Citizen Oversight Committee

The purpose of the Committee is to become familiar with the Columbia Police Department’s present system for reviewing complaints, to understand the feelings of those within the Police Department and various interested groups that might have concerns, to obtain general citizen comment, to study the various systems of citizen oversight and to provide a report with recommendations to the Council in regard to citizen oversight of the Police Department. Appointments are made by the Mayor and there are no term limits.

Members & Terms:

Diane Booth
Rex Cambell
Joseph Carrier
Chris Egbert
Wynna Faye Elbert
Stacy Ford
Virginia Law
Ellen LoCurto-Martinez
W. Keith McLaughlin
Jeffrey Milyo
David T. Smith
Joan Sullivan
Jeffery Williams

Establishing Legislation:

Motion made at the June 4, 2007 Council Meeting - Excerpts of those meeting minutes:
Mayor Hindman stated he had met with the various citizen groups that had been active in the discussion of a Citizens Review Board and had also talked to a representative from the Justice Department. He thought it was more appropriate to look at it as a citizen oversight of the Police Department at this stage without defining what the oversight would be since that was a major question which would involve a significant amount of input. He commented that he was convinced that enough issues had been raised for Council to consider looking at some possibility of citizen oversight of the Police Department. He noted there was already some citizen oversight of the Police Department now. He thought they needed to determine if what they had now was what the community felt was needed. He explained the City Manager worked for the Council and the City Manager hired the Police Chief and so forth. The Police Department had an internal system for dealing with complaints, which had been reviewed with suggestions made for improvement. He believed they could assume changes would be made pursuant to those suggestions, so things would be different and improved. He explained that when the internal review system was complete, it was subject to review by the City Manager who worked for the Council, which was the ultimate citizen oversight. He noted the groups he had spoken with were asking for a broadened citizen oversight of the Police Department. After speaking with those groups and listening to suggestions of the Justice Department, he was proposing the formation of a committee with the idea of looking over the present system, becoming well aware of the Police Department and the feelings of the Police Department and the various interested groups, getting general citizen input and studying the various systems of citizen oversight that were available, which were broad in range. He suggested the Council allow him to put together a committee subject to Council approval of membership and to charge the committee with the idea of reviewing what they had and studying what should be done in the way of citizen oversight. If they came to the conclusion Columbia needed a Citizens Review Board, they could make recommendations with respect to that. He noted this would be a time consuming and difficult process for the committee and if they did not get a lot of citizen input, it could be contentious. If it was done right, they might be able to improve the situation. If Council agreed, he suggested they advertise to see if people were interested in serving. They would make it clear that application was not the only way one could get on the committee because they might want to reach out to people who might not apply. He stated he would try to put together a list to present to Council. Ms. Hoppe asked if there would be a suggested timetable. Mayor Hindman replied he did not like to have timetables when putting together committees. Ms. Hoppe clarified she was asking about a timetable for the work process. Mayor Hindman stated he thought it would be difficult to assign a timetable to something like this because they did not know what they would be getting into. Ms. Hoppe stated she did not think it would take more than a year. Mayor Hindman agreed, but wanted it to be done well. Mr. Skala stated he liked this idea and assumed the make up of this committee would include representatives of the Police Department. Mayor Hindman noted he had appointed quite a few committees over the years and believed his record was good at being fair and balanced. He explained he believed a couple theories could be used to develop this committee. One was to try to get people from the Police Department and people who were anxious to have this done to sit face to face with a mediator. He thought a better way for this situation would be to get Police Department type people, neighborhood type people, and a jury of interested people who did not have a predetermined goal or interest with respect to the outcome. He noted they also had the University of Missouri and Columbia College who studied issues involving Police so they might have some incredible talent there to draw upon. He noted he would seek suggestions. He explained that the ACLU, the NAACP, the Douglas Neighborhood Coalition and the Minority Men’s Network were all asking to have representatives. He did not believe they could include all of those groups because they would then need to find four individuals with Police interest. They needed to try and make it a workable committee. He noted he discussed that issue with those groups and believed they understood. Mr. Skala stated he believed this was a great idea and noted he was in favor of some sort of oversight group. He understood this was incredibly complicated and would take a great deal of time. Although there was some degree of civilian control over the Police Department because of the nature of the City Council and City Manager, it approached the analogy of the military with civilian control over it. He believed it was good to have oversight and believed it benefited both groups involved - those with complaints and those complained against. Mayor Hindman noted it took the right balance. Mr. Skala agreed. Mayor Hindman pointed out they could come back and say the current oversight was appropriate. He reiterated he had no predetermined ideas. Ms. Nauser wondered if this was premature. She noted they had just asked the consultant to come in and redraft some of the internal affairs and procedures because they were told they were not for the times. She did not think they were giving that change or process time to solve some of the kinks and problems that had arisen. Mayor Hindman stated he thought about that as well, but believed there was a sufficient amount of community concern to cause them to act. He felt this committee should be made aware of the recommendations made by the consultant and the changes that would be and were made so that would all be taken into consideration. He did not believe this was premature. He noted his instincts were telling him the timing was right. Mr. Janku stated he believed this issue would continue and they needed to find a way to address it. He noted he agreed with Mayor Hindman’s approach. He commented that the report was focused on the internal procedures in terms of discipline and structure and would make improvements to that aspect. It did not address how the public would learn about that process of improvements and have confidence in it. He thought giving the public a greater confidence was important and believed this committee would help address that. Ms. Nauser stated she had a philosophical problem with the people being policed having authority over the police in a direct sense. She noted the analogy was made in regard to civilian control over the military and she believed the civilian aspect of that control was too involved. Mr. Skala stated he considered it an imprecise analogy. Ms. Hoppe felt “control” might be too big of a word for what a Civilian Review Board was. She recalled asking Mr. Thompson about him not being asked to do a citizen review and understood he normally did that. She commented that an internal review did not exclude the need for the civilian review. She understood he normally recommended that. Mayor Hindman pointed out he was not recommending they have a committee to study civilian review. He was looking at civilian oversight of the Police Department, which could involve civilian review of cases, but might not. Ms. Hoppe agreed and noted it took that extra step to create dialogue and enhance confidence. She believed this was a good democratic step. Mayor Hindman stated he felt it was an opportunity for the groups to get together. He commented that being a police officer was a tough job. They had to make incredibly difficult, dangerous and frightening decisions. He noted the attended a Police Academy as a volunteer and learned a lot. He stated he would not want their job. He believed people needed to learn to appreciate both points of view. They needed to know what it was like to have difficulties with the police and what it was like to be a police officer. He hoped this group would be exposed to both situations. Mr. Skala stated his daughter was graduating from Ohio State and had been accepted into the Police Academy for the Columbus Police Department. There was a great deal of concern on both sides of this issue and he believed by just getting the discussion started and relatively open ended within the framework of oversight would go a long way to create confidence within the Police Department and within the community at large. Mayor Hindman made the motion for Council to give him the authority to put together a list of people for a committee with the charge previously described. The motion was seconded by Ms. Crayton. Mr. Janku suggested they might want to have a resolution authorizing the Mayor to appoint the committee and for staff to provide resources at the time the committee was ready to be appointed. Mayor Hindman agreed. The motion made by Mayor Hindman and seconded by Ms. Crayton was approved unanimously by voice vote.