Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Roosevelt Island Residents Meet With RIOC Directors On Public Safety Brutality Allegations - Call For Removal Of Public Safety Department Director And Deputy


2/25 RIOC Ops Committee Discussion On Public Safety Brutality Allegations

The Roosevelt Island Operating Corp (RIOC) Operations Committee met yesterday (audio web cast of meeting will be here) planning to discuss security cameras on Public Safety officers and in Public Safety facilities. Immediately upon hearing this, Roosevelt Island resident Ike Nathem (one of the organizers of 2/16 Pubic Safety Protest Demonstration) interrupted RIOC Director Michael Shinozaki and sought permission to ask a question which Mr. Shinozaki agreed to allow. Mr. Nathem asked why the RIOC Board was discussing security cameras instead of the brutality allegations directed at the Public Safety Department. According to Mr. Nathem:
...there is a crisis here centered on Pubic Safety conduct and leadership of public safety ... I think that should be discussed as opposed to security cameras...

... that's like discussing a weather vane in the middle of Hurricane Sandy...

... I don't understand why we are discussing security cameras when the community is demanding that Guerra and Bryan and that brutal regime must get the hell out of here so I don't understand why we are discussing security cameras when the crisis is that ... not that I am against security cameras....
Mr. Shinozaki explained that RIOC is:
... trying to figure out how to hold Pubic Safety accountable so we have evidence based actions....
One way to hold Public Safety accountable is with security cameras said Mr. Shinozaki and he added that from now on, if Public Safety officers use any level of force:
... handcuffs and up on the force ladder, the Board is immediately notified... 
RIOC Director David Kraut said:
... I have to say that problems are less with Public Safety than they are with your Board of Directors, to tell the truth. I’m not saying that we were lax in any way, but in fact, Public Safety should have been taking their leadership and guidance from us for 20 years, 25 years, and we’re only now at the point where we’re establishing policies, the kind of stuff Mike is talking about. We’re behind the eight-ball here. We should have been out in front of the issue from the go, and we weren’t, and now people are unhappy.

That doesn’t mean that all this crap that you’re talking to us is true or right. Some of you are famous on the Island for making stuff up. You just are. I’m on the rock 34 years, on this Board 19 years, and I know my neighbors....
RIOC Director Margie Smith urged residents with complaints to file them with RIOC so that investigations can be conducted. Residents said RIOC either has the complaints and has not acted upon them or expressed frustration that nothing would be done if they file those complaints. Roosevelt Island Residents Association (RIRA) Public Safety Chair Erin Feeley-Nahem said that she would deliver written complaints detailing examples of Public Safety brutality to the RIOC Board at their February 28 meeting.

The residents attending the meeting demanded that the Board immediately dismiss/seek resignation of Public Safety Department Director Keith Guerra citing as precedent the immediate forced resignation/firing of bus driver Neil Steuber.

Acting RIOC President Don Lewis remained mostly silent throughout the entire meeting though he could be observed whispering to others at the Board table and did agree to meet with Mr. Steuber to discuss Mr. Steuber getting his RIOC job back.

Mr. Guerra sat silently at the table with the other RIOC Directors. Several Pubic Safety Officers sat quietly in the back of the room. NYPD officers from the 114th precinct, including Precinct Commander Cirabisi, were on hand to provide assistance if necessary. It wasn't.

Here's video of the meeting.

Part 1.



Part 2.



Following this Public Meeting, the RIOC Board met with Mr. Guerra and several Public Safety Officers in Executive Session without the public or press being allowed to attend.

106 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thіs simplе rule of thumb for pοѕtρaгtum rаsρberrу κetoneѕ рroсeѕs.
When yοu arе hеаvier and it гegulatеs body functіonѕ ԁuе to dеhydratiοn, fеelings of guіlt.


Feel frеe to visit my webρage: www.emr-energy.com

David Enock said...

>Kraut, I wasn't at the meeting so I would appreciate it if you would first, clarify who and what were referring to when you said.......“That doesn’t mean that all this crap that you’re talking to us is true or right. Some of you are famous on the Island for making stuff up. You just are. I’m on the rock 34 years, on this Board 19 years, and I know my neighbors.” I would like to clearly understand what you meant before I respond to it, which I will.
.........and second, you ought to be ashamed of yourself for responding to resident Lashawn Marston, who spoke of RIOC as a “dictatorship,” with “Oh, sit down and shut up, you moron.”

David Enock said...

>Kraut, As a member of RIRA aren't you supposed to advocate for residents not against them? Based on the overwhelming number of complaints over the years of alleged abuse and brutality by PSD, for you to even suggest that it may be residents who are to blame is preposterous and offensive. To come to that conclusion now, as residents are finally speaking out about deeply disturbing experiences suffered at the hands of the PSD is callous and unforgiving. Contrary to what you may think, you do not know your neighbors—therefore, you should not be a RIRA board member, I don't care how long you've lived here. You should resign immediately. And, though your posture and voice level in the meeting is seemingly thoughtful and objective it suggests otherwise. Your response to resident Lashawn Marston, who spoke of RIOC as a “dictatorship,” with “Oh, sit down and shut up, you moron.” was shameful at best.

Jesse Webster said...

I thought calling that resident a moron was way out of line. Looks like it's time for the community to petition the governor to replace Kraut on the RIOC board.

Anonymous said...

Hey thегe! I've been reading your blog for a long time now and finally got the bravery to go ahead and give you a shout out from Lubbock Texas! Just wanted to tell you keep up the great work!

Feel free to visit my website: fotografos bodas madrid precios

CheshireKitty said...

Certain RIOC board members are political appointees, and there is no reason to think that Don Lewis, now the Acting President of RIOC, wasn't also a political appointee when he was appointed RIOC General Counsel, a position he retains in addition to his "presidential" duties. Lewis thus does not represent the people of Roosevelt Island.


Likewise, Guerra is politically connected - up to the level of Governor - and may also have gotten his job as a result of those connections.


It is quite disappointing that the Board members who were recommended for appointment by means of our RIOC board member nominee elections, do not use the power delegated to them by their electoral victories to remove Guerra, a political hire, who has harmed and continues to harm their constituents.


Many of the Board members continue to voice the refrain of "the IG investigation process taking care of everything" even though nothing has resulted from that process for the past several years, and thus, the IG investigation process, is seemingly, for all intents and purposes, useless.


The Board members should ask Guerra to resign. Prior to doing so, they should identify a suitable replacement from outside the PSD. May I suggest they work to find someone who will not be awarded the job as a political reward, and instead hire a security professional with the proper qualifications, not someone who glad-handed their way into his present job by befriending politicians at fund-raising galas. May I suggest they look at the Housing Police Division of the NYPD to find suitable candidates. Ideally, the community should be offered a chance to vote for a new PSD director from among an array of candidates. If that isn't possible, then the board should consider an array of non-politically connected, well-qualified candidates instead of being forced to hire only one "recommended" by Albany, i.e. a political hire.


Another option is to do away with the PSD and instead invite the NYPD to establish a satellite office at the site of the PSD. Although we all already pay City taxes for fire protection, public schools, and many other city services - including NYPD, we do not receive full NYPD protection on RI. One officer from the 114th Pct on RI does not equate to full NYPD protection. We are getting short-changed - we are not getting something we pay for in taxes, that everyone else in NYC gets. There's no reason we should not have NYPD instead of PSD protection, since we already pay to receive it in our NYC tax payments.


True, the NYPD on RI would not be subject to the RIOC board, which includes the political (i.e. hack) appointees of RIOC President, and likely RIOC General Counsel as well as Guerra. That of course would be a good thing.

Mary Lynn Zelker said...

You obviously didn't watch the video on the blog when the 114 commander was here. Go back a few pages on this blog and watch the video. You will see how he says due to the low crime here,nypd cannot justify placing more officers here. As he stated,we have a c-pop and sector cars are always coming on the island and they respond to ALL 911 calls. Your idea to establish a satellite office will not happen cause again,it would require more nypd man power,which going full circle again,he already stated will not happen.
Yes we pay taxes,but when it comes to nypd,you will not win.

Our options are limited as far as our police force. Even if psd was disbanded,we would be left with nothing but an afternoon cpop and an occasional sector car.we are left with the option of fixing what we have. I think we should do raise the training standard here. I don't know what the current training is,but its obvious that they dont go to a police academy,cause if they did,someone would have stated that our officers go to the academy.

Second,I think the legislation to make all state officers fall under the same review board must go through.

CheshireKitty said...

Fine. Maybe there shouldn't be an outpost of the NYPD on Roosevelt Island because of its low crime rate, which is a good thing. The NYPD could evaluate the need for on-island coverage if the patrols and sector car are found to be insufficient. Perhaps they would assign additional Housing Police, a division of the NYPD, to do the vertical patrols.

GeorgeProzakis said...

Hey, your babbling incoherently again. Nypd housing division officers only patrol NYC owned public housing buildings and property.

Wy not go through the training curriculum and upgrade it. Put them through a police academy and give them police officer titles. It will and sounds like a much better alternative that this full circle of nothing.

CheshireKitty said...

So George, what would happen if there was no PSD on RI? The NYPD would be forced to provide coverage. Problem solved. No more complaining about not having enough cars and police officers. If the Housing Police aren't allowed onto non-NYCHA property, then let the regular NYPD cops do the vertical patrols. Problem solved. I only mentioned the Housing Police since there is a Housing Police precinct house nearby in Queens in the Ravenswood houses.

GeorgeProzakis said...

I can guarantee you arrests and summonses would be skyrocketed. The nypd officers assigned here would be given a performance objective to reach each month. I'm sure courtesy parking in the breezeway, in their spot or any other off hand location would be gone. Calls for nuisance calls, well you would get the picture to never call that in pretty quick.

People are now going to HAVE to go to jail due to more stringent liability, as opposed to given a universal summons for some offenses that other agencies in nyc practice.

Your courtesy levels are going to be gone and I guarantee your calls of service would be cut down due to priorities.

Not defending these guys just stating what I see in my opinion of the future bestowed upon your wish.

CheshireKitty said...

So you're saying we're "lucky" to have the PSD? That's what you're saying? But we're not "lucky" if they go around beating people up for no reason!

Mary Lynn Zelker said...

I think what George is trying to say is be careful what you ask for. As a cop for nypd,he knows more then we do as far as how the guys are. Yrs we are lucky to have psd,and in my opinion,they are PART of the reason for a low crime rate.

Now as far as you said,if there was no psd,nypd would be forced to provide coverage. That's wrong. Without psd 114 would continue to provide the same coverage cause of the low crime rate. Only way we would get more nypd coverage is a higher crime rate,so its sort of pick your own poison. No psd,higher crime rate,which leads to more nypd but if you get a higher crime rate,then nypd would lock everyone up. Resident or not. Young kid or not.

As George said,give them police powers. Send them to an actually police academy cause I don't think they go to one now. I'm not sure if they do or not but that's what they need. I think professionalism will go up,service will go up,community relations will go up,and bad encounters will go down.

RIOC is a public benefit corp. Just like the MTA and just like the Port Authority. Both have a police department,and officers must complete a full police academy. You never hear anything about those officers. See where I'm going with this

GeorgeProzakis said...

I don't know the public safety training curriculum but all I know is the bare minimum training standards for any peace officer in New York is 99 or 100 hours. That is the minimum. I would assume that the department extends that training. Again, I don't know and am assuming. The bread and butter of peace officer training is just reading the books. Scenarios and other realism training is not required. It is not required for police officer training but 10 out of 10 police academies build it into their curriculum.

You guys still don't know if its an actual training issue, but as I am reading,it may be apparent that it is. Maybe the training has dropped since the director took over?. I have read he has been in for about 5 years and since he came on the quality went down?.

Maybe it's a moral within the agency issue?. Maybe it's complete utter disrespect and non compliance in the street?. Maybe it's the community not really grasping their duties and responsibilities?.

I know they are not security guards, but perhaps the majority does not understand they are very much like police officers?. I know for sure I had absolutely no clue what their duties and responsibilities were when I moved in. I had no clue they were law enforcement. When I see public safety anywhere in the city I assume they are security guards.

I know that many peace officers in NYC use the wording POLICE on their uniforms, cars, badges and identification cards. Not illegal at the single bit but it give them a very high perception of their duties and an understanding of who they are immediately.

For example, NYC Hospital Police are "special officers" but they are titled POLICE. Again, they are Peace Officers.

Perhaps an image makeup is needed?.

I don't know but it's a very very interesting topic and it has me very much interested. If I didn't live so far maybe I would come to a meeting or two to see this in live!.

GeorgeProzakis said...

Provide coverage? Absoluetly not. What will happen is zero discretion for violations. A precinct conditions van will come periodically a. Hammer everyone with tickets and arrest. Ever hear of the "broken windows" philosophy?.

Your not going to have a car sit on the island 24/7. The 114 is a very busy precinct.

Frank Farance said...

Office Prozakis: You don't understand what you're talking about with an NYPD patrol here. First, we'd be getting the patrol because we'd be paying for it, i.e., instead of $2.9 spend on PSD, $1.2 million over budget, we'd pay NYPD $1.7 million. Second, unlike elsewhere, there aren't quotas and such, there would be specific patrols (e.g., vertical patrols to satisfy RIOC contractual obligations), but there would be NO quotas. Third, unlike elsewhere in NYC the parking enforcement would be "normal" because writing parking tickets is not a revenue generator for RIOC (because NYC Department of Finance does not pay parking ticket fees back to RIOC). So the patrol on Roosevelt Island is not simply asking the 114th pct to do a little more (which is not rationalized due to our low crime rate), it is to do community patrolling with objectives similar to the mission of Public Safety.

Frank Farance said...

Officer Prozakis: Again, you're misinformed about NYPD vs. Public Safety on arrests. According to the NY DA's office, they have specific criteria and procedures for trespass / loitering. The PSD arrests don't meet that criteria, and PSD doesn't follow the NYPD procedure ... possibly a reason the NY DA declined to prosecute the Anthony Jones case. Thus, we are having more problems with PSD. We would be Lucky to have NYPD, which is better trained, more competent, and has a local CCRB (unlike the state-wide CCRB in the Kellner bill).

GeorgeProzakis said...

Paying for NYPD officers will never happen. Period. Your living fantasy land. No performance objectives? You know paid detail officers do not answer radio calls or perform any enfoecement duties. So what is their purpose?. You are NOT going to get calls for service or enforcement of offenses. Of course if a felony or violent crime occurs they will do what they have to do. Do not expect them to answer up the radio.

You have no idea what you are saying either it seems.

Also if you are going to make the paid officers WORK its going to a revolvint door and word will get out quick to not even aplly for paie detail at rooeevelt island. Just like when home depot did not pay us for a year; we all boycotted.

Your theory is very flawed as well. Makes no reality sense.

And then you think off duty cops are going to put them in harms way toget a ccrb? Hahahahahhahahaah.

GeorgeProzakis said...

I guess you didn't factor in money for arrest overtime and court appearances and anything else in between.

You also did not factor in that they will not be performing police functions but a security function unless something serious happens. You will have all the weed smoking and nonsense in staircases as you have because the officers are NOT going to be performing duties of when they are working their full time jobs.

Also it is PROHIBITED for officers working over a set amount of hours per week. I believe 20, don't quote me on it.

So your going to have HOW many nypd officers on their payroll?

Each officer would only be allowed to work basically 2, 8 hour shifts and that's it.

It's not happening because you don't know the rules of the system or how it's operated.

You refuse to accept that. You refuse to understand that perhaps having your own force is probably the best thing since sliced bread. I think just by reading it needs a major make over. Perhaps a new image, maybe making a community affairs unit within if they don't have one. Hold regular meetings. Have a open door policy with the community.

Things CAN be fixed. Your way of pursuing things will NOT work. Mark my words. You are wasting your time and energy.

GeorgeProzakis said...

I also think it is insane to notify board members whenever handcuffs are put on a subject. That is actually handcuffing the officers from doing their job.

Perhaps if physical force in the use of a baton strike or a hospitalized prisoner sounds about right.

Les not short change yourself with these ideas. It's only going to backfire.

Mary Lynn Zelker said...

I agree again George,maybe they need an image makeup. I never thought about hospital police,but your right,they are called police. Coop city is private,but they are called police. Image makeover might go along way. Also,I spoke to my brother who is a nyc probation officer,also peace offcer. He said that 100 hours is the new requirement from the state,that started this year. Before that the training hours for peace officer was 40 hours. Not very high for a law enforcement official. My other brother who is a trooper,has over 1000 hours of training. And that's required before he was able to graduate the academy. Then countless hours of retraining every year. Big difference between both state law enforcement agencies

Frank Farance said...

As I said previously, the program would be different that the off-duty detail. Right now PSD officers have no performance objectives (arrests, tickets, etc.). And you make incredibly dumb points: so because there is no performance objective, then according to you "its going to a revolvint door and word will get out quick to not even aplly for paie detail at rooeevelt island", i.e., officers are only interested when there is an artificial need (performance objective) to make requests.

From the officers I've spoken with, this sounds like a dream job: straight patrolling in a low crime area without a need to boast arrests or tickets to please your boss.

GeorgeProzakis said...

No I say it's going to be a revolving door once you expect the officers to perform police functions OFF DUTY.

If your not going to pay them OFF duty, then you are not going to get them at all.

GeorgeProzakis said...

My training was about mid 500 hours. But only about 3 months was classroom and examination. The other 3 were role playing and scenarios.

Frank Farance said...

So how does performance objectives, like X arrests or Y tickets make it desirable to work? If the work is ON-DUTY, but doesn't have typical arrest/ticketing performance objectives, then why is that undesirable? It's just patrolling in a lower crime area rather than a higher crime area, right? By your reasoning, all the low crime areas would have problems staffing, right? (Or maybe the staffing problem goes away if your boss forces you to have more arrests/tickets.)


So could you explain why on-duty patrolling in a lower crime area is undesirable?

GeorgeProzakis said...

Your expectations are undesirable. You want full service from off duty cops. Not going to happen. They want a nice easy gig. Not verticals or keeping the peace. That's not desirable. Your fantasy is not and will never happen or work.

Frank Farance said...

Officer Prozakis: You avoid the question about on-duty police force, please re-read my question.


In fact, we can pay for more government services because RIOC is a government entity (not a private entity), which is why it might not work for the Hasidic community in Brooklyn, but could work for Roosevelt Island. Assemblymember Kellner and Councilmember Lappin looked into this kind of contract vehicle for Roosevelt Island a couple years ago when the G&T (Gifted and Talented) program at PS/IS 217 needed more funding. We also pay for different kinds of sanitation services, too, that the City provides.


We've thought about this more than you think.

GeorgeProzakis said...

You are clearly thinking way into it. We cant afford to put 20 nypd officers on a near zero crime island.

School funding is a completely different animal. And yes you are right rioc is quazi governmental. That does not mean anything.

As noted why does the mta and papd have its VERY OWN police force. As a matter of fact mta has two. Mta police and triborough authority peace officers.

You need to come back down to earth. Its pure fiction.

Frank Farance said...

RIOC Board David Kraut fibs about the truth on his own intimidating actions, just like Public Safety. Last Friday night, Mr. Kraut entered Trellis, a friend and I were talking by the "mints" (behind the register), Kraut spoke loudly "Get the f**k out of my way" towards me. He could have easily walked around us or asked politely "Excuse me", but he spoke so loudly that many people heard, including several children. (Mr. Kraut drinks regularly at Trellis, many times until closing, and many times inebriated. I don't know how much alcohol he had.)

I told Mr. Kraut that he should be polite, but he mumbled something under his breath. I filed a complaint at Public Safety right then and received a copy of the incident a couple days later: "Sgt Lindsey responded to above listed location and spoke with party 2 [Mr. Kraut] who stated he asked party 1 [me] to 'Please get out of the way'.". Mr. Kraut's statement is a flat out lie, as others remember Mr. Kraut's rude behavior, especially in front of several children.

Mr. Kraut was intimidating, as if he expected the seas to part, people clear out of the way, and give wide berth en route to his regular drinking stool.

Of course, this isn't the crime of the century. But it representative of the lack of interest in being truthful within RIOC/PSD where several people tell a story and the PSD report doesn't reflect reality. And for Mr. Kraut's complaining about residents of Eastwood and the truth of his neighbors' reporting, it's clear that Mr. Kraut himself is a liar it his own reporting.

Mr. Kraut you have no authority on what truth is or isn't.

Mary Lynn Zelker said...

Frank,here are the problems with your idea. One,that program your talking about,doesn't exist. You were already told by the precinct commander that no program or detail exist to fill your needs.then you pretty much told him he was because YOU think something that you want does exist. First mistake. You told a precint COMMANDER he was wrong and to do more research. Now he knows who you are and does not like you for this simple reason. Let me just say this,you do not become a deputy inspector in the countries largest police dept by not knowing things.
Two,as geogre stated,you can not just simply hire police officers. It does not work like that. They are not a private entity.

Three,you can't simply divert the public safety money to the nypd. One because the city would not accept it and two,in the end its up to rioc. You keep talking about the psd budget and using it for this and that like its your money. Rioc isn't going to give its money to an outside agency that it has absolutely no control over. I already know your response,"well since we pay for them,we will just leave that portion of our rent out" Go ahead and try that,and in three months,the city marshall will be at your door remove all your items from your former apartments. Think about it.

Four,and this sorta goes back to my other point. The program you want doesn't exist. And since it doesn't exsit. The nypd isn't going to spend the time or money creating a program to please 300 residents who don't like there local police force. Even if the numbers grew to 2000 unhappy people,it means nothing to the people who run a city of over ten million. Think about.

Five,you said it when the commander came to have that community meeting and you just said it to geogre. You stated at the meeting"we appreciate the training nypd recieves" then you stated to geogre that we would be lucky to have nypd which is better trained. It seems to me that training is very big on your criteria,so why no lobby for psd to recieve full nypd training? It would be easier and better that way right? If your so big on training,ill ask my brother if its possible to get psd officers into the state police academy since its a state agency and email you all the needed info so you can lobby for better training.But that's not what you want because training is just the cloud of smoke your trying blow up everyones a** because in reality,you just plain don't like psd especially its director. So instead of doing research on ways to improve the dept,you just want to disband it.

YetAnotherRIer said...

I am sorry Frank, but do you not realize that many people do not like you and treat you that way? Did you not know that because of the way you treat people when they disagree with you they start treating you the same way? Are you really not able to understand that?

David Enock said...

George, I differ with most of what you have been writing here. Much too much routine police academy approach to the problems on Roosevelt Island. I refer you to the wonderful story of the sun and the wind. You my friend are wind.

CheshireKitty said...

He took the opportunity to say something insulting to you in public. He's skeptical of the effort to oust Guerra and is taking his ire out on you. He might have said the same thing to anyone else standing there that is anti-Guerra. If he didn't do anything violent, I would have let it slide, although him cursing at you was uncivil. YetAnotherRIer - even so, it doesn't give Kraut the right to go around insulting people he doesn't agree with, especially his neighbors. We have to live together in peace on this island. Kraut may very well run into Lashawn Marston in his own building - why did he say that to him? Why didn't he let him speak? I hope we hear from Lashawn in future meetings - he should not be intimidated or put off by Kraut's comments. I think Kraut insulting Lashawn, and now also Frank, publicly, each case with witnesses, is indicative of arrogance, selfishness, or possibly the deleterious effects of drink. If Kraut was so anxious to get to the bar that he had to practically barge across the room and even yell at someone to get out of the way, he may well have a drinking problem. If he has a drinking problem, such a condition can eventually lead to cognitive impairment. I'm not trying to excuse his behavior by suggesting that excessive alcohol intake has impaired his judgment, which resulted in these two outbursts (that were boorish and uncalled for in each instance) just offering a possible explanation. Kraut represents the State of NY in his capacity as board member and his insulting remarks to two residents is unworthy of his official status. If he were a mensch, he would write personal notes of apology to both Lashawn and Farance apologizing for his insults. His insult to Lashawn was caught on videotape so he cannot get away with denying it as he is trying to with the harsh words he delivered to Farance. Nonetheless, Frank has witnesses who could attest that Kraut yelled at him and cursed him. If Frank felt threatened in any way by Kraut's words or behavior, he could make out a formal police report of the incident. Although Kraut is of course entitled to his opinion regarding the PSD, that doesn't give him the right to go around cursing at and insulting people. Especially as a RIOC board member, he should act in a civil and respectful manner to others, even if he disagrees with them. Even if Kraut's lack of self-control is caused by a condition brought on by drinking, or perhaps undiagnosed hypertension - given that he is rather obese and one of the negative effects of untreated hypertension can be cognitive decline - if he's to remain in his position as a board member, he should seriously consider (1) personally apologizing to the two residents he has insulted and therefore hurt with his words (2) behaving in a regular non-aggressive manner (3) getting his drinking habit under control if that is the source of his irascibility and boorish behavior (4) go for a BP check if he has not done so recently, if he does have HBP, he should receive the appropriate antihypertensive medication; otherwise Kraut should not stay on as board member.

GeorgeProzakis said...

To be fair, I can only comment on what I have read and use my personal opinion as a professional to where perhaps there can be room for improvement. I am simply shooting in the dark here as I do not know their training. I only found out about the so called peace officer training while looking it up and reading about it on a nys website.

I am not wind or rain or fire or whatever else you may think up. I am simply trying to help you guys understand there can be many different faults. Maybe the easiest fault can be fixed. Maybe it cannot be fixed with remedial training and different modified or new guidelines. No guidelines equal a disaster.

I can only help out with what I know as a professional. In think you are an attorney?. I'm not going to go into a court room and act like I am an attorney. I am a cop, I can only provide my direct observations and my own views on how things are done on my end and compare the two to make a judgement based on what I know and what I am reading.

Nothing personal. I have seen plenty of false accusations, plenty of false lawsuits, plenty of lawsuits of the arrested person twisting things around. It's in my nature to be a skeptic. I deal with criminals for the most part who come up with very good convincing stories. I never believe everything I hear and I still only believe of Half of what I see!. Don't fault me for that.

Remember the Michael Mineo subway sodemy case?. It was all lies. Story had more holes than Swiss cheese. I was a sure skeptic then too.

CheshireKitty said...

I don't think it's so restrictive to the PSOs. Once they handcuff a subject, they can send a quick text message to Mr. Shinozaki letting him know someone has been cuffed. This draws Mr. Shinozaki's attention to the matter, so that he and his fellow Operations Administration Committee members can review the details of the arrest the next day and then let Guerra know their reaction to the report - if they approve of the way the matter was handled or disapprove.

CheshireKitty said...

RI's situation is somewhat similar to that of Coop City's, which has its own force of peace officers in addition to coverage by a police precinct. Of course Coop City is several times the size of RI population-wise and their force consists of 100 peace officers. If you go onto the Coop City's PSD website, you'll see an extensive range of services and information - unlike the RI PSD. Coop City PSOs were only given the right to issue parking tickets a few years ago, but they are armed with guns, batons, pepper spray. They have a Community Relations button on their website and a person listed as a community liaison with their phone number included. The Coop City PSD seems very attuned to the community - at least judging from their website. This seems to be a big part of their outreach and image. I can't imagine one of their PSOs doing to a Coop City resident what was done to Mansour - that would have been totally counter to their pro-community stance. Instead they would have tried to resolve the softball field dispute amicably, with each side perhaps giving a bit, and let any of the parents, who they must have realized would be carrying cameras/phones to photograph their kids' game, to take whatever photos they want with no questions asked. But PSD on RI is not like that. PSD over-enforces, PSD acts like brutes, and PSD turned an ordinary matter of resolving a simple dispute over the duration of a softball game, into an excuse to arrest and mistreat an individual. Why? Because he wasn't moving fast enough when he was told to stop taking photos? But why should he have been told that in the first place?! That is why RIPSD is an anti-community PSD, unlike the Coop City PSD, and why it must be changed from top to bottom, unless it is disbanded and police coverage is supplied by the NYPD.

CheshireKitty said...

PSD is hopeless as it is currently constituted. I think the changes Mr. Shinozaki has now mandated will help but after the court cases are resolved, Guerra will need to go (if not sooner). The State of NY obviously doesn't want to kick Guerra out at the present time since that will be like kicking him out for cause and destroy whatever leverage they may have either in a settlement or case. It's not in their interest to give this "win" to Anthony's side at this time - each side in an adversarial contest of course will act in their own interest. So Guerra's tenure may actually drag on for another year or two until the case or cases go through the courts. This pragmatic reasoning underlies what RIOC is currently doing - defending Guerra - since it means they wont have to pay as much in the end if they don't fire him right away. Unfortunately, we're currently left with Guerra and his crew in this scenario. Under the above circumstances, Mr. Shinozaki's recommendations represent an excellent effort to rein in PSD now. Later, RIOC can ask Guerra to quit. As for the other brutal officers, those that actually beat Anthony - let's hope the DA decides to bring charges.

mary lynn zelkner said...

Why didn't you call nypd?

mary lynn zelkner said...

Kitty,what are you going to say if the inspector general says it found no wrong doing it drops its investigation?

What are you going to say if the da says it will pursue no charges cause it found no wrong doing?

GeorgeProzakis said...

Thats called micromanaging. I know officers of all likes hate being micrimanaged. Your dedication and desire goes out the window to be a cop. Its a backfire situation. Sounds great on paper but does nothing positive. Last thing you want is cops hating their jobs.

GeorgeProzakis said...

Its not easy to police with no firearms. Comparing coop city and roosevelt island is non comparative. They obviously have protection and the perps in a weird way understand and respect their command presense. It all starts with a cops professional command appearance. Again as I said before if I see public safety I think security guard. If I see no firearm I definently think security. I googles coop city police and I notice their command presence is strong. They have police written everywhere and their training is a couple hundred hours.

I dont think they let anyone who has not been fully trained out on patrol from what I read. It is not uncommon to have peace and police officers to patrol up to a year before being certified in law enforcement. A big step up for coop city as they train first and then you go on patrol.

Lets face it. The roosevelt island officers look and dress up like security guards. Just the way you like it. Its also obvious they get no respect. I can only assume they get called security guardsall the time. As I said before I thought they were security.

To reitterate I think they need a massive image and department make over. Either you want a professional police type force at your convenience and immediate disposal or you want to wait a few hours for a nonsense call response from 911.

It all begins with officer command presence. If you look like security your treated like security

Ratso123 said...

I don't know the people involved in the "get the f___ out of my way" incident, but it doesn't seem appropriate to go to any policing agency to file a complaint about this. Is this serious enough to investigate?

David Enock said...

George, you missed the metaphor, here is the fable. Think about it, maybe you can put it use someway on the job.Æsop. (Sixth century B.C.) Fables.
The Harvard Classics. 1909–14. The Wind and the Sun THE WIND and the Sun were disputing which was the stronger. Suddenly they saw a traveller coming down the road, and the Sun said: “I see a way to decide our dispute. Whichever of us can cause that traveller to take off his cloak shall be regarded as the stronger You begin.” So the Sun retired behind a cloud, and the Wind began to blow as hard as it could upon the traveller. But the harder he blew the more closely did the traveller wrap his cloak round him, till at last the Wind had to give up in despair. Then the Sun came out and shone in all his glory upon the traveller, who soon found it too hot to walk with his cloak on.
“KINDNESS EFFECTS MORE THAN SEVERITY.”

Frank Farance said...

Ms. Zelker, you frame this as a small group of complainers, but this is not so.

The November 2008 Island-wide referendum vote was 1038 (yes) to (67) for a Public Safety review board, which was in response to Public Safety. It was *after* Guerra started and *before* the Blue Beard Incident in Summer 2009. And recently, RIRA voted 21-1 in October for RIOC to investigate the Stueber Incident; and the next RIRA Common Council unanimously voted in February to request RIOC to terminate Guerra, Bryan, et al.

In 2010, Assemblymember Micah Kellner submitted legislation for a CCRB-like review.

Thus, Public Safety has been a problem for at least five years, and a well-known problem by the community. The fact that the RIOC Board has done zilch, despite ongoing indicators, shows the incompetence, reluctance, and haplessness of the RIOC Board.

As for getting extra NYPD officers via contract, I've heard this exists, but don't yet know it's name. Having done a fair amount of work with government contracting, there are several kinds of contract vehicle types. So one kind of contract vehicle (off-duty detail) doesn't work, but others are possible. And there is the all-purpose "interagency agreement" that can work, too. Look, right now these kinds of services are described in our ground leases, so (obviously) it can be contracted for.

Yes, NYPD are better trained, but I don't want the inefficiencies of the PSD management, e.g., 43% of the officers don't patrol, which is a very poor utilization. By, effectively, outsourcing the patrolling, we would get what we pay for.

In other words, just giving PSD officers NYPD training is not enough.

As for a deputy inspector and how much he/she knows, I doubt a deputy inspector can speak about contract vehicle types, something that is more a specialty of a contracting officer or NYPD administrative attorney. When I spoke to the deputy inspector after the meeting, he told me has was not familiar with the contracting aspects but would look to find someone who understood it better.


As for Director Guerra, he's lost the trust of the community in a variety of ways. For me, he's simply lied about a variety of facts that I verified otherwise and, as true for many people, you no longer trust anything he says. For others, he's turned his head away from problems he could help (a management / executive issue), he's given the wrong guidance (maximum enforcement, zero tolerance), he's accelerated community friction rather than reducing it. And so on.


Overall, there are multiple problems: actions of PSD officers; really poor PSD management and executives; a RIOC Board that is incompetent, reluctant, and acts helpless; and a governor who hasn't taken decisive actions in both hirings and firings; just to name a few.

GeorgeProzakis said...

Your ground lease means nothing to get nypd here. They will tell you, call 911 and we will come just like any other citizen.

Your not entitles to this. Why do you think you are entitles to more nypd services when people in desperate neighborhoods cannot even get these services?.

Your approach is weak and nothing will become of it. Keep wasting your time.

GeorgeProzakis said...

The DA office will absolutely not bring up the officers on charges. I guarantee this. If it was to happen, trust me, it would have happened already. It sounds like an amazing wet dream to a few here but not happening.

CheshireKitty said...

They brought it on themselves - if they had not been brutal, then the micromanaging would not be necessary.

GeorgeProzakis said...

In police work, handcuffs go on and can always come off in the field. We are taught that in training.

So if they detain someone matching the description of a crime, but during their detainment, figure out its not him, they need to notify the "board".

What makes a bunch of civilians law enforcement experts?. Leave the policing to the police. If they need to be notified, notify them on use of force and that's it.

GeorgeProzakis said...

You really think nypd cops are going to perform verticals as well?

Strongly mistaken.

CheshireKitty said...

The board has the last word. If PSOs don't like their system, they can quit.

Frannie Fran said...

Thanks but we didn't ask nor do we need your help...

Frank Farance said...

Officer Prozakis: You portray NYPD as officers that have their own mind and don't want to do certain kinds of patrolling. Doesn't sound like you'd be the right kind of officer for Roosevelt Island, nor in any department in a top-down command and control setting. I don't understand why you keep commenting here. Residents are interested in solving problems, you just complain about them or throw cold water on following up on ideas.

Frank Farance said...

Officer Prozakis: Like I said many comments before, you don't know much about Roosevelt Island. And you don't seem interested in being informed about Roosevelt Island, which sorta makes it a waste of time responding to you.

Frank Farance said...

Officer Prozakis: Uh, that's the way this country works: civilians are at the top, which directs law enforcement, not the other way around. In fact, NYPD officers point out: they see their own oversight as necessary. I guess, you're one of the officers who doesn't like policy, taking direction, or oversight.

GeorgeProzakis said...

That's not the direction I was heading. There's little to no point in putting out a bulletin for someone handcuffed. Use of force, go right ahead. Handcuffing, unnecessary all the way around. You, civilian, do not fully understand the rules or basically the lifestyle of being a police officer. I see way too many assumptions and I can't help but to reply to the nonsense I read.

I can't even count how many times someone I put handcuffs were released on the spot. Many active officers won't recall either.

It is very apparent you don't understand you have it pretty well. Ask the residents of an impact precinct how they feel. They welcome the police but can't stand the heavy enforcement. Riding on sidewalk, ticket. Parking tickets, yeah up the behind, hanging out on the sidewalk, sorry your getting one for disorderly conduct. All in the name of broken windows theory.

"Sir, may I park in -name the spot on the island- for an hour?". Yeah right. That will never fly.

My little good boy Tylor was locked up and I demand to know why. Meanwhile little good boy is 22 years old. She's gonna get escorted out immediately.

This fantasy perception is incredible.

GeorgeProzakis said...

I am telling you how it is. Patrol cops do not perform verticals. I keep commenting because I am an easy person to drag into conversation. It's also very easy for me to get dragged into things that need fixing like the false things that keep getting posted. I wish to one day come right on back to the island. If I can schedule things out,it works out great for me to move back. When I was there, i don't recall this blog existing. I commend the moderator for maintaining it and putting up news. There are things there that I never knew existed. So forgive me for trying to stay educated and on top of things in my recreational down time.

mary lynn zelkner said...

Frank,why didn't you call nypd when kraut told you to get the f out of his way? Why go into the dept that you are tirelessly trying to shut down ?

GeorgeProzakis said...

You are right, I don't know a tremendous amount but I know the facts and how we run things. You don't want to accept the facts and have a predetermined idea that does not exist. I have no choice but to open my trap and let you have it.

It's not that you don't want to reply to me because of that. You do not want to reply because you know I am correct.

Frank Farance said...

Ms. Zelkner: To be precise, I didn't call PSD, I walked to their offices to make a complaint. Just like NYPD, I wouldn't be calling NYPD, I would go to 114 Pct on Astoria Blvd to file a report. What makes you think I wouldn't also file a complaint with NYPD? Given RIOC/PSD's ability to lose complaints (at last Monday's RIOC Operations Committee Meeting, how many RIOC Board members can't seem to file residents' complaints?), it seems we should file complaints at NYPD, too, right?

Frank Farance said...

Officer Prozakis: With all your experience, please explain: if a vertical patrol is a task for an officer in a command and control structure, then under what rubric does he/she choose not to do that task?

mary lynn zelkner said...

Im just curious what nypd is going to tell when you go there and tell them that someone told you to get the f out of his way.

GeorgeProzakis said...

It does not fall under the scope of a patrol officers duties unless certain circumstances dictate it. Such as a missing person or a serious crime was committed in a building, or for a perp search. Routine verticals are not part of a patrol officers duties. In housing, yes.

You, again, have a false idea on how things work.

Frank Farance said...

Officer Prozakis: You missed the point, if a vertical patrol is one of an officer's several tasks for patrolling, then under what rubric does he/she refuse to do that task? Can you cite policy/procedure (in a verifiable way) that shows that officers can only patrol horizontally, but not vertically? According to you, an officer can walk around a block of a dozen houses during his/her patrol, but they can't walk down a dozen flights of stairs for houses stacked vertically (e.g., a high rise). Is that your point? Really, I think all of us would like to see that written NYPD directive that you refer to.

mary lynn zelkner said...

You can send all the letters you want to the governor. He does not read them. Like all people in high places,everything us screened before it gets to him. When one of the of his employees open any letter,including the ones from Erin and or any of us common people,ill tell you exactly what happens.

Let's say the letter is drom someone complaining about kraut calling someone a moron.

Dear Governor,
Im writing to talk about a state official that called someone a moron during a public meeting. I think Mr.kraut should be dismisse

GeorgeProzakis said...

Yes that is the point. I am not inclined to post directives in public, nor do I believe you should see those directives. If you want to know, work for it as I won't simply give it to you.

All you need to know patrol cops do not perform random vertical patrols. There is a thing called shortage of manpower and a over worked radio. With what time do you think they can do these verticals?.

I don't want to sound like a jerk or the bad guy but I simply want you to realize its only a dream and that is all. I guarantee you it will never happen. I am sticking to my knowledge and you stick to your imaginary theory.

Frank Farance said...

CheshireKitty: My hunch is Mr. Kraut acknowledged what was obvious (poor oversight of PSD by the RIOC Board) because: (1) that conclusion was inescapable, (2) he felt he could take the wind out of complainers' sails by admitting it (certainly, I pointedly made that complaint about the board at it's last Operations Committee Meeting), (3) maybe he'd feel less foolish than Margie Smith's "the complaints haven't been signed [so we can't investigate them]", or Howard Polivy's "we don't have the medical records" (certainly RIOC/PSD has enough of the medical records to determine that is wasn't pneumonia and it was roughness from the arrest), or Mike Shinozaki's "can't seem to find any complaints".

As a State official, Mr. Kraut needs to wear that role better. Imagine if another public authority such as the MTA had a board member call a strap-hanger a "moron". As a public official, he must accept that people will be critical about his performance. And, he shouldn't advertise his Open Office Hours ("you know where to find me") as a drinking stool at a bar.

Frank Farance said...

Officer Prozakis, I don't believe you. According to the Daily News, there are 4000 (non-NYCHA) buildings in Manhattan that have vertical patrols, and virtually all the private (non-NYCHA) buildings in the Bronx have vertical patrols, and approximately 240,000 vertical patrols were done annually. So vertical patrols seem to be a regular thing in Manhattan and the Bronx in private, non-NYCHA buildings.

As for a shortage of manpower, you're wrong, too. Even with 4-5 officers patrolling each shift 24/7, the full vertical patrols on Roosevelt Island would consume only 10-13% of the available staff-hours, i.e., there is plenty of resource to do vertical patrols.

Officer Prozakis, the problem is, you're just negative on this, you don't know your facts, and you don't know Roosevelt Island.

CheshireKitty said...

Time will tell. I believe the information evaluation process is still on-going.

CheshireKitty said...

The IG investigation is a given, Mary. An investigation can't be "dropped" - the whole point is that the matter is investigated and then a conclusion or recommendation is reached.

You really think the IG investigation will reveal it was perfectly alright to beat Jones to the extent that he required hospitalization for his PSO-inflicted dire injuries, and was also cuffed to his bed illegally, and was also denied the opportunity to see his mother or contact a lawyer? If the IG says all that is alright, then we uncover the rot at the IG office.

It's possible the IG office is filled with political appointees - more hacks - that do not want to get a fellow political appointee/hire (Guerra) into trouble. All these scandals will make wonderful fodder for the right-wing press - such as the Post, the WSJ, and many other right-wing media outlets, who would be overjoyed to identify a weak point in the seemingly invincible Democrat machine in NYS, thrilled to have such a story of official depravity, as minor as it may seem to you, to use as a political weapon against against Cuomo in 2016. Imagine the headline: Cuomo, pres candidate, filled all the top spots in NYS with hacks. An unfortunate victim of police brutality in NYS could even get a fair hearing because all the top spots were filled with Cuomo appointees - political hacks. That will really score points with the independents - maybe even some registered Democrats will turn to a progressive Republican candidate (if there is still such a thing ) in *revulsion*. Does Cuomo want to hand this story of political corruption to the right? I don't think so. Because this is exactly how political campaigns are built up and promising candidates are torn down, Mary. All these things that seem so small at first - until they aren't. Even Kraut screaming at Marston. Those words hurt. Imagine if that story was picked up by the wider press: A State of NY official named David Kraut publicly called a NY resident named Lashawn Marston a "moron" - publicly wounding Marston with his words: A possibly racially-tinged story that is different only in degree from what Zimmerman did to Trayvon. Get my drift?


The story that you think will be buried by the IG office actually has the potential to be big, very big. Which is why I am certain Cuomo wont let it get to that point and will instead do all the right things to ensure peace and tranquility on RI. What that will mean, we shall see - but don't expect it to include a non-report by the IG. And don't expect the civil case to go nowhere either. And don't expect Vance to do nothing - he too is an elected official after all. Have I missed a case somewhere - oh, yes - there's several other cases of pending litigation I've heard of..the matter of some deli workers getting arrested for - doing nothing!


This picture of a PSD beset with litigation from all sides is hardly what the State of NY wants, Mary. It's politically uncomfortable for Governor Cuomo. Trust me, Cuomo will make his intentions known in no uncertain terms once the civil case finishes or is settled. It makes no sense to ask Guerra to resign or fire him at this time since that would give the appearance of admitting RIOC/PSD did wrong and thus simply give that edge to the other side. Even in a settlement, RIOC gains more leverage by keeping Guerra around for the time being. After the civil case is finished, then you will see Guerra sent packing, or quitting.

CheshireKitty said...

You forget one thing. Cuomo, in his quest for "control" sometimes shoots himself in the foot!

Look at this amazing story that even made it to the UK, of the Cuomo administration screwing up, of letting something seemingly minor become big.. making Cuomo look bad, violation of privacy, and probably a nice lawsuit filed by the guy who resigned... The point being you can be sure the Republican political operatives carefully monitor and save these embarrassing stories for use later, such as in 2016..

Check this out: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-politics/9889099/Andrew-Cuomo-aide-shamed-employee-on-air.html

CheshireKitty said...

The point being, Mary, like I said before - we don't have to write to Cuomo. Cuomo will do the right thing.. once he finds out about Kraut's behavior, which he probably has already. Just like he knows exactly what is going on with the Jones case.

Now why would Cuomo want to let this situation "fester" in a City that by now has an overwhelming majority of blacks, Latinos, and Asians? And by so doing possibly alienate the national voting bloc that gave Obama his win in November? All you need is have someone come up and say, hey, this guy was really badly beaten by the State of NY RIOC PSD POs. Afterwards all the cards were stacked against him because all the officials were political appointees and didn't take his case seriously, so as to "protect" - another political appointee/hire. Voters then think: "Hey, I don't like that. That 's not justice. I think I will vote for this socially progressive liberal-sounding Republican candidate who promises to clean up the corruption in State government. Yeah, I think that's what I'll do - even though I'm a registered Democrat!" I don't think Cuomo would like voters - of any color, race, ethnic group, political affiliation, and so forth - to do that. Not doing the right thing by Jones, and letting Kraut get away with publicly humiliating Marston, is not in Cuomo's political best interest. Nuff said, Mary?

CheshireKitty said...

You know what I think? I think you're right - but that the moment has not arrived politically to call for an investigation of RIOC.

So far, RIOC, with all its warts - and it has a few - is doing the right things (I know you don't want to hear that, but that's my opinion): Cameras, check; notification of force escalation; check. Next the IG investigation and the audit. I know that does not sound like a lot - certainly RIOC is protecting Guerra and the brutal officers at this time, which is a big minus - but the cameras, notification, investigation and audit show that RIOC at least has a pulse, and is doing something.

There is the distinct possibility that at some point, when it is politically unavoidable, an investigation will be launched into RIOC itself - which is why Torres and Martinez are already gone.

The pattern of RIOC Pres & VP of Operations being allowed to quit before an investigation hits virtually mirrors the situation at BPCA two years ago, when it underwent a massive IG investigation resulting in a shake-up and other consequences. Check out this story: http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20101105/downtown/battery-park-city-authority-blew-300k-on-parties-lavish-expenses-probe-finds.

Put in place RIOC's lax oversight of PSD resulting in 5 years of complaints because of over-enforcement, lawsuits, brutality, the near-death of a PSD beating victim - instead of the excessive party expenses and silencing of a whistleblower at BPCA.


Yep, gotta agree - there will be plenty to investigate at RIOC.. at some point..

Frank Farance said...

CheshireKitty: I do agree with your points above (e.g., cameras/reporting will help) and I said so in video Part 2 above (first couple minutes).

GeorgeProzakis said...

Because we all know the news is 100 correct. Not exactly the most factual thing to use.

We do not go out on patrol and have objectives to patrol FTAP buildings. That is not the scope of a patrol cops duties.

A supervisor MAY have a two or three man team perform a couple verticals in a horrible complaint prone building, yes. Possibly for a week or so, even that is pushing it. Every tour? No. Everyday? Probably and most likely not. This team would probably comprised of a conditions team whose objective is to produce activity.

So your simple policing of shoe the kids away won't work, you are going to have kids getting locked up and summonsed.

YetAnotherRIer said...

You kept at it for a lot longer than most of us. Kudos to you, George. There is really absolutely no point in discussing anything with Frank. He simple does not care for anything that does not support his point of view.

YetAnotherRIer said...

He may not know all the facts, i.e. numbers, but he knows a lot more than that. He's got the experience. He knows the culture within the department. He knows a hell lot more than you do, Frank. As usual you think numbers trump everything. This is not how the real world works. Oh, and the real world is also a loss less complicated than you may think.

Frank Farance said...

Officer Prozakis: You make illogical points: if we're paying for a certain level of staffing, and RI is low-crime, then "its a waste of time as there is actual crime elsewhere to combat" is a false statement, right?

Even Director Guerra points out about vertical patrols: if something urgent comes up, an officer can go to the incident, then continue vertical patrols later.

I'm starting to believe that you're not an active NYPD because you don't seem to be aware of the vertical patrols policies and recent changes. You can't seem to grok that the patrolling here would have different objectives, that vertical patrols are done elsewhere in the city.

You claim you're an officer, but we have no way to verify that. And you say that claim means that you're right about arguments, but you provide no other supporting points. And you still don't know Roosevelt Island.

Not to mention, you avoid very straight forward questions that, in theory, you should be able to answer: if a vertical patrol is a task for an officer in a command and control
structure, then under what rubric does he/she choose not to do that task? You keep giving the impression that officers can refuse to do tasks ("verticals or keeping the peace. That's not desirable").

You tell us "Patrol cops do not actively perform verticals", but in fact they do and you acknowledge it. The vertical patrols are a contractual requirement for our buildings.

You have a very poor attitude about your job: you look to avoid work, you look for excuses why you don't want to do work, and you present a bad attitude about NYPD (which is different that most of the NYPD I interact with). Hopefully, you'll never work on Roosevelt Island.

GeorgeProzakis said...

I felt compelled to try to help him understand it just doesn't work the way he believes it will work or the way he wants it to work. As an experienced professional I simply tried to show guidance and explain the realities of an idea that is a failure before it even began.

There were plenty of alternative idea that can work and have been brought to the plate. After careful review of his postings it beyond apparent that he is out for a vengeance against the officers and staff of the islands law enforcement leg.

It was discussed to might as well enact them to be police officers and send them to a police academy, which to was probably the best suggestion I have read. As well as to explore better hiring practices, entrance exams, psychological testing, physical standards if such do not exist or are lax.

Review and help enact a better training curriculum if such area is lacking was also another suggestion. All great ideas that can be enacted and help make a better agency on Roosevelt Island.

Personally, I Love small community full service police departments. I remember when I use to live in a small incorporated town in Nassau. We all knew the cops and the cops knew us. Respect was well rounded and when an issue was brought up, it was taken care at the town hall meeting. Of course the community knew their role and they understood why the police were doing their jobs the way they did. That is why I said you guys are very lucky to have this, although not full service, it is still absolutely better than waiting 10-15-20 or more minutes for help from 911.

It generally takes 4-7 minutes for a 911 call to be entered in the computer and sent to the precinct dispatcher. By the time the dispatcher sends out the message over the radio, about and the time the officers respond it can take about 10minutes for a response from a sector. A sector car is not necessarily in their sector the whole time. They can be on the complete other side of the command and may be responsible for several other "sectors" within the precinct due to manpower and coverage.

I know in my old command I was responsible for 4 separate sectors during my tour.

The imagination that the nypd is ready at his disposal is disturbing and false. It just does not work that way. You can't pay for nypd services. We are not a Fortune 500 company, our services cannot be purchased at your will or wave of a stick. I am absolutely offended at his buy a civil servant cop plan.

Frank Farance said...

Ms. Zelkner: Here's what NYPD said: my complaint about Mr. Kraut involved "harassment", they are happy to take the complaint (it's an easy task, according to them), and they see documenting the incident is important step. Pretty much what I expected.

YetAnotherRIer said...

His attitude is a lot better than yours, Frank.

YetAnotherRIer said...

I am one of the 11,900 residents. I never had a real run-in with the PSD except once when an officer asked me to ride my bike on the streets even though it was a lot more convenient at that time to just go on the sidewalk, slowly. Should I have complained because I didn't do any harm and was careful? Should I have cursed out that officer because he made my life "harder"? Should I have pointed out the fact that there was another bicyclist on the other street who got away with riding on the sidewalk but I did not? And so on, and so on. No, I listened, took my time to think about what happened, and let it go.


I said it before, I say it again. The people who complain are the ones that have been exposed to law enforcement more than once. They are known to be "bad". Should they always get the benefit of a doubt? Sure, in a perfect world. Is that reality? No, of course not. They need to be treated that way because they tend to do something wrong by default. Better safe than sorry.

YetAnotherRIer said...

I wonder how many people are tempted to do the same after they had to deal with you and your attitude.

GeorgeProzakis said...

Contractual with who? Not nypd. FTAP is not a contract.

Frank Farance said...

YetAnotherRIer says: "The people who complain ... They are known to be 'bad'. ... They need to be treated that way because they tend to something wrong by default. Better safe than sorry." Sadly, you have no sense of justice, fairness, the Constitution, and the rights we enjoy. You have no moral authority with that kind of thinking.

GeorgeProzakis said...

Wah wah wah.

Whatever happened to real men?. You should have cussed him back. What a pathetic.

GeorgeProzakis said...

I guess you will feel just fine and dandy walking along a desolate alley with a group of 10 of our upstanding citizens smoking weed and drinking 40's. right.

You are a pathetic "man" with no common sense and a feeble mind wrapped around the all mighty Internet. If you have children, and i pray you don't, they must be really proud of their daddy. You would have no problem letting your precious spawn hang out with the urban youth?. Share a joint?. Talk about vagina and sexual acts?. Hey it's anatomy!.

If you answered YES, you need psychiatric help. If you answered no, then stop pretending. Cut the Ringling Brothers act out already. I don't even live there and it pisses me off how you act and come across. You act like a bullshit czar

Frank Farance said...

Officer Prozakis: You mislead us about the truth. According to Patrol Guide 212-59 (Vertical Patrol): "PURPOSE: To prevent, detect and take necessary enforcement action regarding illegal activity occurring in lobbies, stairwells, basements and other common areas of multiple dwelling buildings that are ***not owned by the New York City Housing Authority.***" [My emphasis added.]

When I point out that Vertical Patrols are done in private buildings and cite the Daily News, your response is "Because we all know the news is 100 correct. Not exactly the most factual thing to use." But, in fact, Vertical Patrols *are* done in private buildings, you knew that already, you just look to mislead the community with your FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) attack.

So when you say "I am telling you how it is. Patrol cops do not perform verticals.", you're just not telling us the truth because it is in the Patrol Guide.

Because you don't know Roosevelt Island, you don't know about ground leases. The vertical patrols are required by RIOC/PSD in our ground leases. It's not a TAP (a Manhattan thing; not FTAP, e.g., Brooklyn), but a contractual requirement.

And you say "Just so you understand we
have a housing division for a REASON", but in fact Vertical Patrols (as per PG 212-59) are done *not* by the housing division. Again, either your don't know your (supposed) NYPD job, or you're just misleading us, right?

Lastly, it's "rubric", not "rubic". So I ask again: With all your experience, please explain: if a vertical patrol is a task for an officer in a command and control structure, then under what rubric does he/she choose not to do that task? Hint: Since you don't know what "rubric" means (looking on the web won't help), why not ask your supervisor or union rep to help you answer the question.

GeorgeProzakis said...

i don't know if you know but you only worded the first paragraph and not the key component.

How about you post STEP 1?. You post the right wording but not the key components.

Those group of cops doing the vertical are not pushing a sector car. They will be probably most likely conditions team doing it. Guess what their objective is?. I'll give you a multiple choice exam on this. Is it a)make friends and check on door knobs? B)check for burned out light bulbs? or C)stop people and give them summonses or perform arrests?.

The answer is C.

A patrol officer pushing a sector car will never be forced to perform a vertical patrol for a random building to be built into their routine patrol, especially in a very busy command. That is the way it is and that's the way it stands.

Your flawed theories about knowing the police department is wrong. The patrol guide is about 2,200 pages. Is if followed to the tee? Absolutely not. Real world and patrol guide world do not coexist the majority of the time.

I'm done with you. You are an insane man.

Frank Farance said...

Officer Prozakis: I'm glad you're done because you keep misleading the community on a variety of topics, including your latest post. You say "I know ground lease affects psd but stop trying insinuate that it is contractual for nypd", which I never said.

Here's what I have said:

- PSD has been doing a lousy job, NYPD could do much better

- It's not just better training with NYPD, it's also better management, better hiring, better promotions, a CCRB (very important), and more effectiveness.

- Our City taxes and low crime rate would rationalize very few patrol officers via normal mechanisms.

- However, RIOC has $1.7 million in Public Safety Fees that it collects from the building (tenants' rents / maintenance) via ground lease payments. At approx. $100K per officer, that would pay for about 17 staff (across three shifts 24/7) which is the same level a patrolling that we have now according to Director Guerra

- The vertical patrols are a contractual requirement for the WIRE buildings via the ground lease, i.e., RIOC is obligated (presently via PSD) to provide security/patrol services.

- RIOC could still meet its contractual obligations under the ground leases by replacing the present PSD with NYPD officers. A separate arrangement (e.g., interagency agreement or some other contract vehicle) would be required for RIOC to get the *additional* services (e.g., **additional** 17 F.T.E. staffing via NYPD). The mission of these officers would be, essentially, the same as the present PSD: quality of life, patrolling, enforcing the laws of the City and the State, and so on.

Thus, I never implied that the ground lease was a contractual obligation of NYPD, it is a contractual obligation of RIOC, which might be satisfied via (say) a separate interagency agreement with NYPD.

As for the Patrol Guide, I had guessed that before you asserted that Vertical Patrols were not part of the Patrol Guide for non-NYCHA housing (which you sounded very familiar with), you would have checked what it said in the Patrol Guide, right?

As for your statement "A patrol officer pushing a sector car will never be forced to perform a vertical patrol for a random building to be built into their routine patrol, especially in a very busy command", this is where your lack of knowledge of Roosevelt Island trips you up: there is no need to drive from 550 Main (presently, PSD headquarters) to the buildings that require vertical patrols: they are all less than 3 minutes walk away.

Lastly, why (with all your purported experience) do you avoid answering a basic question: if a vertical patrol is a task for an officer in a command and control structure, then under what rubric does he/she choose not to do that task?


My sense is: you avoid answering that question because the correct answer contradicts what you've said previously, right?

CheshireKitty said...

No George.. more like Hah hah hah.. You *wish* Frank would have been drawn into a verbal showdown with Kraut.. unlikely, since Frank is much smarter than that. Go ahead.. call it pathetic.. it ain't. It's smart. Kraut comes off as an idiot, and Frank simply steps aside and files the complaint, quite correctly. Case closed -- for Kraut..

CheshireKitty said...

Gimme a break YetAnotherRIer. Prozakis IMO should immediately start taking his Prozac.. he needs to get his depression under control since his beloved PSD is about to implode. Prozakis knows alot? It sounds to me Prozakis is a PSD shill, if not actually posting from within PSD. His only aim for the past week or so is to throw cold water onto any idea envisioned for the post-Guerra, probably post-PSD upcoming era. It's only Guerra or his puppet who would be lobbying so hard to keep PSD as it is currently constituted under Guerra on RI. Because Guerra or whoever he may be paying to post comments for him, has the most to lose in the upcoming investigations/probes/audits, he has the most to gain by spreading continuous unending pro-PSD propaganda on this blog. C'mon YetAnotherRIer - please don't automatically defend Prozakis. If you disagree with Frank, say so - and say why. But please don't just stick up for Prozakis. As I said, Prozakis needs to take his Prozac... because of his upcoming depression.. once he gets fired or is forced to resign...

CheshireKitty said...

Dumb, George, dumb.. confusing the word rubric (look it up) with Rubik (as in the cube) is only something a clueless rube would do..

CheshireKitty said...

This is a very reasonable, well-thought-out design to provide police protection for RI by the NYPD. I hope Frank presents it to RIRA for discussion/endorsement.
(PS George aka the guy who needs to start taking his Prozac as of, like, yesterday - You wish he were insane. Very sadly for you, he isn't. Adios PSD, sayonara Guerra..)

CheshireKitty said...

Do finish George. We're tired of your pro-Guerra propaganda. Guerra and his shills will say anything to keep the PSD as it is - a nice "sinecure" for a retired NYPD - so he can work another 5 years on RI and collect another pension, right? Guerra or his puppet George still needs to pull down the bucks - he badly needs the RI job which pay so much more than his pension from the Greenburgh gig. That's why he's fighting so hard to defend the PSD and Guerra. Your recitations are tiresome George. Time to turn in with a nice cuppa Prozac and herb tea... settle down... get ready for your forced retirement...

CheshireKitty said...

Garbage, YetAnotherRIer! If the world thought like you, then everyone who ever got a ticket for any reason, oh, just discount what they're saying, they're "bad" - just lock 'em up. It's people like you that enabled the Nazis - well-meaning, smug, well-behaved... those who figured, well, if all these folks -- oh, I see they're wearing the Star of David, gee I wonder what that could possibly mean -- are getting locked up, then the State knows best, all these folks *must* be "bad" if they're getting locked up. Oh, I'll think I'll just go on my way here, on my bike, by Lake Wannsee.. oh my.. look at all those Nazi brass at some sort of conference... I wonder what they are meeting about.. but, why think about it.. after all, they're the State, and they *always* know what they're doing, much more than the people...

CheshireKitty said...

Nobody has said anything of the sort although Governor Cuomo has recommended the decriminalization of the possession of small amounts of marijuana. As far as drinking containers of beer - it seems the enjoyment of alcoholic beverages, which is pushed right and left and day and night in all media, is only OK if it's done in expensive restaurants or hip bars by those of a certain class, income-level, or color. Do you really think some cop in Williamsburg is going to pick on a young white trust-fund hipster sipping from a 40 oz beer at one of the new, hip parks along the E. River? I doubt it. Yet the same cop will pick on a Latino "youth" doing the same thing a few blocks south, in the "un-hip" Puerto Rican part of Williamsburg, right?


Your other comments make no sense. You need to seriously learn about what goes on throughout the country since forever. We're not living in the 50s anymore. The sexual revolution occurred circa 1960s.. You are living in the past.. a past that is thankfully over. Sex is prevalent with youth throughout the country - youth of all classes, races, income levels. In fact, maybe even more prevalent in the upscale suburbs. There's a reason kids learn about sexuality in high school or even junior high school - since they're gonna have sex anyway, they might as well be fully informed about it beforehand..


And nobody is saying people should join gangs.. That suggestion represents more of your utterly contemptible garbage George (and I thought you were going to quit the blog - please do so so we can be spared your continuing garbage). The entire law enforcement establishment of the US, from FBI on down, is focused on conquering the scourge of gangs - Russian gangs, the Italian mafia, Asian gangs, Chicano gangs, and urban gangs. Nobody is saying we should let kids of any race, color, creed or ethnic origin join gangs. But, you have to collect evidence and built a watertight case before you swoop in and bust gangs. That involves wire-taps, surveillance, monitoring, possibly agents "embedded" within the gang. Usually PDs or the FBI does this is there's rampant shootings and violence occurring. Yet George, you keep saying RI is a low crime zone in other contexts such as when you say, oh, getting rid of the PSD means NYPD coverage will not be forthcoming because there's so little crime on RI. Now, however, you suggest there is gang activity on RI. So what's your position, George? RI is high-crime or low-crime? RI has gangs, or doesn't. You wont answer because it doesn't suit you to give a straight answer 'cause all you're looking to do is save your job. And that , I suggest, is what's pathetic.


So George, you are the one that's pathetic - clutching desperately at your PSD job which, as we speak, is becoming more and more a shadowy thing of the past... too bad George.. you shouldn't have done all the bad things you did to the kids and adults and moms and dads on RI.. Your past has come back to haunt you.. .there's no escaping.. the chickens have come home to roost.. it's time to pay the piper... the jig is up.. Time to start popping those Prozacs, George Prozakis, and head on out back up the Sprain Brook Expressway.. back to those delicious suburban shady groves.. if not exactly home... then, maybe... Singsing?

GeorgeProzakis said...

I don't care about any employees of the public safety. I am trying to enlighten you on your plan makes no sense and will never ever work.i am trying to make you understand you need to re evaluate your options.

Frank Farance said...

Officer Prozakis: Thank you for sharing. Because you don't know about Roosevelt Island, then you think this is an "elitist" thing, but it's not. Many of us on the RIRA Public Safety Committee explore ideas, bring them up for discussion, and (sometimes) forward them to RIRA for endorsement. For example, the RIRA Common Council voted unanimously (25-0, I think) for the resolution requesting termination of Guerra, Bryan, etc. from Public Safety. So that's the Island's elected (and recognized representative) body that made that request. That's a democratic thing, not an "elitist" thing. But because you're unfamiliar with Roosevelt Island, you make these basic mistakes in understanding the discussion.

If you want to see "elitist" thinking, look at YetAnothrRIer's statement "the people who complain ... are known to be 'bad' ... need to be treated that way because they tent to do something wrong by default. Better safe than sorry." A real nice us-versus-them thinking that excuses any abuses with "better safe than sorry".


I guess when you say "Hey prick, ..." to me, it means you don't have a good argument, and it's an admission you lost the argument, right? You keep getting it wrong on the facts, right?



So back to the question you keep avoiding: if a vertical patrol is a task for an officer in a command and control structure, then under what rubric does he/she choose not to do that task? In other words, with a given "a vertical patrol is a task for an officer in a command an control structure", then the question is asked: "under what rubric does he/she choose not to do that task?". Did you ask your union rep or your boss?


Anyway, thanks for sharing.

Westviewer said...

You are making assumptions and you are wrong. You are lucky that that while you were "thinking" the officer didn't handcuff you.

GeorgeProzakis said...

My facts are right but you act like a prick at times and refuse to understand how things are done. Look I have nothing against you but you are not a member of the police department. All you know is what you read but you fail to understand the realities of how things are done.

You are trying to avoid heavy handed enforcement. All I am saying is the department has a lot of heavy fish to catch and those are not on Roosevelt island. I am speaking on a personal perspective level and not in a spokesperson level.

You just don't want to understand.

YetAnotherRIer said...

And you sir, or ma'am, didn't understand one word he said.

CheshireKitty said...

OK. So we're supposed to automatically accept that because George says it, it's true? He has the lock on truth, is that it? No dice, YetAnotherRIer.


Firstly, George can't even answer the basic question about vertical patrols. A very simple question at that: RIOC has the money (currently allocated to PSD) to pay for additional NYPD coverage. The additional NYPD officers will then perform vertical patrols.


George can't admit that this will work because it means PSD's end.


I don't think you, YetAnotherRIer, have understood the discussion.


And no need to patronize me with the sir or madam business. Nobody ever calls a cat sir or madam..

CheshireKitty said...

George: You forget that the island is the fruit of a special NYS-NYC relationship - that cooperation, to foster the continuing progress of the island - could easily be extended to improve police coverage.


The Mayor doesn't want RI to be mired in scandal - not with the cornerstone of his legacy, Cornell-Technion, about to unfold. The Governor would only be too happy to replace PSD with NYPD if PSD brought shame to RIOC, which it has done, as we know.


Obstacles crumble when there is political cooperation. If the Governor and Mayor agree on NYPD protection for RI, believe me, it will happen - including vertical patrols.

GeorgeProzakis said...

I have nothing to lie about. I have no stake at anything except to help you understand it's a different world and different concepts of crime fighting.

Other than that, I don't give two moonpies for anything else. I don't care what happens to the safety agency or if you just hire basic security guards. I just want you to understand the dedication of time to patrol Roosevelt island will not happen. It's a false promise.

It's hard to sit back and "listen" to people basically demand the impossible. It's also hard to see people think they know how things are done just because its on paper somewhere meant for something else.

Call me a sucker, a sucker I am.

Frank Farance said...

Officer Prozakis: I spoke with NYPD officers, none of them see any of the restrictions you talk about, I've cited confirming points in the NYPD Patrol Guide, and in various news articles (Daily News, NY Times, Columbia Law). Your points don't hold up to scrutiny, you're just wrong on many points, as verified by other authoritative sources (documents, manuals, discussions with NYPD, etc.). What you continue to offer is Disagreement Without Substantiation. You tell us your an experienced NYPD officer, yet your facts are wrong and it seems your demonstrated knowledge is shallow.

And you don't know much about Roosevelt Island, which has a particular set of quirks that make this neighborhood different than most others in NYC (such as getting basic services).

A better question is: Why do you continue to spend much time writing on this blog when (1) you don't live here, (2) according to you you have no connection here, and (3) you don't know much about the Island. A more plausible explanation is: you're a shill for RIOC/PSD, Guerra, etc..

So, hypothetically, assuming that we are asking the impossible, but clearly you're not convincing the protesters/petitioners because their sizes are increasing, not decreasing. Maybe YetAnotherRIer agrees with you (but he likes you mostly, I'll bet, because you disagree with me). So why keep spending all this time on this blog if you're not a shill for RIOC/PSD/etc.?

Your concern is "It's hard to sit back and 'listen' to people basically demand the
impossible. It's also hard to see people think they know how things are
done just because its on paper somewhere meant for something else." A "sucker"? No, that doesn't make sense. Creepy? Yes, because we have someone who has little connection to this community, opining on community needs, doing it anonymously, who doesn't seem to have good knowledge in his purported profession, yet keeps hanging on. That's a little creepy, right? Or, you're just a shill to throw cold water and misinformation on residents considering something other than the present PSD ... which makes a lot more sense.

CheshireKitty said...

I think you do, and I think you'll say anything to save your skin and that of your beloved PSD. I think Guerra was thrilled with the position because it seemed a relatively simple way to not only work for another 10 years post-retirement, but also get a second pension in the end. That second pension would have enabled him to retire in style.


Guerra was not the right man for the job, though; unfortunately, it took a long time for this fact to emerge, but it has. The countdown has therefore begun on the end of Guerra's tenure at the PSD.


I think everything you have been putting on this blog is preconditioned by your need to defend Guerra and the PSD; because of this twisting of facts to suit your objective of keeping your job, it is therefore not exactly truthful.


You even go so far as to refuse to answer Frank's simple question about C&C because you know there is no way a cop could refuse a direct order to perform vertical patrols as part of his normal, day-to-day routine activities. Yet you keep side-stepping and therefore lying about that one simple question. George, I'm not Frank and I'm not as knowledgeable or as well-versed in many things as Frank is. One thing I do know though: If a cop is told to perform vertical patrols in buildings as part of his regular day-to-day activities, he'll do it. Isn't that how the C&C structure works in a police force, just like in the military? You do as you are ordered, no questions asked.


In addition, when we point out that the money is there to pay for additional NYPD coverage if PSD is disbanded, you raise the most idiotic objections that in the end are also lies - as if there is no way for the City & State to cooperate on this matter, when everyone knows the whole blessed island is based on City & State cooperation. If someone listened to you, then maybe we should never have had let the municipal water supply onto RI since it's from NYC. Or the hookups to the sewers. And many other networks that come from NYC. George - RI is already tied in tightly to NYC - it would be simple and inexpensive to disband the PSD and switch to NYPD protection.


So, yes, I'd have to say you have been wasting everyone's time with your lies, no doubt deliberately intended to "defend" Guerra & the PSD, no doubt written either by Guerra himself, or a puppet of Guerra's, or someone Guerra is paying to add comments to this blog.


Guerra is desperate.. "too bad.." Now he has to live with what he did... Soon, it'll be up the investigating agencies to make recommendations regarding his status as a RIOC employee.