Document of Interest Provided By Councilmember Hamann on Civilian Review Boards

Home Browse Search

The Portland, Oregon, Police Internal Investigations Auditing Committee: A City Council, Citizen Advisers, and a Professional Examiner Share Oversight Responsibilities Background When the police arrested a number of gay persons in a park in 1993 for alleged sexual activity in public, some neighbors and the arrested individuals complained that the police had used excessive force and had singled out homosexuals for special enforcement. The mayoral can- didate promised to look into the problem. As a result, the city auditor prepared an audit of both the Portland Police Bureau’s IA unit and the existing Police Internal Investigations Auditing Committee (PIIAC) that had been created in 1982. A local Copwatch organization also sub- mitted a proposal for strengthening citizen oversight. As a result of these efforts, in 1994 the mayor proposed, and the city council approved, changes to the city code that strengthened PIIAC’s authority and provided for the appointment of an auditor. As shown in exhibit 2–11, Portland’s oversight structure includes three components: the four-member city council, citizen advisers, and a professional examiner. • Technically, the city council itself (including the mayor) is the Police Internal Investigations Auditing Committee, although most people loosely refer to the entire oversight procedure as PIIAC. By ordinance, the committee is required to: — Assist the police bureau in maintaining community credibility in its internal affairs investigations by issuing public reports on the process. — Provide a discretionary review process for complainants who are dissatisfied with an IA investigation. • The ordinance allows the committee to “utilize Citizen Advisors consisting of 13 persons to assist in perform- ing its duties and responsibilities.” Advisers: — Hear appeals as a group at monthly meetings from citizens dissatisfied with police internal affairs investigations of their complaints. — Review all closed IA cases involving use of force. — Individually conduct random audits of IA investigations. • An examiner, hired by the mayor, coordinates the work of the committee and citizen advisers and conducts much of the auditing herself. In 1997, citizen advisers processed 21 appeals. The advisers or the auditor monitored 98 cases. C ITIZEN R EVIEW OF P OLICE: APPROACHES AND I MPLEMENTATION 41 THUMBNAIL SKETCH:PORTLAND Model: citizens hear appeals (type 3) and audit IA process (type 4) Jurisdiction: Portland, Oregon Population: 480,824 Government: strong mayor, city council Appointment of chief: mayor appoints and can fire Sworn officers: 1,004 Oversight funding: $43,000 Paid oversight staff: one full time Appointed by council members and neighborhood coalitions, 13 “citizen advisers” hear appeals from cit- izens dissatisfied with police investigations of their complaints, review all closed cases involving the use of force, and conduct random audits of IA investiga- tions.The city council, meeting as the Police Internal Investigations Auditing Committee (PIIAC), hears appeals from citizens who are dissatisfied with the police department’s investigation of their complaints. A professional examiner coordinates the work of PIIAC and the citizen advisers and conducts many of the audits herself.The examiner and citizen advisers also provide the chief with policy recommendations.