Item B: Update on Implementation of Measure 20-106

Home Browse Search

Police Complain!_~y-~!.~_~._~_~~__CiviHan Oversight Recom~~ndations Upon further discussion of the merits of these two models, the committee decided to combine elements of both opt.ions into a new model. This oversight system was presented to the Police Commission at its May meeting for preliminary discussion and conceptual approval oftile hybrid oversight system. Also in May, committee chairs met with members of ClJBP to compare oversight models. This discussion indicated that the two group's proposals, while not identical, were alike in many important aspects. Once the commission agreed to a hybrid oversight model, research then focused on other communities with similar systems, particularly Seattle, Portland, and Denver. The Deputy Director of the Portland Independent Police Review' Division and Chair ofthe Citizen Review Committee provided 3...'1 overview of Portland's system to the commission. In June, Richard Rosenthal, formerly the Independent Auditor for the City of Portland 3...'1d recently hired as Denver's police monitor, gave his assessment ofthe commission's proposed model. The commission held three meetings in June for deliberation and revisions to the model, considering further input from City Manager Dennis Taylor (s.ee Attadmlent D), the City Attomey, stakeholder groups, aJld input received at two public forums. At the June 9th meeting, the CUBP gave its ~upport to t1~~ connnis~ion's draft prorosal iffre goveman.ce.ofthe model ,vas under the auspices oftne Crty CounCIl. On June 23f and 28 " the conml1SSlOU worked through the intake system and auditor/review board roles to detern1ine where there was consensus on the model and identify areas in need offurther refinements {see Attachment E fi)r the commission's voting record on the substantive portions of the oversight model). At the July 14th meeting, the commission held a 30-minute discussion session with CUBP members to detemline how the ClTBP would proceed with sharing its proposal and/or comments on the commission's oversight model with the Council. A memo from the CtJBP regarding the civilian oversig.~t propos.al is included as Attachment F. Also attached is the Human Rights Connnission's statement of suppon for the oversight proposal that was read into the record at the July meeting (see Attachment G). AHer the conversation with the CUBP and another discussion with the City Attorney on the fUnction of the review board, the Police Commission made several adjustments to the model and voted to forward the oversight recommendations to the City Council for its review. Attachment H includes the City Attorney's review ofthe oversight model and spedfic advice regarding the function of the review board, V. Proposed Oversight System Description In its research of civilian review models, the Police Commission established that. police oversight has evolved from purely citizen volunteer boards charged with reviewing complaints against police. Civilian review of police now includes a range of different oversight systems with stmcturai and procedural variations that are unique to each community. The conunission agreed early on that it favored a model that provides for an external review of complaints by professional statIto ensure competent, thorough, objective and timely investigations. It also valued models that enabled identification of systemic issues within the police department that helped generate complaints. Rather than being eon fined to the review of individual complaints, a 8