Public Records Requests and the Oak Park Police Department

Jul 31

This blog post is focused on the process and procedure used to obtain the data in last week’s report, “Alarming racial disparities in Oak Park policing”. We will feature the use of public records and our process to obtain them, while discussing, also, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). In addition to making our process transparent as possible, we also wanted to introduce public records and Freedom of Information Act with the community. Data doesn’t speak for itself, it requires interpretation and sometimes visualization. We are sharing this process and data so that the community can dig in and work with police data. The present blog post would be a first step in true transparency (and self-criticism).

If you have no previous knowledge about Freedom of Information Act requests or public documents, read the post, Quick overview of the Freedom of Information Act and public records access process.

Our on-going task is to understand how policing works in Oak Park, to understand how policing might affect our community. To understand police stops in Oak Park, we used public records and documents produced and used by the Oak Park Police Department. Here’s a quick overview of our process, before we move to some more technical matters.

We used archival knowledge and record keeping practices to successfully FOIA the list of records produced and kept by the Oak Park Police Department;
Then we used that public document (a record of all records) to request specific data listed in that record of all records;
Only once we saw how the police categorized their data, were we able to ask for it in their terms, specifically, and clearly. That’s called “Field Interrogation and Contact Cards.”

This story breaks down into multiple stages, of course. If you want to know more about the FOIA or public records access process, check out the post about the process followed to acquire the Field Interrogation and contact cards.

How do I request records when I don’t know what exists?

In some cases we already know what types of documentation public agencies produce. We know, for example, HR departments do payroll and disciplinary records. But what about a Police Department? The Oak Park Police Department publishes some data that is accessible. But, the police do a lot--they aren’t just a repository of HR records or budgets and purchasing. We didn’t know what types of things existed so we requested a list of all the records they keep (OPPD Records Retention). This kind of list can go by different names for other agencies or departments, but the most common is a “records retention schedule,” a record of all records. It’s the list of record keeping categories, their volume, date range, and when they can be destroyed. The destruction rules are a Cook County thing. This document is useful but also doesn’t contain descriptions of the records (what or who they’re about, subjects, topics, actions...).

Up until this point we were stuck in a Rummsfelidian known unknowns scenario. So we asked for the records retention schedule: a record of all records. Seven days later we were in receipt of the comprehensive list linked above. It was only then that we knew how to formulate the request. Prior to this, we knew we didn’t want only the criminal activities posted on the web. But the solution only came when we could see all the records they create and use.

What do I do when I get the master list?

Once we got the record of all records, we knew what we wanted: what documentation does the OPPD keep of all their interactions, whether or not they end up in the activity report or as actionable criminal issues. We read the record of all records and were able to formulate a clear ask with date spans, and the record keeping categories and terminology the agency uses. We were able to ask for:

“All field interrogation/contact reports since 2015; if only able to provide past five years, I request the most up to date records in the past five years from June 2020-back five years.”

They provided this: Field Interrogations excel file, the data used to produce our report. From there we analyzed the public data and produced a report.

What do I do if I don’t have everything?

We don’t have everything we need. We are still waiting to receive official Oak Park Police Department General Orders governing Field Interrogations: what can occur and how they need to be documented, coded, etc. The Oak Park Police Department provides limited forward-facing public data, and ensures that community oversight follows the burdensome requirements sketched out in FOIA law. In our case, at least two successful FOIA requests. In lieu of broad access to public records, we asked Oak Park Village Manager for the definition of Field Interrogations and she provided this:

“A field stop can be described best as a fact finding process. It occurs when a police officer has stopped a person, in a public place, to ask general questions when the individual is not in custody. Questions directed to the individual are about a crime – such as questions to determine if the individual has witnessed a crime – or alternatively under Illinois Statute (725 ILCS 5/107-14) [link provided by FTT team] which states:
A peace officer, after having identified himself as a peace officer, may stop any person in a public place for a reasonable period of time when the officer reasonably infers from the circumstances that the person is committing, is about to commit or has committed an offense as defined in Section 102-15 of this Code, and may demand the name and address of the person and an explanation of his actions. Such detention and temporary questioning will be conducted in the vicinity of where the person was stopped.
Upon completion of any stop under subsection (a) involving a frisk or search, and unless impractical, impossible, or under exigent circumstances, the officer shall provide the person with a stop receipt which provides the reason for the stop and contains the officer's name and badge number.”

This definition is informative and only bolsters the original report’s conclusions: there are alarming racial disparities in Oak Park policing, and the data shows it. This definition, again, the data is the police’s own, further illuminates the stark analysis provided in our original report.

Conclusion

We feel compelled to show our process and share our data so that others in the community can draw their own conclusions. We want to share our approach to public oversight to make it a truly communal effort so that we can fulfill our duty to discuss public issues fully and freely, and make informed political judgements and monitor our government. Our FOIA journey was a success and yours can be too.