Publication Date: Wednesday, December 14, 2005
City to explore hiring police auditor
City to explore hiring police auditor
(December 14, 2005) Action caps yearlong struggle to determine best way to review police
by Bill D'Agostino
The City of Palo Alto took a first step toward hiring an independent police auditor who could review citizen complaints and internal investigations into alleged officer misconduct on Monday night.
The council voted 8-1 to have three top city officials -- Police Chief Lynne Johnson, City Manager Frank Benest and the City Attorney Gary Baum -- explore the legal and financial questions surrounding the hiring of an outside auditor for a one-year trial. The three will submit a written report to the council within 90 days.
The action capped, but did not actually resolve, a yearlong examination by city leaders into the best way to review police officers' conduct.
Baum, who will conduct the legal review of the issue, said hiring a police auditor would probably require approval from the city's voters to amend the City Charter. The charter establishes staff authority and responsibilities. The earliest that vote could likely be taken is November 2006, if the council decides to move forward, Baum said.
The request for the report came from a subcommittee of three councilwomen: LaDoris Cordell, Judy Kleinberg and Dena Mossar.
Councilman Vic Ojakian voted against the police-auditor idea. He said he was concerned the trio of city officials examining the idea lacked sufficient independence from the police department. But the three councilwomen said the officials' report would be factual and simply outline the models other cities use, among other issues.
Other cities with police auditors include San Jose, Tucson, Ariz. and Portland, Ore.
The council's vote foregoes establishing two committees that Benest proposed earlier this year: one of city staff to review internal investigations and another of outside experts to review new police policies.
The council subcommittee concluded "there are serious concerns" with Benest's plan, according to a memo they wrote to the full council. The city-staff committee lacked "arms-length" distance from the police department and would not be subject to independent review, the memo said.
Instead of the panel of experts, the council approved -- at the subcommittee's request -- holding a study session in early 2006 to discuss ways the council itself could oversee police policies.
After the vote, Ojakian asked the council to authorize a survey of police personnel to determine the morale of the department. He said he was concerned that Palo Alto officers were demoralized from the yearlong scrutiny of the department.
No other council member supported Ojakian's request.
Cordell said the exploration into hiring a police auditor "in no way" reflected a lack of support for the police chief or the police department.
"It was by no means an act of lack of confidence," Kleinberg agreed.
How to properly oversee the city's police department became a controversial topic earlier this year when police officers Michael Kan and Craig Lee went on trial for beating Albert Hopkins, a black man, in 2003. A jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict about whether the beating was legally justified, and the officers then pled guilty to an infraction.
In response to that and other incidents, the council voted Feb. 7 to make the city's Human Relations Commission the city's official police-review board. But commission members complained they lacked the time and expertise for the task.
Benest then proposed forming the two new committees that have now been shot down.
Staff Writer Bill D'Agostino can be e-mailed at bdagostino@paweekly.com.
E-mail a friend a link to this story. | 
