HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3 - Learning Session SLOPD. Presentation and discussion with Chief Deanna Cantrell and Chief James Gardiner (ret).City of San Luis Obispo, Council Memorandum
DEI-TF Agenda Correspondence
Date: September 15, 2020
TO: Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Task Force Members
FROM: Dale Magee, DE&I Task Force Coordinator
SUBJECT: Item 3 - Learning Session: SLOPD. Presentation and discussion with Chief Deanna
Cantrell and Chief James Gardiner (ret).
Please see the attached and the links below for some background material you may find helpful
for our discussion with Chiefs Cantrell and Gardiner on Thursday.
2019 crime report
Racism a Public Health Emergency
Joint Statement from Council Members Pease and Stewart
Community and Mayoral Questions
Additional Information Re: Black Leadership and RACE Matters Questions
Attachment 1 - Civilian Oversight Memo
Packet Page 1
DATE: August 3, 2020
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Deanna Cantrell, Police Chief
VIA: Derek Johnson, City Manager DJ
RE: Civilian Oversight Review
ENC: A – References and authorities
B – NACOLE recommendations for effective practices, June 1, 2020
C – Major characteristics comparison of Civilian Police Review Systems D – City by City comparison of Civilian Police Review Systems
On June 16th, 2020 Council directed Staff to agendize as a “receive and file” item a public presentation
of the information discussed below. Given the complexity of the information, staff has released this information in advance of a future council meeting. Currently, Council Agendas are impacted through
late October; thus, a special meeting would need to be scheduled for the Council to discuss the attached
information and for the public to provide feedback and for Staff to answer any questions.
This memorandum and related attachments provide broad information about Civilian Oversight Systems.
The recommendation is to receive and file this memorandum and provide direction to the City Manager
specific to the perceived necessity and desire to proceed further with any form of citizen oversight review.
This report does not provide an extensive evaluation of the San Luis Obispo Police Department or recommendations in favor of an oversight system. It also does not evaluate the labor meet and confer
obligations that may be associated with a particular option or the costs of establishing and maintaining
any particular system specific to San Luis Obispo. Those steps should and in an abundance of caution be
done prior to any Council action.
If Staff is directed to initiate a broad public engagement process, staff would return an approach to meet
Council objectives including any tradeoffs in current work program efforts and more and more
comprehensive evaluation of costs and meet and confer obligations. Another alternative could be to place
this request into items for the next Council to evaluate as part of the 2021-2023 Financial Plan.
DISCUSSION
There are more than 140 variations of Civilian Oversight Systems around the country, with 33 different
police review entities in California (Attachment D), 16 of which are in chartered cities.
The purpose and goals of these systems include:
1. Increasing police accountability
2. Building trust between the community and the police
Attachment 1
Packet Page 2
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 2
3.Eliminating bias and implicit bias
4.Demystifying police internal affairs investigations
5. Deterring police misconduct
6. Ensuring due process of law for all involved parties
7. Increasing the transparency of police operations, and
8. Involving the community in the creation of policing standards.
Successful civilian review systems require consideration of these elements:
1.Organizational structure of the system
2.Necessary and desirable powers and processes, and
3.Integration of civilian review with existing internal procedures, statutes, and constitutional
accountability systems.
Oversight systems vary in numerous ways, from complexity to costs (Attachment C), therefore, tailoring
the civilian police review systems to local needs is critical.
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT JULY 3, 2020
Many cities seek guidance from an organization called the National Association for Civilian Oversight
of Law Enforcement (NACOLE), a non-profit established in 1995. NACOLE has identified four
approaches to civilian police review systems outlined below. NACOLE’s June 1, 2020
Recommendations for Effective Practices is included in Attachment B.
1.Investigation-focused
(a)Conducts independent or parallel investigations
(b)Most costly and staff intensive
(c)Hired professional staff
(d)Extensive access to police records and personnel (requiring extensive training and
backgrounds)
(e)Most independent form of oversight
(f)California cities that use this system include Berkeley, Long Beach, and San Francisco.
Attachment D provides a city-by-city comparison of major civilian review systems for
25 police departments in California and around the country
2.Review-focused
(a)Reviews internal investigation for quality control – does not conduct independent
investigations and advisory in nature
(a)May issue independent findings, conclusions, or recommendations to the police chief,
city manager, a review board or Council
(b)May recommend further investigation
(c) May identify policy deficiencies or training needs as they apply to individual cases
under review
Attachment 1
Packet Page 3
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 3
(d) Typically, least costly, and least staff intensive
(e) Less independent than investigative review with equal access to investigative records
(f) California cities that have some variation of a review-focused system include
Claremont, Davis, Novato, Riverside, and Santa Cruz. Other cities include Indianapolis
and Las Vegas
3. Auditor/Monitor-focused
(b) Reviews data developed by hired analysts who report to a board or commission with
an eye for broad patterns
(c) May make recommendations to the police chief, city manager, a review board or
Council
(d) May be more effective for long-term systemic change in organizations, but less
effective on individual complaints or investigations
(e) Typically, advisory
(f) Primary cost of this model depends on the number of analysts assigned
(g) California cities that use this model include San Jose, Anaheim, Fresno, Inglewood,
and Sacramento
4. Hybrid combinations of two or more of the other
(a) Elements of all three types above
(b) May have two boards reviewing the department, such as an investigatory model for
misconduct allegations and a separate advisory panel for reviewing policies and
practices.
(c) The strengths and weaknesses of a hybrid system correlate with each component
system, along with costs and resource requirements.
(d) May have a board that has multiple functions, such as investigations and auditing.
(e) Hybrid systems are often the best choice for a city.
(f) California cities that use this model include Los Angeles, Oakland, and San Diego.
Other cities include Albuquerque, Chicago, and Eugene, Oregon.
EXISTING LAWS, PRACTICES and TRANSPARENCY REGULATIONS
In addition to the many different types of civilian review systems, there are many processes, practices,
policies, and laws currently in place to monitor, scrutinize, review, oversee, influence, and change
police practice as outlined below:
• San Luis Obispo Police Department Complaint Process with major case review from Human
Resources and the City Attorney’s Office
• Accountability and transparency laws
o CA Penal Code Section 832.5A PC832.5
• AB 953 – Racial and Identity Profiling Data Reporting 2016
Attachment 1
Packet Page 4
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 4
Went into effect to require California law enforcement agencies to collect and
report data on complaints that allege racial or identity profiling and to
Collect and report the specific types of profiling alleged. Penal Code 13012 also
expanded the definition of racial and identity profiling.
• Enhanced Access to police records through SB 1421 and AB 748
o Went into effect in January 2019 to increase public access to police records under the
California Public Records Act (CPRA) and amended CA Penal Code Sections 832.7 and
832.8 to require disclosure of documents related to certain high profile categories of
officer conduct or misconduct, including:
Discharge of a firearm at a person
Use of force causing death or great bodily injury
Sexual assault, and
Findings of dishonesty that have been sustained
• Peace Officer Bill of Rights (POBAR)
o POBAR sets forth a lost of basic rights and protections that must be afforded to all peace
officers by the public entities that employ them. Codified under California Government
Code Sections 3300-3310, POBAR is a catalog of the minimum rights that the state
Legislature deems necessary to secure stable employer-employee relations in public
safety. When a law enforcement agency investigates alleged misconduct by an officer,
the procedural protections in POBAR balance the public interest in maintaining the
efficiency and integrity of the police force with the police officer’s interest in receiving
fair treatment.
• 42 USC Section 1983
o This federal statute created to deterring police misconduct because it creates civil liability
for police misconduct. Section 1983 of Title 42 of the United States Code was enacted
by Congress as Section 1 of the Ku Klux Klan Act of April 20, 1871 in order to enforce
the 14th Amendment following the Civil War.
o Police officers can be held personally liable for Section 1983 violations.
• Constitutional protections for persons accused of crimes - Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83
o Regardless of civilian review or police internal affairs processes, prosecutors have an
independent constitutional duty to disclose favorable, material evidence to a criminal
defendant, including information contained in police personnel files. The legal rationale
for this constitutional rule is that evidence of police misconduct can be used to attack an
officer's credibility on the witness stand and can make the difference between acquittal
and conviction. A Brady violation occurs when the prosecution (including the City and
Police in their assistive roles) fails to disclose to the defendant exculpatory or impeaching
evidence.
Attachment 1
Packet Page 5
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 5
The purpose and goals of Community Oversight Systems are:
1. Increasing police accountability
2. Building trust between the community and the police
3. Eliminating bias and implicit bias
4. Demystifying police internal affairs investigations
5. Deterring police misconduct
6. Ensuring due process of law for all involved parties
7. Increasing the transparency of police operations, and
8. Involving the community in the creation of policing standards.
The San Luis Obispo Police Department received nine citizen complaints in 2019 and used force 26 times
which is nearly a 50% reduction over the previous years.
Total population City of San Luis Obispo: 46, 548
• UoF incidents 26
• UoF representation of total population 0.056%
• Citizen complaints 9
• Citizen complaint representation of total population 0.019%
Estimated total contacts SLOPD made with the public: 68,732
• UoF incidents representation of all contacts 0.037%
• Contacts that resulted in no use of force 99.97%
• Citizen complaint representation of total contacts 0.013%
Total Calls for Service: 31, 376
• Use of force incidents representation of all Calls for Service 0.082%
• Citizen complaint representation of total Calls for Service 0.028%
Total arrests: 2,173
• Use of force incidents representation of arrests 1%
• Citizen complaint representation of total arrests 0.4%
Additionally, the SLOPD works in close partnership with all segments of the community, and City leaders
to foster open, honest communication between marginalized community members and the police. We
engage in challenging conversations around race and policing and provide a civil and safe environment to
do so.
SLOPD has received thousands of hours of training in principled policing, procedural justice and implicit
bias, and crisis intervention (88% of sworn employees are trained). We have worked with the community
on policy revisions, as well as procedural changes around hate crimes and we have taught the community
about policing through PEACE (Policing Education And Community Engagement) and learned from them
about cultural and diverse issues. We are arguably one of the most diverse Departments in City of San
Luis Obispo, and we will continue to learn from and engage with our community to be a model for others
to follow.
Attachment 1
Packet Page 6
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 6
CONCLUSION
Each civilian police review system includes the ability to make recommendations for improving police
policies and practices. Broad considerations for civilian police review and oversight include:
• Needs assessment
• Type of independence
• Board composition
• Manner of appointment
o In other California chartered cities, appointment power rests with either the City Council
or City Manager/administrator
o The Independent Police Auditor in Santa Cruz is hired by the City Manager
o The Independent Police Auditor in San Jose is one of five Council appointees and reports
to the Mayor and City Council
• Resource needs
• Costs
• Community outreach
• Community involvement.
If the City chooses to move forward with a Citizen Oversight System, it should be formalized in an
ordinance or charter amendment to establish the review system and must be done within the meet and
confer process and be consistent with both state and federal laws.
Attachment 1
Packet Page 7
7
ATTACHMENT A
References and Authorities
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88–352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964)
Civilian Oversight of Police: Advancing Accountability in Law Enforcement (Prenzler and den
Heyer, 2016)
The New World of Police Accountability (Walker and Archbold, 2d ed. 2014)
Overview of Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement in the United States (Attard and Olson,
2013) http://accountabilityassociates.org/wp-content/uploads/Oversight-in-the- US-
%E2%80%A6FINAL.pdf
National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE), www nacole org,
https://www.nacole.org/police_oversight_by_jurisdiction_usa
Walker, Samuel E. 2003. “Core Principles for an Effective Police Auditor’s Office.” University
of Nebraska. http://samuelwalker.net/wp- content/uploads/2010/06/coreprinciples.pdf
Skelly v. State Personnel Bd. (1975) 15 Cal.3d 194
Monroe v. Pape (1961) 365 U.S. 167, 171 [81 S.Ct. 473, 475, 5 L.Ed.2d 492] overruled by Monell
v. Department of Social Services of City of New York (1978) 436 U.S. 658 [98 S.Ct. 2018, 56
L.Ed.2d 611]
Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York (1978) 436 U.S. 658
Attachment 1
Packet Page 8
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 8
8
ATTACHMENT B
National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE) recommendations for
effective practices, June 1, 2020
Recommendations for Effective Practices
NACOLE, through its research and work with oversight practitioners, has developed a set of
recommendations for practitioners to consider in their own work. Each recommendation
focuses on strengthening an agency's practices in relation to the thirteen principles for effective
civilian oversight. While NACOLE has attempted to develop an extensive list of effective
practices for civilian oversight, this list should not be considered exhaustive. The following
addresses topics that have come up as recurring themes or concerns identified by practitioners
and stakeholders.
It should be note that "effective practices" take into consideration the core values and principles
that should be satisfied to the greatest possible extent in order to produce better outcomes. Such
practices value the diverse perspectives and wisdom of experienced practitioners while
acknowledging that in the field of civilian oversight, there are several possible paths to success.
Furthermore, they are consistent with the "best fit" approach to structuring civilian oversight and
prioritizing stakeholder input and dialogue, rather than merely prescribing the "best" in all
contexts.
Recommendations for effective practices are meant to offer guidance, not concrete solutions. The
challenges associated with civilian oversight can rarely be boiled down to technical problems
with technical solutions. Oversight practitioners must consider each recommendation with a
mindset oriented towards a "best fit" approach and consider the following questions with all
relevant stakeholders before implementing a particular practice:
1. Is this practice an appropriate "fit" for our local context?
2. How will this practice strengthen civilian oversight in relation to the thirteen
principles for effective oversight?
3. What are the potential unintended consequences of implementing this practice?
The following is a list of the recommendations. Additional information
regarding recommendations is available upon request during this time at
info@nacole.org .
Attachment 1
Packet Page 9
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 9
9
I. Complaint Process
A Filing and Receiving Complaints
1 Submission of Complaints
Recommendation: There should be several alternative modes for the filing of a complaint
and the process should be as easy and accessible as possible.
2 Barrier-Free Complaint Process
Recommendation: Members of the public, including adjudicated/ pre-adjudicated,
incarcerated individuals should not be discouraged, dissuaded, burdened, or otherwise
threatened or intimidated by the complaint process or when filing a complaint. Unless
required by state law1 the complaint process should not require individuals to notarize a
complaint, sign an affidavit, issue statements under penalty of perjury, or threaten potential
prosecution for false statements. In addition, while it may be appropriate to look at current
criminal charges as they relate to the complaint, reviewing an individual's criminal history or
performing warrant or immigration checks should not be tolerated.
3 Anonymous complaints
Recommendation: Unless prohibited by law, the complaint process should allow for the
anonymous filing of complaints. Complaint forms and brochures should make clear that
complaints can be submitted anonymously and that providing any identifying information is
optional.
4 Third-party complaints
Recommendation: If permitted by law, the complaint process should allow those who have
witnessed or have sufficient knowledge of an incident of alleged misconduct to file a
complaint.
5 Internal complaints
Recommendation : A civilian oversight agency' s complaint jurisdiction should cover internal
complaints - those filed by officers or deputies within the overseen law enforcement agency -
to provide law enforcement officers with a neutral and independent outlet for reporting
officer misconduct and alleged retaliation for reporting misconduct.
6 Accessibility for non-English speakers and persons with disabilities
Attachment 1
Packet Page 10
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 10
10
Recommendation: Oversight agencies should, to the best of their ability, accommodate all
languages spoken by significant portions of the community. Brochures and complaint forms
should be made available in these languages so as to make the complaint process as
accessible to the community as reasonably possible. Both the
oversight and law enforcement agency should maintain compliance with federal Limited
English Proficiency (LEP) laws to ensure language barriers are not a deterrent to filing a
complaint.
B. Case Management
1 Complaint Triage and Alternatives to Formal Investigation
Recommendation: Civilian oversight agencies with jurisdiction over complaints should
develop clear protocols for how complaints are to be handled following a preliminary
investigation. When formal investigation or mediation of low-level allegations are
expected to require a significant commitment of resources and are unlikely to produce
beneficial outcomes, alternative methods should be considered.
2 Handling Complaints Alleging Potential Criminal Conduct
Recommendation: Upon receiving a complaint, oversight staff should evaluate whether it
has jurisdiction over the complaint and whether the complaint should also be referred to
either a law enforcement agency or prosecutor. Protocols should be established for
referring complaints alleging potential criminal misconduct and when an administrative
investigation should be stayed during the pendency of a criminal investigation.
3 Referring complaints to mediation
Recommendation: The seriousness of a complaint and likelihood of a successful mediation
outcome should determine whether an individual complaint will be referred to mediation.
II. Communication with Complainants
A. Status updates
Recommendation: The complaint process is more likely to be perceived as fair and transparent
if complainants receive regular updates regarding their complaint and can obtain status updates
at any time.
B. Close-out meetings
Attachment 1
Packet Page 11
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 11
11
Recommendation: Once a complaint has been adjudicated and/or after a disciplinary decision
has been made, the civilian oversight agency should invite complainants to an in-person, close-
out meeting.
C. Complaint Process and Mediation Feedback Surveys
Recommendation: When a complaint has been mediated, or when an investigation has been
completed and adjudicated , the civilian oversight agency should invite complainants and
officers to complete a survey about their experience and provide feedback regarding the
complaint and mediation processes.
III. Independence
A. Political independence
1. Enabling legislation
Recommendation: An oversight agency is more politically independent and less susceptible
to political interference when its mission and authority are established by municipal charter.
2. City Council Confirmation
Recommendation: A volunteer board or commission' s real and perceived independence can
be strengthened by requiring the city council to confirm appointments.
3. Recruitment and Selection of Oversight Executive
Recommendation: The independence and effectiveness of a civilian oversight agency can
be strengthened by selecting the agency executive through an inclusive, deliberative, and
consensus-based process.
4. Removal of Oversight Executive
Recommendation: The decision to terminate an oversight agency executive should be for
cause only, and the result of a consensus-based decision.
5. Reporting structure
Recommendation: The civilian oversight agency should be structured within government
so as to minimize real or perceived political influence on the decision-making, reporting,
recruitment, and termination of key political staff.
Attachment 1
Packet Page 12
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 12
12
B. Operational and Procedural Independence
1. Report Editorial Authority
Recommendation: Stakeholders outside of the civilian oversight agency should not be able
to edit, modify, or influence the contents of the agency's public reports.
2. Essential Functions, and Daily Operations
Recommendation: Agency staff should be able to make key decisions regarding the
oversight agency' s daily operations without consulting or requiring prior approval from
outside entities.
3. Budget and Staffing Floors
Recommendation: Budget or staffing minimums established in an oversight agency' s
enabling legislation ensure that the agency will have adequate resources to perform its work
and protect it from budget cuts that could undermine its effectiveness.
IV. Boards and Commissions
A. Diversity and Inclusion of Community Groups
Recommendation: The diversity of civilian boards or commissions should closely mirror
the diversity of the community served. Stakeholders should consider involving sufficiently
knowledgeable and relevant local civic organizations and community groups in the
appointment process, so as to leverage their expertise, outreach, and representation of cross-
sections of the community.
B. Staggered Terms and Term Limits
Recommendation: Volunteer boards or commissions should have staggered terms and
term limits for its members so as to introduce fresh perspectives while maintaining
institutional knowledge.
C. Stipends
Attachment 1
Packet Page 13
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 13
13
Recommendation: Board diversity and participation can be enhanced by providing
stipends to offset expenses relating to a volunteer member's duties and work for the board
or commission.
V. Access to Information
A. Oversight Models and Information Access
Recommendation: Stakeholders and oversight agencies should consider the records and
corresponding level of access needed in relation to the oversight model deployed and the
oversight functions to be performed by the agency.
B. Enabling Legislation Language Relating to Accessing Department Records
Recommendation: Legislation establishing civilian oversight must explicitly address an
oversight agency's unfettered access to relevant records and documentation, as well as the
law enforcement agency's obligation to cooperate with the oversight agency's request in a
reasonable and timely manner.
C. Law Enforcement Liaisons
Recommendation: Law enforcement cooperation with civilian oversight can be strengthened
by designating at least one high-ranking individual within the chain of command to serve as
a liaison and the point of contact responsible for coordinating the civilian oversight agency's
requests.
D. Direct Access to Law Enforcement Databases
Recommendation: Direct access to law enforcement databases reduces delays in
information requests, permits the civilian oversight agency to run advanced queries of the
database content, and ensures the accuracy and integrity of the overseen law enforcement
agency's data.
C. Disciplinary Sanctions for Failure to Cooperate
Recommendation: Law enforcement agencies that are subject to civilian oversight should
establish policies outlining the role of their civilian oversight agency, processes and
procedures for cooperation, and the duty of officers and staff subject to oversight to cooperate
with an oversight agency's requests. Failing to cooperate should be subject to discipline
Attachment 1
Packet Page 14
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 14
14
similar to the type of discipline imposed for failing to cooperate with an internal
investigation.
VI. Staffing
A. Oversight Executive
Recommendation: The qualifications for an oversight executive should meet minimum
educational, experience, and skill requirements dictated by agency mandates and municipal or
county employment standards.
B. Supervisory Investigators and Investigators
Recommendation: The qualifications for supervisory investigators and investigators should
meet minimum educational, experience, and skill requirements dictated by agency mandates
and municipal or county employment standards.
C. Policy Analysts
Recommendation: The qualifications for policy analysts should meet minimum
educational, experience, and skill requirements dictated by agency mandates and
municipal or county employment standards.
D. Outreach Staff
Recommendation: The qualifications for staff dedicated to community outreach
should meet minimum educational, experience, and skill requirements dictated by
agency mandates and municipal or county employment standards.
VII. Training
A. Board or Commission Member Training
Recommendation: All board or commission members must receive training, shortly after
appointment, on the policies and procedures of their local law enforcement agency, the
basics of civilian oversight, and the authority and responsibilities associated with their
role as a board or commission member.
B. Staff Training
Attachment 1
Packet Page 15
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 15
15
Recommendation: Staff should be given training on the policies and procedures of their local
law enforcement agency, the basics of civilian oversight, the authority and responsibilities
associated with their agency, as well as continuing education and professional development
on an ongoing basis.
C. Law Enforcement Agency' s Ro le in Training
Recommendation: Members of the overseen law enforcement agency should be
involved in the development and implementation of training for civilian oversight
staff and board/commission members.
VIII. Investigations
A. Investigation Manuals
Recommendation: An oversight agency should develop a manual guiding the processes
and procedures for handling complaints and conducting a thorough misconduct
investigation.
B. Conducting Interviews
Recommendation: Oversight agencies with the authority to conduct investigations should
have clearly stated protocols for interviewing complainants, officers and civilian witnesses.
C. Evidentiary Standard s
Recommendation: The findings of an administrative investigation should be based upon
the standard of proof established by the jurisdiction. Oversight agency staff con ducting
investigations or reviewing findings must be thoroughly trained on the applicable standard.
IX. Auditing
A. Required Audits
Recommendation: Audit or/ monitor -focused agencies should be required to audit matters of
ongoing community interest in order to improve the law enforcement agency's compliance
with its own policies and enhance the trust between law enforcement and the community.
B. Follow-up Audits
Attachment 1
Packet Page 16
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 16
16
Recommendation: The civilian oversight agency should perform follow -up audits regarding
issues it previously examined to determine whether any reforms previously implemented
have remained in place, are still effective, or whether additional remedies need to be
implemented to address outstanding issues.
C. Audit Standards and Standardization
Recommendation: Civilian oversight agency audits should be planned and performed with a
set of uniform or standardized criteria.
X. Monitoring
A. Monitoring Cases of Interest
Recommendation: Civilian oversight agencies authorized to monitor open law enforcement
internal investigations should be permitted to monitor any case the agency deems in the public
interest.
B. Interview Monitoring and Participation
Recommendation: Civilian oversight agencies authorized to monitor open law enforcement
department internal investigations should be able to actively watch or listen to relevant
interviews in real-time. The oversight agency should be able to provide specific questions
before or during the interview as well as consult investigators regarding the direction of the
investigation.
C. Public Demonstrations and First Amendment Assemblies
Recommendation : Civilian oversight agencies with adequate staff and sufficient
resources should be authorized to monitor, evaluate, and report on the overseen law
enforcement agency's policies, procedures, and tactics for policing public demonstrations
and similar First Amendment -related gatherings if deemed by stake holders to be a matter
in the public interest.
XI. Reviewing Investigations
A. Investigation Review Checklists and Matrices
Attachment 1
Packet Page 17
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 17
17
Recommendation: The civilian oversight agency should develop and use a case review
checklist or evaluation matrix to consistently evaluate the thoroughness, accuracy, and
fairness of internal investigations.
B. Voting Seat on Use of Force Review Boards
Recommendation: A representative from the civilian oversight agency should have a
minimum of one voting seat on the law enforcement agency's Use of Force Review Board
(UOFRB).
XII. Data and Policy Analysis
A. Internal Data Collection
Recommendation: The civilian oversight agency should collect sufficient internal data and
records relating to its own work to analyze strengths and weaknesses in its operations,
identify pattern s and trends in law enforcement relevant to its mandate, present information
to the public, and provide additional insight if the agency is being evaluated.
B. Analyzing Civil Claims and Litigation
Recommendation: Collecting and analyzing legal claims and lawsuits filed against the
overseen law enforcement agency provides an opportunity to improve law enforcement
functions, identify at-risk officers or units, and mitigate municipal and taxpayer exposure to
future legal claims.
C. Analyzing Use of Force
Recommendation: Oversight agencies with access to use of force reports should
regularly analyze and publish disaggregated data to the public.
D. Data Quality and Data-Driven Analyses
Recommendation: Civilian oversight agencies should only use credible and relevant
data to support assertions made regarding the law enforcement agency' s policies,
practices, and procedures. Data analyses must use appropriate and methodologically-
sound statistical approaches.
E. Policy Reform Task Forces
Attachment 1
Packet Page 18
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 18
18
Recommendation: Policy recommendations pertaining to matters of significant
community interest may require the convening of a task force, including civilian
oversight, law enforcement and their unions, community members and advocacy groups,
relevant municipal agencies, and national experts to develop policy recommendations
and assist in their implementation.
XIII. Issuing Recommendations
A. Developing Policy and Training Recommendation s
Recommendation: Policy and training recommendations should include, to the greatest extent
possible, specific details, relevant examples and resources, and actionable language to guide
proposed actions for the law enforcement agency.
B. Developing Disciplinary Recommendations
Recommendation: Disciplinary recommendations for sustained allegations of
misconduct should be consistent, fair, and just.
C. Requiring Written, Public Responses to Oversight Recommendations
Recommendation: Requiring the law enforcement department to publicly respond in writing
to a civilian oversight agency' s recommendations can improve transparency and
accountability.
D. Status of Recommendations and Follow-Up
Recommendation: Oversight agencies should track and report the status of recommendations
issued to the law enforcement department. If the law enforcement department has accepted a
particular recommendation, the oversight agency should follow -up on its status and assist
with its implementation where possible.
XIV. Reporting and Transparency
A. Regular Rep o rt s
Recommendation: The oversight agency shou d issue regular reports to the public describing
the agency's mission, authority, activity, and accomplishment s for the reporting period.
B. Special Reports
Attachment 1
Packet Page 19
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 19
19
Recommendation: Investigations and reviews of matters of significant community
interest should be published as standalone special reports.
C. Publishing and Presenting Data
Recommendation: An oversight agency's data should be regularly published and presented
in a clear and accessible format.
XV. Retaliation and Confidentiality
A. Prohibit ion s Against Retaliation
Recommendation: All forms of retaliation, including threats, harassment,
discouragement, intimidation, coercion, or adverse action, against oversight staff or any
individual who files a complaint, cooperates with an investigation, or provides information
to a civilian oversight agency, must be expressly prohibited by the oversight agency's
enabling legislation and departmental policy. Retaliation must be subject to discipline,
up to and including termination.
B. Monitoring and Reviewing Retaliation Complaints and Policy
Recommendation: Oversight agencies should periodically review civilian and internal
retaliation complaints to assess the prevalence of retaliation and ensure that both the
investigative and disciplinary processes of the law enforcement organization are functioning
properly.
XVI. Community Outreach and I nclusion
A. Assessing Outreach Needs
Recommendation: Oversight practitioners should plan and evaluate its outreach needs based
on its resources, mandate, goals, and local needs and challenges.
B. Partnerships with Community Organizations
Recommendation: An oversight agency's outreach efforts can be strengthened by developing
partnerships with local community organizations.
C. Targeted Outreach to Key Groups
Attachment 1
Packet Page 20
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 20
20
Recommendation: Targeting and tailoring outreach efforts to key local stakeholders can
maximize an agency's reach and ability to share relevant information.
D. Community Inclusion in Developing a Mediation Program
Recommendation: An oversight agency should work with local stakeholders to
develop protocols determining which types of complaints are eligible for
mediation.
XVII. Evaluation
A. Oversight Agency Evaluation
Recommendation: Oversight agencies should be evaluated periodically to identify strengths,
weaknesses, accomplishments and promote continuous improvement.
B. Evaluation App roaches and Frameworks
Recommendation: Various approaches, methodological considerations, and frameworks
should be taken into account when evaluating an oversight agency.
C. Evaluation Metrics: Workload and Performance
Recommendation: When properly contextualized and interpreted, certain metrics relating to
the agency's workload and performance can be helpful in understanding an oversight
agency's work.
D. External Evaluation
Recommendation: Stakeholders should weigh the relative benefits of having the oversight
agency evaluated by community, municipal, or private entities.
E. Internal Evaluation
Recommendation: Oversight staff should be periodically surveyed by an outside entity to
gauge staff morale and internal perceptions of management, operations, processes, and
procedures.
Attachment 1
Packet Page 21
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 21
21
ATTACHMENT C - Major Characteristics Comparison of Civilian Review System
System Type
Recognized Areas of
Effectiveness and Efficiency
Potential Changes to the City’s
Administrative Functions
Cost
Complexity
Places in Use
Investigation-focused
Professionally trained
investigation staff conducts
investigations of alleged
misconduct independently of a
police department’s Internal
Affairs (IA) or replaces the
Department’s IA critical
functions. This can be the costliest
and most staff- intensive model.
• May reduce bias in
investigations into citizen
complaints
• Full-time civilian
investigators can have
highly specialized
training
• Civilian led investigations
may increase community
trust in the investigations
process
• Can help reduce public
concern about high-
profile incidents
• This system avoids
potential conflicts inherent
in many internal affairs
departments in which
investigators are rotated
from, then back into, other
units within the
Department.
• May replace or duplicate
the police internal affairs
Process
• Make recommendations or
findings as to whether the
evidence supports the
allegation(s). In some
oversight systems, the
agency has the authority to
recommend and/or impose
discipline.
• Not necessary (or even
advantageous) that the
investigators be formally
trained law enforcement
officers.
$$$$$
Berkeley, Long Beach, and San
Francisco
Attachment 1
Packet Page 22
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 22
22
Review-focused
Provides community members
the ability to review the quality of
misconduct investigations.
Concentrates on commenting on
completed investigations after
reviewing the quality of police
internal affairs investigations.
• Ensures that the
community has the
ability to provide input
into the complaint
investigation process
• Generally the least
expensive form of
oversight since it typically
relies on the work of
volunteers instead of hires
staff such as investigators
or analysts
• An individual or
commission is authorized
to review Internal Affairs
(IA) investigations of
complaints, find them
adequate or not, and state
whether it agrees or
disagrees with the IA
findings. Often such
boards may recommend
further investigation
and/or make policy and
training recommendations.
$ - $$
Claremont, Davis, Novato,
Riverside, and Santa Cruz
Page 1 of 3
Attachment C
Attachment 1
Packet Page 23
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 23
23
ATTACHMENT C - Major Characteristics Comparison of Civilian Review System
System Type
Recognized Areas of
Effectiveness and
Efficiency
Potential Changes to the
City’s Administrative
Functions
Cost
Complexity
Places in Use
• Community review of
complaint investigations
may increase public trust
in the process.
• This type of model can
provide greater
transparency and an
additional layer of
civilian and greater
involvement by the
community because
when they make
recommendations, the
department may be
more inclined to take
action.
• Review boards
frequently hold their
meetings in public.
• Can improve department
policies and procedures
by identifying areas of
concern and
subsequently offering
options to improve
policing.
• Focuses on reviewing
the quality of completed
police internal affairs
investigations.
• May make
recommendations to
police executives
regarding findings or
request that further
investigation be
conducted.
Auditor/monitor-
focused
Designed to promote change in
law enforcement through policy
and trend analysis. Focuses on
examining broad patterns in
complaint investigations,
including patterns in the quality
of investigations, findings, and
• Often have more robust
public reporting
practices than other
types of oversight
• May be more effective at
promoting long-term,
systemic change in
police departments
• Can assist a jurisdiction
in liability management
and reduce the
likelihood of costly
• Some auditors/monitors
may actively participate
in or monitor open
internal investigations
• Can be utilized in
addition to other outside
resources such as
LEXIPOL in conducting
systematic reviews of
police policies, practices
or training and making
$$ - $$$
San Jose, Anaheim, Fresno,
Inglewood, and Sacramento
Attachment 1
Packet Page 24
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 24
24
Page 2 of 3
Attachment C
Attachment 1
Packet Page 25
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 25
25
Page 3 of 3
ATTACHMENT C - Major Characteristics Comparison of Civilian Review System
System Type
Recognized Areas of
Effectiveness and
Efficiency
Potential Changes to the
City’s Administrative
Functions
Cost
Complexity
Places in Use
discipline rendered. The cost of
this model depends on the
number of auditors assigned.
litigation by identifying
problems and proposing
corrective measures
before a lawsuit is filed
• Identify issues of
supervision and training
• Ensure that complaints
are able to be received
from a wide variety of
sources
recommendations for
improvement
• Can identify areas of
weakness—particularly
bias—by providing
opportunities for
dialogue and
understanding between
the police and
individuals and groups
within the community,
• Ability to assess the
effectiveness of early
warning systems and
determining whether
discipline is consistent
and fair
Hybrids
Often the best choice, a hybrid
combines functions of several
models. Can exist in 2 ways:
hybrid systems and hybrid
agencies. In the first case, a
board may have multiple
functions, such as investigatory
and auditing. The latter, may
have two boards reviewing the
department, such as an
investigatory model for
misconduct allegations and a
separate advisory model for
reviewing policies and
practices. Cost depends on
models chosen.
• Addresses the issue that
oversight is not a one-
size-fits-all proposition.
Many oversight
practitioners are finding
that it is less useful to
talk about models and
more useful to talk about
options of authority.
• Merged features from
the different systems to
address their specific
needs.
• Depends on the
combination of models
and oversight authority
given
$ - $$$$$
Attachment 1
Packet Page 26
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 26
26
Attachment C
ATTACHMENT D - City-By-City Comparison Civilian Police Review System
CITY & NAME OF
COMMISSION (Number of
Sworn Police Officers)
TYPE MEMBERSHIP DESCRIPTION COST COMPLEXITY WEBSITE
Anaheim, CA Public
Safety Board (250
sworn)
Auditor/Monitor 5 members chosen by lottery -
4 from City Council
neighborhoods and 1 at- large
External auditor collaborates
with the Board to make
recommendations on Police
Department practices,
procedures, training,
equipment, and potential
reforms
Quarter to half time staff out
of City Manager’s Office; 1
External Auditor
$80,000 to $100,000 and
small training budget
External Auditor has access to
all files; Board does not. Board
conducts outreach. Board
works with External Auditor
and City Manager’s Office to
issue reports to Council
http://www.anaheim.net/48
02/Police-Review-Board
Albuquerque, NM
Independent Review of the
Police Oversight Commission
(839 sworn budgeted for
1,000)
Hybrid
(Auditor/Monitor and
Investigatory)
9-member board selected by
Mayor and City Council
The Civilian Police Oversight
Commission receives,
investigates and reviews
complaints and
commendations submitted by
community members
for/against the Police Dept.
The Civilian Police Oversight
Agency also reviews Police
Dept. policies, practices, and
procedures, making
recommendation to the Chief
of Police
0.5% of the Police
Department Budget and
approx. $1 million for 2020
Investigator and Executive
Director has access to
personnel files. Board does not
Board reviews final
investigation
Board conducts outreach
and issues reports to
Council
http://www.cabq.gov/cpoa
Attachment 1
Packet Page 27
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 27
27
Berkeley, CA
Berkeley Police Review
Commission
(182 sworn)
Investigatory 9 members appointed by City
Council. Review Commission
Officer hired by City Manager
with input from Board. Staff
hired by Review Commission
Officer
Receive complaints of
police misconduct;
independently investigate
complaints
Release advisory findings to
City Manager
Review Police Department
policies and provide
mediation in some cases
Over $600,000 for staff of 3 Does not have access to
personnel files or Internal
Affairs (IA) files but has
access to other confidential
files including Review
Officer’s reports
Conducts outreach and
publishes annual reports
https://www.cityofberkeley.i
nfo/prc/
Page 1 of 10
Attachment D
ATTACHMENT D - City-By-City Comparison Civilian Police Review System
CITY & NAME OF
COMMISSION (Number of
Sworn Police Officers)
TYPE MEMBERSHIP DESCRIPTION COST COMPLEXITY WEBSITE
Attachment 1
Packet Page 28
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 28
28
Chicago, IL
The Police Board of the
City of Chicago
(12,244 sworn officers)
Hybrid (Review and
Auditor/Monitor)
9 members (2 former police
officers) appointed by Mayor
with advice from City Council
Decides disciplinary cases
when the Superintendent of
Police files charges to
discharge or suspend for more
than 365 days.
Considers appeals from
employees facing disciplinary
suspensions of 6 through 365
days.
Submits to Mayor a list of 3
candidates when there is a
vacancy in the position of
Superintendent of Police;
Mayor must choose from the
list or request another list from
the Board. Adopts rules and
regulations governing the
conduct of sworn and civilian
members of the Police
Department
$540,000 for FY 2020 Does not conduct
investigation but receives
documents submitted in
appeal hearings and
conducts outreach and
publishes reports
https://www.chicago.gov/cit
y/en/depts/cpb.html
Claremont, CA
Police Commission
(38 sworn)
Review 7 Commission members
appointed by City Council
Reviews all formal
investigation complaints for
thoroughness. Reviews
policies and procedures to set
goals that reflect county
values. Reviews recruitment
and training to promote
retention and diversity. Makes
recommendations to City
Manager and City Council
No budget No access to personnel
files but access to
complaint files
https://www.ci.claremont.ca
.us/government/commissions
Davis, CA
Independent Police Auditor
(61 sworn)
Review Selected by City Council
and City Manager
Reviews all Internal Affairs
investigations; takes and
refers complaints, makes
recommendations for
trainings and practices
Not to exceed $60,000
(part-time position)
No access to personnel files
but access to IA files
Conducts outreach but
does not issue reports
https://www.cityofdavis.org/
city-hall/police-
department/administration/i
ndependent-police-auditor
Page 2 of 10
Attachment D
Attachment 1
Packet Page 29
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 29
29
ATTACHMENT D - City-By-City Comparison Civilian Police Review System
CITY & NAME OF
COMMISSION (Number of
Sworn Police Officers)
TYPE MEMBERSHIP DESCRIPTION COST COMPLEXITY WEBSITE
Davis also has a Police
Accountability Commission
Denver , CO
Office of the Independent
Monitor (OIM)
(1450 sworn)
Review 6 members appointed by
Mayor and confirmed by
City Council
Reviews all Internal Affairs
investigations (including
internal criminal
investigations) and officer-
involved shooting
investigations and makes
recommendations on findings,
the imposition of discipline, as
well as, changes in policy.
OIM also makes
recommendations on findings
and discipline to the Chief of
Police and the Manager of
Safety.
Publishes annual reports.
Conducts policy reviews
and makes policy
recommendations as
necessary
Around $1,500,000 that
includes 16 staff members
and a $20,000 stipend for
members for training
Has access to disciplinary
files and IA complaints
Conducts outreach and
publishes reports
https://www.denvergov.org/
content/denvergov/en/office
-of-the-independent-
monitor.html
Eugene, OR
Eugene Police Commission &
Civilian Review Board
(190 sworn)
Hybrid (Auditor/Monitor and
Review
7 members for the Review
Board appointed by City
Council and 12 members for
the Commission appointed
by City Council
Monitors a staffed Police
Auditor who receives and
classifies complaints and
monitors IA investigations
Acts in an advisory capacity to
City Council, the Chief of
Police and the City Manager
on police policy and resource
issues
Per ordinance, the Police
Commission does not
undertake the review of
allegations and inquiries
Between $450-500,000 for
staffing an auditor, a deputy
auditor and an administrative
assistant
Board and Commission not
compensated
Access to IA files; does
outreach and issues public
reports
Publishes weekly complaint
summary
Eugene Police
Commission:
https://www.eugene-
or.gov/664/Police-
Commission
Civilian Review Board:
https://www.eugene-
or.gov/88/Civilian-Review-
Board
Page 3 of 10
Attachment D
Attachment 1
Packet Page 30
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 30
30
ATTACHMENT D - City-By-City Comparison Civilian Police Review System
CITY & NAME OF
COMMISSION (Number of
Sworn Police Officers)
TYPE MEMBERSHIP DESCRIPTION COST COMPLEXITY WEBSITE
related to the actions of
individual police officers
Fresno, CA
Office of Independent
Review
(793 sworn)
Auditor/Monitor Independent Reviewer hired
by City Manager with input
from City Council, Police
Commission, and 2 members
of the community
Reviews IA investigations;
provides guidance to officers
and managers when
requested
Audits inquiry and
complaints including in-
custody deaths or vehicle
pursuits resulting in serious
injury or death
Hears no appeals
Approx. $200,000 per year for
reviewer, second person
assisting in audits and an
executive assistant
Access to IA files, conducts
outreach and issues 4 quarterly
reports a year
https://www.fresno.gov/city
manager/office-of-
independent-review/
Indianapolis, IN
Citizen Police Complaint
Board and Citizen Police
Complaint Office (CPCO)
(1743 sworn)
Review 12 members (9 civilian voting
members and 3 non- voting
police officers) appointed by
Mayor and City Council
Members must complete
yearly 20 hours in training in
police procedures and 16 hours
of ride-alongs with officers
Offers opportunity for citizens
to have complaints voiced and
investigated.
Members are appointed by the
City/County Council, the
Mayor, and the Fraternal
Order of Police (FOP) and
have the task of reviewing all
cases filed in the CPCO
N/A No review of personnel files
but reviews IA files and
conducts outreach and issues
public reports
https://www.indy.gov/activit
y/citizens-police-complaint-
board
Attachment 1
Packet Page 31
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 31
31
Inglewood, CA
Citizen Oversight
Commission
(186 Sworn)
Auditor/Monitor 11 members (2 appointed by
the Mayor, 2 from each City
Council District, and 1 by the
Police Chief)
Refers complaints to Police
Department; Police
Department then reports
investigations of external
complaints in closed session to
Commission
Commission then
recommends discipline to
Police Chief and the Police
$5,000 budget for training No access to personnel files
but access to IA files in closed
sessions
Does not conduct outreach
https://www.cityofinglewood
.org/657/Citizen-Police-
Oversight-Commission
Page 4 of 10
Attachment D
Attachment 1
Packet Page 32
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 32
32
ATTACHMENT D - City-By-City Comparison Civilian Police Review System
CITY & NAME OF
COMMISSION (Number of
Sworn Police Officers)
TYPE MEMBERSHIP DESCRIPTION COST COMPLEXITY WEBSITE
Chief makes final decision.
Does not review Police
Department policy
Key West, FL Citizen
Review Board (91
sworn)
Investigatory 7 members appointed by
City Commission
The Citizen Review Board is
an independent board with
authority to review and/or
investigate complaints
involving Key West police
officers and forward findings
and/or recommendations to
City management, Chief of
Police, State Attorney, other
state and federal law
enforcement agencies and/or
grand juries.
Investigations conducted by IA
$81,400 No access to personnel
files but reviews IA
investigations
https://www.cityofkeywest-
fl.gov/department/index.php
?structureid=6
Attachment 1
Packet Page 33
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 33
33
Las Vegas, NV Citizen
Review Board (2,696
sworn)
Review 25 volunteer members
appointed by two members of
the City Council and two
members of the Clark County
Board of Commissioners
Receives and investigates
complaints of misconduct by
peace officers of the Las Vegas
Metropolitan Police
Department in the performance
of their duties. The Review
Board is also able to
investigate any deaths, which
occurred while in the custody
of, or in connection with,
actions of police officers. The
Review Board advises the
Police Department regarding
citizens' complaints or
departmental policies and
practices and makes
recommendations
N/A Reviews IA files, conducts
community outreach and
issues reports
https://www.lvmpd.com/en-
us/Pages/InternalAffairs-
CitizenReviewBoard.aspx
Page 5 of 10
Attachment D
ATTACHMENT D - City-By-City Comparison Civilian Police Review System
CITY & NAME OF
COMMISSION (Number of
Sworn Police Officers)
TYPE MEMBERSHIP DESCRIPTION COST COMPLEXITY WEBSITE
regarding discipline,
policies, procedures, and
programs
Long Beach, CA
Citizen Complaint
Commission
(889 sworn)
Investigatory 11 members appointed by
Mayor, confirmed by City
Council with 1 being from
each district and 2 at-large
Takes complaints on cases of
use of force, false arrest, sex,
and race and assigns to
investigator
Reviews IA investigations
and holds hearings to
facilitate fact finding
process
Over $250,000 with 3
administrative staff, a director,
and 2 investigators
No access to personnel
files but reviews IA
investigations
Conducts outreach
City Manager can make
public the disposition of a
complaint investigated by
the Commission
http://www.longbeach.gov/c
itymanager/cpcc/
Attachment 1
Packet Page 34
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 34
34
Los Angeles, CA
Board of Police
Commissioners
Office of the Inspector
General
(9,858 sworn)
Hybrid (Investigatory and
Auditor/Monitor)
5 civilians appointed by the
Mayor and confirmed by City
Council
Reviews and monitors all
personnel investigations;
Inspector General conducts
investigations as directed by
Board of Police
Commissioners; oversees,
audits and periodically reports
on disciplinary system;
conducts audits and special
projects; reviews and approves
or disapproves all officer-
involved shootings and law
enforcement related injuries or
deaths; performs other
assignments as directed by the
Police Commissioners. May
initiate and conduct
investigations
Staffing costs of 30 are
approx. $6,000,000
Has access to personnel
files and investigations;
conducts outreach and
issues reports
http://www.lapdonline.org/p
olice_commission
Page 6 of 10
Attachment D
ATTACHMENT D - City-By-City Comparison Civilian Police Review System
CITY & NAME OF
COMMISSION (Number of
Sworn Police Officers)
TYPE MEMBERSHIP DESCRIPTION COST COMPLEXITY WEBSITE
Attachment 1
Packet Page 35
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 35
35
New York, NY
Civilian Complaint Review
Board
(34,817 sworn)
Hybrid (Investigatory and
Auditor/Monitor)
15 members appointed by City
Council, the public and the
Mayor
Board’s responsibilities are to
(1) receive, investigate, hear,
make findings and recommend
action complaints against New
York City police officers that
allege the use of excessive or
unnecessary force, abuse of
authority, discourtesy, or the
use of offensive language; (2)
issue semi-annual reports
describing its activities and
summarizing its actions; (3)
inform and educate the public
about the board and its duties;
and (4) offer a mediation
program
$19.5 million supporting
212 civilian employees
Access to personnel and
investigatory files
Conducts outreach and
issues reports
https://www1.nyc.gov/site/c
crb/index.page
Novato, CA
Police Advisory and Review
Commission
(60 sworn)
Review 5 members appointed by
City Council; all but one
must live within city limits
Reviews citizen complaints
referred to by City Manager.
Complainant can appeal to
City Manager
Provides community
participation in Police
Department policies
No budget In appeal cases,
Commission can review
investigation report at PD
No outreach
https://www.novato.org/gov
ernment/boards-
commissions-
committees/police- advisory-
and-review-board
Page 6 of 10
Attachment D
ATTACHMENT D - City-By-City Comparison Civilian Police Review System
Attachment 1
Packet Page 36
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 36
36
CITY & NAME OF
COMMISSION (Number of
Sworn Police Officers)
TYPE MEMBERSHIP DESCRIPTION COST COMPLEXITY WEBSITE
Oakland, CA
Citizens’ Police Review
Board
(674 sworn)
Hybrid (Investigatory and
Review)
9 members plus alternate
selected by Mayor and City
Council
The Board receives and
investigates independently,
citizen complaints of police
misconduct. CPRB holds
public hearings, makes
findings and recom-
mendations to the City
Manager on individual
complaints of police
misconduct and makes policy
recommendations to the
Oakland Police Department.
$1.3 million for an executive
director, a policy analyst, 3
investigators and 3 intake
techs
No access to personnel files
but access to IA files
Conducts outreach and
issues public reports
https://www.oaklandca.gov/
departments/community-
police-review-agency
Palo Alto, CA Independent
Police Auditor (170 sworn)
Investigatory Auditor selected by City
Manager approved by City
Council
Reviews citizen and internal
investigations by IA, assesses
for objectivity, thoroughness
and appropriateness of
dispositions; can receive
complaint but refers to IA
Not to exceed $26,000 Full access to personnel
and IA files, along with
other records
Conducts outreach
https://www.cityofpaloalto.o
rg/gov/depts/pol/auditor.asp
Riverside, CA
Community Police Review
Commission
(361 sworn)
Review 9 members appointed by
City Council
Recommends improvements
to policy, practices, and
procedures
Conducts independent
review of officer involved
deaths and citizen
complaints
Can contract with
independent investigator
Members unpaid
Operating budget of
$250,000
No access to personnel files;
some access to IA file material
Does outreach and
publishes reports
https://www.riversideca.gov
/cityclerk/boards-
commissions/community-
police-review-commission
Page 8 of 10
Attachment D
Attachment 1
Packet Page 37
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 37
37
ATTACHMENT D - City-By-City Comparison Civilian Police Review System
CITY & NAME OF
COMMISSION (Number of
Sworn Police Officers)
TYPE MEMBERSHIP DESCRIPTION COST COMPLEXITY WEBSITE
Sacramento, CA
Community Police Review
Commission
(696 sworn officers)
Auditor/Monitor 11 members appointed by
City Council
Monitors and tracks high
profile and serious
complaints, reviews
completed IA investigations,
and examines and critiques
the Department’s efforts to
work within communities of
color
$250,000 for director and
support staff
No access to personnel files
but access to IA files
Conducts outreach
https://www.cityofsacramen
to.org/Clerk/Legislative-
Bodies/Boards-and-
Commissions/Sacramento-
Community-Police-
Commission
San Diego, CA
Citizens Review Board of
Police Practices
(1860 sworn)
Hybrid (Review and
Auditor/Monitor)
23 members representing
diverse backgrounds
appointed by Mayor for 1
year term
Mayor also appoints an
Executive Director
The Board reviews citizens’
complaints against the Police
Department
They also review all officer
involved shootings and in-
custody deaths
Reviews policies and makes
recommendations
Over $100,000 a year for
Executive Director with
some administrative staff
No access to personnel files
but access to IA files
Conducts outreach
Publishes reports
https://www.sandiego.gov/c
ommunityreviewboard
San Francisco, CA
Office of Citizen Complaints
(2,250 sworn)
Investigatory Director and Board are
appointed by Police
Commission who in turn is
appointed by the Mayor and
City Council
Investigate complaints
against San Francisco
police officers
It is staffed by civilians who
have never been police
officers in San Francisco
Over $5 million for 34 staff and
15 investigators
No access to personnel files
but access to IA files
Conducts outreach
Publishes reports
https://sfgov.org/dpa/
Page 9 of 10
Attachment D
Attachment 1
Packet Page 38
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 38
38
ATTACHMENT D - City-By-City Comparison Civilian Police Review System
CITY & NAME OF
COMMISSION (Number of
Sworn Police Officers)
TYPE MEMBERSHIP DESCRIPTION COST COMPLEXITY WEBSITE
San Jose, CA
Office of the Independent
Police Auditor
(1,259 sworn)
Auditor/Monitor No board; the Auditor is
appointed by Mayor and
City Council
The office has four primary
functions: (1) serves as an
alternative forum for people to
file complaints; (2) monitors
open investigations and upon
completion, audits the final
investigation; (3) conducts
community outreach; and
(4) publishes semi-annual
reports and recommends
policy and procedural
changes. The IPA conducts
case-by-case reviews, requests
further investigations, if
needed, and disagreements
with the findings are sent to the
City Manager. Performance
audits are conducted to assess
compliance and to determine
increases or decreases in
similar complaints.
Over $1.2 million for 6
positions
No access to personnel files
but access to IA files
Conducts outreach
Publishes reports
https://www.sanjoseca.gov/
your-
government/appointees/ind
ependent-police-auditor
Attachment 1
Packet Page 39
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 39
39
Santa Cruz, CA
(94 sworn)
Independent Police Auditor
Review Auditor selected by City
Council
Reviews all internal and
external IA investigations to
evaluate quality and
thoroughness. Can sit in on
investigations and provide
feedback during active
investigation. Reviews and
makes recommendations to
Department on policies and
practices
$54,000 on a limited
schedule
Access to personnel files
and IA files
Conducts outreach
https://www.cityofsantacruz
.com/government/city-
departments/police/commu
nity-policing/independent-
police-auditor
Page 10 of 10
Attachment D
Attachment 1
Packet Page 40
Council Memo – Civilian Oversight Review
August 5, 2020
Page 40
40
Attachment 1
Packet Page 41