NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD PORTLAND, OREGON CHAPTER
3519 NE 15 AVE #155 TH
PORTLAND, OREGON 97212
MEMORANDUM DATE:
August 9, 2017
TO:
Mayor Ted Wheeler, ted.wheeler@portlandoregon.gov
CC:
Commissioner Dan Saltzman, dan@portlandoregon.gov Commissioner Amanda Fritz, amanda@portlandoregon.gov Commissioner Nick Fish, nick@portlandoregon.gov Commissioner Chloe Eudaly, chloe@portlandoregon.gov Auditor Mary Hull Caballero, mary.hullcaballero@portlandoregon.gov IPR Director Constantin Severe, constantin.severe@portlandoregon.gov
RE:
Testimony to City Council re Police Accountability Issues The NLG thanks the Mayor and City Council for listening to the public at last Thursday’s
hearing and taking some action in that direction. The NLG has heard, and hopes it is true, that the City is postponing its amendments to the Settlement Agreement for further analysis. The NLG believes that the latest proposed amended ordinance is insufficient to meet the minimum demands made by the AMA Coalition and other community organizations and members. The NLG believes that the amended compelled testimony ordinance before you today is an improvement over the former version. The amended compelled testimony ordinance could present a good policy if it changed “within 48 hours” to “by the end of the shift” or, at least, “within 24 hours,” and did not have the exception stated in paragraph 21. That exception, which gives the city discretion to defer an administrative investigation until after a criminal
Page -2investigation in any circumstance it deems warranted, is overbroad and vague. It creates an exception so wide that it could swallow the rule. We make policy in neutral settings like these, where public has chance to weigh in, outside the pressures of an actual use-of-force incident, so that when incidents do arise, actors can follow the clearly thought out rules and procedures put in place without having to make emotionally-charged decisions that have lasting effects on the situation and greatly impact community trust. This exception provides no guidance regarding when and how the City will determine whether the “circumstances suggest a deferral is warranted.” It vests with a few people the discretion of deciding when to pursue an administrative investigation; subjecting them to outside influence and pressure, which undermines the policy. It is insufficient for the City to tell the community: “just trust us.” The exception minimizes police accountability by threatening to undo the compelled testimony mandate when it is most necessary. Instances where the Chief of Police or Police Commissioner would feel need to use the exception are likely those where administrative investigation is most important. As such, this exception unacceptably fails to address community concerns. Moreover, the amended compelled testimony ordinance at paragraph d allows the City to file or join a legal action, but does not mandate the City to seek judicial review of the deadly force directive. The NLG is uncertain why this change was made and believes it does not serve the interest of finality on this issue. The NLG strongly urges the City to remove paragraph 21 from the ordinance and modify paragraph d to require the City Attorney to attempt to seek judicial review of its deadly force
Page -3directive. Alternatively, the City should modify paragraph 21 to provide an exception, narrowly tailored to the City’s specific concerns, until a judicial ruling can be obtained.