POL Government Elected Officials Auditor Hull Caballero Divisions Independent Police Review CRC CRC Meeting Information Public Meeting Minutes Citizen Review Committee Monthly Meeting Minutes 2010
October 13, 2010


Citizen Review Committee

October 13, 2010


Date Approved: November 10, 2010


Meeting Location: Lovejoy Room, 2nd Floor, Portland City Hall 


Chair Bigham called the meeting to order at 5:30 pm.


Introductions and Welcome


CRC Members Present: Michael Bigham (Chair), Jamie Troy (Vice-Chair), Jeff Bissonnette (Recorder), Lindsey Detweiler, Loren Eriksson, Hank Miggins, Ayoob Ramjan,


CRC Member Absent: Lewellyn Robison (excused), Rochelle Silver (excused)


City staff: Mary-Beth Baptista (IPR Director), Constantine Severe (IPR Assistant Director), Amy Stevens (Mayor’s Office)


Police Bureau: Captain Ed Brumfield (Professional Standards Division)


Community/Media: Dan Handelman (Portland CopWatch and Flying Focus Video), Debbie Aiona (League of Women Voters)


Approval of Minutes of the 9/14/10 CRC Meeting


Mr. Eriksson made a motion to approve the minutes.  Mr. Bissonnette seconded.  The minutes were then approved by 4-0, with abstentions by Mr. Bigham and Mr. Miggins.


Director’s Report


Independent Police Review Division (IPR) Work Plan / Accomplishments:


NACOLE Conference:  Auditor Griffin-Valade, IPR Director Baptista, IPR Assistant Director Severe, IPR Community Outreach Coordinator Irene Konev, and CRC Vice-Chair Jamie Troy attended the Annual Conference of the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE).


Police Oversight Stakeholder Committee: On 9/16/10 CRC Chair Michael Bigham, IPR Director Baptista, IPR Deputy Director Hess, and IPR Community Outreach Coordinator Konev attended the final Police Oversight Stakeholder Committee meeting.  


Improving IPR/CRC Communication: IPR has created a new section on the website for CRC members to post, update, and access reports, photographs, and PDF documents. 


IPR Community Outreach


Grand Opening of the Gateway Center:  On 9/8/10 Ms. Konev and CRC member Dr. Silver attended the grand opening of the Gateway Center.  The Gateway Center provides local victims of domestic violence with access to essential services.   


CRC Recruitment: IPR launched the 2010 CRC recruitment last month with over a hundred letters going out into the community to solicit applications for volunteers. Letters were sent to elected officials, judges, attorneys, community-based and faith-based organizations, and other members of the community who have shown interest in serving on CRC.  Completed applications are due on Wednesday, 10/20/10 at 4:30 pm.  


International Visitors: On 9/30/10 Director Baptista and Ms. Konev met with international delegates from China, Peru, Lesotho, Montenegro, Angola, Bahrain, Mozambique, and the Philippines.  


IPR and IAD Caseloads:  See caseload tables in Director’s Report.


CRC Chair’s Report (Chair Bigham):   Mr. Bigham used this time for a discussion of the final report of the Stakeholder’s Committee.   


Workgroup Updates


Appeals Workgroup (Mr. Troy):  Last meeting was 9/27/10.  The workgroup completed its work on the draft of Protocol 5.03.  The next meeting will be on 11/1/10 from 12:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. in Mr. Troy’s office. 


Outreach Workgroup (Mr. Miggins):  Last meeting was 10/6/10.  The workgroup reviewed the agenda for the upcoming public forum.  Mr. Miggins encouraged CRC members to continue to accompany Ms. Konev on community outreach events.  The next meeting of the Outreach Workgroup will be on 10/25/10 at 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.


Protocol Workgroup (Mr. Miggins):  Last meeting was 9/29/10.  The workgroup sent proposed revisions of Protocols 5.07, 5.12, and 5.14 to be posted for public comment.    The next meeting will be on 11/5/10 at 5:00 p.m.


Taser/Less-lethal Force Workgroup (Mr. Bigham):  Last meeting was 9/27/10.  The workgroup reviewed its notes from the previous meeting and discussed inviting someone from either the City Attorney’s Office or a defense attorney to talk about compliance with the 9th Circuit Court on reasonable standards.  The workgroup is working to complete its case file review prior to the next meeting, which will be on 11/2/10 at 5:00 p.m.


Recurring Audit Workgroup (Mr. Ramjan):  Last meeting was 9/20/10.  The workgroup met with Lieutenant Robert King of the Police Bureau Training Division.  The workgroup also discuss the timeliness of investigations.  The next meeting will be on 10/26/10 at 5:00 p.m.


Old Business


Tracking List:  Nothing to add. 


Presentation and discussion of Draft Protocol 5.03 – Appeals Procedure Protocol (Mr. Troy). 


A decision was made to not make reference in Protocol 5.03 to the Case File Review process, which is addressed in Protocol 5.11, and to focus on the appeal process itself. 


Mr. Bissonnette made a motion to change section 4 as follows:  “…CRC shall schedule a hearing on the appeal as soon as practicable.”  Mr. Ramjan seconded the motion.  The motion passed by a vote of 5-2.


Yes:  Bigham, Bissonnette, Eriksson, Ramjan, Troy

No:  Detweiler, Miggins


It was agreed by consensus to add the word “recommended” in the following sentence of section 3.a.  “The IPR Director may make recommendations to the Police Bureau Command staff regarding changes in recommended findings or allegations….”


Regarding section 7, Ms. Baptista suggested that the appellant and the appellant’s advisor be invited to remain for the policy discussion following the appeal.  Mr. Bigham said he would be sure to include this in his closing comments, and he did not think it was necessary to include this in the protocol. 


In sections 2 and 3, it was agreed to capitalize the word “division” in “Independent Police Review Division.”


Mr. Troy read the written comments that had been submitted by Ms. Robison, and her comments were fully discussed.


In section 5, it was agreed to add language in section 5 about providing a draft of the CRC case summary to IPR, IAD, and the complainant at least two weeks before the scheduled appeal hearing so that they may offer written comments as to accuracy.  


Director Baptista suggested the following language: "A draft of the case summary shall be delivered to IPR, IAD, and the complainant at least two weeks prior to the scheduled hearing, for corrections.  Any corrections shall be provided in writing to IPR for distribution to the CRC Chair and the two assigned members within 5 calendar days after receipt of the draft.  Copies of the final case summary shall be delivered to the complainant, involved officers, and Portland Police Association no later than one week prior to the scheduled hearing." 


During public comment, Mr. Handelman noted that the CRC conference committee is not part of the ordinance, so in his opinion it should not be included in the appeals protocol.  Mr. Troy respectfully disagreed.  


Mr. Bissonnette made a motion that draft Protocol 5.03 on Appeals Procedures be adopted as amended.  Mr. Eriksson seconded the motion.  The motion passed unanimously. 


[It was noted by Recorder Bissonnette that Mr. Miggins left the meeting at 7:00 p.m.]


Additional Old Business


Director Baptista made the following announcements:  Protocols 5.11 and 5.04 have been approved by the Auditor and posted on the website; copies of Chief Reese’s letter of response to CRC recommended changes in findings are in the CRC packets and available to for the public; there is a new administrative rule regarding Travel Expenses Incurred by Commission Volunteers, including parking expenses. 


Mr. Bigham asked if CRC would like to form a subcommittee to review the IPR Annual Report in terms of changes that have been made. Ms. Aiona noted that this year’s annual report is quite a bit different from previous annual reports, and she thought that IPR would benefit from obtaining CRC’s feedback on the changes.  No CRC members expressed interest in forming a subcommittee at this time.  


New Business


Sign-in sheets for workgroup meetings are no longer needed.  Minutes should reflect who the participants were. 


Mr. Bissonnette asked if there are any rules about when workgroup draft reports may be disseminated for public comment.   Director Baptista said that the protocol speaks to IPR and the Bureau receiving a confidential copy for review and comment prior to distributing it to the full CRC and / or the public.  However, there is no other explicit rule regarding whether the draft can, or must, be made public (prior to releasing it to the full CRC or at the same time).  


Public Comment


Ms. Aiona commented on the proposed disbanding of the Protocol Workgroup after completing their current work.  Ms. Aiona suggested that the workgroup consider reviewing the protocols that apply to IPR and the Police Bureau because there is a lot of out of date information in these protocols.   Ms. Aiona requested that Mr. Troy report back things that he learned at the NACOLE Conference.


Mr. Handelman suggested that it would be helpful if there could be some additional explanation as to which cases the letters from the Chief are in reference to.  Mr. Handelman encouraged CRC to form a committee to review changes that have been made to the annual report.  Mr. Handelman said he appreciates it when workgroups post their draft reports for public comment and that this should be a routine practice.  


Wrap-up Comments  


Director Baptista added that giving the IPR and the Police Bureau the opportunity to review workgroup reports before they are disseminated for public comment are in line with auditing standards.  


Mr. Bigham said that last night’s training was at times frustrating because some members of the public were causing the instructors to become distracted from their subject matter.  Captain Brumfield said that the instructors have been told to try to stay on topic as much as possible. 




Chair Bigham adjourned the meeting at 8:04 p.m.