City officials say they’re evaluating complaints made by Portland’s largest police union against a city councilor.
On March 19, Aaron Schmautz, president of the Portland Police Association, fired off a memo to Portland Mayor Keith Wilson, City Administrator Raymond Lee III, and other top city administrative staff, alleging District 2 City Councilor Sameer Kanal had interfered in the operations of the city’s new Community Board for Police Accountability (CBPA). By attending a CBPA meeting—which the councilor was invited to attend and give a presentation at—and offering his office’s support with logistics and administrative help, Schmautz says Kanal was overstepping.
While the complaint primarily focused on the councilor’s meeting attendance, the PPA memo cited “continued and concerning evidence of overt bias and manipulation of the CBPA” and set the stage for what could be a future legal fight between the city and the police union over Portland’s new independent, civilian-led police oversight system.
The CBPA is a key part of the new Office of Community-based Police Accountability, which was approved by voters in 2020 via measure 26-217. The accountability office will replace the city’s current system with one that is independent of police influence and involvement. It will independently and impartially investigate alleged police misconduct, and make disciplinary decisions, when deemed appropriate.
The CBPA is still fairly new–the group held its first meeting in February. At the time the PPA memo was drafted, the group had met just three times.
Kanal was asked to attend and present at the group’s March 11 meeting because of his background and familiarity with the new police oversight system. Before being elected to Portland City Council in 2024, Kanal previously worked for the city as a project manager for the Police Accountability Commission–the precursor to the CBPA. The Commission was tasked with developing recommendations and policy guidelines for how the new system would operate. During the meeting mentioned in the complaint, Kanal provided a timeline and overview of the Police Accountability Commission’s work, while answering questions from CBPA members.
But Kanal’s presence and role at the meeting struck a nerve with Schmautz, who argued the councilor is playing a heavy-handed role in guiding the CBPA, in violation of the city charter.
“Councilor Kanal sought to recast his appearance as that of a former project manager for the Police Accountability Commission. That characterization fails,” Schmautz wrote in the memo. “He appeared as what he is: a sitting Councilor with an institutional interest in shaping the CBPA’s direction.”
Schmautz took issue with the councilor using a city laptop, asking his office staff to help him prepare presentation materials, and offering to use his Council office funds to help pay for an outside facilitator for the CBPA.
“By his own words, he sought to put his ‘thumb on the scale,’” Schmautz wrote. Kanal’s words to the CBPA were in the context of explaining a community agreement the Police Accountability Commission created.
“…There’s a community agreement. I think it’s actually the last [part], is ‘accept non-closure,’” Kanal told CBPA members, recounting how the Accountability Commission operated. “And If I could put my thumb on the scale, not in a formal way, but in the suggestion way, that’s one of the most important things. You have to have closure by the last vote, but there will probably be things you can’t get done in a given conversation.”
The updated city charter that governs the new oversight system prevents the Council, mayor, city administrators and other city staff from interfering with or influencing the CBPA’s independent judgement. The CBPA, still in its infancy, hasn’t begun hearing cases yet and likely won’t for some time. The group still needs to hire a director, who will hire staff to investigate complaints against police.
Kanal reiterated his role in the public safety sphere and the purpose for his presentation at the meeting.
“The Community Board for Police Accountability has independent judgment under the City Charter. They are also under the responsibility of last year’s Community and Public Safety Committee, which I co-chaired, and this year’s Committee of the Whole, which I chair,” Kanal told the Mercury via email. “The Board used their independent judgment to invite me to present on the decision-making processes used by the Police Accountability Commission, which I was the project manager for. When I did so, I started by noting that everything I say is advice and/or sharing my experience, and none of it is guidance or direction from a City Councilor. I’m not sure what problem Mr. Schmautz sees here.”
In his memo, Schmautz requested a meeting with the city leaders he sent the memo to. A city spokesperson confirmed that the city administrator, city attorney, a deputy city administrator, as well as Portland Police Chief Bob Day, the city’s human resources director, and the mayor’s chief of staff met with Schmautz on April 15 to discuss the grievance. The city is still “evaluating the concerns” raised by Schmautz.
On behalf of the PPA, Schmautz also requested several records, including a broad range of communication (including emails, Microsoft Teams messages, and text messages) between Kanal’s office and CBPA members, Kanal and his own staff, as well as any communication from Kanal or his staff pertaining to “CBPA and/or civilian oversight of PPA members,” including messages on the subject sent from Kanal to any city councilors. The city is still working to fulfill the PPA’s records request, the Mercury confirmed.
Police union has pushed back on new accountability system for years
The March 19 PPA complaint follows a pattern of grievances from the police union about the new independent police oversight system–which the PPA has challenged since it was approved by voters. In 2024, a police union-backed initiative petition sought to substantially weaken the authority of the voter-approved police oversight system, and slash its budget, while instructing the city to hire more police officers. The initiative was challenged in court, and ultimately never brought before voters after a judge ruled the proposed ballot measure’s title didn’t sufficiently convey the full scope of the proposed measure.
The PPA also didn’t approve of the final recommendations from the Police Accountability Commission when they were presented to the City Council in 2023. Schmautz told the Oregonian he felt the group’s work wasn’t aimed at accountability and fairness, and instead sought to “punish police officers, regardless of what they did.” Conversely, the Commission also disapproved of the final version adopted by the Council, warning that city attorneys and councilors had watered down their recommendations, and threatened the oversight system’s independence.
Earlier this year, Schmautz took issue with the final selection process for the CBPA. In his March 19 memo to city leaders about Kanal, the aggrieved union president simultaneously complained about the City Council’s decision to allow a member to serve on the CBPA who had previously been disqualified for alleged bias against police, stemming from past social media posts.
“The CBPA is compromised. Unless City leadership acts immediately to cure impermissible bias and Council interference, it will cement what is already becoming unmistakably clear: the CBPA lacks the legitimacy necessary to exercise its authority in a fair, impartial, and lawful manner,” Schmautz wrote.
Schmautz did not respond to requests for comment.
City “still evaluating” police union memo
It’s unclear what the intended outcome of the PPA complaint is, or what remedies are available. While Schmautz seeks records to try to sniff out evidence of collusion or influence, the union president’s memo sets the tone for what may occur during labor negotiations between the PPA and the city, or down the road, if the PPA ever decides to appeal a decision made by the CBPA.
It’s a concern the city attorney’s office has already vocalized to councilors. If the police union has documented instances of perceived bias or violations of the city’s charter, the union could try to overturn disciplinary decisions made by the CBPA, forcing both sides into arbitration—a legally binding mediation process sometimes used to resolve labor contract disputes.
Alison Perkins, a public information officer for the city, told the Mercury that if the PPA believes CBPA activity violates their collective bargaining agreement, there are formal processes for that, which could include arbitration. However, if the PPA has complaints that don’t involve alleged labor contract violations, the union can submit a complaint to the city’s Bureau of Human Resources or the deputy city administrator of operations—as Schmautz did with his memo back in March. That process is less defined.
“The City will review the complaint for potential City rule, ordinance, or charter violations and determine what remedy, if any, might be appropriate,” Perkins noted.
The city has limited authority to reign in the conduct of a sitting councilor. Elected officials aren’t city employees, meaning they can’t be subject to discipline from any city administrator or the mayor. Arguably, the only office that can levy penalties against councilors under narrow circumstances is the Auditor’s Office.
Perkins confirmed city administrative leaders are still “evaluating the concerns Aaron [Schmautz] brought forward and determining the best path forward.”
