Document of Interest Provided By Councilmember Hamann on Civilian Review Boards

Home Browse Search

Other activities Based on its audits, the examiner recommends policy and procedure changes to the police bureau in her quarterly reports that the city council, acting as PIIAC, votes to adopt. The chief must respond to the report in writing within 60 days. The response must indicate what policy or procedural changes within IA, if any, he has instituted as a result of the report. If the chief does not respond within 60 days, the examiner sends an e-mail reminding him or telephones the IA commander. If the chief still fails to respond, the city council can consider the matter. Chapter 3 presents illustrative policy recommendations PIIAC has made that the bureau has adopted. Staffing and budget Each of the four city council members appoints one adviser; the police commissioner, who also is the mayor, appoints two advisers; and each of seven neighborhood coalitions chartered by the city recommends an adviser to the city council for appointment. Advisers serve for 2 years, subject to reappointment. The mayor appoints and funds the examiner, who spends full time on oversight activities. The examiner’s salary is $43,000. The mayor’s office also pays for oversight- related duplication, telephone, and secretarial costs. Distinctive features The most unusual features of Portland’s oversight system are, first, the use of citizen advisers to review completed internal affairs investigations at the police station and, second, the city council’s role in hearing citizen appeals. • By trying to ensure that IA investigations are done properly, the auditor’s approach may eliminate the need for independent professionals to investigate citi- zen complaints. This approach may reduce the costs of citizen oversight. • Because PIIAC does not accept citizen complaints, some individuals may not report allegations of police misconduct because they may be afraid to take their complaints to the police bureau. Citizens do have the option of filling out complaint forms at the neighbor- hood coalitions represented among the citizen advisers, which then forward the forms to IA. • PIIAC examines only completed cases. As a result, PIIAC cannot shape the conduct of individual investi- gations while they are in progress. However, through its audits, PIIAC may be able to motivate investigators to do a better job overall. By not investigating cases, the oversight procedure may receive better cooperation from the police. • Citizen advisers are not professional auditors. As a result, they may not possess, or may need time to learn, the skills needed to conduct a competent audit. • Because a majority of citizen advisers are chosen by neighborhood associations, citizens may be more likely to feel they are well represented in the oversight process than if advisers were chosen by city officials. • The system does not require police officers to partici- pate in the audit process. • Because PIIAC and advisory board meetings are pub- lic, and because PIIAC must publish periodic reports, the media have an opportunity to focus on police C ITIZEN R EVIEW OF P OLICE: APPROACHES AND I MPLEMENTATION 45 WHEN PIIAC AND IA DISAGREE ON A FINDING PIIAC disagreed with an IA finding three times in 1997. In two cases, the chief disagreed with PIIAC and agreed with IA that there had been no officer misconduct. In one of those two cases, PIIAC voted 4 to 1 to sustain an allegation of misuse of position against an officer who wrote a police report docu- menting that his neighbors’ unsupervised children were making noise on a trampoline late one night after the officer had tried to resolve the problem by talking with the parents.The report suggested that the State’s Child Services Division, which investigates child abuse cases, become involved.The chief sup- ported IA’s exoneration of the officer. In the third case, PIIAC decided that IA was incorrect in deciding that an officer had not violated bureau policy by removing a child from school without notifying the child’s parents.The officers felt that informing the principal was adequate notification.The chief sided with PIIAC.