A pair of fiercely fought police reform bills that will slap new restrictions on how cops do stops and searches passed the City Council on Tuesday.
After bottling it up for more than three years, pols approved the Right to Know Act in a close vote at their last meeting before a new Council takes over in January.
A last-minute deal to change the legislation got the support of the NYPD and Mayor de Blasio — but it alienated advocates, who urged Council members to vote down one bill.
One measure requires cops to tell people they have a right to refuse to be searched when there’s no legal basis to force a search, and to get proof of their consent. The other forces officers to identify themselves with a business card when they do many kinds of stops, and to state the reason.
“I grew up in the projects. I grew up in the Bronx. I’m not from an ivory tower. And I’m convinced ... from my own lived experience that this bill will have a real impact in improving the day-to-day interactions between police and civilians,” said Councilman Ritchie Torres (D-Bronx), the sponsor of the identification bill, who gave an impassioned defense of his deal after being hit with a torrent of criticism.
“I believe what I’m doing is right. And I will defend what I’m doing, even if it means I stand alone,” he said.
The identification bill passed 27-20, with three abstentions. The consent-to-search mandate passed 37-13.
In the deal with the NYPD, low-level stops were excluded from Torres’ bill, which will now apply only to stops based on the suspicion of criminal activity, as well as searches. Traffic stops were also excluded.
“That means if an officer stops me, asks me for my ID, asks me why I’m here, asks me a bunch of questions, that officer does not have to give me a card. That doesn’t make sense,” said Councilman Jumaane Williams (D-Brooklyn), who voted against the revised bill.
Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito had blocked votes on the two bills — previously making a deal with the NYPD to instead make internal policy changes — but moved them forward after last week’s compromise.
The votes came amid a marathon session, the last in Mark-Viverito’s term as speaker, where the body voted on 38 bills.
Both the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association and police reform advocates ended up lobbying pols to vote against the identification bill. The union slammed the whole package as an unneeded burden on cops.
“Today the City Council chose politics over public safety by passing two pieces of harmful legislation. As we’ve said from the beginning, the 'Right to Know’ bills will discourage police officers from proactively addressing the threat of crime and terrorism — a threat that is no doubt growing based on recent events,” said PBA president Pat Lynch.
He charged the Council has “continuously piled on new burdens and second-guessing for our police officers, presenting a dangerous distraction that will place New Yorkers in harm’s way.”
A police reform coalition that had pushed the Right to Know Act backed only the consent to search measure, rejecting the ID requirement it said was too watered down.
“We have the right to know who the officers are that are stopping us,” said L. Joy Williams, head of the Brooklyn chapter of the NAACP. “We’re not accepting a piece of the pie. I want the whole damn thing.”
But Torres, who is running for Council speaker, rejected the criticisms, saying advocates had “no business asserting veto power” and denying he was motivated by politics.
“There is no political calculation under which I’m making a remotely rational decision. The bill I’m advancing has no organized support. It faces hysterical opposition,” he said.
He said he opted not “to go to political war with the NYPD and risk a revolt,” like the one that happened among rank and file cops in 2014 when two officers were killed.
Councilman Antonio Reynoso (D-Brooklyn) sponsored the consent-to-search bill, which will require cops to explain in plain English that they won’t do a search unless the subject agrees.
Currently, he said, many New Yorkers don’t know they have the right to say no — or are too scared to refuse.
“There is a power imbalance when you’re asked to empty your pockets by someone with a gun,” he said.