EXCHANGEI A L E P

Summer 2004 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT PLANNERS NEWSLETTER Vol 8, No 2

������������� ����������� ��

��� ����������� ��������

�����

�����

The Executive Board has been busy over the last few months working on several items that I

want to share with you.The 2004 Annual Conference in Chicago

is coming together nicely. Brian Scruggs, and the rest of the Illinois Association of Police Planners, are hard at work putting together the final conference details. I encourage you to register via our website at www.ialep.org or call Brian Scruggs at (847) 866-5024 if you havenʼt done so.

The 2005 Annual Conference will be hosted by the Ft. Worth, Texas, Police Department. Marty Humphrey is finalizing the hotel site. In addition, Newport, Rhode Island, will be our conference location in 2006. The Newport Police Department will be assisting us with some of the planning details.

The IALEP Executive Board has received two proposed changes to the by-laws, which will be voted on at the annual conference in Chicago. The major change is the addition of a Training and Certification Coordinator to the Board.

This change, as well as the complete by-laws text, is posted on our website. Additionally, two petitions have been received. Both petitions are unanimously supported by the Board. The two petitions are:

1) Re-name the IALEP Project of the Year Award to the: Chief Phillip E. Keith Project of the Year Award. Chief Keith is retiring after 34 years of service in the Knoxville, Tenn., Police Department and has been instrumental in establishing and supporting our international organization

for many years.2) Nominees running for any vacant

office on the IALEP Executive Board will be required to obtain a letter of endorsement from their Chief Executive Officer. This requirement will benefit the candidate as well as our organization.

Currently, only the Repository Director position has this requirement. By practice, this endorsement has been routinely provided by nominees running for all the board positions for many years, but the requirement had inadvertently been

omitted from the by-laws. Both of these petitions will also be voted on at our annual conference.

In an effort to promote our organization, an IALEP exhibit booth was set up at the 2004 Annual Conference on Criminal Justice Research and Evaluation in Washington, DC. Staff Vice-President John Kapinos and I staffed the booth, and both of us had the opportunity to speak with a number of the conference participants (including several IALEP members) about our organization. Other marketing venues are being considered in the future.

In an effort to have a more timely and consistent newsletter, the Executive Board hired a professional editor, Mr. Tom Kimball of The Light Group, a multi-media company in Denver, Colo.,

who was recommended by John Kapinos. Hopefully, you will like the results.

Finally, as another avenue to promote our organization and tap our collective expertise in law enforcement issues, we have been invited to attend the first joint “Technologies for Public Safety in Critical Incident Response Conference and Exposition” in New Orleans, LA.

The Director of the National Institute of Justice, Sarah Hart, was gracious enough to invite us as their guest. Our Treasurer Dan Anderson will be attending in late

September and representing our organization. Information on the conference is available on-line at www.ctc.org.

Fall Plannerʼs Courses – A fall Plannerʼs Course has been scheduled for November 8-12, 2004 in Newport, RI. Additionally, by popular demand, an Advanced Staffing Analysis Course and will be offered on November 11-12, 2004 in Newport. Information is available on our website. So mark your calendars!

A final note to share is to remind you that we have two Executive Board position openings next year: Staff Vice-President and Secretary. If the Training and Certification Coordinator position is approved as proposed in the by-law changes, we will have three positions to fill effective January 1, 2005.

The time commitment is manageable with an average weekly commitment of a couple of hours each week along with the mid-year Board meeting and annual conference. Specific duties and responsibilities are listed in the by-laws.

If you are interested or if you have any further questions, please contact one of the Board members. Elections will take place at the annual conference in Chicago.

I look forward to seeing you all in the Windy City in September!

By Tom Pulaski, IALEP PresidentPrince William County (VA) Police Department

IALEP president urges members to attend

2

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 3

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

PresidentTom PulaskiPrince William County Police DepartmentPrince William, Virginia(703) 792-6671tpulaski@pwcgov.org

Executive Vice PresidentMarty LegéNorth Texas Tollway AuthorityPlano, Texas(214) 224-2231mlege@ntta.org

Staff Vice PresidentJohn KapinosMontgomery County Department of PoliceBethesda, Maryland(301) 657-0137john.kapinos@montgomerycountymd.gov

Past PresidentBarry HorrobinWindsor Police ServiceWindsor, Ontario, Canada(519) 255-6866bhorrobin@police.windsor.on.ca

TreasurerDan AndersonSaint Paul Police DepartmentSt. Paul, Minnesota(651) 266-5514dan.anderson@ci.stpaul.mn.us

SecretaryNavin PuriNorth Carolina Governorʼs Crime CommissionRaleigh, North Carolina(919) 733-4564navin.puri@ncmail.net

Chapter RepresentativeMichael HeckelmanUSC Dept. of Public SafetyLos Angeles, California(213) 740-5927mheckelman@caps.usc.edu

Repository DirectorPhil JohnsonKansas City Police DepartmentKansas City, Missouri(816) 889-6049pjohnson@kcpd.org

IALEP Contact InfoInternational Association of Law Enforcement PlannersP.O. Box 11437Torrance, CA 90510-1437(310) 225-5148www.ialep.org

2004 IALEP EXECUTIVE BOARD

LaVada Charbonneau, 59, a 24-year DPS employee, passed away July 8

in Glendale from complications associated with acute pancreatitis.

A memorial service for Mrs. Charbonneau, an administrative services officer at DPS, was conducted July 13

at the Shepherd of the Valley United Methodist Church in Phoenix.

During her career with the Department, Mrs. Charbonneau received the 1997 Arizona Administrators Association employee of the year award for updating an informative manual given to new employees and for developing and implementing an orientation program for new employees.

Additionally, the award recognized her for creating a program by which civilian employees at DPS received recognition upon promotion. The Oakland, Calif., native who was reared in Oklahoma began her career with the Department as an identification clerk in May 1980. She was promoted to criminal records supervisor in August 1983 and then in 1987 to her last position as an analyst with Research and Planning where she assisted in various departmental surveys among her other responsibilities.

During her DPS career, the Phoenix resident served as editor/writer for the DPS annual report and in recent years assisted in the compilation of charts and statistics for this report.

In 1999, she coordinated the development of the “Crime Trends in Arizona” report and two years later played a pivotal role in the formulation of the Departmentʼs 2001 Strategic Plan.

On at least one occasion, she also was active with the State Employees Charitable

Campaign within DPS. In the early 1990s, she was the agencyʼs employee suggestion program coordinator.

In recent years, Mrs. Charbonneau served on the LEMSC Rules Advisory Committee and was considered an authority on General Orders issues.

Mrs. Charbonneau also was recognized for her work with the International Association of Law Enforcement Planners.

A certified advanced law enforcement planner, Mrs. Charbonneau earned a bachelorʼs degree in English Literature from Oklahoma State University, Stillwater.

She is survived by her husband of 35 years, Karl, two children, Ryan and Sara, and two grandchildren, Kayleigh and Nicholas. Also surviving are her parents, a brother, and a sister.

The family requests donations to your charity of choice or to the ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome) Support Center, 7172 Regional Street, #278, Dublin, CA 94568.

In Memoriam - goodbye to a colleague

2

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 3

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

IALEP 2004 Annual Training ConferenceThe 2004 International Association

of Law Enforcement Plannerʼs Annual Training Conference will

be held in Chicago September 19 through 24 at the Hyatt Regency Chicago Hotel on the Riverwalk. The Illinois Association of Police Planners in association with Northwestern Universityʼs Center for Public Safety (formerly the Traffic Institute in Evanston) will host this yearʼs event.

“Our conference will include many of the same features enjoyed at our past annual c o n f e r e n c e s —n e t w o r k i n g , speakers, exhibits, social events, and more,” said IALEP President, Tom Pulaski. “Networking with your colleagues from coast to coast – and beyond our borders – is our primary association service and one of the most important reasons we attend conferences.”

Conference attendees will learn about what other agencies are doing and how they do it, get fresh points of view, gain new contacts, and discover new resources. As usual, there will be many opportunities – both structured and informal – for meeting colleagues from other agencies and renewing old acquaintances, including roundtable discussions, member presentations, new member lunch, all member lunch, receptions/hospitality and after-hours events. The conference will culminate with the annual banquet, celebrating camaraderie and recognizing member accomplishments.

Speakers will address a variety of law enforcement issues, touching on current “hot topic” issues, successful programs, new technology, resources for police planners, legal issues and more. Some tentative topics are: Starting a Multiple-Agency Task Force; Incident Command Planning; Police Based-Social Workers; Tracking Bias-Based Profiling; Computer Crime/Identity Theft; Computer Forensics; Legal Issues; Event Planning Workshop (chapter meetings and conferences); Resources for Planning and Research Workshop; and Police Networking.

Vendors will set up exhibits displaying their latest equipment and products. Product representatives will be available to answer questions and provide demonstrations.

The current lists of speakers, topics, and exhibitors are available at the IALEP Website: www.ialep.org.

“We have many important issues to discuss at our general business meetings to keep our association vital and growing,”

Pulaski said. “As a member-based and member-driven organization, we need an involved, active membership to achieve our goals. I encourage everyone to attend these meetings and contribute your ideas and time to the association. We all benefit from our collective efforts.”

A Registration Form is provided on the IALEP Web site for you to print or download to a file. Just fill in the form, choosing the fees applicable to your attendance, and mail it with your payment to the address on the form.

Registrations should be mailed to IALEP not later than September 3. Attendees registering after that will be charged a higher registration fee to cover expenses for making last-minute additions to meals, refreshments, and other events or purchases with pre-conference deadlines.

IALEP welcomes the guests of our members to attend the member lunches, the Thursday banquet, and other social functions at the conference. A single fee of $75 per guest will cover all these events. Children under 16 may attend the lunch and banquet free. Please list your guests and children who will be attending these events on the registration form, so we may be prepared to serve them.

The Hyatt Regency Chicago “On the Riverwalk” is the official site of the 2004

IALEP Conference. The Hyatt with is located in the heart of Chicago, overlooking the Chicago River, Lake Michigan, Grant Park, and the “Loop.”

Members should make their reservations not later than August 30 directly to the Hyatt Regency Chicago at 151 East Wacker Drive, Chicago, IL 60601, by calling (800) 233-1234 or on the Internet at www.chicagohyatt.com.

The Hyatt has deeply discounted their nightly room rates for IALEP C o n f e r e n c e attendees and their guests. Attendees should ask for the IALEP Conference rate when making reservations.

The Hyatt does not guarantee room availability after August 30.

If rooms are still available, however, the discounted IALEP Conference Room Rates will be honored.

The 2004 IALEP Conference Schedule:Sunday, September 19: Registration,

Welcome ReceptionMonday, September 20: Opening

Ceremonies, Keynote Speaker, General Business Meeting, Part I, Exhibits, New Member Lunch, Speakers/Workshops, Exhibits, Social Event.

Tuesday, September 21: Speakers/Workshops, Exhibits, Conference Lunch, Speakers/Workshops, Exhibits, Roundtable, Hospitality/Pin & Patch.

Wednesday, September 22: Speakers/Workshops, Exhibits, Chicago Activities TBA.

Thursday, September 23: Speakers/Workshops, Exhibits, Lunch On Your Own, Speakers/Workshops, Exhibits, General Business Meeting, Part II, Conference Reception & Banquet.

Friday, September 24: Speaker/Workshop TBA, Chapter Meetings, IALEP Board Meeting, Member Committee Meetings, Conference Planning Committee.

For more information, please visit the IALEP Website or call Brian Scruggs at (847) 866.5024, or email him at bscruggs@cityofevanston.org.

4

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 5

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

The 1995 Criminal Justice Information Network (CJIN) Study Report, conducted by Price Waterhouse, noted an inability of law enforcement and other public safety agencies to communicate

on a statewide basis. The study asserted that there was a growing need for law enforcement agencies to be able to more quickly access simple driverʼs license and vehicle registration information to the more complete criminal history data and photo images such as driverʼs license photos. The study also noted a need for automating an officerʼs incident, accident and citation report writing capabilities.

One of the recommended solutions was to equip patrol vehicles with mobile data computers (MDCs) which would allow officers to run their own criminal and vehicle queries, without requiring dispatcher assistance, and to enable officers to electronically complete and submit much of their required paperwork. Benefits of placing these MDCs in law enforcement vehicles were said to include: the reduction of data entry errors and redundant data entry, a rapid return of Division of Criminal Information (DCI) data immediately back to the officer, thus reducing the number of criminal and vehicle queries which at that time went through the agencyʼs dispatchers, as well as allowing officers to be able to allocate more time on patrol versus report writing. Other benefits included: improving officer safety, the possibility of recovering more stolen property and vehicles and the immediate sharing of information between officers in the same agency, as well as across divergent law enforcement agencies.

The authors of the CJIN Study Report further noted that there

was a lack of statewide standards and definitions in this area with considerable funds being expended in an uncoordinated fashion. These deficiencies contributed to a situation in which multiple communication pockets were springing up across North Carolina; pockets which were not technologically suited for statewide communications and could not be interconnected in a simple and straightforward manner.

Shortly thereafter the North Carolina State Highway Patrol began developing a statewide 800 MegaHertz mobile data network infrastructure which would enable all participating law enforcement agencies to truly communicate with each other. This CJIN mobile data network (CJIN-MDN) would alleviate the uncoordinated, and incompatible, communications systems that were springing up across the state.

In an effort to support this statewide initiative, and enable local law enforcement agencies to tap into the CJIN-MDN, the Information Systems and Technology Committee of the Governorʼs Crime Commission, began providing federal grant funds for purchasing MDCs. Original funding for these devices

began in 1996 and by 1998 mobile data computers were one of the committeeʼs top policy and program development priorities. The committee sought to provide funding for these devices to as many law enforcement agencies as possible and to place the devices in as many counties as possible. Given this goal, and the limited amount of federal funds which were available, the committee imposed funding caps which specified the maximum dollar amount to be awarded per device

and established a funding ratio of no more than one device for every ten sworn officers. The committeeʼs intent was to enable agencies to obtain a number of MDCs, versus outfitting the entire department, and then demonstrate their utility to local governmental officials who would hopefully provide the necessary remaining funds to equip each patrol vehicle with an MDC. The committee also endorsed the Highway Patrolʼs effort, to develop a statewide and integrated mobile data network, by strongly encouraging, and often requiring via grant special conditions, that the MDC grant recipients establish connectivity to the CJIN-MDN.

Technology on PatrolAn evaluation of Mobile Data Computers in Law Enforcement Vehicles

By Adam Byrd, University of North Carolina Summer Intern; Navin Puri, Information Systems Planner, Gov-ernor’s Crime Commission; and Douglas L. Yearwood, Director, N.C. Criminal Justice Analysis Center

Editor s̓ Note: This article was previously published in the Winter 2003 edition of North Carolina Police Officer Magazine and is reproduced here with the permission of the NCPOM editor.

Introduction/Study Rationale

See Tech Patrol on page 5...

4

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 5

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

Since 1996 the Information Systems and Technology Committee has awarded 315 separate MDC grants, to 217 distinct law enforcement and public safety agencies, with a total Federal Byrne fund allocation of $ 9,646,150. These 217 recipient agencies represent roughly one-half of the stateʼs law enforcement and public safety agencies. These grant awards have placed at least 1,473 MDCs in 82 of the stateʼs 100 counties and, as of April 2003, represent 25.6 percent of the total 5,758 mobile data computers which are connected to the CJIN-MDN 800 MegaHertz infrastructure.

This report presents the findings of a process and impact evaluation which was conducted in an effort to evaluate the efficacy of mobile data computers in law enforcement patrol vehicles. The study sought to ascertain evaluative information on the process of acquiring and installing these devices in patrol vehicles; as well as to obtain both qualitative and quantitative data on the reported benefits of these devices for the law enforcement professional. Questions were designed to identify both strengths and weaknesses surrounding the process of acquiring these devices and to elicit the impact of MDCs on the proported benefits of these devices as outlined in the 1995 CJIN study.

Methods

Tech Patrol...cont from page 4

Study Survey

A two-part 27-item survey instrument was designed which included both process and impact related questions. Part

one included items which sought to determine the number of MDCs in the agency, where they are located and how they were obtained. Questions also inquired about the acquisition and installation process and any difficulties that were encountered during this early period of program operation. Several questions were also included to determine the level of satisfaction with the Highway Patrolʼs customer service representatives and its overall CJIN-MDN service provision.

Part two sought to determine what impact MDCs have had on a variety of measures including: officer safety, report writing, intradepartmental and interagency communications, identifying suspects and recovering stolen property. Questions were also included which sought to ascertain how the use of MDCs has affected agency dispatchers; specifically to determine if MDCs have reduced the number of dispatcher transmissions related to running criminal history and vehicle checks.

Study SampleAll 217 law enforcement agencies that received Federal Byrne

funds, for MDC grants, during the years 1996-2002 comprised the study universe. 2003 MDC grantees were excluded since their grant awards would not become active until July 1, 2003 and consequently would not be able to adequately respond to the questionnaire. A list of the applicable MDC grantees was generated from the Crime Commissionʼs Grants Management System (GMS) and used to select the study sample. A 15 percent

random sample was drawn producing a list of 34 agencies that had received MDC funding during the 1996-2002 study period. A combination of phone calls and faxes were used to administer the survey to the selected 34 agencies with a 100 percent response rate being obtained.

ResultsThe Governorʼs Crime Commission (GCC) funded

approximately 40% of the total MDCs of the agencies surveyed. This percentage is consistent with the Information Systems and Technology Committeeʼs intentions because a preset goal was to fund a small percentage of MDCs and let each particular agency build support and fund the remaining MDCs to meet its needs. This 40% is higher than the 25.6% mentioned in the introduction because that smaller percentage represents the percentage of MDCs actually connected to the CJIN Mobile Data Network. The discrepancy comes in the fact that not all of the MDCs and its components are connected to the CJIN Mobile Data Network. Some are connected to a private network (i.e. Greensboro PD) and some are used as stand alone devices for writing reports and performing other functions unique to the department.

The GCCʼs allocation of grant money for MDCs has been widespread and wisely spent. Based on the survey results, the average agency received funds for eight MDCs from the GCC and the number of MDCs funded by the GCC ranged from two to twenty-three. These numbers reflect the GCCʼs efforts to spread the funding among small and large agencies alike.

Since the Governorʼs Crime Commission did not fund all of the MDCs for each agency, a question on the survey inquired about the funding sources that were used to purchase additional MDCs. As Figure 1 demonstrates seventy-nine percent of the respondents answered that local funds were used. The remaining funding sources are as follows: 6%-State Funding, 12%-Additional Federal Funding, 3%-not sure of the fund source. Below is a pie chart that illustrates the breakdown of funding by source.

See Tech Patrol on page 6...

��

��

���

���

����� �����

����� ������� �������

����� �������

��� ����

������ �� ���������� ������� �������

6

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 7

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

Tech Patrol & MDCs ...cont from page 5

The grants were activated on July 1 of each grant year. At that time, each agency was ready to place procurement

bids and decide which vendor would supply their equipment and software. After accepting bids from different vendors, the agency would decide with which vendor to sign a contract and make arrangements for installation. The range of time for the entire process, from grant activation to installation, was from one month to one year; however, the average time frame was about five months. When the respondents were asked to rank the difficulty they had in procuring their MDCs on a scale of 1-10, with 1 being “not difficult” and 10 being “very difficult”, the average rating was three.

One goal of the GCC was to have grant recipients use the CJIN Mobile Data Network. The survey results supported this goal. The results showed that 97% of the respondents are connected to and use the CJIN Mobile Data Network. The only exception was the Greensboro Police Department, which is connected to a private network because of its large size, using 190 MDCs. Regarding the CJIN/SHP MDN, everyone has been pleased with the mobile data service and the help desk support service. Although everyone who answered was satisfied overall, some respondents complained of temporary dead time or patchy dead signal areas.

Usage of the mobile data computers is an important point. Based on the survey results, 97% of the officers who are using the computers are certified to use them by the Division of Criminal Information. Study findings indicate that only 13% of all MDC users needed any general computer or Windows training. As low as that number is, 13% does not accurately illustrate the actual need for this training. One agency put all officers through a standard computer-training program, forcing that agency to answer that 100% of its officers required training. A few small agencies had just a few officers to undergo training, but because their total agency is small in number, that agencyʼs percentage answer for this question was higher.

The location of the MDCs as well as the type of computers

that are needed and are being bought is another point of interest. The survey reflected that 93% of MDCs in use are located in line officer patrol vehicles. This statistic shows that the overwhelming number of MDCs are being used everyday, on every shift, and by the officers who need them the most. The other 7% of MDCs are located in the vehicles of investigators, narcotics officers, mobile response units, or in department command centers. The two types of computers that are being bought for mobile data law enforcement are ruggedized or nonruggedized. The nonruggedized computers are basic laptops

Based on the survey results, 97% of the officers who are using the computers are certified to use them by the Division of Criminal

Information.

similar to what other business professionals and personal users carry. Ruggedized computers are heavy-duty computers that are designed to withstand extreme contact, vibration, and heat. The percentage breakdown of types of computers bought by the respondents is as follows: 82%-ruggedized, 6%-nonruggedized, 12%-combination of both types within agency. The pie chart below gives a visual representation of the responses.

Impact of Mobile Data Computers

A major benefit of mobile data computers is the time saved in the report-writing process. Currently in North

Carolina, approximately half of the agencies surveyed have the appropriate software and are capable of using MDCs to write reports. The minimum amount of time saved by the MDCs in the survey was fifteen minutes per report. The largest amount of time saved was reported to be one hundred hours per month for the entire department. The minutes and hours that are saved because of the report-writing capabilities of mobile data computers are now being spent on patrol instead of in the office. As a result, there is more police visibility in the community, quicker response to calls, and more officers available to backup other officers. All of these results lead to more effective and efficient local law enforcement.

Communication is one of the most important features of mobile data computers and their wireless capabilities. An item on the survey asked respondents about the frequency with which their agency communicates with officers of other agencies.

The first part of this question asked: “How often do your officers use MDCs to communicate with officers from other agencies in your county?” The responses were as follows: 73%-daily, 15%-weekly, 9% monthly, 3%-never. The responses support the idea that MDCs are vitally important for communications and data sharing within a county. Figure 3 on page 7 presents a visual representation of the responses.

See Tech Patrol on page 7...

���

��

�������������

��������������

�����������

������ ������� �� ���������

6

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 7

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

Tech Patrol...cont from page 6

The second part of the question asked: “How often do your officers use MDCs to communicate with officers from other agencies in other counties?” The responses were as follows: 18%-daily, 32%-weekly, 38%-monthly, 12%-never. Intercounty communication doesnʼt occur as frequently as intracounty communication because intracounty communication involves daily functional communications. Adversely, intercounty communication usually occurs in times of special need such as finding an escaped inmate, a wanted criminal, or other emergency situations. Although the MDCs are not used as frequently for intercounty communication, the responses to this question show that the wireless communication capabilities are still needed (Refer to Figure 4).

All of the respondents agreed that the MDCs have helped to improve officer safety and that their officers feel safer and more prepared now than in the past without MDCs. When asked the ways that the MDCs have helped to improve officer safety, the responses clustered into three groups: 68%- the officer has immediate access to important information, 38%-the officer has better knowledge of a situation and can call for backup if needed, 15%-officer location and actions are not broadcast over the radio, thus preventing citizens who use commercial scanners from receiving this information.1

Agencies across the state of different sizes and with different needs have benefitted from using mobile data computers. A question in the survey targeted those benefits and grouped them into several distinct response choices. The major benefits and the number of agencies who have received these benefits are as follows: 85%-recover a stolen vehicle, 97%-verify illegal car tags and driver, 91%-apprehend a wanted criminal, 68%-protect the life of an officer (Refer to Figure 5). Other ways that agencies have benefited from the MDCs are to help crack an unsolved case, to help recover guns and stolen property, and to locate missing persons.

Below are a few quotes that exemplify the usefulness of and the necessity for MDCs:

“An officer was running car tags at a hotel on his MDC and discovered one particular car to be stolen. The car thief was caught and later convicted of murder in Virginia.”

“An MDC helped to apprehend a criminal with a federal warrant.”

“An officer using an MDC apprehended a wanted man from New Jersey using an MDC. He was later convicted of murder.”

“Using MDCs, we were able to communicate with another police department to apprehend a criminal wanted in another county.”

See Tech Patrol on page 6...

���

���

��

��

������ �� ������������� ���� �����

�����

������

�������

�����

���

���

���

��������

�����

������ �� ������������� ���� ����� ��������

������

�������

�

��

��

��

��

���

������ ����� ��������

���������������������

���������������������������

���� ��� ����� ������������

�������������������������

��������������������

8

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 9

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

No one has seen any unintended negative consequences of having MDCs in patrol vehicles. However, some have reported the possible danger that exists if the airbags were to deploy with the laptop open, although none of the responding agencies ̓officers actually experienced this during a collision.

Effectiveness of mobile data computers is a critical point of focus in the consideration of GCC funding. The last four questions of the survey specifically targeted the effectiveness of MDCs by asking the respondents to rate how effective the MDCs have been in certain areas of law enforcement such as freeing time for patrol versus handwriting reports, reducing radio airtime for dispatchers, identifying suspects, and locating stolen property and discovering outstanding warrants. When asked to rate the effectiveness of MDCs in these particular areas on a scale of one to ten, with ten being the most effective, the mean answer for each item was 7 or higher. The responses to these questions validate the positive effect MDCs have had on local law enforcement as well as the constantly growing need for them. The bar chart below illustrates the figures and data just described. Recommendations

The Division of Criminal Information currently charges law enforcement agencies $6 per terminal per month to use the CJIN/MDN. All respondents stated that their agency was functioning well at the current DCI fee schedule. When asked about a DCI fee increase, most respondents indicated that any increase would be a difficult budget adjustment, especially an increase of any significant amount. Survey respondents were asked to hypothetically give an approximate dollar amount at which their agency would be forced to discontinue using some or all of its MDCs if the DCI fee was increased. The median of the respondents ̓answers was $11 indicating the extent to which a hypothetical fee increase would impact their operational and budgetary capacities. See Tech Patrol on page 9...

Based upon the study results, and respondent input, a series of policy implications and recommendations are offered below in an effort to benefit the GCCʼs Information Systems and Technology Committee.

After researching possible improvements for the software, communications, and network capabilities of mobile data computers, a list of recommendations was compiled. The final question of the survey directly asked the respondents if they agreed which of these features would make MDCs more helpful or more useful to them and their agency. The recommendations and the percent agreement are listed below.

77%-involve officers and other users in the system design process

Many officers and administrators believed that involving the personnel who use the computers on a regular basis for input and design ideas is very sensible. This involvement would lead to efficient improvement in areas such as laptop mounting convenience, software that is user-friendly, and control panels that are easy to operate.

79%-voice-activated softwareThis software provides huge benefits with only one real

drawback. Voice-activated software drastically improves an officerʼs ability to safely and quickly perform communication functions and write reports while driving. By speaking into a microphone instead of typing on a keyboard, an officer can drive and perform the needed functions without pulling to the side of the road. The only real drawback is the cost of voice-activated software. This high-priced software can be cost prohibitive given the fact that the agency has already purchased several laptops, hardware, and other software.

79%-back-lit keyboards Many agencies already use backlit keyboards and are satisfied

with them. A large majority of the respondents agreed that back-lit keyboards would be very helpful for officers who are

Tech Patrol 2004 ...cont from page 7

� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��

������ �� ��� �������������

������� ���� ��� ������

�������� ����� �������

����������� ��������

�������� ������ ������������������� ����������� ��������

8

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 9

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

Tech Patrol...cont from page 8patrolling on night shifts. With these keyboards, officers can see the keys to type without having to turn on the overhead light in the car.

100%-availability of Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) photographs

Respondents unanimously agreed that being able to access DMV photographs would be helpful. Currently, most agencies can only access their respective agencyʼs database of mugshots. The availability of DMV photographs, and consequently digital images of all licensed drivers in the state, would minimize cases of mistaken identity, deter suspects from providing fictitious names and expedite the process of offender verification on site.

76%-text only email feature An email feature is attractive because of its compatibility.

Any officer with Internet access can email any other officer with Internet access. Types of connections, types of computers, and location are irrelevant.

Below are additional suggestions made by respondents: Touch screensTouch screens would be beneficial for two main reasons. One,

the touch options on the screen would be larger than the keys on a keyboard making it easier for the officers to operate the computer. Two, the keyboard would be eliminated, thus creating more space in the car and less hardware to possibly malfunction.

Hand-held devicesHand-held devices would enable the officer to use the same

communications and report-writing capabilities on the scene rather than being confined to the patrol vehicle.

Messaging programsInstant messaging programs would allow instant

communication between officers. Instant communication can be beneficial in emergency situations and is wanted by the line patrol officers. However, administrators fear that the instant communication feature will be abused by officers who will engage in idle, non-work related chat while on patrol.

Digitized city maps for faster response routesMore 800 MegaHertz towers for better receptionKeeping in mind the relative youth of mobile data technology

for the previously mentioned suggestions for improvement, the benefits of mobile data computers are immeasurable. Despite varied percentages and responses, all respondents expressed a tremendous need for mobile data computers, as well as their benefits for law enforcement. The Information Systems and Technology Committee should continue to list MDCs as one of its policy and program development priorities targeting those agencies that currently possess few or no MDCs. The Governorʼs Crime Commission should continue to act as a champion for interoperable communications enhancements for all public safety agencies across North Carolina.

References:Price Waterhouse (April 7, 1995). Criminal Justice Information Network

Study: Final Report. Raleigh: N.C. (Footnotes)1 The percentages for this question exceed 100% when added because multiple

and responses were allowed.

10

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 11

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

The Police Executive Research Forum has just released a free document, supported by the

Community Oriented Policing Services Office, that provides law enforcement analysts and other researchers with information on how to responsibly interpret the vehicle stop data collected by agencies to assess whether officers ̓ stop decisions are biased by race or ethnicity. Conferences to be held this summer will similarly provide guidance to people inside and outside of agencies who are analyzing vehicle stop data.

By the Numbers: A Guide for Analyzing Race Data from Vehicle Stops, (a report written by the author), details what data sets to collect, how long to compile them before analysis, and how to promote data quality. It explains various benchmarking methods for analyzing data—researchers ̓attempts to construct a comparison group that accurately represents the drivers at risk of being stopped by police if no bias exists.

This group is compared to the group of drivers actually stopped to help determine whether racial bias may have been a factor in police officers ̓decision-making process. The report explains how the strongest benchmarks consider variations in driving quality, driving quantity, and driving location. It lays out the capabilities and limitations of each method, and ultimately recommends that data collection results be used more to initiate meaningful dialogues with citizens and other stakeholders than as the sole measure of whether racial bias exists.

An unknown but large number of agencies are collecting data on various types of stops made by police to assess whether their line personnel are inappropriately using race or ethnicity as factors in their decision making. Some are collecting the data voluntarily; others are required by local mandate or state legislation to do so. The agencies collecting data generally

PERF Issues Guide to Analyzing Race Data from Vehicle Stops

require officers to report information on all traffic-related stops or on all vehicle stops (that is, traffic-related stops and stops to investigate a possible crime). The information collected by officers includes the race/ethnicity of the driver and other information about the stop, such as the reasons for the stop, the disposition of the stop (a citation or warning, for example), whether a search was conducted, and the outcome of the search.

Although jurisdictions nationwide have invested considerable resources to collect race data from vehicle stops, many jurisdictions do not know how to analyze the collected data properly. According to Fridell, “In jurisdictions across the country, reports prepared by agencies or external groups (for example, civil rights groups) draw conclusions wholly unsupported by the data.” The purpose of By the Numbers is to provide the guidance that is needed so that agencies and stakeholder groups can select the best methods that their resources will support and interpret results responsibly based on the strengths and weaknesses of their chosen methods.

It is not difficult to measure whether there is disparity between racial/ethnic groups in stops made by police; the difficulty comes in identifying the causes for any identified disparity. For instance, many jurisdictions conduct “census benchmarking.” These jurisdictions compare the demographic profile of people stopped by police to the demographic profile of residents as measured by the census. The results might show “disparity”; that is, the results might show that some groups are stopped disproportionate to their representation in the residential population. The jurisdiction, cannot, however, identify the causes of the disparity using this method; the jurisdiction cannot draw conclusions regarding the existence or lack of bias in policing.

A number of factors other than bias can legitimately impact on the rates at which different demographic groups are stopped by police. Key factors include driving quantity, quality and location. According to Fridell, “Everyone is not at equal risk of being stopped by police. The more

they drive, the more at risk they are. The more they drive poorly, the more at risk they are. The more they drive in areas with high police stopping activity, the more at risk they are.” The strongest benchmarks take into consideration variations across groups in driving quantity, quality and location. The more of these factors that a benchmarking method encompasses, the stronger the method.

Chapters one through four explain the conceptual challenge of benchmarking, describe and provide guidance for the early decisions that agencies must make when they begin collecting data (for instance, what activities to target, what elements to collect, whether to partner with residents and/or social scientists), and set forth the factors to consider when selecting a benchmark. Additionally, the importance of implementing processes to ensure data quality is highlighted and various methods for this set forth.

These last six chapters of Volume One describe how to implement various benchmarking methods and the strengths and weaknesses of each. These are:

Chapter 5: Benchmarking with Adjusted Census Data

Chapter 6: Benchmarking with DMV Data

Chapter 7: Benchmarking with Data from “Blind” Enforcement Mechanisms

Chapter 8: Benchmarking with Data for Matched Officers or Matched Groups of Officers

Chapter 9: Observation BenchmarkingChapter 10: Other Benchmarking Coming this Spring are the final three

chapters that will provide guidance on analyzing post-stop activities (for instance, searches), calculating levels of disparity, and using the data for reform.

Many agencies and interest groups are inappropriately drawing conclusions regarding bias in searches.

There are no conclusions regarding bias that can be drawn from information on the percentage of each racial group that was

By Dr. Lorie FridellResearch DirectorPolice Executive Research Forum

See PERF Guide on page 11...

10

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 11

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

searched.However, unequal hit rates for

discretionary searches should lead an agency to review further the search decisions made by officers.

The “hit rate” is the percentage of searches that produce contraband or other evidence. A lower hit rate for minority searches compared to Caucasian searches, while not proof of racially biased policing, is a legitimate cause for concern and further exploration.

The 300-plus page guide can be downloaded at no cost from the PERF website (see “racially biased policing” at http://policeforum.mn-8.net/). It builds on

a previous PERF publication, also funded by the COPS Office and also available on the website, entitled Racially Biased Policing: A Principled Response.

That book encourages police and community leaders to address the issues of racially biased policing and the perceptions of its practice through supervision/accountability, policy, education/training, recruitment/hiring, and community outreach.

To facilitate dissemination of the contents of By the Numbers, the COPS Office funded PERF held two conferences on analyzing vehicle stop data July 13-14 in Las Vegas and August 24-25 in Kansas City, MO. These conferences were targeted

toward researchers who are analyzing the data collected by law enforcement agencies. This would include personnel within law enforcement research units, social scientist partners of law enforcement agencies and researchers associated with other stakeholder groups that are analyzing law enforcement data. The topics covered are similar to those addressed in By the Numbers described above.

Plenary speakers and workshop facilitators included the author of By the Numbers and the top social scientists in the country working in this area of research.

Editor s̓ Note: Dr. Lorie Fridell is scheduled to present on the topics discussed in this article at the IALEP Annual Training

PERF Guide: By the Numbers now available onlineContinued from page 10

IALEP Strategic Business Plan Supplement

On April 3, 2004, the IALEP Executive Board reviewed the April 2003 version of the Strategic Business Plan. This supplement served the Board well last year and the

Board reviewed and updated the Strategic Business Plan for 2004. This supplement will serve as the Board’s goals and objectives for the upcoming year.

The Board will keep the original May 2000 version for historical reference and for the archives, but the Board will work very hard to try to achieve the following goals and objectives. The Board will retain the mission statement that was developed last year and this year the Board will focus on four goals with strategies that can be achieved in this new supplement.

The Board reviewed the entire Strategic Business Plan and will add the following supplement.

Members of the Board who participated were: Tom Pulaski, President; Marty Legeʼ, Executive Vice President; John Kapinos, Staff Vice President; Dan Anderson, Treasurer; Phil Johnson, Repository Director; Michael Heckelman, Chapter Representative; Barry Horrobin, Past President; and Navin Puri Secretary.

Mission StatementThe International Association of Law Enforcement Planners

will be the most valued information resource for the entire law enforcement community worldwide in the fields of planning, research, and other administrative responsibilities.

Goal 1: Focus our energy and resources on serving our members.

Strategies for Goal 1• To continue to respond to member inquiries in a timely

manner.• Conduct needs assessment of the membership.• Use List Server, the Exchange, and Personal Contact to

increase communication between the Executive Board and the General Membership.

• Promote chapter membership and activity.• Make Executive Board more accessible to IALEP

members throughout the year.

Goal 2: Increase the value of IALEP membershipby developing new products and services.

Strategies for Goal 2• Continue two (2) Plannerʼs Courses each year.• Explore opportunities for partnership with related

association.• Encourage use of existing databases as an internal

referral service. (Speakers Bureau, Area Expertise, Consultations)

• Implement initial modules of more advanced training in selected topics.

• Continue to explore alternative modes of delivering training and programs.

• Review Certification Requirements.• Maintain The Exchange newsletter on a quarterly basis.

Goal 3: To increase awareness of the Organization.Strategies for Goal 3

• Explore working with a marketing consultant to help develop and implement a marketing strategy for the Association.

• Procure material i.e. graphics, text, and informational brochures for use on the table-top display.

• Explore costs and types of promotional items as part of the recruitment effort.

• Provide bulk promotional materials to the Chapters.

Goal 4: To expand IALEP membershipStrategies for Goal 4

• Develop new methods for recruiting and retaining members.

• Assist existing chapters in increasing membership and expanding chapter activities.

• Promote establishment of new chapters.• Support and assist chapters with appropriate resources.

12

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 13

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

MID-YEAR EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETINGAPRIL 1, 2004

(DAY 1)

On Thursday, April 1, 2004, a meeting of the Executive Board of the INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT PLANNERS, a Missouri Nonprofit Corporation, was held at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in the City of Newport, Rhode Island. The following Executive Board members were present: President Tom Pulaski, Executive Vice-President Marty Lege’, Staff Vice-President John Kapinos, Past President Barry Horrobin, Repository Director Phil Johnson, Chapter Representative Michael Heckelman, Treasurer Dan Anderson, and Secretary Navin Puri.

2003 Colorado Springs Conference Closeout Report

President Tom Pulaski welcomed the board and opened the meeting at 8:30a.m. The minutes from the last Executive and General Membership meetings in September 2003 were signed prior to the meeting and approved as written in the last edition of The Exchange. The agenda for the next three days will be slightly modified due to scheduled site visits and meetings with various persons during the week and the agenda will be adjusted as the meeting is conducted. One goal of this mid-year meeting is to visit some possible sites for the 2006 Conference.

Tom Pulaski and Barry Horrobin then gave the closeout report from the 2003 Colorado Springs Annual Training Conference. The conference was a great success and there were 68 registered attendees from several different states and a few countries. The event did well financially. There was a sufficient balance after the expenses and vendors were paid for. The format of holding only 2 sessions per class period did very well. It kept the attendees interested in different sessions throughout the day. The feedback indicated that most participants greatly enjoyed the conference and the various topics that were offered. The majority seemed very happy with the layout of the hotel and the various activities that were available during the week. The Chicago Conference Committee will try to use the model that was offered in Colorado Springs.

The Board also discussed the idea of giving something back to Colorado Springs as a thank you for their great success with this conference. IALEP is a non-profit association, so the board will look at a possible charitable donation to a local Police Athletic League or a Volunteer Corp that works with the Colorado Springs Police Department. The Board will continue to explore this possibility.

Site Visit with Hyatt RegencyHotel

The Board then met with Lisa Gross, Sales Manager; Yvette Eichner, Director of Sales; and Tom Delaney, General Manager of the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Newport. A preliminary proposal was given to the Board from the hotel as a potential site for the 2006 Annual Training Conference. The Hyatt will offer the government rate during the weeks in September and October that may be utilized by the IALEP Conference.

The Board was given a tour of the hotel’s guestrooms, conference center, restaurant, and outdoor pavilion. The hotel also has a spa on sight, as well as an indoor pool and exercise rooms. The hotel is uniquely situated on an island away from the downtown area, but has shuttles that are continually taking guests from the hotel into the downtown area.

Site Visit with Hotel Viking

The Board then conducted a site visit of the Hotel Viking. The Board met with Marie Soliday, Sales Manager for the Hotel Viking. The Hotel Viking is situated in the downtown area of Newport and is a historic landmark. The Hotel was opened in 1926. The Hotel Viking would also offer the government rate for the proposed dates for the 2006 Conference. The Board was given a tour of the hotel’s guestrooms, meeting and classroom area, and the restaurant. The hotel also has an on-site spa, pool, and exercise rooms.

Chicago Conference Update

The Board then had a discussion on the upcoming Chicago conference. The dates for the Annual Training Conference are September 19-24, 2004 at the Hyatt Regency in downtown Chicago. The Board reviewed the brochure that has been drafted for the upcoming conference. The Board made some revisions to it and will notify Brian Scruggs, Evanston Police Department, that it is ready for distribution. The Chicago Conference is coming along fine with many speakers already lined up. The Illinois Chapter (host chapter) is still working on some keynote speakers and will update the website with additional information as soon as it becomes available.

Meeting With Chief Charlie Golden

The Board then made a visit with Chief Charlie Golden, Chief of Police, Newport Police Department. This was arranged by Tom Pulaski as an attempt to inform the Chief and his department of the interest in IALEP holding a conference in 2006. Chief Golden was very enthusiastic about this interest shown by the Association in coming to Newport. Chief Golden was very supportive of the Board’s efforts and was more than happy to offer his department and his staff’s resources to help make this a very successful conference. He was also very enthusiastic about the Planner’s Course and the possibility of it being held in Newport. He would make sure that his Planning Officer (who was away training that day) would contact members of the Board to discuss this upcoming conference.

Follow Up Discussion

The Board then returned to the hotel to resume the meeting. The Board felt the meeting with Chief Golden went very well. The Board came into this Mid-Year meeting without much knowledge of the Newport area. Now after seeing two hotels and meeting with the local police chief, the Board was feeling more confident about making this the Conference site for 2006. As a result, a motion was made to grant (comp) two memberships to the Newport

IALEP Minutes

See IALEP Minutes on page 13...

12

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 13

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

Police Department for the remainder of the year 2004. This would be for their commitment to the 2006 Conference and also as a possible site for the Planner’s Course. This would be granted to the Police Chief and to the Planning Officer. This would allow them to receive information and to review the information on the website that has a conference planning guide and to review past editions of The Exchange. This would give them a better sense of the membership and information that is shared by members in the Association. The Board would also hope that this new relationship with the Newport Police Department would help trigger expanding the membership of the Association in the Northeast portion of the United States. The motion was made by Marty Lege’ and seconded by Barry Horrobin. The vote was unanimous.

The Exchange Newsletter

Marty Lege’ spoke about The Exchange newsletter. Unfortunately Bonnie Golian had to resign as Editor due to work commitments. Bonnie was a great editor and her service will be greatly missed. Marty is still putting together the next edition of The Exchange, which will be the last one published before the Conference in September. It will need to contain all of the important information prior to the conference including any by-law changes, minutes, registration information, and any other articles that can be put into this edition.

The Board discussed what to do with the Editor position. The discussion ranged from making this a Board position to hiring out a free lance editor. The Board will continue to explore other options. In the interim, Barry Horrobin has a cooperative education student working in his department that may be interested in helping with the newsletter. He will speak with the person and get back to the Board.

Project and Planner of the Year

The Board then had a brief discussion on the Project and Planner of the Year applications. So far, only 2 submissions have been received this year. One of the possible reasons for the low number is the process. These awards are submitted through a nomination process. The response may be more positive if the process was more of an application process. This may encourage more persons to apply for both awards. This would help take away the stigma of having to have someone on your behalf submit for you.

Board Officer Vacancies

The Board will have two openings at the end of 2004. One position is the Staff Vice President and the other is the Secretary position.

The Board then adjourned for evening at 5:45 p.m.

MID-YEAR EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETINGAPRIL 2, 2004

(DAY 2)

Planner’s Course

President Tom Pulaski welcomed the board back and opened the meeting at 8:30a.m. Barry Horrobin updated the Board on the on-going Planner’s Course. The eighth edition of this course will be held in

April 19th - April 23rd in Fort Myers, Florida. The Lee County Sheriff’s Office will serve as the host for this course. The seventh edition of this course was held in November 2003 in Seattle, Washington. The course has proven to be one of the most successful products that the Association has to offer its members. The instructors for the course will debut an advanced model during the Fall 2004 edition of the course. This would be a specific topic that will be taught for two days and will give the students a very comprehensive curriculum in that topic. Two suggested topics are Patrol Allocation and Strategic Planning. The instructors will determine by the summer which curriculum will be taught in conjunction with the ninth edition of the planner’s course.

Conference Planner Meeting

The Board then met with Laurie Stroll, who is the President of Newport Hospitality, Inc. This is a private company that works with organizations that are interested in holding a conference in the Newport area. Ms. Stroll talked to the Board about the types of services her company can help with, from preliminary planning, to coordination with various events, and to management services. Her company could not assist much with the hotel site selection; since the Board has already begun that process, but she did reiterate that if the Association was able to secure the government rate for their conference, which would be a very good rate for the Newport area.

Convention Bureau Meeting

The Board then met with Jennifer Pitt, Sales Manager and Martha Sheridan, Vice President, for the Newport Convention and Visitors Bureau. They gave a small presentation to the Board about the Newport area and its attractions. They talked about the numerous conferences that have been held in the Newport area and how it is a very desirable location to hold a meeting. The Convention and Visitors Bureau is always available to distribute literature and brochures about venues and events to any group looking to come to the Newport area.

Fort Worth Conference

Marty Lege’ then discussed the Fort Worth Conference. This will be the location of the 2005 Annual Training Conference and will be spearheaded by IALEP member Marty Humphrey of the Fort Worth Police Department. She is now putting together a committee that will work with her on finalizing a host hotel, academic curriculum, and event sites for the 2005 Conference. Marty Lege’ will work closely with her on this conference. They have already met with the Convention Bureau and have begun selecting possible hotels for this conference.

IALEP Minutes...

See IALEP Minutes on page 14...

Continued from page 12

14

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 15

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

Lisa Gross Meeting

The Board then met briefly again with Lisa Gross to explain the format of the conference. This gave her a better idea of what items the board needed to get price estimates on. They also asked Lisa to submit a proposal and try to package some of the costs together to try and make it more amenable to the members who participate in this Conference.

The Board then adjourned for the evening at 5:00 p.m.

MID-YEAR EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETINGAPRIL 3, 2004

(DAY 3)

Treasurer’s Report

President Tom Pulaski welcomed the board back and opened the meeting at 8:30a.m. Dan Anderson then gave the Treasurer’s Report. The IALEP account has been transferred from the bank in California, where Laurie Anderson maintained it, to a bank in Minnesota where Dan will be the administrator of it. That bank gave the best rates and lowest fees that he could find. The bank suggested that a second signature should be on the account as a safety measure, and the board decided to put John Kapinos as a second signature since his term will be for the next four years.

The Board then revisited the issue of the success of the Colorado Springs Conference. Earlier during the Board meeting, there was a discussion about how to show appreciation for the great success of the 2003 Conference. The Board decided that instead of a donation, to allocate $ 1000 to the previous host agency to send a representative to the upcoming conference; based on the proceeds of the previous conference. A motion was made to allocate $ 1000 to the Colorado Springs Police Department to send an attendee to the 2004 Chicago conference. This was based on the proceeds that the 2003 Conference was able to generate. The motion was made by Marty Lege’ and seconded by John Kapinos. The motion passed. This may become an annual allocation, but only if the previous year’s conference is able to generate additional proceeds. This would be a way of thanking the previous host agency and to try and give some incentive for coming out under budget.

Last year, the board approved additional chapter support for chapters if they were interested. The Southwest Chapter did take advantage of this incentive and did receive an additional $ 500 to help set up a conference and obtaining a speaker. The board did ask though that in the future these requests are submitted directly to the Chapter Representative, not through the Treasurer.

Association Report

The Board then reviewed the Association Office report, which was submitted by Denise Thurston, Association Office Manager. The renewals have gone out for updating memberships and there

may be a need to submit a second renewal to ensure that the membership is aware of the dues that are needed. Everything else is going well and the board reviewed some correspondence that had been submitted to the IALEP mailbox. Some were request for information, invitations to various conferences and meetings, and membership retirements.

IALEP Marketing Strategy

The Board had a discussion on how best to market IALEP and generate new members. The budget has always maintained a line item for this purpose. The amount in the line item is $ 10,000. Every year, the Board as well as the general membership try to determine the best way to market the Association. Very little has been done on this issue. The board after much discussion decided that it would be best to hire some help to do this work. A motion was made to contract or hire a marketing consultant to look at the association to develop, implement, and execute a marketing strategy and plan. The motion was made by John Kapinos and seconded by Marty Lege’. The motion passed.

Repository Director Report

Phil Johnson then gave the Repository Director’s report. The List Service is still expanding and will require more server space soon. The PALS submissions have slowed to about 5 entries per year. All information on the List Serve is automatically archived. There has been a question on the Association’s Certificate of Incorporation. The Association was chartered in Kansas City, Missouri and the Charter currently has the name of Mike Wilson on it. Mike has now retired from the Kansas City Police Department. The Board concurred that the name should be switch to Phil Johnson, to ensure some consistency on the Certificate of Incorporation, as a current IALEP member and a member of the Kansas City Police Department.

Chapter Representative Report

Michael Heckelman then gave the Chapter Representative Report. Despite the chapter incentive that was discussed earlier in the meeting (and was only taken up by the Southwest Chapter), the chapter overview is still mixed. The Illinois and Southwest Chapters are going strong and moving forward. The Southern California chapter, Florida chapter, Texas chapter, Intermountain chapter, and the RAPP chapter are all still struggling or almost non-existent. Michael will continue to work with the chapters and see if they can be revitalized. The Board then discussed the concept of regions holding meetings and training sessions rather than the actual chapters. This would be if a group of agencies were interested in working together on a training class or meeting, then IALEP could help support them. These groups would not have to be as rigid as chapters, as defined in the by-laws, but could still get some support as long as there are members of IALEP associated with it. This could be using the chapter fees as a revitalization fund to encourage inter-regional cooperation.

Secretary Report

See IALEP Minutes on page 15...

IALEP Minutes...

14

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE 15

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

Navin Puri then gave the Secretary Report. He reviewed the Strategic Plan with the Board. He also discussed any by-law changes that would need to be taken to the full membership in September.

Past President Report

Barry Horrobin then gave the Past President Report. He is mainly working on the Planners Course and is helping the President in matters relating to the future conference sites and developing future training agendas. Barry talked about the responsibilities of the Board and how it has become very overwhelming. He spoke about two positions in particular, Training and Marketing. The Board earlier addressed the marketing issue by voting to hire a marketing consultant to develop a marketing plan. Training is the other big issue for future growth of the Association. He spoke about developing a Training Coordinator position and making that a Board position. Proceeds from the Planner’s Course could be used to offset any additional costs involved in having another Board member. The Board discussed the concept some more and determined that professional development should be included in this new role. This would help build some continuity on the training curriculums and help increase the services to the members. A motion was made by Marty Lege’ and seconded by Dan Anderson. The motion read: “To add a Training and Professional Development Coordinator to the Executive Board. This position would serve a two-year renewable term. This will require a Bylaw Change that will have to be approved by a quorum of the General Membership at the September 2004 Annual Training Conference Business Meeting.” The motion passed.

Staff Vice President Report

John Kapinos then gave the Staff Vice President Report. He is working on building a better working relationship with other associations. He is working with his counter-part at the International Association of Chiefs of Police forging a partnership between the two associations. He hopes this will lead to IALEP getting a chance to host a booth at the next IACP National Conference. This may also help with sharing research projects between the associations and interaction among members of both organizations.

Marty Lege’ then brought up the issue of IALEP hosting a booth at the upcoming CALEA conference in Austin, Texas in November 2004. This was discussed last year and there is interest in putting up the tabletop display at that meeting. Marty Lege’ would try and be present at this meeting. A motion was made by Barry Horrobin and seconded by Phil Johnson to expend the funds to have someone staff the CALEA conference in Austin, Texas. The funds would be used to purchase a vendor spot at the conference.

President’s Report

Tom Pulaski stated that most business had already been completed. He spoke briefly about a survey tool called Zoomerang, which could be used by the association for conference surveys, training curriculums, and chapter issues. He received some unsolicited information on this tool and wanted to make the Board aware of it. The cost is $ 600/year but would allow up to 10,000 responses. It is a web-based tool and Tom will explore it further.

The President then drew the meeting to a close.The Board will meet again in September 2004 in Chicago,

Illinois.The board then adjourned until September at 2:00 p.m.

IALEP Minutes...Continued from page 14

16

Summer 2004

IALEP EXCHANGE

������������� ����������� ��

��� ����������� ��������

�����

�����

IALEP ExchangePO Box 11437Torrance, CA 90510-1437