The city auditor needs to make changes to stop widespread
public mistrust of the Independent Police Review (IPR) process,
according to an independent consultant’s report released last week.
“There is widespread community dissatisfaction with the Independent
Police Review system,” says the 186-page report, written by
Arizona-based consultant Eileen Luna-Firebaugh. “There is a lack of
trust that complaints about police misconduct are being seriously
addressed.”
The report continues: “The general conclusion of the consultants is
that the system of civilian oversight, as manifested by the IPR and
Citizens’ Review Committee (CRC), does not have the confidence of the
community. The question is why.”
Which is where the controversy begins. The report appears to suggest
that City Auditor Gary Blackmer is responsible for the IPR’s problems,
referring directly to Portland’s choice of an “Auditor Model” of
civilian oversight of police, in page two of its damning executive
summary.
“In this model, there is one person who, depending on their
individual ability and characteristics,” says the report, “seeks to
address police policy issues and the enhancement of accountability in a
systemic way.”
Blackmer did not return the Mercury‘s call for comment on the
report by press time, nor did IPR Director Leslie Stevens, who
announced last Thursday, January 24, that she plans to leave the IPR to
head up the police bureau’s Office of Professional Standards—a
move the Oregonian’s editorial board wrote on Saturday, January
26, “may suggest she’s had a too-cozy relationship with the
bureau.”
Nevertheless, one city commissioner in particular is not so sure
Blackmer should shoulder all the blame for the IPR’s perceived lack of
community trust.
“The mayor has not accepted his responsibility in all this,” says
City Commissioner Randy Leonard. “Why is the man who is supposed to be
in charge of the police bureau [Mayor Tom Potter is police
commissioner] seeking to hold the city auditor responsible?”
While he won’t use the word “setup,” it appears Leonard feels the
mayor’s office wanted to use Luna-Firebaugh’s report as a way to
justify making changes to the IPR by blaming Blackmer for its
shortcomings, when public confidence in the police bureau’s complaints
process should be Potter’s responsibility, Leonard thinks.
“I think the mayor’s office had a distinct point of view about how
the CRC works,” says Leonard, “And they told that to [Luna-Firebaugh]
and she was heavily influenced by the impression she got from the
mayor’s office.”
Luna-Firebaugh responds: “I think it is unfortunate if [Commissioner
Leonard] thinks I am biased. The only thing I am biased in favor of is
good government.”
The mayor’s office, too, isn’t buying it.
“Tom’s not a big fan of sound-bite solutions, which is why he hired
a nationally known expert to evaluate the program the city council
enacted,” says Potter’s spokesman, John Doussard. “If there are
improvements that need to be made, I know he looks forward to working
with the council and Gary to make them.”
Doussard also points out that the last four years of neighborhood
surveys show that a majority of Portlanders have questions about the
oversight system.
“That was enough for Tom to ask for an independent look,” he
says.
Commissioner Dan Saltzman agrees. “This report has been long
overdue,” he says. “I’m sure Randy’s got it all connected on the wall
of his office, but the report is certainly not motivated by any mayoral
conspiracy.”
Luna-Firebaugh’s report will be formally presented to city council
at the end of February, when Portland’s city commissioners will have to
decide whether or not to adopt some of its recommendations. One
recommendation is to appoint independent investigators to look into
complaints—something the IPR hasn’t done in its six-year history,
despite being technically authorized to do so. Instead, IPR has always
sent complaints to the cops’ own internal affairs detectives, prompting
questions about the fairness of the process.
The report also recommends granting more authority to the CRC to
decide when to hear complainants’ appeals. The CRC used to have that
authority, until IPR Director Stevens took it over in 2005. Between
2002 and 2004, the CRC heard 90 appeals, but since Stevens took over
the decision-making, only 13 appeals have been heard, according to the
report.
“Whatever new system we have has to transcend individual
personalities,” says Copwatch activist Dan Handelman. “It has to serve
the people of Portland who feel they’ve been mistreated by police.”