Document of Interest Provided By Councilmember Hamann on Civilian Review Boards

Home Browse Search

C ITIZEN R EVIEW OF P OLICE: APPROACHES AND I MPLEMENTATION 103 Openness of Oversight Proceedings Most citizen oversight advocates feel strongly that over- sight proceedings benefit from openness. Many experts believe that one of the most impor- tant functions of citizen oversight is to provide information to the public about the police depart- ment and the complaint process. By itself, this information serves as a form of oversight and accountability, providing voters, elected officials, and the news media with relevant information about police activities. Information serves to “open” police departments to the public. 4 However, oversight procedures have to be sensitive to the legal and ethical privacy rights of complainants and police officers. For example, State public records, statutes, and labor-management agreements may limit the information citizen oversight bodies can disseminate to complainants and the public. • A California statute provides that “Peace officer personnel records and records maintained by any state or local agency, . . . or information obtained from those records, are confidential and shall not be disclosed in any criminal or civil proceeding except by discovery.” Disclosure, with narrow excep- tions, is a criminal offense. • The corporation counsel to the city of Rochester advised that “the public airing by the Police Advisory Board [sic] of its agreement or disagreement with the findings of the Chief of Police would not appear to be fully in keeping with the intent of the New York State’s Civil Rights Law, which makes all personnel records used to evaluate performance toward contin- ued employment or promotion of a police officer confidential.” Even when not prohibited, openness and access may dis- courage citizens who want complaints kept secret from coming forward, and it may inhibit officers from report- ing misconduct by other police personnel. When legal, activities that oversight procedures can con- sider making public include: • Hearings. • Findings. • Policy recommendations. • Internal quality control findings. Hearings in Berkeley and Orange County are open to the public. The Berkeley ordinance requires that all commis- sion meetings and agendas be publicized at least 3 days in advance by written notice to newspapers, radio, and television stations serving the city. The Orange County board invites 57 media outlets to board meetings. Flint’s ombudsman’s office faxes its findings to the local news- paper, two radio stations, and three television stations. Many oversight bodies write com- plainants about the outcomes of their cases but, because of legal limitations or the chief’s decision, rarely report what discipline was imposed—and sometimes whether discipline was imposed. Finally, all oversight bodies prepare annual reports (and sometimes monthly or quarterly reports). (See “The San Jose Office of the Independent Police Auditor Annual Report Is Particularly Informative.”) At a minimum, these reports should include: • The disposition of complaints. • Patterns of complaints, such as: — Type. — Geographic area. — Race, ethnicity, and gender of complainants. — Characteristics of the officers (e.g., race, gender, assignment seniority). • Any policy recommendations. The Orange County board invites 57 media outlets to board meetings.