(former) CM GORDON AMENDED DRAFT (AUGUST 20, 2021) of CHAPTER 172. - POLICE CONDUCT OVERSIGHT
As the Council is considering a more recent proposal to amend the police conduct ordinance, I humbly offer this work product from last year, which I drafted with the help of some key community advisors and with input from city staff. The underlining indicates new language and the strikethrough marking indicates language to be removed. I hope that it might be helpful.
Former CM GORDON's AMENDED DRAFT, AUGUST 20, 2021
CHAPTER 172. - POLICE CONDUCT OVERSIGHT[3]
Footnotes:
--- (3)
---
Editor's note— Ord. No. 2012-Or-061, § 1, adopted September 21, 2012,
amended the title of Ch. 172 from "Civilian Police Review Authority"
to "Police Conduct Oversight." See also the Code Comparative Table.
172.10. - Police conduct oversight system
established.
For the purposes of (1) assuring that police services are
delivered in a lawful and nondiscriminatory manner, (2) assuring that
effective accountability for policing is supported through appropriate
supervision and management (3) contributing to the Mayor receiving early
warning information regarding potential future risk of civil liability (4) providing
to the public meaningful participatory oversight of the police and their
interactions with the citizenry and (35) investigating complaints
of misconduct on the part of officers of the Minneapolis Police Department and
making recommendations regarding the merits of such complaints to the Mayor chief
of police, there is hereby created an office of police conduct review and a
police conduct oversight commission, with duties and authority as described in
this chapter. (90-Or-043, § 1, 1-26-90; 90-Or-188, § 1, 7-27-90; 2003-Or-028, §
1, 3-21-03); 2012-Or-061, § 2, 9-21-12)
172.80.20
- Police conduct oversight commission.
(a) Composition.
The police conduct oversight commission shall be comprised of a minimum of
seven (7) members, four (4) of whom shall be appointed by the city council,
and three (3) of whom shall be appointed by the mayor, subject to the approval
of a majority of the city council. If more than seven (7) members are
appointed to comprise the pool of commission members, the city council shall
appoint the eighth member, the mayor the ninth member, subject to approval by
a majority of the city council and alternating thereafter. All commissioners
shall be appointed in conformance with the open appointments as outlined in
Minneapolis Code of Ordinances Title 2, Chapter 14.180. In order to stagger
the expiration of terms, the original appointments of commissioners shall be
for terms of one (1) or two (2) years, as determined by the city clerk.
Thereafter, appointments shall be for two (2) years. A chairperson and
vice-chairperson of the commission shall be elected by a majority of the
appointed members. In order to stagger the terms of the chairperson and
vice-chairperson, the initial appointment of the vice-chairperson shall be for
one (1) year. The vice-chairperson shall only have chairperson duties in the
absence of the chairperson. In the absence of a chairperson or vice-chairperson,
the chairperson or vice-chairperson may designate an acting chairperson to
serve until the next board meeting or until a chairperson is duly appointed.
If the chairperson or vice-chairperson are unable for any reason to designate
an acting chairperson, the commission shall appoint an acting chairperson to
serve until the next board meeting or until a chairperson is duly appointed.
The acting chairperson shall have full authority to conduct actions of the
chairperson. All members shall continue to serve until their successors have
been appointed. A majority of the members shall constitute a quorum.
(b) Qualifications.
All members shall be residents of the city. Residents currently or previously
employed by the Minneapolis Police Department are ineligible to serve as
members of the commission. The office of police conduct review may establish
additional required qualifications.
(c) Minimum training
requirements.
(1) All members must participate in an annual training
session as arranged by the Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights.
(2) All new members must complete training in the following
subject areas as arranged by the Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights: police
use of force, Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Open Meeting law, the
Minnesota Public Employee Labor Relations Act, ethics and conflict of interest.
(3) Within two (2) years of appointment, all new members
must complete the portions of the Citizen's Academy as determined by the
Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights. Members will be compensated fifty
dollars ($50.00) for each Citizen's Academy session attended.
(d) Removal. Any
member of the commission may be removed, by vote of a majority of the city
council and approval of the mayor, for incompetence, neglect of duty,
misconduct or malfeasance, or failure to participate in and complete minimum
training requirements. Any vacancy occasioned by resignation, death, or removal
of a member shall be filled for the balance of the unexpired term by
appointment by the mayor subject to approval of the city council.
(e) Compensation—Limitation.
Each member shall be paid fifty dollars ($50.00) for each day when the member
attends one (1) or more meetings, and shall be reimbursed for expenses incurred
in the performance of duties in the same manner and amount as other city boards
and commission members. The total amount of per diem and reimbursable expenses
payable under this section shall not exceed the total annual budget allocation
for such costs.
(f) Authority.
The commission shall meet once every month at a regularly scheduled time and
place for the purpose of conducting any business necessary to the operation of
the commission, and to assign panels for the subsequent month. The
commission may meet at such additional times and places deemed necessary by its
members, or on the call of the chairperson. The commission may:
(1) Conduct programs of research and study, in conjunction
with office of police conduct review staff appointed by the director of the
office of police conduct review. Research and study includes programs that
analyze Minneapolis Police Department practices, internal controls, compliance
with applicable law and regulation relating to police policy and procedure and
other related matters, to ensure that police services are delivered in a
lawful, effective, and nondiscriminatory manner for the purpose of ascertaining
how the objectives of this chapter may be attained and sustained. For this
purpose, all members of the police conduct oversight commission must have
access to all private data
(2) Collect, review and audit summary data and compile
aggregate statistics relating to programs of research and study such as
patterns of behavior related to complaints of police officer misconduct, and
present results of such analysis on a periodic basis to the public safety
subcommittee of the city council, mayor, and/or chief of police.
(3) Make recommendations to the city council, mayor, and/or
chief of police relating to Minneapolis Police Department officers,
practices, internal controls, compliance with applicable law and regulation
relating to police policy and procedure and other related matters contained
within a program of research and study, or for purposes of potentially
providing early warning of risk of civil liability.
(4) Facilitate outreach and training as a result of the
research and study process.
(5) Regularly meet with the Mayor so as to establish
communication about: a) the goals of police oversight generally, b) the impacts
of discipline decisions on effective oversight, c) potential civil liability,
and d) for Ccontributing to
the performance review appraisal of the chief of police.
(6) Create and implement a community outreach program and
coordinate outreach activities with the Minneapolis Commission on Civil Rights.
(7) Submit periodic reports to the public safety
subcommittee of the city council regarding the activities of the commission.
(8) Establish, amend and repeal rules and procedures
governing its own internal organization and operations in a manner and form
consistent with this Code.
(9) Form subcommittees to assist in fulfilling its duties
and responsibilities.
(10) Request from the mayor and city council the
appointment of such staff as is necessary to carry out the duties of the
commission.
(11) Request from the
city attorney the appointment of an independent attorney when the city attorney
may be in conflict due to its handling of all civil liability legal defense
cases.
(g) Facilitation of
research and study. The director of the office of police conduct review may
designate one (1) or more analysts to facilitate the police conduct oversight
commission in programs of research and study. The analyst may:
(1) Conduct periodic research and study directed by the police
conduct oversight commission.
(2) Establish a follow-up process to monitor the
disposition of results communicated to the police conduct oversight commission
and appraise the commission on the effectiveness of corrective actions taken or
the acceptance of the risk of not taking action.
(3) Submit an annual report to the police conduct oversight
commission, mayor and city council indicating research and study projects
completed, major findings, corrective actions taken by administrative managers,
and significant findings which have not been fully addressed by management.
(4) Conduct special reviews and programmatic reviews at the
request of the mayor, city council, internal auditor, city departments or
boards and commissions.
The analyst for the office of police conduct review shall
organize and administer programs of research and study to operate without
interference or other influence that might adversely affect an independent and
objective judgment of the analyst. In the event of alleged or suspected
impropriety, fraud, or misappropriation or misuse of city funds, the analyst
for the office of police conduct review shall seek advice from the city
attorney, the joint supervisors director of civil rights, and,
as appropriate, conduct an investigation and report any suspected criminal activity
to appropriate law enforcement authorities. (90-Or-043, § 1, 1-26-90;
2003-Or-028, § 9, 3-21-03; 2012-Or-061, § 9, 9-21-12; Ord. No. 2017-076 , §
1, 12-8-17)
172.20.30 - Scope of authority,
office of police conduct review. (moved
to come under Commission)
The office of police conduct review shall consist of a
civilian unit be established under the authority of the director of
civil rights, and will not employ any persons with duties that currently
are, or formerly were, supervised by the Minneapolis Police Department. and
an internal affairs unit under the authority of the chief of police. For
duties outlined in this chapter, the director of civil rights, and not the
chief of police, shall be construed as to hold Mayoral delegation authority
with respect to the city charter. The office shall receive complaints that
allege misconduct by an individual police officer or officers involving any of
the following:
(1) Use of excessive force.
(2) Inappropriate language or attitude.
(3) Harassment.
(4) Discrimination in the provision of police services or
other discriminatory conduct on the basis of race, color, creed, religion,
ancestry, national origin, sex, disability or age or sexual orientation.
(5) Theft.
(6) Failure to provide adequate or timely police
protection.
(7) Retaliation.
(8) Any violation of the Minneapolis Police Department's
policy and procedure manual.
(9) Criminal misconduct. (90-Or-043, § 1, 1-26-90;
2003-Or-028, § 2, 3-21-03; 2006-Or-064, § 1, 6-16-06; 2006-Or-114, § 1,
10-20-06; 2012-Or-061, § 3, 9-21-12)
172.30. - Complaint filing, preliminary review
and investigation.
(a) Complaint filing.
Any person who has personal knowledge of alleged misconduct on the part of a
Minneapolis police officer may file a complaint with the office of police
conduct review by submitting said complaint by means of any readily available
method approved by the office. The office shall endeavor to facilitate the
complaint filing process by providing multiple and accessible avenues for the
filing of complaints. Absent extenuating circumstances deemed sufficient to
warrant untimely filing, no person may file a complaint if more than two
hundred seventy (270) days have elapsed since the alleged misconduct.
Complaints may be filed anonymously.
The office of police conduct review may initiate its own complaint
when investigation is warranted and no other complainant has filed.
(b) Complaint review.
All complaints shall be jointly and collaboratively assessed and
preliminarily reviewed by supervisory staff of the office from both
the civilian unit and the internal affairs unit. A Subject to
reconsideration, a complaint may be declined dismissed with
no further action required pursuant to the authority and discretion of the
office if, on its face, it fails to allege a violation within the purview and
jurisdiction of the office. A complaint may also be referred to another more
appropriate governmental agency or, in the case of allegations which rise only
to a potential "A" level infraction under the police department's
adopted discipline matrix, may be referred to a program of mandatory mediation
instituted by the office of police conduct review or directly to the officer's
supervisor for coaching. Such complaints may also, pursuant to the authority
and discretion of the office, be referred for formal investigation pursuant to
subsection (c).
(c) Complaint
investigation. All other qualifying complaints shall be formally
investigated by the office. through assignment to an investigator or
investigators from the civilian unit and/or the internal affairs unit. The
office shall endeavor to complete any reviews and investigations as promptly
and efficiently as possible. Any complaint alleging criminal misconduct by an
officer shall also initially be referred to the internal
affairs unit of the Minneapolis Police Department, which will only
investigate the criminal charge – directly or through an independent police
agency – and, if no charge will be filed, immediately returned to the office of
police conduct review for resumption of the personnel misconduct investigation.
Complaints not alleging criminal misconduct may be assigned to the civilian
unit at the formal request of a complainant. The investigative report shall
be in a format designated by the office and all final reports shall be reviewed
and approved by supervisory staff. of the office from both the civilian unit
and the internal affairs unit. The investigative report shall not include any
recommendation or conclusion regarding the merits of the complaint.
(d) Procedural
discretion and decision making. Any procedural issue related to the duties
and authority of the office for which supervisory staff from the civilian unit
and the internal affairs unit is unable to reach agreement upon shall be
referred to the director of civil rights and the chief of police, who shall
jointly determine the matter. In the event the director and the chief are
unable to resolve the issue, a designee of the mayor may mediate, and if
necessary resolve, the issue.
(ed) Mediation
and Restorative Justice. Upon the joint direction of supervisory
staff of the office of police conduct review from both the civilian unit and
the internal affairs unit, a A complaint may be referred to mandatory
mediation or restorative justice, subject to the agreement of the
complainant and respondent, and in accordance with administrative rules
established by the POLICE CONDUCT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION. upon preliminary
review of the complaint or at any other time in the course of investigation
when deemed to be appropriate. The mediation shall proceed according to
procedures adopted and instituted by the office of police conduct review. To reflect their professional role as
neutral, no Mmediator and or restorative justice
facilitator shall be neutral trained mediators unaffiliated
with the office of police conduct review, the police conduct oversight
commission, the civil rights department, the police department, or[GCA1] any other
department of the City of Minneapolis.
(fe) Firewall.
Information from investigations shall be shared only with staff assigned to the
office of police conduct review and police conduct oversight commission, unless
otherwise specifically authorized by law. (90-Or-043, § 1, 1-26-90;
2003-Or-028, § 3, 3-21-03; 2003-Or-112, § 1, 9-12-03; 2004-Or-068, § 1,
6-18-04; 2009-Or-029, § 1, 3-27-09; 2010-Or-022, § 1, 4-16-10; 2012-Or-061, §
4, 9-21-12)
172.35. - Reserved.
Editor's note— Ord. No. 2003-Or-028, § 4, adopted March 21, 2003, repealed
§ 172.35, which pertained to compensation—Limitation. See the Code Comparative
Table.
172.40. - Review panel procedure.
All final and approved investigative reports shall be
forwarded to a review panel for the purpose of making recommendations regarding
the merits of the complaint to the chief of police. Mayor.
(1) Each review panel shall be comprised of four (4)
three (3) panelists. Two (2) of the panelists shall be from the pool
established in 172.60 (below), sworn officers of the police department
holding the rank of lieutenant or higher assigned by the chief of police or the
chief's designee members of the and two (2) the third panelists
shall be civilians a member of the police conduct oversight
commission, who will serve as the panel’s chair, and be responsible for
submitting the written findings adopted by the panel.
(2) All panels
will be assigned by the director of civil rights or the director's designee.
chair of the police conduct oversight commission under parameters and
timelines established through administrative rules.The panels shall be
scheduled on an as-needed or regular basis by the office of police conduct
review. Each panel shall appoint a chair, although the office of police conduct
review shall designate whether the chair of each panel shall be a civilian or
officer member on a rotating and equal basis.
(3) The panel shall review and discuss the investigative
report but shall and may take no testimony from witnesses
or parties unless a request from the panel is specifically approved by the
office of police conduct review.
(4) The panel shall issue its recommendation within three
(3) seven (7) business days of the panel review, which shall be
returned to the office of police conduct review and promptly forwarded to the
Mayor chief of police. The recommendation shall be in a format jointly
approved by the office of police conduct review and the police conduct
oversight commission, shall be signed by all panelists, and shall
include a recommendation as to whether each allegation is supported or not
supported by a preponderance of evidence and whether discipline is
warranted or not warranted along with reference to the investigative
evidence which supports the recommendation. And a The
recommendedation may include considerations for range of
discipline, including whether transparency goals warrant that discipline should
be imposed to ensure a public record of the disposition.
(5) The recommendation shall include the votes of each
panelist, and in the event the panel is evenly divided on any
recommendation, such division shall be noted may include explanation of
internal disagreement.
(6) The standard of
proof necessary to recommend that an allegation be sustained is preponderance
of the evidence, which is the same evidence standard applied by civil juries
in lawsuits against the city for police misconduct, and therefore supports an
early warning process for liability risk. Preponderance of the evidence
means that the greater weight of the evidence supports the decision.
(7) The office of police conduct review shall provide
written notice to the officer of the review panel's recommendation. The office
shall provide written notice to the complainant of any allegation not sustained
in the review panel's recommendation. (90-Or-043, § 1, 1-26-90; 2003-Or-028, §
5, 3-21-03; 2012-Or-061, § 5, 9-21-12)
172.50. - Request for reconsideration by
complainant.
(a) Within fifteen (15) days of receipt of notification of either
1) a dismissal, or 2) the review a panel's decision recommending
that a complaint not be sustained, a complainant may submit a written request
for reconsideration to the office of police conduct review.
(b) Reconsideration
of a dismissal will be reviewed by the chair of the police conduct oversight commission
(or delegate), who will have discretion whether to bring the matter to a vote
of all members of the police conduct oversight commission.
(bc) Any request for rReconsideration
of a panel decision, shall be jointly and collaboratively reviewed by
supervisory staff of the office of police conduct review and the chair of
the police conduct oversight commission (or delegate). from both the
civilian unit and the internal affairs unit. If the review determines that
the request for reconsideration alleges newly discovered and relevant evidence
or information not previously available to the complainant panel,
the complaint may be remanded for additional investigation by office staff and
reconsideration by the designated review panel. The review panel may sustain,
reject or modify its prior recommendation regarding the complaint. Alternatively,
the complaint and new evidence or information may be forwarded directly to the
chief of police pursuant to section 172.70.
(cd) The office of police conduct review
shall provide written notification to the officer of the request for
reconsideration and its outcome. (90-Or-043, § 1, 1-26-90; 2003-Or-028, § 6,
3-21-03; 2012-Or-061, § 6, 9-21-12)
172.60. - Review panel civilian appointments.
(a) Composition.
The pool of civilian review panelists shall be comprised of a minimum of
seven (7) members, four (4) of whom shall be appointed by the city council, and
three (3) of whom shall be appointed by the mayor, subject to the approval of a
majority of the city council. If more than seven (7) members are appointed to
comprise the pool of civilian review panelists, the city council shall appoint
the eighth member, the mayor the ninth member, subject to approval by a
majority of the city council, and alternating thereafter. All civilian review
panel members shall be appointed in conformance with the open appointments as
outlined in Minneapolis Code of Ordinances Title 2, Chapter 14.180, except as
provided in this section. In order to stagger the expiration of terms, the
original appointments of civilian panelists shall be for terms of two (2),
three (3) or four (4) years, as determined by the city clerk. Thereafter,
appointments shall be for four (4) years.
(b) Qualifications.
All members shall be residents of the city. Individuals currently or previously
employed by the Minneapolis Police Department are ineligible to serve as
members of the pool. The office of police conduct review may establish
additional required qualifications.
(c) Minimum training
requirements.
(1) All members must participate in an annual training
session as arranged by the Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights.
(2) All new members must complete training in the following
subject areas as arranged by the Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights: police
use of force, Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Open Meeting law, the
Minnesota Public Employee Labor Relations Act, ethics and conflict of interest.
(3) Within two (2) years of appointment, all new members
must complete the portions of the Citizen's Academy as determined by the
Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights. Members will be compensated fifty
dollars ($50.00) for each Citizen's Academy session attended.
(d) Removal. Any
member of the review panel pool may be removed, by vote of a majority of the
city council and approval of the mayor, for incompetence, neglect of duty,
misconduct or malfeasance, or failure to participate in and complete minimum
training requirements. Any vacancy occasioned by resignation, death, or removal
of a member shall be filled for the balance of the unexpired term by
appointment by the mayor subject to approval of the city council.
(e) Compensation—Limitation.
Each civilian member shall be paid fifty dollars ($50.00) for each day when the
member attends one (1) or more meetings or panel reviews, and shall be
reimbursed for expenses incurred in the performance of duties in the same
manner and amount as other city boards and commission members. The total amount
of per diem, payment for file review, and reimbursable expenses payable under
this section shall not exceed the total annual budget allocation for such
costs. (90-Or-043, § 1, 1-26-90; 2003-Or-028, §§ 7, 8, 3-21-03; 2012-Or-061, §
7, 9-21-12)
172.70. - Disciplinary decision by the Mayor.
Upon conclusion of the panel review process, the office of
police conduct review shall forward the investigatory file and panel
recommendation to the Mayor chief of police for the Mayor’s
determination of discipline, which shall be made within thirty (30) days
of receipt, subject to the following exception: if the subject employee
could be subject to discipline that requires a pre-discipline hearing, and that
employee is on statutorily-protected leave for any period during the thirty
(30) days following receipt of the panel recommendation, the deadline is tolled
during the time that the employee is on statutorily-protected leave. Once the
statutorily-protected leave ends, the chief must make a disciplinary decision
within thirty (30) days of the end of statutorily-protected leave. The
Mayor, upon making his or her determination of discipline, shall return
the determination and file to the office of police conduct review. For any
allegation which the review panel recommends to be supported by a majority
vote, the chief shall notify the review panel and the office of the reasons for
such determination through issuance of a written memorandum explaining the
basis for the decision, including the relevant facts, policies and law
supporting the decision. To the extent permitted by Minnesota Statutes, Section
13.43 and other applicable law, the police department shall make the decision
and memorandum immediately available to the public via a departmental or city
website and shall make copies available for physical inspection. If the
disciplinary determination required pursuant to this section is not timely
issued the complainant shall be entitled to a remedy from the police department
consisting of a two hundred dollar ($200.00) penalty payment, with such penalty
doubling in amount upon each subsequent thirty-day delinquency. (90-Or-043, §
1, 1-26-90; 2012-Or-061, § 8, 9-21-12; Ord. No. 2020-045 ,
§ 1, 8-14-20)
172.85. - Confidentiality.
The members, staff, and contractors of the office of police
conduct review and the police conduct oversight commission shall comply with
all of the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Chapter
13 of Minnesota Statutes. All members and contractors, paid and volunteer,
shall sign a contract agreeing to comply with the provisions of the Minnesota
Government Data Practices Act, currently Chapter 13 of Minnesota Statutes. In
return, the city will afford to such member or contractor the same legal
protection that any other agent or employee of the city receives who performs
duties within the scope of employment. (2006-Or-114, § 2, 10-20-06;
2012-Or-061, § 10, 9-21-12)
172.90. - Requirement of cooperation by the
Minneapolis Police Department and all other city employees and officials.
Office of police conduct review staff shall have full, free
and unrestricted access, to the extent authorized by law, to the records of the
Minneapolis Police Department in order to conduct investigations of police
misconduct; facilitate research and study projects for the police conduct
oversight commission; and conduct special reviews and programmatic reviews at
the request of the mayor, city council, internal auditor, city departments, or
boards and commissions. The failure by any official or employee of the
Minneapolis Police Department or by any other City of Minneapolis employee or
official to comply with lawful requests for information or access shall be
deemed an act of misconduct. (90-Or-043, § 1, 1-26-90; 2003-Or-028, § 10,
3-21-03; 2012-Or-061, § 11, 9-21-12; Ord. No. 2017-076 , § 2, 12-8-17)
172.95—172.190. - Reserved.
Editor's note— Ord. No. 2012-Or-061, §§ 12—23, repealed §§ 172.95 through
172.190, which pertained to Civilian Police Review Authority. See also the Code
Comparative Table.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home