Laserfiche WebLink
<br />...........P.olice Compl~~nt ~ystem and Civilian Oversight Recommendations <br />_nn.. _. ~___*_ <br /> <br />model that had strong evaluative capabilities to detenlline where changes to policy, procedures <br />and training would improve the overall performance of the department was desired. <br /> <br />The proposed model is a hybrid oversight system that consists of both a full-time pwfessionaUy- <br />stuffed auditor's offIce and a civilian review board. The role of the auditor's office is to provide <br />a neutral location to lodge complaints and to actively monitor on-going internal affairs <br />investigations to ensure objective, thorough and high quality investigations. The auditor <br />identitles poHcy, practice and training concerns to promote organizational changes that improve <br />police services to the community and reduce risk and liability to the city. In addition, a civilian <br />review board, consisting of five to seVCll conmlUnity members, will oversee the work of the <br />auditor's office. The role ofthe review board is to evaluate the case handling decisions and <br />investigative recommendations ofthe auditor's office, and in a set of pre-established <br />circumstances, assess how complaints are being investigated and responded to, By involving <br />community members in the review of complaints, the commission sought to increase the <br />transparency and public understanding of incidents under investigation, and, over time, hoped to <br />reestablish trust and credibility in the complaim process. <br /> <br />The proposed model is broken down into three main components: 1) complaint intake, <br />classitication and routing decisions, 2) investigation monitoring and adjudication <br />recommendations, and 3) case review. TIle auditor and review board's function in these three <br />areas are described in more detail below. <br /> <br />Complaint Intake <br /> <br />The success of any complaint system is contingent on an intake process that is easily accessible <br />and perceived a.<; credible and responsive to the end users. The current police department <br />complaint intake process is wholly internal, meaning that the police department has sole <br />responsibility for complaim handling and resolution decisions. In soliciting public input 011 this <br />system, people often expressed <L.'1Xiety that if they complained about a police officer, they would <br />be subject to some fonn of retaliation, their concerns wouldn't be taken seriously, and/or that <br />nothing v.:ould come of their complaint. In response to these concerns, the commission is <br />recommending that the auditor's oHice become the singular intake center for community <br />member complaints, <ind that police employees can choose to lodge complaints through either <br />internal atTair:., or the auditor's office. The auditor's office can also process commendations. <br /> <br />The Police Commission recognizes that designating the auditor's office as the receptacle for aU <br />community member complaints will reqllire a sik,'Tlificant public education process. It <br />recommends that information on the redesigned complaint process with an accompanying <br />complaint fonn is available at multiple locations throughout the community, including <br />community centers, social service providers and even large retail centers. The brochures should <br />encourage honest feedback about police conduct and department services and be available in <br />English and Spanish. The commission is wi11ing to participate as appropriate in developing a <br />revised complaint intake fornl and associated information that clearly explains the process, <br />options for complaint resolution and possible outcomes, and timeline expectations. <br /> <br />The commission also acknowledges that internal procedures for referring community members <br />to the appropriate entity to take a complaint, answer a question, or access other intormation <br /> <br />9 <br />