Item B: Update on Implementation of Measure 20-106

Home Browse Search

__.mm_.m..!:,olice Complaint System an~Lg~vman Oversight Recof!.!.~endations other types of closed cases. It 'vvill be the auditor's responsibility to alert complainants that their case will be automatically reviewed by the board as a matter of policy for community impact cases, and will notify complainants of their ability to request review by the board in other types of cases. Board Membership Recommendations The commission strongly believes that the success of the proposed model rests in large part on the quality of community volunteers that serve on the board, A high level of integrity and discipline will be required, as will the ability to review cases impartially, acting primarily as fact finders, The commission has developed the following board membership and selection process parameters; o A smaller board size comprised of 5-7 members is reCOlIh'11ended to maintain a highly effective and qualiiled membership. The existing enabling ordinance for the Police Commission already provides that one member of the revie\v board is appointed to serve as a member of the commission to facilitate information exchange, o Members should serve 4~year staggered temls, with a two-ternl limit (some members preferred 3-year temls). o Members must be age 18 or older and must meet residency requirements (residency within the urban growth boundary and city limits were both discussed, but a decision on which requirement was preferred was not reached). . o Real and perceived impartiality is critical to the credibility of the board. As such, city employees are not allowed to serve, nor should direct family members of police employees. Those with felony convictions should also be prohibited from serving on the board. Additional recommendations for background qualifications, skills ~md training requirements will be developed once the flmction of the board and its reporting relationships are decided. o Selection of members should strive to be reflective of the community, but should not be based on representing a particular constituency (council wards, special interest groups, neighborhoods, etc.). Instead, members should be selected based on a demonstrated ability to be fair and impartial. o The Mayor should develop and oversee the selection process, possibly in consultation with the auditor, so that it includes broad community participation in application screening process. The community panel would review applications and select a slate of candidates for City Council's consideration. However in making the board appointments, Council may select an applicant outside the selection panel's recommended candidate pool. o Procedures ror removal of members after appointment should be developed. o The commission agreed that to protect the board from outside influence, the Chief should not serve in an ex.-officio capacity on the board, nor should any city officials have specific nominating authority it)r board members. 22