Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Civilian Review Board <br />Kate Wilkinson, Chair 800 Olive Street <br />Tim Laue, Vice Chair Eugene, Oregon 97401 <br />Bernadette Conover (541) 682-5005 <br />Snell Fontus (541) 682-5599 FAX <br />Marisa Mendoza www.eugene-or.gov <br />Steve McIntire <br />Eric Van Houten <br />April 5, 2010 <br />Mr. John Kroger, Esq. <br />State of Oregon Attorney General <br />Oregon Department of Justice <br />1162 Court Street NE <br />Salem, Oregon, 97301 <br />Dear Attorney General Kroger: <br />On behalf of the City of Eugene Civilian Review Board (CRB) we are writing to seek clarity on <br />issues involving the release of records to the public in investigative complaint cases reviewed by <br />the CRB. <br />As Eugene considered the development of a model for civilian oversight, the concept of <br />transparency was one of the primary principles emphasized. Legal opinions used in the <br />development and implementation of the model clearly indicated that by choosing a “closed case” <br />form of review the CRB could discuss and make available investigative files in cases that were <br />found to be “unfounded,” “within policy” or “not sustained” and where no discipline was <br />imposed. <br />The CRB is covered under four governing layers: by City Charter, by Council Ordinance, by a <br />Labor Contract with the Eugene Police Employees Association (EPEA) and by collectively <br />bargained protocols between the City, the Police Auditor and the EPEA. <br />The goal was to have those records made publicly available to show the “thoroughness, <br />completeness and absence of bias” in the complaint investigation. Or, on the other hand, to <br />indicate where the Board felt the investigations did not meet those same standards. <br />Now we are informed by the Eugene City Attorney that such is not the case, citing another <br />statute that was not considered at the time the Council put the initial charter amendment before <br />the community. Nor was the Council informed of the implications of the statute at the time. In <br />part, that letter from the Eugene City Attorney’s office to the CRB states: <br /> “In sum, between ORS 181.854 and 192.501(12), unless an exception applies, records <br /> related to a personnel investigation of a public safety officer are exempt from <br /> disclosure, whether or not discipline is imposed.” <br /> <br />