In June of 2012, the City Council introduced a bill that would establish the office of Inspector General for the Police Department. The office would oversee the policies and practices of the NYPD and analyze the effect of those policies and practices on civil liberties, among other things. Mayor Bloomberg has expressed serious opposition to the bill, promising to veto the legislation and describing the creation of an Inspector General’s office as mere “politics” that tamper with public safety. The mayor could not be more wrong.
The Police Department has consistently said that there are already oversight mechanisms in place to keep law enforcement in check. Unfortunately, these current oversight entities are ill equipped to address policy issues and are only responsive to individual cases. Furthermore, even in individual cases, there have been instances where the department has refused to cooperate with these oversight entities. Ignoring the City Charter’s mandate to cooperate with the Civilian Complaint Review Board, the police commissioner refused to let his officers testify before the board regarding a 2004 incident of alleged police abuse on a wide scale.
Similarly, the former chairman of the Mayor’s Commission to Combat Corruption, a mayoral appointee, expressed to the City Council that the commission was largely ineffectual because it lacked subpoena power and did not receive cooperation from the department when they made inquiries into larger policy issues like the integrity of crime statistics reporting, fraudulent claims for police overtime, sexual misconduct, and domestic violence by officers.
Additionally, the CIA, FBI, U.S. Department of Justice, most New York City agencies, and comparably large municipal police departments, such as Los Angeles, all have Inspectors General. Yes, policing the cultural and financial capital of the world presents special considerations and strategies. But this is not a reason for less oversight, it is the precise reason for more.
Establishing an Office of Inspector General not only helps to build stronger public trust, its focus on department policy helps detect waste and inefficiency, a role neither the prosecutor nor the ethics enforcement bodies occupy. While it will not serve as a panacea to all problems within the department, it will help enhance the transparency, oversight, and accountability of the NYPD, a desirable outcome for citizens throughout the city.
As the courts currently weigh a class-action suit against the Police Department regarding their stop-and-frisk policy, it is important for our officials to consider common-sense solutions regardless of the trial’s outcome. If the Police Department is confident in the strength of their policies, subjecting these policies to the review of an independent Inspector General will only strengthen that position. If there is room for improvement, however, then sensible input from an outside observer will serve both New Yorkers and the NYPD alike.
Critics of the bill claim that an Inspector General would curtail the Police Commissioner’s power. This position, however, can be chalked up to a misreading of the bill and lack of understanding of legal precedents. In past iterations of City Council attempts to create investigative boards for the Police Department, courts ruled that they violated the city charter because they were not “purely investigative bodies” and its members would be considered officers of the city; triggering mayoral appointment curtailment. The current bill addresses this conflict, however, by giving the mayor sole discretion over who is appointed as Inspector General as well as allowing the mayor to fire the Inspector General without cause. Additionally, the bill gives the administration an opportunity to respond to the IG’s reports, giving it ample opportunity to refute any frivolous charges levied against the department.
I commend Council members Jumaane Williams and Brad Lander for sponsoring this bill and championing the effort for over a year now. It appears as though their work, along with the tireless advocacy of communities and organizations throughout the city, will pay off as the Speaker of the City Council and mayoral candidate, Christine Quinn, recently suggested that she will allow the bill to go to a vote soon. It is my hope that this sends a strong message to our mayor that our communities want the Police Department to continue its great work in bringing crime down throughout the city in a manner that is consistent with our civil liberties and under the accountability that an Inspector General would help provide. I can personally attest to the excellent work our Police Department does to keep us safe as a member of my local precinct council. An Inspector General will help spread and maintain this work throughout the entire city.
Zellnor Myrie is a current Urban Studies graduate student at Fordham University and serves as the Chair of Bronx Neighborhood Advisory 7.
admin
Welcome to the Norwood News, a bi-weekly community newspaper that primarily serves the northwest Bronx communities of Norwood, Bedford Park, Fordham and University Heights. Through our Breaking Bronx blog, we focus on news and information for those neighborhoods, but aim to cover as much Bronx-related news as possible. Founded in 1988 by Mosholu Preservation Corporation, a not-for-profit affiliate of Montefiore Medical Center, the Norwood News began as a monthly and grew to a bi-weekly in 1994. In September 2003 the paper expanded to cover University Heights and now covers all the neighborhoods of Community District 7. The Norwood News exists to foster communication among citizens and organizations and to be a tool for neighborhood development efforts. The Norwood News runs the Bronx Youth Journalism Heard, a journalism training program for Bronx high school students. As you navigate this website, please let us know if you discover any glitches or if you have any suggestions. We’d love to hear from you. You can send e-mails to norwoodnews@norwoodnews.org or call us anytime (718) 324-4998.
English
Arabic
Bengali
Chinese (Simplified)
French
Spanish
The NYPD and the people of the City of New York will NOT be better served by the introduction of an IG- Inspector General.First, as currently presented, the NYPD-IG would be a part of the Department of Investigation, whose Commissioner is appointed by the Mayor, as is the Police Commissioner. That from the beginning is problematic. But more importantly, there already exists ready and competent authorities to act and who do act as “watchdogs” and they are the 5 Offices of the District Attorney..It may take some readers by surprise, but the Chief law Enforcement Officer of a county in NYS is NOT the Police Commissioner/Chief, but the DA. If one wants to go a little further north, authorize the NYS Attorney General to impanel an ongoing Grand Jury…..the investigations, when warranted would be carried out by AG detective/investigators and the NYS Police. Unless the IG “Investigators” are given full police status (not the current “special investigator” peace officer held by DOI investigators, the IG will be spinning its wheels. We don’t need yet another bureaucracy in NYC, but let the ones already so authorized, do their jobs. Save the pre-election Grand Standing for another issue…..like getting more corrupt NYC Council, NYS State Assembly/Senate off the payrolls and into jails..Investigate the “pork barrel” projects in neighborhoods, look at staffing at not for profits run by politicans…see how many family/friends are on the payroll…..OH WAIT, that would be too close to home, wouldn’t it Speaker and others of the City Council.
Thank you to the Editor of the NN for this kind article on page 12 of this weeks edition reporting on the transition unfolding at Epiphany Lutheran Church and my departure from this wonderful community.
I pray the when Epiphany does move to Holy Nativity Episcopal Church and the Church of Our Savior-Ethopian Orthodox takes possession, Epiphany will be given front page and continuing coverage…Being a part of defining the Norwood community since 1928 and determined and committed to remain in Norwood, speaks volumes of its
members. The fact that I left after 5 years……page 12 was most gracious…..:)
Read article.
Print
Hello Pastor,
Thank you for reading and engaging in what I believe to be an important conversation on the future of our city. If I understand your point correctly, you disagree with the current iteration of the proposed bill because the IG would lack “police powers” and because it would be under the control of the mayor. I agree with you in part.
The problem is, the New York City Charter does not allow the Council to pass legislation that curtails the power of the mayor; meaning, any type of “check” on a mayoral agency (in this case, the NYPD) must be under some auspice of the mayor as he/she is entrusted with enacting city policy by virtue of their election as the city’s chief executive. Any action seeking to limit, or “curtail” in legal parlance, this power will be (and has been) struck down by the courts. As such, an Inspector General must be subject to some oversight by the mayor. In order to change that, we would need a fundamental restructuring of our city’s charter.
Additionally, the IG, as currently proposed, would not just be a “special investigator.” While the IG’s reports on NYPD policy would not be “binding” in the traditional sense, the IG would have subpoena power. This is huge. The NYPD would not be able to withhold documents (as they have done in the past) or not respond to inquiries under this structure as they would be legally impelled to comply to a subpoena.
Now, the argument can be made that NYPD might still be resistant. That is up for debate. But the public pressure to disclose might be greater if the public knows that the IG has made requests that PD refuses to respond to.