HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 339-05.;
,,'.1
City of Palo Alto
City Manager's Report
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: POLICE
DATE: AUGUST 1, 2005 CMR:339:05
SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION OVERVIEW REGARDING POLICE REVIEW
This is an informational report that provides an overview of the Council study session regarding
police review and no action is required.
On February 7,2005, Mayor Burch and Council Member Freeman agendized the issue of using the
Human Relations Commission (HRC) as a police review body. At that time, the Council directed
the City Manager to return to the Council for discussion of responsibilities of such a police review
body as soon as possible after providing the Human Relations Commission with an opportunity to
review and provide input. At the HRC meeting of February 10, 2005, the City Manager and Police
Chief discussed the Council's proposal to formalize the HRC role in this regard. At that time, the
HRC raised some questions and requested additional clarification on its proposed role.
At the April 21,'2005 HRC meeting, the City Manager and Police Chief provided responses to the
HRC questions concerning its role. At that time, with two members absent, the HRC voted three to
one to take on the role as proposed by Council on a short term basis for nine to 12 months while, in
the interim, the Council and/or the HRC would explore other options in case the strategy did not
work out. However, several members expressed concern about their lack of knowledge and
expertise in this area, as well as their thought that they would be unable to deal with other issues
they needed to address in addition to the police review.
Since then, staff has attended one additional HRC meeting (May 12, 2005) for a subsequent
discussion on the implementation of the police advisory role. Specifically, items that were discussed
included a proposed calendar for meetings dealing with police issues, additional training that the
Commissioners would need and Commissioners' access to additional resources. This meeting was
primarily dominated by discussion about police issues and little time was available for members to
handle other issues.
In May, two HRC members submitted their resignations and both cited one of the reasons for their
resignations as being their concern about the police oversight direction.
As a result, staff has been reviewing the various responsibilities that make up the .police review
function. The purpose of the study session is to share with the Counc~l staff s thoughts in this
regard. Additionally, in order to better understand the complexities of poiice oversight, a "primer"
CMR:339:05 Page 1 of2
1
on the Peace Officer's Bill of Rights and the associated legalities will be provided for the Council
during the session.
ATTACHMENT
Attachment A -Study Session Agenda
PREPARED BY:
L
Police Chief
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: "-~~b£)
Assistant City Manager
CMR:339:05 Page 2 of2
Study Session on Police Review Function
I. Review Purpose of Study Session & Agenda
Introductions & history leading up to Study Session -not
Asking for action, share thinking, will return
II. Review Peace Officer Bill of Rights & Penal
Code 832.7 & 1043 of Evidence Code
A. Presentation
S. Questions from Council & HRC
III. Police Review Function
A. Identify different functions
S. Provide closer oversight, provide additional resources
& not over burden the HRC
IV. Council Questions & Discussion
V. Follow Up
City Manager to bring police review issue to HRC
Frank Senest
(10 min)
Steve Sherman
(15 min)
(15 min)
Frank Senest
(15 min)
Council
(30 min)
Frank Senest
(5min)