AGENCY TESTIMONY
Discussion of proposed legislation (Intro 1020-2024)
0:26:23
ยท
3 min
Commissioner Strauber provides DOI's perspective on the proposed local law Intro 1020-2024, which includes mandates relating to OIG-NYPD.
- The law would require filling a vacancy in the OIG-NYPD Inspector General position within 90 days
- DOI argues that the 90-day timeframe is unrealistic given current hiring challenges
- The law would also require public reporting on investigations open for more than 3 years, instances of NYPD restricting access to information, and investigations closed without issuing a report
- DOI supports transparency but notes that some details may not be shareable to protect ongoing investigations
- The commissioner suggests that additional reporting requirements may not be the best use of limited resources
Jocelyn Strauber
0:26:23
And I'm gonna start with, intro 10 20 dash 10 2024.
0:26:29
This proposed local law has several elements.
0:26:32
First, it would amend the city charter to require the DOI commissioner to fill a vacancy in the position of the inspector general for OIG NYPD within 90 days.
0:26:43
While this time frame mirrors the deadline set in the city charter for the hiring of the 1st inspector general for this unit in 2014, it is not realistic in today's hiring environment.
0:26:55
We support expedient hiring for all of our open positions, including, of course, inspector generals and the inspector general for OIG and YPD.
0:27:05
However, a 90 day time frame is not realistic in light of the challenges we have had and continue to have in hiring new staff.
0:27:13
That short time frame time frame presumes no delays or obstacles arriving in the interview or background process or in the onboarding of candidates.
0:27:23
It would also take full budgetary support to ensure that a competitive salary was available for the position.
0:27:30
This proposed law would also require DOI to publicly publicly report the following information relating to OIG NYPD, the subject matter of any investigation related to NYPD open for more than 3 years, descriptions of incidents where NYPD NYPD restricted or significantly delayed access to any information that the office required, or if NYPD interfered with the office's duties.
0:27:55
And 3rd, the number of investigations related to the department that were closed without issuing a report during the preceding calendar year.
0:28:04
DOI certainly supports as much transparency as possible around the work that we do as long as it will not compromise or interfere with our investigations.
0:28:13
We can readily identify the number of investigations open for more than 3 years.
0:28:18
And I am pleased to note that due to the office's efforts largely in 2023 to complete and close older matters, we currently have no such investigations.
0:28:28
However, for the most part, consistent with our practice, we will not be able to identify the subject matter of those investigations.
0:28:36
Similarly, we could share instances of interference with our investigations or delays in the receipt of materials, though I note that there have been no such interferences during my tenure.
0:28:47
There have been delays, which we've addressed, as I mentioned.
0:28:53
However, we may not be able to share the details of our request to the department because doing so would reveal the subject matter of those investigations.
0:29:01
We are also able to share the number of investigations closed without issuing a report during the preceding calendar year.
0:29:07
And during the past calendar year, there were none.
0:29:10
But we likely will not be able to identify the subject matter of those investigations either.
0:29:16
I also note that additional reporting does take time away from the other work that we do and with a limited staff and despite the relatively straightforward nature of the proposed reporting obligation, it may not be the best use of our resources.
0:29:31
Let me turn now to resolution 05 60.