View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
Citizen’s Police Review Board
02/07/2011
MINUTES
Board Members Present: Minister William C. Muhammad
Dardinella Hippchen, Andrew Cirner,
David Bukala, Carlos Florez,
Ann Craig, Quintan Cooley
Board Members Absent: Barbara Kuipers,(Excused)
William O’Shaughnessy,(Excused)
Staff Present: Denny Powers, Staff Liaison
Kurt Dykman, I.A. Detective
Chairperson William Muhammad called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m.
Chairperson Muhammad asked if everyone had a chance to read the previous meeting
minutes and if there were any corrections or additions. It was motioned, supported and
passed to approve the minutes as presented.
Old Business
None.
New Business
Hearing of Appeal 10-09
Chairperson William Muhammad opened the hearing and asked if the complainant Ms.
Verhulst was present and then asked her to speak to the nature of her complaint.
After statements by Ms. Verhulst and her witness Ms. Mickelson and several comments
and questions by board members, Chairperson William Muhammad explained the
jurisdiction of the board and its duties and that the board could not deal with any
allegations of what took place in the court proceedings. Thus the allegation by Ms.
Verhulst that the officer deliberately lied in court is not an issue the board has jurisdiction
to address. The chair did point out that there were several other allegations that were
either included in the narrative attached to the complaint and or stated by the complainant
at the meeting that the board can address.
After a number of other comments by Ms. Verhulst and Ms. Mickelson as well as
comments and questions by the board and after much debate the board arrived at four
main allegations aside from the issue of the allegation of what transpired at court.
After much deliberation the board could not arrive at a satisfactory way of joining all four
allegations into one motion to be addressed at the same time. Thus, all four allegations
were addressed by separate vote.
MOTION 1
Motion that the officer’s statement in his report regarding the destruction of her ticket
was proven false.
This motion was supported and passed by unanimous consent of those board members
present.
MOTION 2
Motion that the complainant’s allegation that she should not have received a ticket for
parental responsibility is valid.
This motion was supported and passed with a split vote of six yea votes and one nay
vote.
MOTION 3
Motion that the complainant’s allegation she was not treated with respect is valid.
This motion was supported and passed with a split vote of five yea votes and two nay
votes.
MOTION 4
Motion that the complainant’s allegation of the officer’s statement in his report of her
cursing and irate behavior is invalid.
The motion was supported, however after roll call vote this motion was dropped due to
the number of abstentions and insufficient remaining votes.
The roll call vote was as follows: Andrew Cirner – abstain; David Bukala – nay; Carlos
Florez – yea; Quintan Cooley – abstain; Dardinella Hippchen – yea; Ann Craig –
abstain; William Muhammad – nay.
Ms. Hippchen thanked Ms. Verhulst for all the time she spent on this and for appearing
before the board.
Public Participation
One student was present and was introduced by Mr. Florez.
It was motioned and supported to adjourn the meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:44 p.m.
The next meeting is March 7, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. in room 103 of Muskegon City Hall.
Respectfully submitted,
Denny Powers
_______________________________
Denny Powers, Staff Liaison to the CPRB