Site Navigation

Public Policy/ Legislation Watch

Portland Police Bureau as a Special Interest

According to a document released in November to members of the Chief's Forum, the Portland Police Bureau has put forth proposed legislation in 13 areas including the following:

* Juvenile Justice (for police to play "an active role" in the system, which they recommend include youth up to age 25)

* Forfeiture (to "follow proposed changes to state laws for their effect on the City's... ability to use the civil forfeiture ordinance to possibly address other activities identified as nuisances")

* Body wires (supporting "expanded use of electronic surveillance equipment in criminal investigations")

* Neighborhood quality of life (support community groups in the introduction of legislation affecting neighborhood quality of life, including regulation of adult businesses, gang graffiti, and zoning from establishments selling liquor.")

If the police are putting forward proposed laws and then bringing them to the city and to neighborhood groups, is the community-police partnership coming from the grassroots up, or the top down?
Back to top.

Free Police Reports

Meanwhile, last July, it was announced that accident reports will be made available at no cost to those involved in the incident. And yet, you still have to pay $10 to get a copy of your own police report when you are arrested. Call City Hall at 823-5120 if you have something to say about this.
Back to top.

10-Foot "Safety Zone" Ordinance Challenge

The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) has issued a statement urging anyone in Portland charged for interfering with an arrest by being within 10 feet of an officer, arrestee, victim or witness to contact them at 243-5727 or the ACLU at 227-3186.

POPSG brought to their attention a newly revised ordinance, passed in City Council in August 1994, that was changed to exclude passive resistance (ie a protester going limp could, under the earlier ordinance, be arrested for interfering with his or her own arrest). But now, according to the NLG, the way the ordinance is written, a third party (such as a Copwatcher with a video camera) within the proscribed 10-foot "safety zone" who poses no threat of violence but wishes to observe or to protest the incident without interfering, can be arrested. Moreover, the ordinance leaves to the officer's discretion the size of this "safety zone." An officer could therefore arrest anyone within 50 feet, 4 square blocks, or a mile of an arrest if they can make an argument that they felt threatened during the arrest procedure.
Back to top.

The Multnomah Sheriff's Race: Who Believes in Accountability?

The sheriff's race is on, and we have determined to find out the views of the candidates on civilian review of the department.

Vera Poole, who ran a tough race against Bob Skipper and lost (only to have him resign) is in favor of a full civilian review process over county law enforcement. She has stated this on several occasions, with the explanation that the department has nothing to hide.

In a recent flap over old charges against the current Acting Sheriff, candidate Dan Noelle of the Portland Police suggested that the Sheriff's department be investigated by some outside entity. When POPSG contacted Noelle he wasn't specific about what form that oversight would take. He did, however, state that he feels the Portland Police Bureau's Internal Investigations Division has been working harder to do a better job simply since the creation of PIIAC. He expressed a perception of frustration by civilians bogged down in the process of PIIAC, and suggested that while the Mayor's changes to PIIAC last year were a big help, the system still wasn't all it could be.

Since then, Noelle appeared before the County Commissioners with a prepared statement. In it he says in writing, "I personally support external oversight of police agencies, and, if elected Sheriff, I will institute a system that ensures the internal investigations process of the Sheriff's office... will be subject to external review."

When we contacted Acting Sheriff John Bunnell, he stated that the issue of civilian review has not come up for discussion in his tenure with the county. He said he could see arguments for and against civilian oversight regarding complaints, but emphasized that the number of complaints is low because of the integrity of the department. He pointed out that a Citizen Advisory Board composed of clergy, business people and neighborhood representatives meets once a month to discuss policy issues.

Also running is Clackamas Sheriffs Deputy Mark A. Hanson. Hanson would not commit to promising civilian review of complaints. However, he pledged an open department that not only encourages but would not function without citizen involvement.

While only 5% of the Sheriff's department is on patrol, there are still many stories (some of which have been reported on our Copwatch line) of alleged misconduct in the jails. And while the County Commission is made up of a Chair whose power is balanced by several other elected Commissioners, the Sheriff is the only elected official in the law enforcement department, surrounded by appointed assistants. The County is currently checking on the legal status of the breadth of their oversight, but they believe their only influence on the department is in creating a budget. Therefore, the only people the Sheriff is accountable to are the voters, and it is up to them, or to the Sheriff, to create a body which investigates misconduct complaints.
Back to top.

Asset Forfeiture: Turning It Over to the People
(Actions for National Police Accountability Week Feb. 26-March 4, 1995)

We encourage citizens to help us demand that forfeiture assets taken by the state and federal government be redirected to groups offering opportunities for youth, drug addicts, homeless and unemployed people. The Center For Third World Organizing (CTWO) in Oakland distributed a memo from Can H. Copeland, Director and Chief Counsel for the Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture at the U.S. Dept. of Justice (DOJ), declaring that asssets seized after May, 1994, could be "passed through" to community groups to go toward prevention measures such as education, housing, job training and drug abuse treatment. (While POPSG questions the legality under the 4th Amendment of asset forfeiture, it is better to see this money go to the community than to build more prisons and hire more police.) The decisions on how the program is implemented is being left up to state and local legislators.

Unfortunately, the DOJ has set the recommended share for community groups at 15%, while Rep. John Conyers of Michigan put forth HR 3347 last year recommending a 50/50 split. (Note that neither CTWO nor POPSG would qualify for these funds, while organizations such as House of Umoja and Youth Employment Services would).

In Oregon, the 15% available to community groups from 1986 to February 1994 would have totalled $2.3 million! Think of how many community centers this could build (or, better yet, the 50% figure of $7.7 million). If you want to help us kick off a local campaign, please come to a special meeting on Wednesday, March 1 (during Police Accountability Week) at the King Facility, 4815 NE 7th Avenue, at 7:00 PM.
Back to top.

First Trimester, 1995
Also in PPR #5

Portland Copwatch
PO Box 42456
Portland, OR 97242
(503) 236-3065/ Incident Report Line (503) 321-5120
e-mail: copwatch@portlandcopwatch.org

Portland Copwatch is a grassroots, volunteer organization promoting police accountability through citizen action.

People's Police Report #02 Table of Contents
Back to Portland Copwatch home page
Peace and Justice Works home page
Back to top