Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Communications Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Community Police Board demands direct access to emails and records; clerk to send member contact list
Summary
Public commenter and board members said city staff were filtering communications to the board; members asked the clerk's office to forward raw messages and establish direct distribution so all members receive communications simultaneously.
Board members and a public commenter raised persistent problems with how emails and public submissions to the Community Police Board are handled, saying messages sent to the board’s public inbox were not always reaching all board members.
Todd Kurzweil, a Commons business owner and public commenter, told the board he had repeatedly tried to send information and that he believed the mayor had “censored” distribution of his messages to the board. Kurzweil said he had asked the clerk whether his emailed materials were forwarded; he said he received no clear response and asked the board for an explicit acknowledgment that messages reach the board.
Board members described inconsistent handling of incoming messages and said the clerk’s office should forward all incoming communications without additional routing through elected officials or other city staff. “The clerk’s office to the chair and nobody else,” said one board member when discussing how the intake should proceed; other members argued all board members should receive incoming messages and the chair should organize them, not serve as a gatekeeper.
City staff explained the board uses a city-controlled intake email account for CPB business and that the account is not itself a distribution list that automatically forwards to all board members; the clerk said the account can be used to forward messages but warned that automatic forwarding may include spam. The clerk committed to send a test message and to circulate a new contact message to the board by the end of the week so members would have a consistent distribution list.
Board members also discussed administrative tools: they recalled past “burn” phones kept at the clerk’s office for investigative use and said they want clear policies for handling complaint calls and records. The clerk agreed to set up a membership distribution and to test forwarding to ensure members receive communications directly.
Why it matters: Board members said direct receipt of messages is essential to independent oversight of the police department. Members said filtering by other city offices undermines that independence and delays response to complaints.
What happens next: The clerk’s office will send a test email, circulate a members’ contact list/distribution, and provide guidance to avoid inadvertent filtering of public submissions.
