February 16, 2005

Back to the table of Contents Page

Classifieds

Palo Alto Online

Commission questions new role

by Bill D'Agostino

Although cast as the city's new police oversight committee by the City Council, members of the Human Relations Commission are questioning whether the appointment has any substantive meaning -- and if they are even qualified to carry it out.

"I'm just not real clear how this proposal will change the role we have played to date," Commissioner Eve Agiewich said during a scheduled Thursday meeting with top police and city officials. "That's one concern. The other concern is that I'm not sure that we actually have the expertise to undertake this particular project."

The commission's new role stems from a Feb. 7 council meeting that dealt with the police department's relationship with minority residents. Amid accusations of racial profiling and a pending high-profile criminal case against two officers, Councilwoman LaDoris Cordell last Monday recommended hiring an independent police auditor. However, no other council member expressed support for the idea.

Commissioner Lakiba Pittman asked City Manager Frank Benest, who made a rare visit to the commission, whether they would "have any authority to do anything?"

Although Benest admitted commissioners would not direct the police chief or the city manager, he noted, "It is a partnership and partners respect each other and we respond to each other."

Commissioner Adam Atito was more optimistic, saying the new role would encourage dialogue. Next Wednesday, the commission and the police department are co-sponsoring a community forum, the first of such quarterly events to discuss police issues, at 7 p.m. in the Unitarian Church at 505 East Charleston Road.

During the Thursday meeting, Police Chief Lynne Johnson presented commissioners with the department's new internal order regarding racial profiling. Included in the police's recently revamped "general orders," the rule states that the "practice of racial profiling is illegal and will not be tolerated by the department." General orders are the department's rules, distributed to all officers and a major part of ongoing training.

Part of the commission's new responsibility will be to review such new policies and protocols before they are adopted, Benest noted. "I think that is a major step."

In coming weeks, Benest and a subcommittee of the commission will bang out, in private, additional details of the new review body, which will be then presented at a future public meeting.

Approximately 30 people attended last Thursday's meeting. Many pleaded for even stronger police oversight, citing recent cases where officers were accused of mistreating and racially profiling suspects of color. The commission will have no ability to subpoena officers or review internal investigations.

Christiane Cook, a Palo Altan who volunteers with the American Civil Liberties Union, asked the commission to reject the council's offer. "You cannot have a review board that has no teeth," she said.

The new order on racial profiling and the review board are just two moves city officials are making to address critics' concerns. Later this year, the city auditor will conduct a survey of drivers and pedestrians stopped by police. In July, officers will travel to the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles. And soon, the department will spend approximately $200,000 to purchase new video cameras for police cars.

The commission will also review the forthcoming policy about when such cameras should record.

Even before the commission's role was formalized, the police had adjusted its policies based on its input. During a meeting in December, members were critical of the police chief's decision to limit racial data officers collect to merely drivers of vehicles.

Due to that criticism, officers are now also marking down racial information about pedestrians and bicyclists with whom they interact.

Staff Writer Bill D'Agostino can be e-mailed at bdagostino@paweekly.com.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.