|
|
|
| |
|
Vol. I
No. 9 Police Review Campaigns Kick
Off in Arcata and Eureka Decision '06 EUREKA – Calling for a new sense of public awareness and empowerment with respect to local law enforcement agencies, representatives of the Coalition for Police Review (CPR) announced on Mar. 8 the filing of initiatives to create Humboldt County’s first police review commissions. Their efforts were met with legal objections sent to CPR by Arcata Police Chief Randy Mendosa which were objected to point-by-point as “sloppy…ingenuous…ridiculous” and more by CPR members at their meeting on Thursday. The result of months of deliberations, public forums and legal analysis, the virtually identical initiatives filed in Arcata and Eureka this week would set up a respective Police Review Commission to scrutinize complaints against each city’s police department. Although no binding decisions regarding the fate of any officer could be made by such a group of seven citizens, backers are confident about the positive impact they allege would result from more public disclosure regarding police conduct.
Both lawyers said the costs incurred by the staffing necessary for such commissions would be offset by fewer claims against the cities under the Government Tort Claims Act due to allegations of police misconduct. Allbright further doubted the ability of the Grand Jury to consistently deliver on their mission of keeping local government accountable. “I think we all know the history of the Grand Jury in this county and we can’t rely on them to be the oversight for police,” she said. CPR spokesperson and Green Party Chair Greg Allen cast law enforcement monitoring as part of a general movement towards the community taking responsibility for its own government. “This is also a forum for police officers to show their conduct and practices were effective and just,” he said. “The police departments are not the enemy here, we are all in this together.” Police Association lawyer’s position in question While her capacity as Chair of the local chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union has kept Allbright in contact with local police chiefs, she wasn’t satisfied with the level of accountability this provides. She later said recent calls for a meeting with Arcata officials have been ignored by Mendosa and agreed to, then forgotten by Arcata City Attorney Nancy Diamond. “We do not believe internal review is an effective process,” Allbright said. Allbright anticipated varying levels of enthusiasm for the idea between the cities, with Eureka Police Chief Dave Douglas cited as willing to cooperate. She discounted the legal arguments of a non-attorney, Mendosa, who has claimed along with outgoing Arcata City Manager Dan Hauser that the city can’t implement police review without the creation of a charter for Arcata.
After several requests to Arcata officials since April of last year by CPR members, Allbright obtained a legal brief by Fullerton attorney Martin Mayer, a graduate of the FBI National Law Institute. He is legal advisor to the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center and had served for ten years as State Chair of the Police Legal Advisors’ Committee for the state police union. As legal advisor additionally for Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs throughout the state, his legal brief contains arguments against creating review boards as they “lack credibility with police…” and “…would greatly increase the risk of an ‘us against them’ attitude on the part of police officers.” “It is questionable whether a general law city may legitimately establish a civilian review board with authority to investigate complaints,” Mayer states. Allbright questioned whether his professional focus on crafting arguments to protect police officers facing internal investigations affected his conclusions. “[Mayer] talks the right talk for being counsel for the Police Officer’s Association,” she said. “It just shocks me that it was such sloppy legal analysis.” Mayer bases his argument on the lack of specific permission for civilian review boards in the parts of California Government Code which pertain to general law cities like Arcata. He postulates that state law does not allow the transfer of duties away from a chief of police. However, in the footnote to his summation he cites a contrary view, namely that of the Attorney General in 1988. His decision held that the same state law cited by Mayer “…would appear to provide ample authority for the electorate or legislative body of a California city (including general law cities) to provide in the city charter or by city ordinance that…a citizens’ review board has authority to investigate citizens’ complaints against police officers or that they have authority to advise, impose or review discipline imposed on police officers for misconduct alleged in such complaints.” This is why CPR spokespersons said they chose not to go the route of putting their Police Review Commission in the Charter of Eureka, the only city in Humboldt County which doesn’t operate by general law. This is also why CPR members were unanimously unsatisfied with suggestions of a “Public Safety Committee” for designed to raise funds and volunteer support for the Eureka Police Department as well as a “Police Advisory Committee” to make suggestions on policy for the Arcata Police Department. Both of these committees suggested by the respective police chiefs would lack any ability to hear complaints or conduct independent investigations. “They probably think they’re taking care of this and throwing us a bone by this advisory committee, but they’re not,” Allbright said. Allbright put together late Wednesday a preliminary response to Mendosa which point by point contests Mayer’s arguments. She stated that the Arcata General Plan’s call for a review board put it squarely within the scope of the city’s defined powers, and denied any violation of the Public Safety Officer’s Bill of Rights Act because the police review boards proposed would have no power to discipline or fire the officers. “There’s nothing stated that prevents a general law city review board from issuing subpoenas and going to court to enforce them,” Allbright stated. “We aren’t reviewing the personnel files that belong to the [police department]. How do these statutes prevent the reviewing of complaints prior to them going to the [police department] for the confidential internal review process? Indeed, wouldn’t an initial screening by an independent body be better?” Allen characterized Mayer’s legal analysis as “ridiculous” and questioned whether this was the reason it was held back from the public for so long by city officials in Arcata. “I find it just absolutely ingenuous,” he said. “This has been the big lie…at this point they’re putting disinformation in the paper.” CPR members agreed to use Allbright’s response to craft a legal brief in response to the one provided by Mendosa, and expect it to be available to the public next week. Nuts and bolts Regardless of their eventual scope of powers, the commissions themselves would be made up of seven residents, none of whom could be current or retired cops from that city’s police department. Three would be appointed by each City Council, with the other four determined by lottery from a pool of applicants who are either low income, non-white, gay or lesbian, disabled or enrolled in college. Any appointee could be later removed, but only if all Councilmembers agree. Once the respective city attorneys provide their own title and summary for the initiatives and these are published, backers hope to collect the signatures they need in the following 80 days, from March 29 through mid-June. With 10% of voters needed, valid signatures will be needed from around 1,450 Eurekans and 1,150 Arcatans, followed by majority assent in the Nov. 6 general election in order to start the work of each Police Review Commission on Jan. 1, 2007. CPR was started last fall as an alliance between the ACLU, Green Party, County Human Rights Commission and the Civil Liberties Monitoring Project, with the goal of implementing review for all law enforcement in the county. Organizers have previously stated their intent to launch a county-wide bid to create police review for the Sheriff’s Department if successful in Arcata and Eureka. They next meet on Thursday, March 30, 5:30 p.m. at the ACLU office, 917 3rd Street, Suite F in Eureka. CPR can be reached at 215-5385, by mail at P.O. Box 292, Eureka, CA 95502 or on-line at policereview.blogspot.com. Charles Douglas is the Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of the Humboldt Sentinel. He can be reached at editor@humboldtsentinel.com. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright © 2005-06, Humboldt Sentinel. All rights reserved. |
“If
they’re not doing anything wrong, there shouldn’t be a problem
with shining a light on their activities,” CPR spokesperson Christina
Allbright said at their press conference.
“What
is illegal is if a police department divulges information from an internal
investigation,” Allbright said. “The privacy statutes don’t
apply to the commission because they don’t use those internal investigations.”