|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Rochester’s Police Accountability Board was dealt a staggering blow this month when a complaint filed by the Rochester Police Department’s officers’ union, the Locust Club, was upheld by Judge Joseph Waldorf.
The state Supreme Court justice’s decision effectively curtails PAB’s data access, investigative, and subpoena powers. An appeal of that decision, brought by the city of Rochester, was filed but could take months to conclude.
In the meantime, the PAB said at a recent board meeting that it has altered its website to comply with the ruling. Executive Director Lesli Myers-Small said at the meeting that complaints would still be accepted and monitored by the board.
Meanwhile, the city of Rochester’s 2025-26 proposed budget reduces PAB spending by $328,000, or 9 percent, compared with last year, to $3.3 million.
The proposed budget states that this decrease is the result of one full-time and one part-time position being cut, as well as a reduction in rent expenses following the agency’s move to the Loretta C. Scott Center for Human Services.
Amid concerns and confusion about the continuation of the police oversight board, the Rochester Beacon posed some questions to Myers-Small:
ROCHESTER BEACON: The recent ruling by Judge Joseph Waldorf removed much of the powers for the PAB. Were you surprised by that? Will you be taking any further steps to challenge that ruling?
LESLI MYERS-SMALL: The ruling was unexpected considering the strong mandate voters gave in 2019. That said, we’re committed to fully complying with the law and continuing to serve the Rochester community in every way we can. On May 6, legal counsel for the city of Rochester filed a Notice of Appeal in the Appellate Division, Fourth Department. We fully support using every legal path available to restore the investigatory and disciplinary powers that were originally granted to the Police Accountability Board under the City Charter. In the meantime, our work hasn’t stopped. We’re still logging complaints, producing oversight reports, recommending important policy reforms, and staying engaged with the community every step of the way.
ROCHESTER BEACON: The lawsuit was driven by the PAB’s decision to release redacted misconduct findings. Do you stand by that decision? Why?
MYERS-SMALL: Our agency was created to strengthen public trust in law enforcement by promoting transparency and accountability, consistent with the New York State Court of Appeals decision in NYCLU v. City of Rochester. Police misconduct records are public under the Freedom of Information Law. The Police Accountability Board’s goal in releasing these records was to ensure accessibility in a way that respects both individual privacy and the public’s right to know. Every precaution was taken to safeguard sensitive information while providing meaningful insight into the oversight process. We believe transparency is essential to effective reform and to rebuilding trust between law enforcement and the community.
ROCHESTER BEACON: The ruling allows for the existence of the PAB and the ability to review and make recommendations, but no longer investigate claims of misconduct or establish a disciplinary matrix for RPD. How does this impact your mission?
MYERS-SMALL: The court’s ruling has changed the tools available to us—but not our mission. The PAB remains steadfast in its commitment to accountability, transparency, and justice.
While we are no longer authorized to investigate individual allegations or recommend disciplinary action, we continue to:
■ receive and review complaints for oversight purposes,
■ conduct systemic policy reviews,
■ analyze patterns and trends in police practices, (and)
■ engage in robust community outreach and education.
In short, we are adapting. Oversight agencies across the country have proven that policy reform and public engagement can be powerful mechanisms for change—and we will continue to leverage every lawful tool to fulfill our mission.
ROCHESTER BEACON: Based on the ruling, will you redefine the work you do at the PAB? Will you continue to operate under these parameters if they remain unchanged?
MYERS-SMALL: Following the court’s ruling, we are reassessing and reimagining our structure and strategy. While our core mission remains the same, we are shifting our focus to expand community education, enhance policy advocacy, and strengthen transparency through data and reporting. Should these legal limitations remain in effect, we will continue to operate within them—while actively working with elected officials, community partners, and legal counsel to pursue meaningful, sustainable reforms. The fight for effective civilian oversight does not end with a single court decision. We remain committed to building a system that is just, community-centered, and resilient.
Jacob Schermerhorn is a Rochester Beacon contributing writer and data journalist.
The Beacon welcomes comments and letters from readers who adhere to our comment policy including use of their full, real name. See “Leave a Reply” below to discuss on this post. Comments of a general nature may be submitted to the Letters page by emailing [email protected]
Unfortunately, between the Appellate Court and Court of Appeals, I believe the PAB will prevail in the appeal. I don’t trust the members of the PAB to be fair and balanced.
Why do you think the PAB will win? I’m not clear what argument they will present other than it was voted in?
The PAB is fair and balanced the same as FOX News is fair and balanced.
The Beacon provides a platform for candid conversations about pressing community issues. On this thread about the PAB, I’m disappointed that a more diverse representative dialogue can’t be had. I can almost count on the same handful of people commenting on a wide range of topics. It makes me wonder if it’s just that most readers don’t want to comment, or if the forum isn’t reaching a broad and diverse audience, especially on a topic of such gravity.
What the perceived need for a PAB with sweeping powers indicates to me is that some segment of Rochester’s citizens are not only dissatisfied with how a few officers behave, but also that they don’t trust or expect their City Council members, the Mayor, and the Police Chief to address their concerns effectively.
Years ago, while I was very active in both NEAD and the Beechwood Neighborhood Coalition, we conducted annual polls of residents. Public Safety was always the number one concern. Ironically, we also compared data with perception and almost always concluded that the perception of crime was always worse than the reality. The emphasis the media puts on infrequent but serious criminal events skews perception. These days, with social media and group chats, I expect that conversations about personal experiences with police interaction are amplified and biased by a deep distrust of police as the enforcement arm of government. Following the so-called “HIT” squad scandal and the arrest of the then-police chief Urlacher in the 1990s, along with some of his police associates, a new Chief was appointed. Chief Irving, along with his Deputy Chief of Operations, worked with me and other community leaders to bridge some of the trust gaps created by the scandal. Collaboratively, we formed the Chief’s Police-Citizen Interaction Committee and expanded its scope by adding additional section-level committees.
Additionally, I helped design the Police Citizens Academy. I even taught a section during the police cadet training on how the community interacts with the police. Different Captains had various levels of commitment to engaging with the community representatives. We learned a great deal and had subsequent appointed chiefs carried out the blueprint we established; we’d be much farther ahead by now. Unfortunately, the average tenure of police chiefs is shorter than the time needed to implement cultural change. The national average is about three years. It’s only under Mayor Evans that we have a more stable police management in place, which appears to be committed to doing a better job. Perhaps after the upcoming mayoral election, should Mayor Evans return, community leaders could sit down with him and Chief Smith to try to reintroduce some of the proactive measures that were attempted to be embedded in the RPD.
If there were to be a newly constituted and adequately funded PAB, it would need to provide well-designed training for its members on the law, police policy and procedures, the union contract, and the needs and expectations of target populations throughout the city that have more frequent contact with the police. One example is the need to closely examine every adverse interaction with young people, supported by well-documented case studies. Of great importance would be a non-political board selected based on objective criteria formed by listing the critical attributes, skills, and knowledge of those chosen to serve. There would also need to be a formal and regular meeting with the Police Chief and their senior staff where concerns, both specific and general, would be discussed, and an action plan established. Although more fraught with challenges, periodic conversations with the Locust Club executive committee would help to build bridges and hopefully tear down the historic adversarial relationship between the Union and the community. The ultimate question is, do vocal community leaders genuinely want to effect meaningful change, or do they seek to lash out at perceived malpractice to satisfy their need to equalize the power dynamic?
Frank, as one of those frequent commentators, my guess is that some are like me, and perhaps you, I happen to have the time.
My guess is that the RB attracts more left leaning readers who prefer reading to TikTok.
As far as the PAB is concerned, I agree with your assessment. I think it was doomed from the start. It was never an effort to improve police-community relations. It was an adversarial body from its inception. The very composition was adversarial, composed of activists with an agenda. There was never the idea that the board would be objective, making decisions based on a thorough or educated basis. It was akin to forming a medical review board that prohibited anyone with a medical background from being on the board intended to hold individuals “accountable.” It was never about a fair and balanced examination of police practices and policies. No one should have been surprised at the push back or lawsuits.
There is a saying that to a hammer, everything looks like a nail. People on both sides of the police/community divide rely on their life experience, and perception that may be skewed by what they’ve been told or believe to be true. These days, police training and recruitment are more diverse and inclusive, and over time, as some of the “old school” officers and leaders retire, I hope that the culture will gradually change. It will be more challenging for community members to make changes. Some of the challenges facing us today are the criminal justice reforms implemented in Albany to address the needs of New York City. Still, they are imposed on the entire state, particularly in areas such as bail reform and prison reform. Legislators are always trying to save money while also seeking to help the poor and disadvantaged, which everyone hopes will reduce crime. There are numerous unknowns and unintended consequences resulting from state and local legislative changes, and then there is the additional layer of all the insanity emanating from DC these days. Sadly, their effort to elevate White Superiority is only going to cause more anger and tension between law enforcement and various minority communities. Law enforcement and the criminal justice system are the contact point between the authoritarian fascist new federal government and citizens who are being “policed.” If the more enlightened citizens don’t regain control of government, I’m afraid that things will get much worse before they get better. Some local legislators were trying to gain more control over how police conduct their jobs. The only way to do that currently is to persuade most legislators and the governor to amend the laws and contracts that are on the books, which is a very significant undertaking. Given the system we must live with, members of the community and police managers need to maintain an ongoing dialogue and honest collaboration to prevent catastrophic events from occurring.
Of course there will always be those who fall prey to mythologies that fit their agenda. Often proving the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Its especially especially pervasive among those who believe they are better informed or more insightful than others,.
Modern policing started with Sir Robert Peele and was begun in the US that had nothing to do with slave patrols.
So sad that people actually believe this revisionist mis-information and speak without expertise in the area. We get enough of this from both extremes.
Frank, Keine gute Tat bleibt ungestraft. For some nothing is ever good enough.
Apparently the American Bar Association , the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, the New Yorker, Time Magazine, the University of Alabama and numerous other organizations and publications are also victim’s of Gary’s version of the Dunning-Kruger Effect. A few minutes research on the internet makes clear that they and others believe the so-called “mythology” that slave patrols were a precursor to our modern day police forces. Interesting that in 1828, a decade before the formation of America’s first professional police force, the following oath was administered to members of slave patrols in North Carolina: “I [patroller’s name], do swear, that I will as searcher for guns, swords, and other weapons among the slaves in my district, faithfully, and as privately as I can, discharge the trust reposed in me as the law directs, to the best of my power. So help me, God.”
Sir, you may want to consult with an historian familiar with the history of policing. Or you could work on a degree in criminal justice at RIT. The problem many have is that a few minutes of research leads them to the confusion that the fact that slave patrols existed they were “the” precursor of our modern police force. Some confuse something being a precursor is the same of as being the origin or basis of another thing. I guess its a sign of the times, if one sees it on the internet they can run with it. For instance one might read the NLEOM piece on slave patrols and mistakenly assume they were they foundation of modern policing. It happens to the best of us.
https://nleomf.org/slave-patrols-an-early-form-of-american-policing/
Thank you for your opinions, Gary. Not clear why a degree in criminal justice makes someone an expert on the historical evolution of American policing any more than a degree in engineering makes someone an expert on ancient Egyptian pyramid construction. Similar to how the thousands of individuals who’ve obtain degrees in American history over the past century and a half and who pursued careers in academia still haven’t been able to agree on various aspects of US history. And while I agree that much information found on the internet must be take with many grains of salt, it would be foolish to claim that ALL internet information is suspect and to thus back up one’s claims with just their opinions as you appear to have done. So please cite your sources.
Len,
A degree in any field should indicate at least a background in the subject area. I agree it may not make one an “expert”, let’s assume it generally has some meaning. I offer that if I have a question about biology I would like to know the person has at least studied biology.
Most criminal justice degrees at the BS level include studies in the history of policing. Let’s look at your analogy, I think someone who has a background in engineering is certainly more qualified to understand the principles behind Pyramid construction than I do.
I’m not claiming all information on the Internet is wrong, only all information should be questioned.
I think personal conversations in these areas is clearly better than text comments, so please take no offense if my answers seem inadequate.
The foundation of Policing in America has a long history dating prior to slave patrols. Did slave patrols exist? Yes. Were they the foundation of American policing? No, any more than any vigilante group. American policing dates back to colonial times. Modern policing is attributed to Sir Robert Peel’s model of the London Metropolitan Police.
I find this reminiscent of the argument that the Iroquois Confederacy was the foundation of our US Constitution.
Sounds fun, not true, despite what a number of internet sources say.
Here’s some background on Peel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Peel
According to Google, the German translates to “no good deed goes unpunished.” My Mother, who grew up in both Paris and Vienna, often recited that to me when I was growing up. Let’s face it, the current Administration in DC, with its war on “woke,” DEI, and academic institutions, achieves several agenda items of the far right. One priority is to divide and conquer the country, to distract from other unlawful and self-serving efforts. However, it is also important to note that the damage they are causing will likely take decades to rectify, and I hope the country will return to a government by, and of, the people, including all its people. In Rochester and other similar cities, with as much money and effort by good people, we have never truly bridged the divide between the Black and poor communities and government-run institutions, including the RSCD. I believe that two significant issues are that minority communities are not monolithic in their hopes and desires, and the disparate pockets of voters in those communities have yet to find an effective, visionary leader who listens rather than talks. Just because a politician is Black and grew up in the city, doesn’t mean they can effectively resolve seemingly intractable issues between, for example, the police and some subset of Black citizens. I believe the current police chief is doing a good job, but changing the culture of an organization, by its very nature, often has an us-versus-them ethos, and may take decades to change. I should also make clear that that ethos isn’t White vs Black, but police officers against the people they see breaking the law.
Frank, I agree with what you wrote. I assume in your last sentence you mean you believe the general attitude of the police you would like see changed is one of them versus the community in that they should not view all in the community as law breakers.
Agreed with Howard’s first sentence and Frank.
Because the voters voted for the PAB that doesn’t translate into it being legal. Nor does it mean it was credible. It was doomed from the start by the very way it was conceived, not as an objective fact finding oversight body, but as a means of retribution.
Both the extreme right and extreme left have confused accountability, oversight, and retribution.
We can see how that’s working out on the national level.
To clarify, I never stated it was “legal.” And I agree it was doomed from the start. It was indeed a political ploy by then-Mayor Warren to garner support from her perceived constituency. Perhaps also to reduce her less-than-stellar performance. All residents, visitors, and businesses in the City have public safety as their number one priority, and there have been some high-profile incidents that she thought she could capitalize on. It’s interesting that, as an attorney mandated by a long-time elected official, she conveniently set aside her understanding of civil service law and the Tri-Borough agreement to which NYC and the Big Five are bound.
Frank, I didn’t mean to imply that you said because the public voted for the PAB that it made it legal. That was directed at the director and those who argue that simply because any item was voted in it was legal. A common defense of the PAB is that people voted for it, therefore it must be constitutional and/or legal.
It seems both sides are using this argument lately.
The PAB, as proposed by a previous administration embroiled in a tug of war with police administrators, was doomed from the start. Despite how the proposal was worded and presented to voters, it was a cynical and perennial political ploy to override both civil service law and decades of union bargaining precedent. That’s not to say that there isn’t room for improvement in how civilian complaints are handled and adjudicated by police administrators. In my experience, concerned citizens have more success in influencing how policing is carried out by working collaboratively with the Police Chief and Captains through existing mechanisms than by trying to influence behavior via subjective complaints from the outside. The current police chief has done an exemplary job in gradually addressing long-standing concerns, and the introduction of a new generation of more diverse officers represents a significant improvement over some previous police managers. I’m not a big fan of either the Locust Club or the Rochester Teachers Association, but they have a role that they take seriously, and they have the advantage over both appointed and elected officials, which allows them to have significant longevity and be familiar with every rule and word in their contracts. If citizens want to effect change in how city employees perform their jobs, they need to become elected representatives, familiarize themselves with all relevant laws and agreements, and work cohesively with citizens to incorporate their expectations into contracts. If necessary, they should also engage their state representatives to modify civil service laws. Except for the recent ICE incident, the media have not reported any incidents of inappropriate police-citizen interactions. That’s a good indicator that the existing system is working. As a beleaguered city taxpayer, I believe the money allocated to the PAB could be better spent on fighting homelessness or addressing absentee fathers.
It’s time to pack it up, and call it a day. In spite of the fact that the vast majority of Rochester citizens who participated in the referendum – were crystal clear about wanting the PAB – they are no match for the Thoroughly Racist, Overly-Powerful, Locust Club (Police Union). The PAB has been defeated in every Court decision (there have been several), and will be defeated in the current Appeal. It’s time to stop squandering tax-payers hard-earned money, and develop a different model regarding much-need police accountability. In my humble, but unequivocally-staunch and informed view, as it relates to models of accountability – the Black Panther Party For Self Defense had the right idea. Dave Atias has suggested that the City could handle the Union via negotiations, but obviously Malik’s Administration does NOT have the gumption to tangle with the Locust Club. In fact his Administration is afraid of the Police Union (afraid that if they insist on accountability – there will be an increased WORK-SLOW-DOWN)!!! How sick (only in modern-day-slave town U.S.A.)!!!
“Except for the recent ICE incident, the media have not reported any incidents of inappropriate police-citizen interactions. That’s a good indicator that the existing system is working.” YOU’RE KIDDING – RIGHT???
https://naacp.org/find-resources/history-explained/origins-modern-day-policing