My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item B: Meeting w/Police Comm.
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2005
>
CC Agenda - 07/25/05 WS
>
Item B: Meeting w/Police Comm.
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:14:05 PM
Creation date
7/21/2005 8:45:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
7/25/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Police Complaint System and Civilian Oversight Recommendations <br /> <br /> o Creating a system that is not overly confusing to the public or procedurally <br /> complicated to maintain; and <br /> o Developing a system that has credibility to employees and the public. <br /> <br />The commission discussed this issue at its June 23rd meeting and considered five options for <br />determining which employees the oversight system had jurisdiction over. It narrowed the <br />options to the following two categories for City Council consideration. <br /> <br /> Categories of Employees Covered Considerations <br />1) All EPD employees Simplicity and consistency in procedures <br /> within the department; however, it would <br /> create inconsistency among AFSCME <br /> represented employees and non-sworn, non- <br /> represented employees City-wide; requires <br /> negotiation with two bargaining units. <br />2) Auditor's role would include complaint Maintains consistent, simple process for intake <br />intake for all EPD employees, access to all and allows the auditor to be aware of and <br />EPD records and ability to monitor all identify issues regarding investigation of all <br />investigations; review board's authority is employees; targets oversight resources on <br />sworn employees. Board would be kept complaints that normally have highest liability <br />apprised of all complaints through auditor's and community interest. <br />quarterly reports. <br /> <br />Govemance Issues <br /> <br />Another key decision point for the Council's consideration is whether it will seek voter approval <br />for a charter amendment to implement the model as proposed by the commission, and if so, the <br />timing for the election. The commission considered the following points when deciding whether <br />the oversight bodies should report directly to the City Council: <br /> o Costs and timing constraints to enable a November 2005 ballot initiative <br /> o Uncertainty of the election results may delay model implementation <br /> o Structural independence for the auditor may be necessary to make decisions that may <br /> not be otherwise supported by city management <br /> o Review board will become a governing body per the public records law and subject to <br /> open meetings requirements; other legal and contractual issues <br /> o Model may have more credibility with the public, but is not likely to gain the support <br /> of the police union <br /> o More potential for politicizing the complaint process if oversight entities report to <br /> elected officials <br /> o Tangential issues associated with modifying the current city manager/council form of <br /> government <br /> <br />The commission agreed that the credibility of the oversight system required that it have structural <br />independence and voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council hire the auditor and <br />appoint the citizen review board. <br /> <br /> 26 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.