Authorization of Agency: MPD invention.

We’ve been hearing about MPD’s Authorization of Agency (AoA) process.   It surfaced in the media during the A-list controversy, where the actual blacklist was on form AA 0306, the Authorization of Agency form.    We also wrote about a couple of Park Protectors who featured on AoAs at the Zoo.

What is Authorization of Agency (AoA)

Authorization of Agency is generally accepted term in real estate law, where it allows an agent to sign property documents in lieu of a principal.

Some police agencies have the concept of authorization of agency, the San Diego PD being an example.  In the case of all police agencies we could find, the authorization of agency is a blanket measure against all trespassers, so it’s similar to posting your property.

MPD’s AoA is different.   It specified the property, but also has one or more individuals who are barred from the property.   This is unique to MPD’s version of AoA.

Normally, trespass does not occur, in the case of property that is not posted, until an accused person has been informed that she is trespassing, and is given time to leave the property.

The legal theory behind the AoA is that the persons listed has been informed that they will be trespassing without further notice if she enters the property again.  It supposedly authorizes the police to act as an agent of the landlord in giving notice.

AoA is also promoted by Shelby Co. DA Amy Weirich as part of Operation Safeway.   Anecdotally, we hear that it is used against the homeless, by apartment complexes and by businesses who seek to prevent “undesirables” on their premises.   The data tends to confirm this.

Our Open Records Request.

We submitted an open records request for all AoAs filed since December 1st 2016, and received about 200 files containing over 1800 PDF forms, many of them older than  December 2016.  Most precincts sent all their AoAs.   We think we have over 90% of AoAs.

As can be seen from the chart, there were 1697 unique AoAs in the data, and race was identified in all but 75.   84.9% of listed persons were Black and 12.3% white, with a couple of percent Latinx and a few Asians.     African Americans are over-represented by a factor of 350% compared with the demographics.  There are seven times the number of Black people over whites.

The original map can be seen on Google Docs.
Click the “Map” tab to view the interactive map, and the “Rows” tab shows the data, with the source field clickable to go to the source PDF.

The collated data table is available on Google Docs, as a comma-separated CSV file, Excel XLSX and OpenOffice ODS files.   These files also contain the name of the barred person, a clickable link to the source .PDF and the page number to search within this PDF.  (Updated 9/11/2017: updated spreadsheet with corrections and added business category field; CSV XLSX ODS.)

The map shows a large concentration stretching through downtown, Midtown, Orange Mound, Parkway Village and Hickory hill, with some outliers in Raleigh and Frayser.    Most of these places are where the races mingle as in downtown and midtown, or in transitional areas where demographics are changing.    But the vast majority of AoA listees are African American.

How AoA is supposed to work.

The forms are filled in by hand by the property manager and are to be witnessed by a police officer.   They are maintained in the original form via scanning to .pdf.  They are apparently kept in hard copy folders by ward which are carried in police cars.   Many of the forms have a three digit ward number written near the top of the form.    The data are accessed by manually searching through the forms in the book.

As manual, hand-written forms, there are no controls on handwriting, spelling or general accuracy.  Many entries are hard to read, either because the original script is undecipherable or because the documents have been scanned, faxed or copied many times.

Many of the forms have additional data, such as sex, weight, height, and marginal notes with drivers license numbers or scanned licenses, phone numbers, addresses, behavioral notes, details of alleged offenses, car tags or descriptions.   DL numbers, Social Security numbers and photos are redacted.   Access the original documents to see additional data.

Although some property managers keep the forms on hand and initiate the application, the suggestion to file often comes from a police officer.

Problems with AoA administration.

The forms state that the complainant has notified the subject that they are not permitted on the property, but we have many instances where the subjects were not duly notified, and there is no checking or control on

• Fergus Nolan and Maureen Spain are on an AoA at the Zoo from 31/5/2016 but were not notified, see example.
• Hunter Demster was placed on an AoA on 9/28/2017 and not notified.
• Up to 12 protesters at the Mayor’s house die-in from 12/19/2016 were placed on an AoA, and an additional 40+ people who were not at the die-in were also placed on the “A-list” AoA, but only Keedran Franklin was notified, and not by Mayor Strickland, the complainant, but by MPD plainclothes police.

Lack of notification of being on an AoA can expose the subject to arbitrary arrest for trespassing while unknowingly being listed on the property.

The “protection” afforded a property owner by AoA is similar to an order of protection, in that it prevents an subject from approaching a complainant while on her property, but AoA does not embody the same opportunity to legally challenge the listing.   AoA may be viewed as an attempt to bypass the safeguards embodied in the Order of Protection process.

The AoA process is not documented in MPD’s P&P manual, and has no maintenance or purge process.  Conditions attached to the AoA listing, such as limited duration of the listing, cannot be enforced.   We have examples of AoAs which were supposed to have limited one-year duration still being on file after many years.    The AoA my still be in effect after the property is transferred to another owner.

The forms are supposed to be signed by the complainant and witnessed by an MPD member.  We found numerous instances of missing signatures of both types, and signatures that were “witnessed” on a different date to the original signature.

We also found numerous instances where a duly signed and witnessed AOA form had additional names added over the original signature, which is a falsification of official records, as the purported signature and witness do not apply to the subsequent changes.   We have instances where both the original form and the updated version are on file, and also instances where later names were added in a different hand to the original list.   Forms should have unused subject lines crossed out to prevent subsequent additions.

Our example.

From personal experience, this example illustrates several of the problems with AoAs. On 5/31/2016, the day after their arrest at a Greensward protest, this AoA (PDF, see page 7) was created for Maureen Spain and Fergus Nolan, without notification.  Their drivers license numbers were provided to the Zoo by MPD for this purpose, in violation of open records laws, which requires DL numbers to be redacted before sharing with members of the public.

Fergus Nolan unknowingly visited the Zoo on at least three different occasions in 2017.  On one of these visits, he was with Hunter Demster, when both were asked to leave.   Subsequently, on the 28th, an AoA was created for Hunter Demster, who was not notified.

During the incident described in our February blog, the police were seen working on some papers.   Once again, for at least the fourth time, they failed to find the existing AoA for Fergus.   The police added him into the existing AoA for Hunter.   The two versions are shown above, where the second line was added in a different hand.

This illustrates what we think are common problems with AoAs.   They are frequently altered to add more names, making the witness signature fraudulent.   Subjects are often not informed of their inclusion on an AoA, making them subject to arrest if they re-enter the listed property unawares.  The system is ineffective.   Fergus Nolan’s 5/31/2016 AoA was not found on four separate occasions.   In addition, the police often add confidential information to the AoA including driver’s license, social security number and photos, which are required to be redacted before sharing with members of the public, and the complainant gets to see this information.

Legal Basis

I’m not a lawyer.   AoA form AA 0705 is another version of the form, and some are present in our document cache.   It cites TCA 39-3-1201, which was repealed, as the authorizing statute.   These AoA forms are still active.

TCA 39-14-405 is the successor statute to the repealed trespass measure and it does not mention AoA or describe its mechanism.   We have consulted attorneys who believe that the process is not legal, but there has not been a legal challenge to date.

Due Process Issues.

As there is no formal record keeping system for AoAs, and as there are no regulations in the P&P manual, the records are chaotic.

There is no judicial oversight, means of correcting, changing data, purging outdated records, or appeal process.

We saw AoAs as old as 2011, and children as young as eleven listed, with no mechanism for parental involvement.

We saw one situation where the same policeman hawked the same AoA against and individual to four different businesses in an area, suggesting that individual police have a lot of latitude in applying this sanction.

The quality of the system, in terms of data accuracy, legibility, efficient access and data maintenance procedures is rock bottom.

We are aware of several AoAs which have been removed fro the database.  These include the original AoA signed in January 2017 for the December 19th die-in, which formed the basis of the A-list.   Also missing is a December 31st for Malco theater which had the names of Keedran Franklin and other CCC members who gave out free theater tickets.   The deletions we know about occurred after political pressure was applied.

Summary

AoA is racist in implementation, has no legal basis, has no checks and balances, is unwieldy, capricious and ineffective, violates due process and has been used as a weapon by MPD officers against the weakest members of our community.

It is questionable if a police force can act as the agent of property owners, in violation of the State trespass law, without compromising their oath to uphold the law.

It needs judicial intervention.

–concluded–