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
Re: Civilian Review <br />June 7, 2005 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br /> Bo Complaint intake <br /> <br /> As we understand the Police Commission's model, both the Internal Affairs Division and <br />the auditor's office would accept and process complaints from community members and police <br />personnel. The auditor would screen complaints and conduct a preliminary investigation to <br />determine which cases should be reviewed by the CRB before adjudication. <br /> <br /> Criteria must be developed for determining which allegations of misconduct would be <br />investigated and adjudicated internally and which ones would be reviewed by the CRB before <br />adjudication ("community impact" cases). In our view, investigation and adjudication of <br />complaints or concerns about an officer's performance that do not involve interaction with the <br />community (such as timeliness to work and effective report writing) should remain internal to the <br />department and should be handled initially by the immediate supervisor. The auditor should <br />focus its efforts on complaints that have an impact on the Department's interactions with the <br />community, such as complaints of excessive force, discrimination or misuse of position. <br /> <br /> The auditor would recommend whether the complaint is investigated by a supervisor or <br />by the Internal Affairs Decision, or the auditor could recommend that an outside investigator be <br />appointed. Such a recommendation should be based on pre-established criteria adopted by the <br />Department based on the nature of the complaint. Final authority for assigning an investigation <br />would remain with the Police Chiefi <br /> <br /> C. Investigations <br /> <br /> The auditor would monitor ongoing internal affairs investigations for thoroughness and <br />objectivity. The investigations themselves, however, should be conducted by the supervisor or <br />by the Internal Affairs Division, depending on pre-established criteria adopted by the Police <br />Department. <br /> <br /> The auditor may recommend that an outside entity conduct the investigation, but the final <br />decision should remain with the Police Chief. We do not recommend expanding the auditor's <br />role to allow the auditor to require an outside investigation. Such an expanded role could <br />jeopardize the supervisor status of sergeants and lieutenants under PECBA and federal law. The <br />Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) requires that supervisors participate fully in the adjudication of <br />complaints and the imposition of discipline in order to remain exempt from overtime. The <br />Public Employees Collective Bargaining Act (PECBA) requires a similar level of involvement in <br />order for sergeants and lieutenants to be "supervisors" and thus remain outside of the bargaining <br />unit. Deschutes County Sheriff's ~4ssociation v. Deschutes County, 16 PECBR 328 (1996). <br /> <br /> The auditor may observe or participate in interviews which are part of the internal <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.