Thursday night I took a group of journalism students to a community policing beat meeting in the hopes they'd catch a glimpse of how the Chicago Police Department works.
They did.
The police department began implementing its community policing programs, known as CAPS, in 1993 and '94, and officially it still touts the cops-and-residents-working-together approach as an effective way to keep city streets safer. "The City of Chicago has a new weapon in the fight against crime--and that new weapon is you, the community," declares the community policing page on the department's Web site. "By opening up the dialogue between police and community, CAPS is producing a number of important success stories at the neighborhood level."
The officers in each of the city's police beats hold a meeting every month with a neighborhood volunteer known as a "beat facilitator" and anyone else who decides to come by. (Meeting dates, times, and places are posted on the department's Web site.) Generally the sessions consist of a police update on recent crime statistics from the area, complaints or questions about criminal activity or police inaction from residents, and pledges from the cops that they're all over it.
At Thursday's meeting, though, the police officer who was supposed to give the monthly crime statistics report didn't show up, so less than five minutes after the facilitator had called everyone to order, she opened the floor to questions.
A resident of a nearby condo building asked how police are dispatched once a 911 call is placed. A plainclothes officer who identified himself as the district commander's community liaison began to answer the question, then looked at the students and stopped.
"By the way, you can't record this without prior permission," he said.
I've been attending CAPS meetings for years, and I'd never heard such a thing. Plus, I didn't think it was legal. So I said so to the officer. "This is a public meeting," I said.
"No, no, no, it's our meeting," he said. "It's a public meeting hosted by the police department, so you need prior consent."
"There are eavesdropping laws, too," said another officer.
The first officer told me I had to call the department's news affairs bureau downtown and get approval.
But when I called news affairs Friday morning, a different standard was explained to me. "It's been the general policy at these meetings that you're welcome to attend, but with any electronic media, you need to get the permission of the people at the meeting,"said Pat Camden, the deputy director of news affairs.
I asked if this policy was in writing, and Camden said he'd check and call me back. A little while later he did. "Talking to our legal people, it's their interpretation that CAPS meetings do not fall under the Open Meetings Act," he said.
The Open Meetings Act states that public agencies and officials cannot hold official meetings without opening them to citizens. "In order that the people shall be informed, the General Assembly finds and declares that it is the intent of this Act to ensure that the actions of public bodies be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly," it says. It defines public bodies in broad terms as "all legislative, executive, administrative or advisory bodies of the State, counties, townships, cities, villages, incorporated towns, school districts and all other municipal corporations, boards, bureaus, committees or commissions of this State, and any subsidiary bodies." And it expressly states that "any person may record the proceedings at meetings required to be open by this Act by tape, film or other means."
Heather Kimmons, assistant public access counselor for Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, said CAPS meetings should not be exempt. "Under the Open Meetings Act, they would absolutely be open to recording," she said.
The law does allow some "responsible" restrictions that would interfere with conducting a meeting, such as noisy equipment or distracting lighting. "But a responsible rule would not include 'No taping without prior consent,'" Kimmons said.
At the Thursday night meeting I simply told my students to shut off their recorders and take notes. They did, and for the next few minutes, they listened to police officers complain that members of the media sensationalize problems within the police department and far too often don't bother to get the facts right.




You can only bend an agency tasked with maintaining civil obedience for so long before it breaks!
I see a state of emergency brewing here.
"Video cameras mounted on squad car dashboards..."
record both the officer(s) conducting the traffic stop AND the citizen(s) being stopped, so, how can there be any objections, by the police, to having whatever the camera 'sees' being recorded?
I anything, the police gain a video record of whatever behaviors were exhibited by the occupants of the stopped vehicle.
"....videotaping of interrogations...."
When a citizen is taken into custody, or 'invited' to an investigative interview, BOTH the police and the citizen are being video and audio recorded.
What possible objections could the police officer have to this?
If anything, the citizen would be more likely to not want their every word and actions during an interview to be recorded, especially if said recorded interview includes potentially incriminating content.
"...GPS in squad cars..."
Wouldn't one think that police officers on patrol would welcome their locations being known to their fellow officers?
Isn't this a good thing for those officers who work in areas of high risk to their safety?
Why wouldn't an officer on patrol want his/her whereabouts known to those who they would be looking to for assistance?
"....audio recordings of CAPS meetings!"
What better way to show, and showcase, the fine accomplishments of the Daley administration's management of our police department, then to share each and every CAPS meeting with those citizens who could not, for various reasons, attend same.
If every CAPS meeting were to be audio AND video taped and made available for download on the CAPS website, wouldn't this be an effective way to show all the citizens of our city how well this program is working?
And what's this about the police being "...an agency tasked with maintaining civil obedience...", I thought the police exist to serve and protect?
Before you go to another story, check the budget of caps and who runs it. Everyone involved is politically connected and recieve loads of money threw overtime! Interview most Police Officers and they will tell you that they get just as much info from calls to the station. The Poice threw you out because they do not want you to dig deeper into the money involved in CRAPS!
Ask people why they go to CAPS meetings in the first place - ask their background. And then tell me if you want your every word recorded. Discover that CAPS meetings are attended by victims of crime and the offenders.
But then that would be true investigative reporting of ALL the facts, not just those facts you select to include.
thank you for the well written, informative op-ed piece you wrote. I only wish the comments above mine possessed the same qualities.
The attitude of the police officer described in your commentary is, unfortunately, typical of what I have experienced in most of my interactions with CPD officers. I would be interested in knowing if members of the neighborhood objected to recording the meeting and/or if the students intended to reveal who provided information on local thug. These two issues were raised above by David Stumm and Orion, albeit in an astoundingly rude manner. However, the two points do have merit, and I can see how a recording might be problematic if it deterred people from speaking openly about the problems in their neighborhood.
In reference to HOLD ON's comment about the police serving and protecting, I think the words "sometimes, when it is convenient" need to be added. My limited experience when I approached the police for help taught me to expect no service or protection at all.
wow
that's really bad advice
The police dept needs new legal people
Mick linked to the text of the Open meetings Act, above
Here's a link to an excellent, somewhat more accessible explanation of our rights as citizens of Illinois (Chicago is in Illinois), written by the Attorney General's office:
Guide to the Open Meetings Act
http://www.illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/government/...
a must-read for anyone who goes to public meetings in Illinois
Open Meetings act is routinely disregarded
The CAPS program exists for 3 purposes:
1. A haven for clouted, 'merit' cops, who are effectively useless on the street.
2. An easy assignment that's gets a cop through his/her shift with minimal risk and effort.
3. A public relations gimmick designed to give the impression that this mayor's administration gives a damn about the neighborhoods these meetings are held in.
As in all of life, the above have their exceptions, but they are the rule.
The anonymous tip hotline is the better source of citizens reporting criminal activities, though it's rarely as reliably accurate as the snitch hotline.
If Daley's administration really wanted to assist the citizens, in providing a more effective and efficient line of communication between residents and their police officers, there would be an officer assigned to each district with the responsibility for reviewing and processing written complaints, concerns and information sent directly through the mail to a P.O. Box.
Anonymity would be acceptable, if no response was desired, and much more intelligence could be gathered than through phone tip hotlines and street snitches.
An open and secure Web comment board, such as this one, would also serve those connected to the WWW.
The CAPS program operates like any other watch dog group the may's people run. Over Budget!
The reason 'people' have 'few outlets' to meet with police is because there ARE few outlets provided by Daley's incompetent and dishonest administration.
Deliberately.
How many different ways of communicating exist today?
And, of what use are these many ways, if they are neither used and/or the citizen has no confidence, (based on experience), that those in power pay any attention to what is communicated to them?
A CAPS meeting is NOT the place for citizens to communicate information to the police about specific criminal activity in their neighborhood.
A CAPS meeting actually ENABLES the criminal elements of a neighborhood to observe and identify those residents who will talk to the police.
CAPS is, by no stretch of the imagination, "..the modern day replacement for the officer..." who used to walk a beat.
CAPS is BULLSHIT.
If the mayor wants to help citizens help the police, let him first help the citizens himself, by resigning.
Also, which CAPS meeting did you go to?
i know in some areas, the CAPS meeting is a political tool to attack the local alderman
phone trees, neighborhood walks and BBQs, etc do make a difference - I think teens especially are a lot less likely to be causing serious crimes (and I'm not talking about a group of kids hanging out, that's a constitutional right, not a "loitering" crime) when neighbors know each other, the anonymity of a large city can be conducive to an atmosphere where people think they can get anyway with anything because nobody is paying attention. CAPS meetings at least build networks in the community (although I'd still like to see the Beat cop come back, perhaps on bikes).
Open Government Guide: Illinois
Prepared by:
Donald M. Craven, Esq.
Scott B. Sievers, Esq.
http://www.rcfp.org/ogg/index.php?op=browse&state=...
It's my sense that the meetings shouldnt be recorded in order to encourage particpiation. Recording devices would merely serve to dampen and discorage participation.
And on another note, did anyone at your beat meeting appreciate you using their beat meeting as a laboratory experiment for the eager little Jpupils?
I am one of Mick's students and we are from Northwestern not Columbia. I was at the meeting where this ocurred and when the officer told us to turn off our recorders we all looked at Mick and this is when he began to argue with the officer. He argued more than what he said in this article and could have gone on for much longer, but in the interest of his students he decided to compromise so that we could accomplish the assignment that we were sent to the meeting for. So because he swallowed his pride for us he obviously showed that he wasn't backing down he was looking out for us so Thank You Mick.
Oh and about the part of us being price gauged, Northwestern definately does that, but Mick is one of the best journalism teachers I've had so far and a true professional and since I am his student I think mine is the only opinion that should count when it comes to that matter.
Andrew has missed the point.
These CAPS meetings are regularly attended by the criminal elements in the area.
The gang-bangers and other riffraff already know that a CAPS meeting is the place to observe and identify those citizens willing to work with the police.
For this reason alone, CAPS meetings are NOT the place for citizens to communicate information and concerns to the police.
The ONLY purpose of the CAPS program is to give the APPEARANCE that this mayor's administration cares about the safety of citizens.
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out the many ways citizens CAN communicate information on criminal activities to the police.
They don't have to do so at a public meeting.
Why hasn't this administration provided a web site, like this one, where citizens can say whatever they want to say to the police, by posting comments?
We know why there are no longer beat cops, the police department doesn't have the manpower, period.
We also know why the Daley administration continues the sham CAPS program, as a public relations ruse and as a haven for clouted 'merit police' hacks.
The fact that Daley and his cronies have yet to bargain in good faith with the police labor union is an indication of how low a value the police are held in by same.
The fact that the mayor uses the police misconduct of a few cops as a means to distract from all of HIS misconduct and incompetence is also revealing.
The one thing that we see, time and time again, is the allergic reaction those in control of our city, county and state governments have to the light of day.
So with police right there people are afraid? What do you think is the solution, private security forces for everyone?
I have heard this same excuse for why people don't phone in graffiti requests (the gangbangers are listening to the radio waves!).
You can start a blog if you want a place to complain to the police and you can hope they respond, but I find it perfectly reasonable that cops can't - and shouldn't - just act on random, unsubstantiated info - unless you want to live in an Orwellian police state.
Anyone can complain anonymously, but the principle of being able to face your accuser is a fundamental right in this country not to be thrown away.
The biggest problem in this city is too many people stay indoors and veg out on the boob tube, and moan on message boards instead of going outside and interacting with their neighbors. Decent folks are far and away the majority in this city, it's long overdue to start living like it.
Trust me, they knew those things before CAPS even came into existance. What big secrets are being dished out at a CAPS meeting? "There are thugs hanging out on the corner at Blah and Blah." "They're dealing drugs in front of the building at 123 Sesame Street." Yeah, wow, big secrets. The cops already know those things, the thugs certainly know it and the people know it. The only people to whom info that that would be a revelation would be people who live on the necxt block over.
CAPS meetings are the place for surprising revelations, which you'd know if you went. And if you have gone, what vital gangbanging secret info have you been privvy to at one of these meetings?
"Why hasn't this administration provided a web site, like this one, where citizens can say whatever they want to say to the police, by posting comments?"
A website? That's your CAPS alternative? Yeah, random unverifiable info from an unknown source on the INTERNET is MUCH better than hearing from acutal citizens face to face. Hell, I'd even take a CAPS meeting over a phone call. If you don't know, not everyone calling the cops are doing so with the good of the community in their thoughts. If the cops are over THERE, then we can do what we want to do over HERE.
isn't there already a blog for overpaid patronage hacks somewhere?
www.sittingonmyasseatingadonut.com or something?
I must really be in your heads.
You folks are so gullible, just like the electorate.
HAVE NO DOUBT, VOTE INCUMBENTS OUT
Here is how to get it done:
1) REGISTER TO VOTE
2) Make a list of every INCUMBENT, (leaving those few incumbents who you are CERTAIN deserve to be reelected off of your list)
3) BRING this list with you when you go to vote
4) DO NOT vote for ANYONE on your list
5) If the INCUMBENT has only one CHALLENGER, vote for that CHALLENGER, no matter who it may be
6) If the INCUMBENT has 2 or more challengers, then:
If the INCUMBENT'S name is listed 1st, then vote for the CHALLENGER who is LISTED LAST
or
If the INCUMBENT'S name is NOT LISTED FIRST, then vote for the CHALLENGER who IS LISTED FIRST
(This will concentrate the most votes for a SINGLE CHALLENGER, thus providing the greatest possibility of the incumbent losing
7) whenever you have the choice to RETAIN or NOT RETAIN an elected official, vote to NOT RETAIN
8) Vote for whomever you choose, for whatever your reasons, it's your vote and you can cast it for whomever you please, but, remember, the INCUMBENTS are the people who have been, are, and will continue to be, the one's responsible for all of our current troubles
Cast your votes with the sole purpose in mind of ousting practically all those currently holding, and abusing, the power and authority they've been entrusted with.
This strategy, if applied, will guarantee that the incumbents will lose, every time.
Primaries are the perfect opportunity for honest individuals, of either major party, to challenge the corrupt, old-school hacks infesting their parties.
Whether one considers oneself essentially a 'liberal', 'conservative', a Democrat or Republican, or a mixture of both, one must acknowledge that the entrenched members of both parties have been, and currently are, responsible for fucking up the lives of the 'common citizens'.
Independent-minded Democrats AND Republicans should flood their respective primaries with challengers, vote according to the HAVE NO DOUBT, VOTE INCUMBENTS OUT protocols, which will replace each party's respective incumbent hacks with anyone BUT the incumbent hack.
In the general election, both Democrats and Republicans can have the opportunity to elect a candidate who is not a hack, not a part of the old-school hack machine, and may well be a person more authentically committed to the ideals of true democracy.
Those citizens who are sick and tired, of the ways in which BOTH Democrats and Republicans have fucked up our city, county, state and country, can apply this voting strategy, in the general election, (should any incumbent hacks survive their respective primaries), to ensure that practically ALL incumbents are ousted.
This will open up the general election for any and all independent candidates to have the chance of successfully challenging the major party candidates.
GET REGISTERED TO VOTE
VOTE IN EVERY ELECTION, (be it a Primary or a General Election.)
USE THE POWER OF YOUR VOTE TO COMPEL CHANGE
Try it, you'll like it.
*wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh*
I am going to give everyone a little lesson on how CR number investigations are completed. I know many know the process well however many do not know.
First, when a citizen makes a complaint, per Chicago Police Department General Order 93-03, a supervising officer of the rank of sergeant or above MUST notify OPS within 1 hour to generate the complaint. The ranking officer must type up a “To/From” Report which is then faxed to OPS. It should be also stated that if a citizen makes a complaint to a patrolmen, he or she must immediately notify their direct supervisor so the sergeant can make the complaint. No matter how silly the complaint may seem, according to G.O. 93-03 a call to OPS must be made and they will decide if a CR number is issued.
OPS will then decide if they will investigate the complaint. For the most part OPS will ONLY investigate brutality complaints. Some have estimated ONLY 5 to 10% of complaints made are for brutality. The rest will be sent to the Internal Affairs Division were they will decide if they will investigate the complaint or, if the officer’s district or unit will investigate it.
Now for the breakdown. Only about 10 to 15% of the remaining complaints will be investigated by IAD. These are considered more serious complaints such as the ones we read about in the paper, complaints involving stolen money and complaints made against officers while they were “off-duty” or out of town.
So what does this mean? Approximately 70% to 85% of ALL CR numbers are investigated by the district/unit sergeant. (If a complaint is on a sergeant, a lieutenant will investigate. If the CR is on a lieutenant, a captain will investigate. If a Captain is the subject of an investigation, ONLY IAD can investigate the CR number)
To say the least, these sergeants have to work with the police officers they investigate. They hope the officers will protect their backs when they are on the street. It only makes sense that the sergeants will do everything they can to "not-sustain" the CR numbers they investigate. Do you really think a sergeant will give a guy he works with a 30 day suspension with no pay? Hell NO!! Neither would I if I wanted my back protected!
And now you know the “REST OF THE STORY”.
I appreciate the service orion is rendering the public, as his comments ALWAYS stimulate the appropriate reaction from same.
If only mayor mumbles would be so frank and forthcoming in expressing the attitudes of orion, which are the common ones shared by many members of the machine.
Thanks, orion, you are a proud example of your peer group.
Bucktown Block Club 16
What Will It Take? CFW
http://groups.msn.com/BucktownBlockClub16/whatwill...
In an 'open' meeting, I was asked to step out in the lobby after the meeting to discuss the 'Oakley Stalker'. The discussion did not go well.
Joe Lake, Bucktown Resident
Is someone in the Corporation Counsel's office getting kickbacks from Loevy & Lovey?
Hello, Pat Fitzgerald!
Office of Professional Standards
http://www.opschicago.org
Joe Lake, Bucktown