My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item B: Update on Implementation of Measure 20-106
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2006
>
CC Agenda - 01/18/06 WS
>
Item B: Update on Implementation of Measure 20-106
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:17:05 PM
Creation date
1/12/2006 11:53:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
1/18/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
43
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
<br />__nm~.?!!.~e Compiain.!..?ystem an~. Civilian Oy.~E~ight Re~?~mendatio~s <br /> <br />VI. Oversight Model Frequently Asked Questions <br /> <br />1. What is a hybrid police oversigllt system and why was it selected? <br /> <br />A hybrid system combines two distinct components into one system. ill this ca.<;e, the tvlO <br />components are a professional police auditor and a civilian review board. The commission is <br />recommending a hybrid system of civilian oversight to build on the strengths of each <br />component to best meet the community's expectations. The full time auditor monitors <br />investigations for quality assurance ,md identities systemic changes needed to improve the <br />overall performance of the organization. The civilian review board creates opportunities for <br />community members to review and conunent on how the department investigates and <br />responds to complaints, promoting a fair and transparent process. <br /> <br />2. What makes this model independent of the police department? <br /> <br />To ensure structural independence of the oversight system, the com..rnission recommends tbat <br />the auditor be hired and report to the City Council, and that the City Council, with <br />community input, appoints the review board members. The auditor's o:ffice will provide the <br />staff support to the review board. So while the auditor and his/her staff are city employees, <br />they \vill not be employed by the police department, physically located in the police <br />department, or supervised by the Police Chief. <br /> <br />3. How does this model assure that all complaints are handled appropriately and that <br />complainants are protected from retaliation? <br /> <br />The intake and classification of complaints, which detennines how a complaint is handled, <br />'Nill no longer occur within the police department. Instead, based on clear protocols, the <br />auditor's office will decide how a complaint would be classified. The review board will <br />monitor these decisions through review of quarterly reports. In addition, the ability to lodge <br />complaints in the auditor's office is intended to provide a safe and neutral environment for <br />complaint intake. People who are still anxious about the possibility of some form of <br />retribution for tiling a complaint may choose to lodge their concerns anonymously. <br />Anonymous complaintswiH be taken seriously and will be classified. However, the auditor <br />will not be able to conduct fonow-up communications with an anonymous complainant. <br /> <br />4. Why does this system still allow police to investigate police? <br /> <br />One of the fundamental values for the complaint system is the desire that investigations are <br />impartial, thorough and fair. Misconduct investigations, which carry the possibility for <br />discipline up to and including employee temlination, must meet rigorous standards for <br />objectivity and integrity. The outcome must be based on a preponderance of evidence. For <br />these reasons, the commission believes that the investigations should be conducted by trained <br />professionals, but monitored for quality assurance by an outside, independent civilian <br />employee, i.e., the auditor. To help protect these investigations from real or perceived bias, <br />the commission is also recommending that the involved employee's supervisor no longer <br />conduct internal investigations. Instead, the intemal afl'airs unit should be restructured so <br />that it has the capacity to conduct investigations of employee misconduct. <br /> <br />23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.