Yes!Weekly’s Jordan Green posts on the controversy surrounding Rep. Pricey Harrison’s proposed legislation that would grant expanded powers to the Greensboro Human Relations Commission. Guarino responds, and Green answers in comments.

Green also mentions my post on the subject:

Hieb asks, “If the council removed the personnel files, and the commission withdrew subpoena power, then exactly which recommendations did need legislative approval? And how did it turn out — as Guarino reports — that Harrison’s bill included access to police personnel files?”

In fact, the city council did not “remove personnel files” in its August 2009 resolution. The complaint review committee model approved by council includes a provision under the heading “Local Ordinance and Legislative Action”: “CRC will be informed directly by the police department about what specific disciplinary measures are taken regarding officers who have been found to have violated the law or policy in cases it reviews.”

There’s a difference: The provision taken out alludes to a history of complaints attached to a particular officer; the provision that survived the August 2009 vote refers to the disciplinary outcome of individual cases reviewed by the complaint review committee.

I guess one should ask what the difference is between “reviewing an officer’s past history and personnel files” —which was Police Chief Tim Bellamy’s main concern—- and being “informed directly by the police department about what specific disciplinary measures are taken regarding officers.” I personally see a difference, but I think it’s, well, different from the difference Jordan Green sees. (Got all that?)

If you watch the video of the meeting, you’ll note that access to officers’ personnel files is the overriding concern. Bellamy mentions it, City Attorney Terry Wood mentions it, council member Mary Rakestraw mentions it, and even then-CRC chair Wayne Abraham said that keeping track of an officer’s record of complaints once a determination is made by the CRC “will require additional access to personnel records.”

What happened between the time the council passed its 8-1 motion and the time Rep. Harrison filed her bill is still a matter of debate and discussion.