[pjw] INFO/ACTION: testify on police oversight plan Wed 11/15

[Peace and Justice Works]

PJW supporters
This email is a combination of two that I sent to the Portland Copwatch 
list over the last couple of days. Sorry for any duplication.

Next Wednesday, November 15 at 2 PM, City Council will be hearing a 
resolution that accepts the City Attorney's proposed changes to the Police 
Accountability Commission's design for the new police oversight board.

  https://www.portland.gov/council/agenda#toc-wednesday-november-15-2023-2-00-pm-

But these are not the plans that the Police Accountability Commission laid 
out to establish the new Community Board for Police Accountabliity (CBPA). 
No, this is the City Attorney's interpretation of those plans, chopped 
down from 96 pages to 27, eliminating or vastly changing what was 
proposed, for no particular reason (although one wonders whether the 
Police Association had a hand in the rewrite...).

So we will need people to speak out, both now and on the 15th, if
ahead with the hearing. Preferably they will table this and put the
proposal back the way it was.

The most important thing if you have time to contact City Council early
and ask them to amend their resolution to require the City Attorney to
return to Council for another vote after December 15. The current
resolution creates a 30 day comment period, but seeing as the City
Attorney's office has proven they're immune to listening to public
input, they likely will just ignore things that are sent in and do what
they want.

   Mayor Ted Wheeler <mayorwheeler at portlandoregon.gov>,
   Commissioner Dan Ryan  <commissionerryanoffice at portlandoregon.gov>,
   Commissioner Carmen Rubio <comm.rubio at portlandoregon.gov>,
   Commissioner Mingus Mapps <mappsoffice at portlandoregon.gov>,
   Commissioner Rene Gonzalez <gonzalezoffice at portlandoregon.gov>

If you can't sign up and testify in person on Wednesday, you can submit
written testimony through this link:

  https://www.portland.gov/council-clerk/writtentestimony

I'm toying with a bunch of metaphors and ways to call out the Council,
including connecting how they heard the community say to stop climate
change but signed a secret deal with Zenith Energy to keep transporting
and storing fossil fuels.

Two days ago someone commented that the City's proposal is "based on"
what the Police Accountabliity Commission wrote. I replied that is like
saying a pile of pottery shards are "based on" a vase.
Here are the links I sent Wednesday to key documents:

A bunch of links below for those who want to dive in.

Here are some of the key points we are highlighting at Copwatch. The City 
Attorney has:

--stated that the panel to screen members for the __COMMUNITY BOARD__
   will include a member of the Police Bureau, a member of the Portland
   Police Association (officers/Sgts/Detectives) and a member of the
   Portland Police Commanders association (Lts). This is clearly their
   attempt to work around the prohibition on cops being _on_ the CBPA.

--removed the ability to file an appeal of complaint decisions
   (a right established in 1982 in Portland and key to its
   previous oversight systems)

--delayed a person's access to a complaint navigator/advocate
   (one of the most important additions to the current system is
   to assign the advocate upon contact with the Board)

--changed the size of the board and hearings panels
  (which will increase workload and make it harder for people from
   marginalized communities to participate)

--narrowed what complaints the board will review

--taken away the ability to fire the chief if they commit misconduct

--required a ridealong for the volunteer board members, who are
   by the charter supposed to include people from marginalized
  communities experiencing over-policing. Such folks will not want to be
  in a police car as a mandatory part of training

--cut the nationally standard four possible findings on allegations
   down to two and removed systemic, non-punitive findings.

In addition, a few other issues have popped up, and there may be more on
the way as we continue looking at the documents.

--a prohibtion on Board members having an "anti-police bias."
   This is a very vague term and can be used for political reasons. Is
   being pro-accountability anti-police? Some would say so. We have
   struggled with this perception issue for 31 years now.

   Moreover, the PAC's proposed code 35B.010 D2e says:
   "Board members must be capable of making fair and impartial
   decisions based on the evidence presented to them in an environment
   where controversy is common. Fairness includes considering lived
   experience, the experiences of the community members, and of the
   police officers involved in the case."

   Such a clause against "anti-police bias" has caused serious issues in
   Boulder, Colorado:
   https://www.dailycamera.com/2023/06/01/pop-selection-committee-member-files-lawsuit-against-boulder/

--taking out the possibility that the Board can call for an open
   hearing in cases that are of great community concern, which is
   allowed by law, only allowing the officer to decide if the hearings
   will be open (which is also part of the law).

--removing the requirement that the annual report include data on
   settlements paid out for police misconduct, even though such
   data are required to be published by the Compliance Officer
   under the USDOJ Settlement Agreement.

   DOJ Paragraph 170-e-v on outcome data to be used by the COCL:
   "the number, nature, and settlement amount of civil suits against
   PPB officers regardless of whether the City is a defendant in the
   litigation."

--diminishing the role of the Board if an officer files an appeal
   through the Civil Service Board or filing a grievance. Rather
   then letting them present to these other bodies, they must
   "cooperate with the City Attorney" on such cases.

--requiring the Board to have the concept of reimbusring its members
   approved by City Council, which undermines the independence
   built into the Charter.

I'm sure there's a LOT more, we'll be doing a deeper dive over the
weekend. If you find other outrageous changes feel free to share with us
(and complain to the appropriate authority).


Proposed amendments to DOJ agreements (exhibit a):
   https://tinyurl.com/OversightDOJ

Proposed City Code (exhibit b):
   https://tinyurl.com/OversightCode

Redline version initially created by former PAC staff:
   https://tinyurl.com/OversightCodeRedline

Council resolution to be considered on the 15th:
   https://tinyurl.com/OversightResolution


Thanks
dan handelman
portland copwatch