Laserfiche WebLink
Informational Report: Police Oversight Models <br />September 15, 2020 <br />Page 4 <br />create significant problems for the community and police department. The board or commission <br />must have the ability to compel evidence (subpoena) and the ability to hear testimony from officers. <br />Would require significant and adequate funding to function properly. <br />Summary <br />Although the models set forth above depict the two general types of oversight board/commissions, <br />there are numerous variation between those with investigatory power and those without. There are <br />civilian review boards, monitors, auditors, and inspectors general, among the variations. The "best" <br />approach continues to be a subject of debate among scholars and practitioners. In part, this is <br />because so many different factors influence what particular agencies and communities need and <br />can sustain. A variety of police oversight classification systems have developed over the years <br />because of the wide variation in approaches adopted by communities. The National Association of <br />Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE) adopted a system developed by Samuel Walker <br />in 2001 with some modifications of their own. NACOLE places police oversight bodies in one of <br />three classifications: <br />1. The investigation -focused model involves routine, independent investigations of <br />complaints against police officers, which may replace or duplicate police internal affairs <br />processes, staffed by non -police civilian investigators. <br />2. The review -focused model concentrates on commenting on completed investigations after <br />reviewing the quality of police internal affairs investigations. Recommendations may be <br />made to police executives regarding findings, or there may be a request that further <br />investigations be conducted. A review board composed of citizen volunteers commonly <br />heads this model, and they may hold public meetings to collect community input and <br />facilitate police -community communication. <br />3. The auditor/monitor model focuses on examining broad patterns in complaint <br />investigations including patterns in the quality of investigations, findings, and discipline <br />rendered. Further, in some cities that use this model, auditor/monitors may actively <br />participate in or monitor open internal investigations. This model often seeks to promote <br />broad organizational change by conducting systematic reviews of police policies, practices <br />or training, and making recommendations for improvement. <br />Since the 1970s, more than 200 police oversight commissions have been established throughout <br />the United States. For information that is more detailed please see Exhibit 1 for a report published <br />in 2018 by the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services <br />entitled Civilian Oversight of the Police in Major Cities. In order to better understand how police <br />oversight plays a role in local law enforcement in California, a summary of police oversight bodies <br />in select cities is provided in Exhibit 2. Civilian oversight programs vary significantly from one city <br />to the next and even within the general categories described here, and some communities deploy <br />police oversight commissions that incorporate more than one characteristic of each of the models. <br />65A-4 <br />