and fairly. Those officers, mentioned by Justice Moran, who consistently have problems with their cameras should be investigated immediately. Finally, officers who lie on the stand ought to prosecuted for perjury.
Justice Moran is absolutely right to be “mad as hell about this.”
Related: Body Worn Camera Program - Rochester Police Department | InfoDoc on Rochester's failed Body Worn Camera draft policy | Police reform group makes policy recs to city for body cameras
This year's RCSD budget crisis can be traced back to the absurd process that "balanced" last year's budget
The current budget crisis in the Rochester City School District (RCSD) is somewhat a mystery. We often hear that the school district overspent its budget by tens of millions of dollars, but rarely hear how this happened. Just how does the school district go from having a budget that was balanced on paper at the end of the 2018-2019 school year to being $30 million short at the start of of the next? One answer is the completely absurd process used to balance last year's 2018-2019 budget.
A good starting point is the Oct. 8 report from Superintendent Terry Dade where he states that the 2018-2019 budget was $22.4 million dollars underbudget when compared to actual expenditures. He highlighted 6 items in particular:
- BOCES Special Education Services
- Charter School Tuition
- Self-funded Health Insurance
- Substitute Teachers
- Retirement Benefits
- Transportation
The confusing part of this list is that each item represents a predictable expense. For example, health insurance costs vary from year to year, but the change can be estimated based on the number of new hires and predicted rise of health care costs. This won't result in 100% accuracy, but it should be fairly close.
How did the school district underbudget by so much, in so many areas that should have been predictable? Well, in order to balance the 2018-2019 budget, they simply reduced the budgets for these items without any plan to actually reduce spending.
A "balanced budget"
In March 2018 Superintendent Barbara Deane-Williams and CFO Everton Sewell were tasked with closing a $52.1 million deficit from the initial budget estimates. They outlined their plan in the budget overview presented on March 27 (see page 28). The majority of the gap was closed with 2 changes:
- Appropriating an extra $10 million dollars from the general fund, for a total of $20 million (AKA dipping into the district's "savings account").
- Reducing various budget items for a total of $32.2 million dollars, including 5 out of the 6 items that would later appear in Dade's report as underbudgeted: BOCES, Health Insurance, Substitute Teachers, Retirement Benefits, and Transportation.
I'll emphasize again: all of the items listed are more-or-less predictable. Any reductions should be accompanied with a reason that we would expect decreased spending or a plan to cause that to happen However, the district never presented anything approaching an explanation, including when board members questioned these reductions. Here are some excerpts from the RSCD Administration's answers to the School Board's questions.
Question: In light of the additional teachers and other staff (total of 186FTE) to be hired in the next year, how is the District planning to attain a $2.6M reduction in employee benefits?
Answer, prepared by Everton Sewell: This reduction is not a year over year reduction, but rather a change in the projected amount that was originally projected for 2018-19. The overall employee benefit is still increasing to accommodate for the change in FTEs (Full-time Employees)
There are many drivers contributing to our employee benefits including NYS retirement system, Social Security, COBRA Claims, medical and dental costs, unemployment insurance and workers compensation, just to name a few. The initial increase costs of employee benefits were projected to be $13.2M. Detail analysis of each item indicated a potential reduction is sustainable.
The first paragraph seems to either miss the point entirely or is intentional misdirection. The district was proposing to add 186 full-time positions and administration itself predicted a 4% rise in health care costs, a 10%-15% increase in retirement benefits costs, as well as a 4% increase for other benefits (RCSD 2018-2019 Budget section 3, page 26). Because of this, it's clear that simply comparing the year over year budget numbers is pointless. A better comparison is against the initial projected amount, which factored in employee growth and increased costs per-employee. When compared to that number, the employee benefits budget was most certainly reduced.
The second paragraph is long on words, but short on explanation. In essence the administration is asking us to accept the reductions based on on their claim that "detail analysis of each item indicated a potential reduction".
The D&C actually has some good reporting on the health insurance reductions. It's unfortunately behind a paywall, but here are some key takeaways:
- The district reduced health insurance budget per-employee in the 2017-2018 budget, which resulted in underbudgeting when compared to actual costs.
- In 2018-2019 the district further reduced the budget per-employee, below the already underbudgeted number while actual costs continued to rise.
- The self-insurance fund balance was positive $11.8 million in June 2017. Money from this fund was moved to the general fund to cover expenses. According to Dan DiClemente, present of the BENTE union, this was done without union official's knowledge.
Charter school tuition was similarly underbudgeted and this happened from the start, before the March 2018 changes. The budget line increased from the 2017-2018 to 2018-2019, however that increase was not nearly enough to cover the predicted increase in both charter school enrollment numbers and per-student tuition cost. Superintendent Dade's report listed charter school tuition as $6 million underbudget.
Other questions received similarly unhelpful answers.
Question: What "transportation efficiencies" are currently being considered by the District?
Answer, prepared by Mike Schmidt: The transportation department is utilizing the feedback from the Board of Education to guide our process of securing efficiency and improved service. We will not be transporting the sixth grade students at Young Men's Leadership on RTS service. We are looking very closely at our service for high school students in alternative programs to provide them more flexibility.
If you can find any explanation of why they expected significant savings, please send me an email (ben at rocus.org). I'm struggling to find any substance in this answer at all. According to Superintendent Dade's report, contract transportation was underbudgeted by $3.3 million in 2018-2019.
Maintenance of Effort
The contract transportation budget was lowered as part of "Department Maintenance of Effort reductions" that totaled $15 million dollars. These reductions seem entirely arbitrary.
Question: The 2018-19 RCSD Budget Overview presentation referred to $15M in projected cost savings from "Department Maintenance of Effort Reductions". Please explain the major source(s) of these reductions, and how the estimates were derived.
Answer, Prepared by Everton Sewell: The major sources of the $15M are listed below.
- Specialized Services $2,701,705
- Student Support Services $885,164
- Alternative Program $1,574,623
- Transportation $1,272,404
- Safety and Security $306,278
- Facilities $2,986,753
- Info Mgmt. & Technology $1,337,530
- Deputy Supt of Admin $213,159
- Teaching and Learning $2,192,780
The estimates were derived based on the remaining budget gap at the time and taking that as a percent of the total operating budget for all the nonschool departments. The amount came to be about 12%.
I find this answer completely amazing. How did the administration determine how much each department could be cut? They simply took the amount the needed to balance the budget and split it up proportionally between all the departments. There was no investigation into how these departments spent their money. The administration simply assumed they could be cut by whatever was needed to close the budget gap.
It's unclear what happened with the budgets for the departments other than transporation. Were they able to reduce spending by 12%? Were they underbudget but not listed on Dade's report? Were the budgets restored, and if so where did the funding come from? Hopefully the upcoming results of the state audit or the comprehensive annual financial report will explain more.
One effect of this budget process is that it severly limits any public participation. When the administration fails to provide clear explanations of what's changing and why, then it becomes very hard for anyone to understand the budget and virtually impossible to give meaningful input.
One consistent cry from the community from the start of the budget crisis is that there is room in the RCSD budget to make cuts without cutting teachers and staff. Many have volunteered to work with the board to identify these areas. Could the community help to find areas of overspending to help balance the RCSD's budget? It seems reasonable considering that the top-down approach, largely driven by the superintendent and CFO, has driven the district into our current financial crisis. It's also one of the few alternatives to suggestions of state control for the RCSD.
Stepping Back
This article focused on tracing the current budget crisis back to the absurd and dysfunctional process used by the RCSD administration and board to balance the 2018-2019 budget. However, it's important we we also look at the larger picture to avoid missing the forest for the trees. The larger picture is that we have a school system that's underfunded at all levels of government, city to federal. We have a system of highly segregated schools, 65 years after Brown vs Board of Education. Finally, we have numerous charter schools working to attract students away from public schools, taking large portions of RCSD funding in the process.
It doesn't seem fair to simply say the board or the administration didn't know how to balance a budget. If they had adequate funding from the start, like most/all of the suburbs, then there would have be no need for this absurdity in the first place.
So let's be fair: The RCSD has been been tasked for years now to balance an underfunded budget at the same time as it needed to improve the quality of education for our children. Maybe it could have been done with the right expertise, more community involvement, or an exceptional leader, but the administration and board we had were not up to the task. They tried to balance the budget using absurd measures that could have been predicted to fail from the start.
Upcoming Events
If you're interested in fighting for change in the Rochester City School District, please consider one of these actions:
- Fund our Schools Lobby Day. Citizen Action and Alliance for Quality Education are taking a bus to Albany to lobby to "demand that Andrew Cuomo fulfill his obligation and pay the Rochester City School District the $86 million its owed in Foundation Aid."
- Protest at Govener Cuomo's State of the State address. A group of Rochesterians is organizing to protest the lack of state funding at the address. There's a lottery to get tickets inside, but if folks don't get tickets they are planning to make some noise outside instead. If you're interested, please send me an email (ben at rocus.org) and I can get you in touch with the group.
Rochester Climate Strike 2019
Residents of Rochester took to the streets on September 27, 2019 to demand action from government and industry to address climate change. It was held in solidarity with Climate Strikes around nation and the world. It was organized primarily by local high school students following the model set by Swedish activist Greta Thunberg who recently drew 250,000 to a speech in New York City. It was not limited to just young people however. Before leaving City Hall the crowd was treated to a concert by the Raging Grannies. A large petition was handed to Rochester Mayor Lovely Warren.
The march consisted of three other stops, all at the offices of entities who have much power to do something about the climate crisis. The next stop was at the Monroe County Office Building on Main Street where activist Liam Smith laid much of the blame for inaction on the climate at the feet of the Republican party. The Legislature will be meeting again on October 8.
The next stop was outside the offices of Rochester Gas and Electric. While Rochester has one of the cleanest electrical grids in the nation, it is still heavily reliant on combustion of carbon based fuels. Activists would like to see a larger commitment to renewable sources. A call was also put out to Governor Cuomo and the New York State Public Services Commission to lower rates by utilizing more free energy sources.
The march then headed to the Federal Building on State Street where farmer Erin Bullock delivered a presentation on organic farming. Not only could organic farming provide less toxic and healthier food, it can also remove carbon from the air. Unfortunately the Trump administration is moving things in the wrong direction nationally, making it all the more important to act local and also vote for candidates who support positive change.
p { margin-bottom: 0.1in; line-height: 120%; }
150 March for Peace on 9-11
150 people turned out to march for Peace on September 11, 2019. The event was in remembrance of the violence and suffering on that date in 2001, and also to honor the 150th anniversary of the birth of Indian peace activist Mahatma Gandhi. Marchers walked through the park and the University of Rochester campus, and over the Genesee River to the MK Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence on South Plymouth Avenue. It was concluded with a speech by Arun Gandhi, grandson of the activist. The event was sponsored by the India Community Center, Veterans for Peace and Colgate Rochester Crozier Divinity School. It was held in solidarity with events worldwide.
p { margin-bottom: 0.1in; line-height: 120%; }
It’s not over for Benny Warr
A decision was rendered regarding motions filed at the conclusion of the Benny Warr civil trial against Rochester Police Department officers who assaulted Mr. Warr. United States Magistrate Judge Marian W. Payson issued her decision on July 22 regarding the plaintiff’s motions to set aside the verdict, grant a new trial, and impose sanctions against the defense counsel, City of Rochester attorney Spencer Ash, for misconduct. The judge has not dismissed the motions meaning that they are still on the table. This is the first public communication from the judge since the end of Mr. Warr's civil trial.
Read the Decision and Order here:
In her decision and order, Judge Payson specifies that the “application is premised on two grounds: first, that defendants’ counsel [Spencer Ash, the City of Rochester attorney representing the Rochester Police Department (RPD) and its officers] engaged in deliberate misconduct prejudicial to plaintiffs’ right to a fair trial; and, second that the jury’s verdict awarding no compensatory or punitive damages was inconsistent and against the weight of the evidence.” The seven-page document elucidates the issues raised in court papers pertaining to both points. The judge does acknowledge in her order and decision that such issues did arise during the trial, but without supporting documentation examining the entirety of the trial, she could not properly rule on the motions.
Therefore, she ordered the plaintiff’s attorney, Charles Burkwit, to “supplement their post-trial motion with an amended affidavit and memorandum of law supported by specific citations to the trial record and accompanied by the trial transcript.” Mr. Burkwit has until September 20 to file the appropriate supporting documentation.
The backstory…
On May 1, 2013, Benny Warr, a disabled, African American man, was waiting for a bus at the intersection of Jefferson Avenue and Bartlett Street in his motorized wheelchair. As he waited, an RPD cruiser rolled up and officers got out and started telling people to move on. The two officers who were telling people to move on, officers Joseph “Joey” M. Ferrigno II and Anthony “Rock” R. Liberatore, approached Mr. Warr and gave him the same order. According to Mr. Warr, officer Ferrigno told him to “Move.”
“Sir, I'm catching a bus.” said Mr. Warr.
“I said fucking move!” officer Ferrigno responded.
After again trying to explain his constitutional right to wait for the bus, officer Ferrigno sprayed him in the face with OC spray as officer Liberatore violently pushed over and threw Mr. Warr out of his motorized wheelchair onto the ground injuring his left side and stump where his prosthetic leg attaches. Officer Liberatore then “delivered an elbow strike to Mr. Warr's head in the hopes of ending the situation as fast as possible.” Officers Liberatore and Ferrigno violently kicked, kneed, and punched Mr. Warr all over his body including his head, ribs, stomach, chest, and back. Then RPD Sergeant Mitchell “Big Face” R. Stewart II arrived to assist in the arrest of Mr. Warr by, according to one witness, kicking him in the head.
According to witnesses, Mr. Warr did nothing to provoke the police violence he endured and he did nothing to resist arrest once the attack began. Mr. Warr was left on the ground waiting for an ambulance, after he was handcuffed, for nearly 25 minutes. At Strong Memorial Hospital, he was given an appearance ticket and charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. On August 9, 2013, Rochester City Court Judge Stephen T. Miller granted an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal with respect to the criminal charges against him.
Ferrigno, Liberatore, and Stewart inflicted severe injuries on Mr. Warr. He had broken ribs, numbness in his hands, neck injuries, internal injuries, and cuts on his wrists. The attack left him with nightmares, PTSD, flash-backs, short-term memory loss, a change in personality, constant and increasing pain, and physical mobility issues namely being unable to use his prosthesis.
The trial…
On January 22, 2019, five and half years later, Mr. Warr’s civil trial began. The jury, seven white women and one white man, was seated in the morning. None of the jurors lived in the City of Rochester; several came from around the western part of New York State (this is where the western district draws its jurors from). Several had indirect connections to law enforcement. There were no people of color. There were no apparently disabled people on the jury. This was not a jury of Mr. Warr’s peers.
Several witnesses from Jefferson Avenue wore dreads, had street tattoos, used unfamiliar slang, and had simmering experiences with police and prison before a jury who would never have had a conversation or a meal or attended a service or gone to school with anyone remotely like them.
Spenser Ash, the city attorney who represented the police, the former chief, and the city, played upon those differences, appealing to the jury’s racist fears, referring to Tashe Young with a role of the eyes, calling her ‘another upstanding citizen’ in a voice dripping with inappropriate sarcasm. He used vulgar street phrase, ‘you’d ride and dive wich yer man’ and winked at Pastor Nina Warr to degrade her explanation of her loyalty to her husband through tribulation. He pretended (he is Black, after all, and is often seen in the neighborhood he derided) not to understand when Ms. Young referred to Uncle Hoppy, knowing that Benny had an affectionate nickname that everyone recognized. Ash knew his audience. Throughout the long days there were so many of these racial and cultural diminishments.
When the defendant officers testified, they used the language of war: “working in the trenches,” looking out for an “ambush,” “watching our six,” “no cover,” and “Jefferson Avenue is a dangerous place.” Ash called Mr. Warr in both his opening statement and his closing statement “blight” and “a nuisance.” How are we, the public, supposed to feel when police administrators and elected officials call for trust with the police and tell us that the police are guardians of the people when the reality is, at least among some elements in the department, that a warrior mentality against communities of color dominates?
On February 4, 2019, the jury indicated that they had reached a verdict. Liberatore was found to have used excessive force. The jury voted no on all other claims including false arrest, battery, and assault. Ferrigno and Stewart were found not to have used excessive force on Benny. For compensatory damages, zero dollars. For nominal damages, $1. For punitive damages, yes on Liberatore, but the jury awarded zero dollars. Those in the gallery were stunned at the miscarriage of justice.
The demands…
The anti-police brutality organization, Enough Is Enough [that the author of this article helped found], formed shortly after Mr. Warr was assaulted by officers employed with the RPD. The demands made by the organization since the attack on Mr. Warr have not changed in over five and a half years:
1. Rochester Police Department, fire the officers involved in the attack; bring them up on criminal charges including assault!
2. Rochester Police Department, publicly apologize to Benny Warr and his family!
3. Rochester Police Department, clarify policies and procedures and retrain officers when interacting with people with disabilities!
4. Rochester Police Department, end racial profiling and the criminalization of neighborhoods of color!
Enough Is Enough has been a pivotal member of the Police Accountability Board Alliance that has been pushing for an accountability board with teeth to do meaningful oversight of the RPD. One of those pillars is the ability for civilians–residents of Rochester–to discipline officers for misconduct. Rochester City Council passed the Rochester Police Accountability Board legislation on May 21, 2019. In order for it to become established law, city voters must affirm the legislation by voting for it on the ballot on Nov. 5. Find out more at PABNOW.com.
It’s not over for Mr. Warr. Not by a long shot.
Enough is enough!
Donate here: https://www.gofundme.com/justice-for-benny-warr
Related: A Jury of One's Fears | Joey Lipari on Syracuse's Citizen Review Board | Civilian Review Board built to fail Benny Warr and other complainants | David Vannv. the system
Critique of a Yellowish Piece of "Journalistic" - Trash
That's right, I'm referring to City Newspaper's so-called 'Highlights from an early summer primary' --- as representing "journalistic"-trash, which are very strong words, and which I should either be able to validate, or I should apologize. So, examine my critique (below), and you decide whether or not I owe (amazingly --- three different "news" reporters who compiled the article) an apology, or not.
The very first fact that should be emphasized is super-"low 14 percent Democratic [voter] turnout," which City pundits attempted to minimize by (for no logically-relevant reason, mentioning that it "was slightly higher than four years ago"). How pitiful is that? Next, let's be clear that the majority of those who did "turnout" are mainly middle and upper class white folks who would not dream of sending their own children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, cousins, etc... to Rochester City School District (RCSD) schools --- period. So, most have no skin in the game. The 86% (the overwhelming majority of whom are poor and Black, and have the most skin in the game) --- stayed home, as usual.
As noted,"voters returned incumbents Beatriz LeBron [whom many believe is devilish, e.g., epitomizes the human embodiment of evil] and Willa Powell [the 20-plus-years-know-nothing,or at least, know-little --- about urban, public education that is] and elected newcomers Amy Maloy and Ricardo Adams" --- all of whom are recipients of benefits that flowed from thousands upon thousands of dollars spent by New York State United Teachers (NYSUT), Rochester Teachers Association (RTA), and other racist unions, in order to ensure victory of the so-called Powell-Adams-LeBron-Maloy - Slate. They are all definitely beholding to the man who many refer to as 'the real RCSD superintendent,' mister Adam Urbanski.
Now here's where their "journalistic"-rubbish starts to get really yellowish and trashy, e.g., they claim that "it's hard to draw an overarching conclusion" --- really? Well it was quite easy for me to do so. The bottom line is that old, entrenched, status-quo-based, white-minority-rule continues firmly intact in slave-town-U.S.A. --- period. Additionally, they actually had the intestinal fortitude, raw audacity, unmitigated gall to attempt to convince you and me that "the election results don't seem to indicate a particular dissatisfaction with the school board." They have got to be kidding. A full 86% of the electorate did not bother to show up (as most haven't for decades). Yet, "the election results don't seem to indicate a particular dissatisfaction with the school board?" WHAT? Even in the face of clear reality, the pundits still tried to make the case that "people did care enough about the district and the school board to show up and vote." Well, we know (for sure) which "people" they're talking about (the mainly white, middle and upper class minority-majority; along with some middle and upper class Blacks and other people of color, many of whom exhibit negropean tendencies, and therefore (obviously) vote similar to, or just like their white counterparts, and a smattering of ordinary poor and working people). The fact that "the top vote-getters were incumbents LeBron and Powell" is an absolute affirmation that old, deeply-entrenched status-quo reigns.
It's very interesting, if not amazing that three different journalists (collectively) can't keep the story straight. For example, they claimed that "Anthony Hall and Robert Hoggard campaigned independently," but those of us who were on the ground know that Hall and Hoggard were supposedly part of a slate that included Lebron and Adams.Thus, two were used solely to siphon off votes, and the other two were anointed by RTA's racist 'czar,' along with two white women (one of whom has presided over chaos and dysfunction for more than two decades). Yes, that's really what happened.
Not only is their political ineptness; less than stellar research skills, and hegemonic tendencies on full display, but they are actually liars. For example they claimed that Rochester Board of Education Commissioner Judith Davis "abdicated one of her most important jobs as a board member, refusing to take part in the selection of a new superintendent because she disagreed with the process." That'a a straight-up distorted, convoluted, conflated, twisted lie.She did in fact participate in all of the initial interviews, and definitely voted, but at the same time, she also publicly criticized the exclusionary (of parents, families and community), illegitimate, rigged process, which has absolutely nothing to do with so-called "abdicating" anything at all. Instead, the pundits obviously do not recognize critically important, necessary interruption of the entrenched status-quo when they see it. Perhaps that's because they are such a vital part of it.
They tried to make a big deal out of the fact that "the current board has already committed to the professional development that Aquino recommended." Yet they had nothing to say about the specific nature of what was, and was not recommended and why, e.g., one of Dr. Aquino's most important findings is that: "The Board acknowledges that there is a need to minimize the underlying racial tension that exists among the group and has engaged in two retreats to begin to address these issues" (Finding #4 --- p.16). However, one of the few shortfalls of the Report is that it contains no specific recommendations for conclusively addressing/resolving this fundamentally vital issue, which we can be certain did not get resolved via two so-called "retreats." In the final analysis, the journalistic-pundits are merely spewing status-quo-supporting rhetoric.
Lastly, they claim that: "If the June and August graduation rates continue to improve, and parents and teachers like what they see in new superintendent Terry Dade, voters may be reluctant to support the [State] takeover." It's most interesting that they would mention "graduation rates" and "new superintendent Terry Dade" in the same sentence, especially when considering that Superintendent Dade expressed to members of our Coalition (https://www.facebook.com/tidpc/ ) when we met with him on June 26th that he has been wondering about something that we believe is very, very important --- something that we have also pondered for years, e.g, "how can we have a 60% graduation rate when proficiency rates are in the low teens?" Is anyone willing to try to provide a credible, rational, informed, valid answer? Don't ask the pundits -- because they are guaranteed to steer you wrong.
Crowd Rallys for Health Care in New York
A small crowd gathered despite rain May 1 2019 in Washington Square park to support the New York Health Act. As we have reported before, the proposed law would establish a universal single payer health system across New York State. The act has passed the Assembly four times and will likely pass the now-Democratic controlled Senate this year.
http://rochester.indymedia.org/node/147839
One speaker, a doctor from Canada reminded the crowd on how Canada's popular and much less costly health care system began in the province of Saskatchewan. New York could be the state that does the same for the US.
On camera: another case of racial profiling by the RPD
After a judge's ruling and an appeal from a second request for body worn camera footage from May 5, 2018, the city of Rochester finally releases an appropriately redacted video.
Still from Rochester Police Department body worn camera footage
Christopher, a Black, Corn Hill resident, was riding his bicycle back home to Troup Street from the Montgomery Neighborhood Center, after hanging out and playing basketball, when a Rochester Police Department (RPD) officer pulled him over for riding on the wrong side of a nearly empty Clarissa Street.
The officer, whose name has been requested by Rochester Indymedia via a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request, tells Christopher that she pulled him over on his bicycle because he was riding on the wrong side of the road. The body worn camera (BWC) footage does not show Christopher riding on the wrong side of the road, or riding period. The video starts as she begins to question who he is, where he’s coming from, what his business is, where he lives, and if he has any warrants out for his arrest. (You can read the rush transcript at the bottom of the article.)
The pretext for the stop was Christopher’s alleged riding on the wrong side of the road. The purpose for the officer was twofold: 1) to get as much personal information about Christopher as she could and 2) to determine if he had any outstanding warrants that she could use to arrest him. After the interaction, which ended with Christopher leaving without physical injury or arrest, I spoke with him briefly as he headed home. I observed the interaction from the front of the Flying Squirrel Community Space. Christopher seemed flustered, frustrated, angry, and exhausted. On the day of the incident, I posted this to Facebook:
I just witnessed an African American guy, who lives in the Corn Hill Neighborhood, pulled over on his bicycle at Atkinson and Clarissa for not having lights on his bike. It was broad day light and there was no inclement weather. He said this happens often. The stop happened at around 5:45pm. He was not arrested or ticketed. It's bullshit. #BlackLivesMatter #RacialProfiling #Roc #PoliceAccountabilityBoardNOW #NoJusticeNoPeaceNoRacistPolice
On May 9, 2018, I filed a FOIL request for the BWC footage of the officer. The request stated:
I would like the body worn camera footage from officers who stopped an African American man on a bicycle at the noted intersection above between 5:30 and 6:00pm on May 5, 2018. Thank you for your time and consideration with this request.
It was given FOIL number: RR18-01891.
Then, on May 21, 2018, my request for BWC footage was granted. Specifically, the email read:
The video I was sent can be seen below:
Clearly, as you can see, the video has been completely blurred with the audio completely stripped from it. This is not transparency.
At the same time, I was also seeking BWC footage from officer Jonathan P. Laureano who pulled over a Black man who the officer had interacted with a year before. (That story is soon to come.) I spoke with the individual and he requested that I get the footage. I requested the video. With respect to Christopher (the man in the still photograph above), I took a gamble. The case with the footage from Laureano was appealed and eventually an Article 78 was filed. My gamble was that if I could hold off on getting the footage from the incident on May 5 and hope the Court ruled in my favor on the Laureano issue, then I could re-request the footage from May 5 and get an unredacted version of the video based on the Court's order. If the Court ruled against me, and the City's policy was allowed to stand, then it might have meant never getting the video or requring me to appeal to the highest court in New York State and possibly the nation.
However, my gamble paid off. On December 18, 2018, Supreme Court Judge Ann Marie Taddeo ruled in my favor on my article 78 proceeding. I claimed that the City’s policy of blanket redactions and removal of sound from BWC video with the added cost of paying a technician hundreds of dollars to review the video and apply the proper redactions was against the letter and spirit of the Freedom of Information Law in New York State. The judge agreed.
The Court held that the Respondents (the City) “shall reconsider the Petitioner’s [the author's] FOIL request.” Judge Taddeo did not buy the City’s arguments: the Court found “no provision” in the law allowing for blanket-blurred video; she found Corporation Counsel Timothy Curtain’s argument that blurring videos “helps the requestor” to be an argument that “strains credibility” and is “unsupported in the record;” the Court found it “surprising that . . . in the first quarter of the 21st century, it will take a trained professional twelve hours to perform redactions to a one-hour video;” and the City “failed to explain” from which section of the law gives them the “power to perform these expected redactions.” She ordered the City to provide a redaction log for any redactions made when reconsidering my request and reminded them that the law “does not provide for the redaction of the arresting officer’s image or voice.” (My attorney, Elliot Dolby-Shields, is appealing the judge’s ruling on the basis that she didn’t provide a compliance date and, to date, the City has still not responded (and is in violation of the Court’s order) to my other FOIL request for BWC footage from officer Laureano.)
Armed with this knowledge, I filed another FOIL request on March 6, 2019 for the RPD body worn camera video footage of the stop with Christopher. My request mirrored my original request made in 2018. My reasoning was that if the City had read the Court’s order, then I should be able to get the video with the audio and without the blanket blur.
What I got on March 26 was this:
It was frustrating to see that the City used an argument that clearly did not take into account the judge’s order.
Upon reading the statement and receiving the same link to the same blurred video, I immediately responded and forwarded the judge’s order to the law department of the city:
No one ever responded to my email. Therefore, I sent an appeal on April 2:
On April 11, Tim Curtain, via Stephanie Prince, responded to my appeal: “I have performed a diligent review and am reversing the determination of the Records Access Officer.” You can see the email below.
And so, nearly a year after my first request, the City finally released the nearly unredacted body worn camera footage with a redaction log. You can see the redaction log below.
Unredacted Video of the May 5, 2018 Incident with Christopher
At the end of the day, we have a video showcasing racial profiling in the City and an officer fishing for information from an innocent person who was humiliated, frustrated, and angry at how he was treated. Thankfully, Christopher was not assaulted by the officer. However, these kinds of daily occurances of injustice are unacceptable and furthers the distrust between the Black and Hispanic communities and the police. Enough is enough.
Redaction Log Page 1
Redaction Log Page 2
Related: Racism Running Rampant in Rush | Court rules against City's Body Worn Camera FOIL policy | Rochester's Racist Marijuana Policies Must End | City Council Candidate Forum on Police Accountability from 2017 | David Vann v. the system | 16 arrested during peaceful demonstration during Black Lives Matter Rally | Charges dismissed against Ms. Bonner; will RPD officer McNees be disciplined? Who knows... | A critique of "The New Guardians" by Cedric Alexander
Rush Transcript:
Officer (O): “Where you comin’ from?”
Christopher (C): “Chillin’, chillin’, chillin’. Ridin’ the bike.”
O: “Where you heading to?”
C: “Home. Around the corner.”
O: “Corn Hill?”
C: “Yes. We own the house.
O: “Own the house?”
C: “Yes.”
O: “Who do you live with?”
C: “We own the house; it doesn’t make a difference. We own the house. In Corn Hill.”
O: “Oh. Ok. Do you have a phone number Christopher?”
C: “Yes. A house phone. For what though?”
O: “Just in case I need to get a hold of you.”
C: “For what?”
O: “It’s just a question.”
C: “I don’t get in trouble.”
O: “Listen.”
C: “I’m 50 years old. No, I don’t have a phone. I don’t have a phone.”
O: “Ok. Listen.”
C: “No, no. I don’t have a phone.”
O: “You don’t have a phone?”
C: “No. A house.”
O: “You don’t have any warrants or anything like that?”
C: “No, no. You got the ID, call it in. You know how to do it. Call it in, man. I don’t have any IDs. I don’t get in trouble.
O: “Alright. 209, I’ll be in records.”
“[inaudible]”
O: “209 to records”
“[inaudible]”
O: “Can I get a 29 check on a male black?”
“[redacted]”
O: “How long have you lived over at [redacted]? A lot of people don’t feel like in the city move around a lot.”
C: “People got money.”
O: “What?”
C: “People have money.”
O: “…have money.”
C: “Yes. I don’t got; I said people have money.”
O: “Yeah. Do you live with friends and stuff over there on Troup?”
C: “Family.”
O: “Family?”
C: “Yeah.”
O: “Then were you riding your bike with friends then? Over?”
C: “Yes, yes, yes. I was just comin’ from basketball.”
O: “The basketball court?
C: “Montgomery Center.”
O: “Do you guys like generally meet up like on Saturdays with friends over there and ride bikes? Er, is it just like a hangout spot?”
C: “I ride with the Thurston crew.”
O: “A Thurston crew?”
C: “Yeah. Like the Judge on DKX ride bikes. They got they own crew. Everybody got they own crew. The Conkey crew. Everybody.”
O: “Yeah.”
C: “Uh huh.”
O: “How long you been riding with them?”
C: “I just got my bike fixed today.”
O: “You just got it fixed?”
C: “Yeah.”
O: “It’s a nice bike. The seat looks really comfortable.”
C: “Oh yeah. It was made in France.”
O: “It was made in France?”
C: “Yeah.”
O: “That’s pretty cool. Do you have a repair shop you go to?”
C: “Yeah, Hudson.”
O: “On Hudson?”
C: “Yeah”
O: “You just get around don’t you.”
C: “They fix free bikes.”
O: “They fix for free?”
C: “Couple places. South Ave., Hudson. It’s a couple places. Give away bikes and fix bikes.”
O: “Do you know anyone else with red bikes like that?”
C: “Huh?”
O: “I said red bikes aren’t very common like that. Does anyone else have red bikes like that you know of?”
C: “It’s orange.”
O: “It’s orange? You think that’s orange?”
C: “Of course it’s orange. Red? This is not red.”
O: “I would call it red.”
C: “No.”
O: “Like a light red and a dark red.”
C: “No.”
O: “Maybe an orangish red? We can meet in the middle?”
C: “No. Yeah.”
O: “Meet in the middle?”
C: “Yeah. But it’s more orangish.”
O: “Alright, alright. It’s weird how people just see color slightly different, you know what I mean?”
C: “Yeah.”
O: “Like blue and purples.”
C: “[inaudible] red. So this is not red.”
O: “You like red?”
C: “Yeah.”
O: “Is that your favorite color?”
C: “No. Green.”
O: “Mine too! Do you like, like the dark greens though? The lighter green? What? Money green? Not the first time I’ve heard that.”
C: “Yeah.”
O: “What was wrong with your bike that you had to get fixed?”
C: “Derailleur.”
O: “The what?”
C: “Brand new derailleur.”
O: “Oh, okay. [inaudible radio] Go ahead.”
“[Redacted]”
O: “ Ten-four thank you. I just gotta check one more thing. Can you hold tight boss?”
C: “Yeah”
“[Radio chatter/inaudible.]”
O: “Alright man. You’re going to be all set. Sorry about that. Just make sure you’re supposed to ride your bike with traffic.”
C: “Yeah, yeah.”
O: “Just for safety and stuff like that.”
C: “And buy some lights.”
O: “Yeah.”
C: “I’m going to Walmart after this.”
O: “Even if you get a cheap flashlight and put it on the front just for when it starts getting dark, yeah.”
C: “No, no, no. You might as well–if you’re gonna do somethin’ do it right.
O: “Yeah, alright. Sounds good. Sorry to bother you on this fine day. Enjoy the rest of your ride. Alright?”
C: “Yes.”
O: “209 we’re all set. Oops shit, wrong channel. 209 we’re all set.”