Site Navigation

Timidly Seeking a Role, Citizen Review Committee Continues
to Meet While Awaiting New System
Staff at Independent" Police Review Gives Inadequate Presentation of Annual Report

The Citizen Review Committee (CRC) has been debating whether and how to communicate with the City in anticipation of the new civilian oversight system being set up (see article). They want to be recognized for their unique areas of experience reviewing potential police misconduct cases. Though CRC has not heard any appeals of community complaints since 2021 (PPR #84), they are heavily relied on to rotate onto Police Review Boards (PRBs) to assess serious cases (such as force and deadly force), ones where a commanding officer's proposed finding is challenged, and those where proposed discipline will include time off for officers. Though the September 2024 PRB Report contains 21 cases, they appear to have taken place over the course of more than a year. So at most, there seem to be about two hearings a month, or 24 a year. At that rate, each of the 11 CRC members likely only has to hear 2-4 cases in a year, not as bad as when the whole group heard as many as eight appeals per year. No doubt it is a lot of work, with files for shooting incidents running in the 1000-page range, but it still seems CRC should be able to hold meetings that last longer than an hour to discuss their own business. Since September, the CRC met three times, and their Work Group on the transition to the new system met twice. Meanwhile, the "Independent" Police Review (IPR), which houses the CRC, finally released its 2023 annual report in late August (see article), CRC even convinced IPR Director Ross Caldwell to discuss the Report at their September meeting-- but instead of delving into the content, he summarized the subject of each section for about 10 minutes and asked CRC members to contact him privately if they had questions. These are public meetings, and it seems a better use of time for people to have the discussion while they are all in the same space.

Also at the September meeting, CRC heard from the Independent Court Monitor team led by Mark P. Smith about how they will approach ensuring compliance with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) Settlement Agreement (see article), which led to that meeting being an unusual two hours in length. At their September, October and December meetings, CRC went over a draft letter to the City which included expressing concern that the job of project manager to help bring the new oversight system online was posted without consulting with them. Their discussion included whether to address aspects of the oversight system causing concern after the City changed the proposed Code and the DOJ Agreement. One example: the question of whether new oversight board members are required to go on a police ride-along. While CRC members who serve on the PRB are required to do so, it does not mean that everyone feels comfortable being in a locked car with armed law enforcement officers. In December they agreed to finalize the letter and send it to the new City Council after they approve a final version in January.

The October meeting also included some discussion about the technical complications for CRC members attending Police Review Boards, such as procedures around digital files and that some hearings begin at 6:00 or 6:30 in the morning.

In September, relatively new CRC member Forest Boles resigned, and in October, Sean Osaki, an alternate who had previously been approved by Council, introduced himself.

January, 2025
Also in PPR #94

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 #94 Table of Contents
Back to Portland Copwatch home page
Peace and Justice Works home page
Back to top