INTEREST ARBITRATIONS

Decision Information

Decision Content

Seattle Police Officer’s Guild

And

City of Seattle

Interest Arbitration

Arbitrator:        Janet L. Gaunt

Date Issued:      11/26/2001

 

 

Arbitrator:         Gaunt; Janet; L.

Case #:              15596-I-01-355

Employer:          City of Seattle

Union:                Seattle Police Officer's Guild

Date Issued:      11/26/2001

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF THE INTEREST ARBITRATION

 

BETWEEN

 

CITY OF SEATTLE,                                     )

                                                                                    )

                                                Employer,                   )

                                                                                    )           INTEREST ARBITRATION

                        vs,                                                       )

                                                                                    )           AWARD

SEATTLE POLICE OFFICER'S GUILD,   )

                                                                                    )

                                                Union.                         )

                                                                                    )

PERC Case No. 15596-1-01-355                              )

__________________________________________)

 

            On January 29, 2001, an interest arbitration was initiated pursuant to RCW 41.56.450

to resolve certain bargaining issues that had remained at impasse despite collective

bargaining and mediation by the Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC). The

issues certified by the PERC Executive Director for arbitration were:

 

            1.         The process for resolving disputes regarding the Office of Profes-

                        sional Accountability Review Board implementation agreement, and

 

            2.         The scope of the issues to which the resolution process would apply.

 

By mutual consent, Janet L. Gaunt was selected to serve as the neutral Arbitrator.

 

            After some earlier postponements, the interest arbitration was scheduled to

commence on November 6, 2001. Prior to that date, the parties advised the Arbitrator that

they had reached agreement upon terms and provisions that completely and equitably

resolved the issues submitted for arbitration. At the request of the parties, I have been asked

to adopt those provisions as my award and hereby do so. Pursuant to the parties' joint

stipulation and in accordance with the statutory criteria of RCW 41.56.465, the following

language should be renumbered and inserted as an Appendix to the current Collective

Bargaining Agreement.

 

OPA REVIEW BOARD

 

I.          NOTHING IN THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE GUILD

SHALL BE CONSTRUED AS A WAIVER AND/OR LIMITATION ON THE

CITY'S RIGHT TO ADOPT LEGISLATION ENACTING THE OPARB SO

LONG AS NOTHING IN SUCH LEGISLATION IMPLICATES A MANDA-

TORY SUBJECT OF BARGAINING AND/OR IS INCONSISTENT WITH

THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE GUILD. THE

CONTRACT GRIEVANCE PROCESS SHALL NOT APPLY TO THE

            TERMS OF THIS APPENDIX. THE EXCLUSIVE PROCESS FOR RESOLV-

ING DISPUTES RELATING TO THE TERMS OF THIS APPENDIX IS SET

FORTH AT 6 BELOW.

 

1.         COMPOSITION OF THE OPA REVIEW BOARD

 

The City of Seattle's, Office of Accountability Review Board ("OPARB") shall consist of

three (3) members. A quorum shall be two members.

 

            A.        The City Council shall appoint all of the members of the OPARB.

 

            B.        The City Council shall solicit input from the Guild concerning potential

appointments to the OPARB.

 

            C.        The City Council shall establish the term of office for the members of the

OPARB with none serving a term of more than two (2) years, although members may be

appointed to successive terms.

 

2.         ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR BOARD MEMBERS

 

The OPA Review Board members should possess the following qualifications and

characteristics:

 

            A.        A citizen of the United States or be lawfully authorized to work in the United

States.

 

            B.        Possess a high school diploma or a GED at time of appointment.

 

            C.        Be at least 21 years of age for appointment.

 

            D.        A commitment to and knowledge of the need for and responsibilities of law

enforcement, as well as the need to protect basic constitutional rights of all affected parties.

 

            E.         A reputation for integrity and professionalism, as well as the ability to

maintain a high standard of integrity in the office.

 

            F.         The absence of any plea to or conviction for a felony, crime of violence, or

an offense involving moral turpitude.

 

            G.        Because members of the OPA Review Board may serve in a quasi-judicial

capacity in making decisions about whether or not investigations of police misconduct are

complete, as a requirement for appointment, candidates must be able to comply with the

requirements of the appearance of fairness doctrine with respect to their duties as a member

of the OPA Review Board. For the purposes of this Appendix, the appearance of fairness

doctrine shall be applied as an eligibility criteria for appointment to the OPA Review Board,

as opposed to being applied on a case-by-case basis.

 

            In an effort to limit disputes regarding the type of information which must be provided to the

Guild regarding a candidate, the parties hereby set forth the information to which the Guild

is entitled. Criminal history record information which includes records of arrest, charges,

allegations of criminal conduct and nonconviction data relating to a candidate for

appointment, and Department records of any complaints of police misconduct filed by the

candidate shall be made available to the Guild. Access to such records by the Guild shall be

for the sole purpose of assessing whether or not the candidate meets the above eligibility

criteria. Access shall be limited to the executive officers and members of the Board of

Directors of the Guild and the Guild’s attorneys. Such records shall not be used by anyone

in connection with any other civil, criminal or other matter, or for any other purpose. After

the Guild has conducted its assessment of the candidate, the records shall be promptly

returned to the Department unless the Guild challenges the appointment as set forth in

Section 6, below. If the Guild challenges the appointment, the records shall be used solely

for the purpose of the arbitration, will be presented to the arbitrator under seal, and will be

returned to the City at the conclusion of the arbitration. Except as otherwise necessary for

the purposes of this Appendix or the resolution of a dispute under Section 6 below, such

records shall be maintained by the Guild as confidential and shall not be copied, disclosed

or disseminated.

 

Section 3:        In addition to the qualifications and characteristics set forth in Section 2

above, at least one (1) member of the OPARB shall be a graduate of an accredited law school

and a member in good standing of the Washington State Bar Association.

 

Section 4:        In addition to the qualifications and characteristics set forth in Section 2

above, at least one (1) member of the OPARB shall have at least five (5) years of experience

in the field of law enforcement.

 

Section 5:        In addition to the qualifications and characteristics set forth in Section 2

above, at least one (1) other member of the OPARB shall have significant experience and

history in community involvement, and community organizing and outreach.

 

Section 6:        The City Council may establish such additional qualifications and

characteristics, as it deems appropriate, consistent with this Appendix.

 

II.        3. CONFIDENTIALITY

 

An intentional breach of the confidentiality provisions of the ordinance shall constitute

grounds for removal.

 

In addition, Board members shall sign a confidentiality agreement that states, as follows:

 

As a member of the City of Seattle's Office of Accountability Review Board ("OPARB"),

I understand that I will have access to confidential and/or investigative information and/or

records that I am prohibited from disclosing. I agree not to disclose any such confidential

and/or investigative information and/or records. I understand that proven, intentional, release

or disclosure of such confidential and/or investigative information and/or records shall

constitute grounds for my removal as a member of the OPARB.

 

I further agree to indemnify, defend, and hold the City of Seattle harmless for and from any

legal action(s) arising from proven, intentional, release or disclosure of such confidential

and/or investigative information by me.

 

Finally, I understand that in the event I do not intentionally release or disclose any

confidential and/or investigative information and/or records, the City has agreed to

indemnify, defend, and hold me harmless for and from any legal action(s) arising from my

conduct as a member of the OPARB in accordance with SMC 4.64.100 and SMC 4.64.110.

 

III.       4. THE BASIS FOR REQUESTING FURTHER INVESTIGATION

 

Prior to submission of an issue to the OPARB the Auditor and OPA Director will delineate

their dispute in writing and the Auditor will specify what if any further investigation is being

requested. Such referrals will not consider disputes over classification decisions, and will

be limited to disputes over (1) whether relevant witnesses were contacted and relevant

evidence collected; and (2) whether interviews were conducted on a thorough basis. The

OPARB after reviewing the file will issue a final and binding decision resolving the dispute

between the OPA Director and Auditor.

 

If the OPARB sends a case back for further investigation, it must specify what investigative

task(s) need to be performed as previously outlined by the Auditor.

 

A case only may be sent back for further investigation if a reasonable amount of time is

available to accomplish the articulated investigative task(s) leaving time for the administra-

tive processing of the investigation before expiration of the contractual 180 day time period.

The administrative processing of the investigation includes the time required for line review,

but does not include any time subsequent to the mailing or other delivery of the Loudermill

notice.

 

The OPA Director will notify the OPA Auditor when the articulated investigative tasks have

been completed and/or will provide an explanation to the OPA Auditor of the reasons the

requested tasks could not be completed. The OPA Auditor may perform an audit of the file

to ensure compliance with the OPARB’s request for further investigation. If the OPA

Auditor does not agree that the Department has complied with the request for further

investigation, the OPA Auditor will meet with the OPA Director to try and resolve the matter

and gain compliance. If the OPA Auditor and OPA Director can not agree regarding

compliance, the matter of compliance will be submitted to the OPARB. The decision of the

OPARB regarding compliance shall be final and binding. All other conditions set forth

above regarding time constraints shall be applicable.

 

IV.       5. OPA REVIEW BOARD REPORTS

 

The Board shall generate reports and those reports shall be quarterly. The Board reports

shall include the following:

 

1)         A review and report on the implementation of the Office of Professional Accountability.

 

2)         A general overview of the files and records reviewed by the Board, including the

number of closed, completed cases reviewed.

 

3)         IIS shall be responsible for gathering statistical data relating to complaints and shall

City of Seattle / SPOG Interest Arbitration Award - p.5.,

provide the same statistical data to the Board as is provided to the Auditor. That data

shall include the:

 

a) number of complaints received;

b) category and nature of the allegations;

c) percentage of cases sustained;

d) disciplinary action taken in sustained cases;

e) data on patterns of complaints, including types of complaints;

f) geographic area of the complaint, and census tract rather than street addresses may

be used to identify the geographic area of a complaint;

g) number of officers, if any, who receive three or more sustained complaints in one

year. The names of the officers shall not be disclosed.

 

4)         The Board’s report shall include the number of cases in which the Board requests

            further investigation.

 

5)         The Board’s report shall include: a summary of issues, problems and trends noted by

the Board as a result of their review; any recommendations that the City consider

additional officer training, including recommendations that the City consider specialized

training for investigators; and any recommendations that the Department consider policy

or procedural changes.

 

6)         The Board shall be advised and the Auditor shall report on the OPA Director’s

involvement in community outreach to inform citizens of the complaint process and the

OPA’s role.

 

7)         After the committee on racial profiling has made its final report and recommendations,

the City may determine that it is appropriate to gather, maintain and report data on the

race, ethnicity and gender of complainants, and on the race, ethnicity, gender,

assignment, and seniority of officers who are the subject of complaints. The City will

provide thirty (30) days notice to the Guild of its intent to begin gathering, maintaining

and reporting such data on complainants and officers who are the subject of complaints,

and within the thirty (30) day notice period, the Guild may request to reopen

negotiations on that subject. Such bargaining shall follow the requirements of

paragraph 10D of the Memorandum of Understanding executed on September 7, 2000.

During the bargaining process, the preexisting status quo will be maintained.

 

6.         Dispute Resolution Process

 

            A.                    Disputes between the City and the Guild over alleged violations of the terms

                        of this Appendix shall be resolved solely through recourse directly to arbitration.

 

            B.                    With respect to disputes over a Board candidate meeting the eligibility criteria

                        for appointment or whether or not the City has met its obligation to provide records

                        regarding a candidate, the Guild shall provide written notice to the President of the

City Council, with a copy to the Mayor, the Chair of the Public Safety Committee

and the Chief of Police, of the Guild’s objections, including a summary of the

evidence that the Guild has at the time in support of its objections. Such written

notice shall be provided not more than ten (10) work days following the date that

the City Council solicits input from Guild on the appointment, as required by

Section 1 .B above. If the City intends to proceed with the appointment despite the

Guild’s objections and/or refuses to provide the required information, the Guild may

submit the matter directly to an arbitrator by providing written notice to the Director

of Labor Relations of the intent to do so, within ten (10) work days following the

date that the Guild is notified by the City of the intent to proceed with the

appointment and/or is notified that the required information will not be provided.

If the Guild fails to raise a timely objection to the appointment there shall be no

arbitration. In the event the City is ordered to provide additional records, the Guild

may rely on such records in raising an objection to an appointment, by providing

written notice in the manner prescribed above not more than ten (10) work days

following receipt of the records, including a summary of the evidence that the Guild

has at the time in support of its objections. If the City does not act on the Guild’s

objections, the Guild may submit the matter directly to an arbitrator by providing

written notice to the Director of Labor Relations of the intent to do so, within ten

(10) work days following the date that the Guild is notified by the City of the intent

not to take action on the Guild’s objections.

 

            C.                    With respect to disputes over a Board member violating confidentiality

requirements, the Guild shall provide written notice to the President of the City

Council, with a copy to the Mayor, the Chair of the Public Safety Committee and

the Chief of Police, of the Guild’s allegations that confidentiality requirements have

been breached by a Board member, including a summary of the evidence that the

Guild has at the time in support of its allegations. Such notice shall be provided not

more than ten (10) work days following the date of the alleged breach of confidential-

ality or of the date that the Guild knew or should have known of the alleged breach.

If the Board member remains on the Board more than ten (10) work days following

notice to the City from the Guild, the Guild may submit the matter directly to an

arbitrator by providing written notice to the Director of Labor Relations of the intent

to do so within ten (10) work days following the ten (10) work day notice period.

 

D.                    With respect to other disputes over alleged violations of the terms of the

Appendix other than those denominated above, the Guild shall provide written

notice to the President of the City Council, with a copy to the Mayor, the Chair of

the Public Safety Committee and the Chief of Police, of the Guild’s allegations that

a provision of this Appendix has been breached, including a summary of the

evidence that the Guild has at the time in support of its allegations and the remedy

sought. Such notice shall be provided not more than ten (10) work days following

the date of the alleged breach or the date that the Guild knew or should have known

of the alleged breach. If the city does not provide notice of its intent to implement

the remedy sought within ten (10) work days following notice to the City from the

Guild, the Guild may submit the matter directly to an arbitrator by providing written

notice to the Director of Labor Relations of the intent to do so within ten (10) work

days following the ten (10) work day notice period.

 

            E.                     The contractual 180 day time period for completion of an investigation shall be

                        tolled and no discipline shall be imposed from the date a dispute alleging a violation

                        of Section 4 of this Appendix is submitted to arbitration until the date of the

                        arbitration award or the date of the settlement or dismissal of the arbitration.

 

            F.                     The parties shall meet and select an arbitrator no later than ten (10) work days

                        from the date of the written notice of arbitration from the Guild to the Director of

                        Labor Relations.

 

                        1.         The parties agree that the following arbitrators shall constitute the pool from

                                    which arbitrators shall be selected:

 

a) Michael Beck

b) Janet Gaunt

c) Kenneth McCaffree

d) Shelly Shapiro

e) Don Wollett

 

                        2.         The same arbitrator shall not be eligible to serve as the arbitrator in consecutive

                                    arbitrations, except by mutual agreement.

 

                        3.         The first eligible arbitrator from the above list available to conduct the hearing

within sixty (60) days shall be selected. If none are available to conduct a

hearing within sixty (60) days, the eligible arbitrator with the earliest available

hearing date shall be selected unless the parties otherwise agree, and the

hearing shall commence on the earliest available hearing date for the arbitrator

selected unless the parties otherwise agree in writing.

 

                        4.         The parties may mutually agree to make additions or deletions to the list at any

time, but the number of arbitrators on the list shall not be less than five. If an

arbitrator is no longer available so there are less than five on the list and the

parties are unable to mutually agree on a replacement, an arbitrator shall be

added to the list using the selection process specified by the grievance

provision in the collective bargaining agreement.

 

            G.                    Briefs, if any are offered, shall be filed and served no later than the beginning

                        of the arbitration hearing. The parties shall present their evidence to the arbitrator

                        at the hearing. The arbitrator shall issue his/her decision immediately at the close

of the hearing and following oral argument by the parties. The cost of the arbitrator

shall be borne by the party that does not prevail, and each party shall bear the costs

and attorney fees of presenting its own case, except as provided by subsection J

below. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties, and

there shall be no appeal from the arbitrator’s decision.

 

            H.                    Disputes submitted to arbitration by the Guild and defenses raised by the City

shall be well grounded in fact and not interposed for any improper purpose, such as

to harass or delay. Violations of this subsection shall support the award of

reasonable attorney fees at prevailing commercial rates by an arbitrator.

 

Dated this 26th day of November, 2001 by

 

                                                                                                Janet L. Gaunt

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.