My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item B: Police Auditor Ordinance Review Report
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2009
>
CC Agenda - 03/09/09 Work Session
>
Item B: Police Auditor Ordinance Review Report
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:15:11 PM
Creation date
3/6/2009 10:30:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
3/9/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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
determination. I propose that if either party is in disagreement with the city manager’s decision, the <br />question could be appealed to the Municipal Court presiding judge for a binding determination. <br />2. Appeals <br />Our civilian oversight system was intended to monitor internal affairs functions, report on the <br />observations of the auditor and the Civilian Review Board to the City Council, and to help the Police <br />Department improve the quality of its work. An appeals process that changes the chief’s decisions will <br />undermine his or her leadership authority, employees’ trust in civilian oversight, and effective long-term <br />organizational health. <br />An appeal process will harden our focus on mistakes and thwart the healthy evolution of the organization. <br />The effect of the enormous energy and interest in the outcome of individual complaints against employees <br />will be a less effective agency with a culture more interested in avoiding mistakes than improving <br />services. Portland’s elected Auditor Gary Blackmere and Portland’s former Independent Police Review <br />Director Leslie Stevens, have both said that an agency can not effectively discipline its way to <br />improvement. <br />Our systems of civilian oversight, police auditor function and internal affairs have struggled to move <br />beyond merely monitoring investigations and recommending adjudications. The advice from Portland’s <br />experience is that the focus of civilian oversight should be to improve policing services by identifying <br />trends and improving on quality through policy and training. <br />3. Continuing the Work of the PAORC <br />I agree that some of the items not addressed by the Police Auditor Ordinance Review Committee should <br />be studied further. I do not believe PAORC should perform that work. The committee was established <br />with a certain membership, which has changed over time, to address issues in a short-term process. It has <br />done an excellent job of completing the work assigned within that schedule. Our committee was not <br />envisioned as a longer-term body to be added to the oversight system. I am confident that when a new <br />police auditor and a chief of police are hired, they will work collaboratively and productively together to <br />make systematic and deliberative changes when needed. This will help our oversight system mature into a <br />robust and effective program of which all of Eugene can be proud. <br />Page 3 of 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.