Lockwood’s Plan for Police Review Panel Draws Fire

A group of former judges, grand jurors and civil service commissioners will be picked by the San Diego Police Department as “consultants” to review internal police investigations of complaints of officer misconduct, City Manager John Lockwood announced Wednesday.

Lockwood’s decision is the result of a yearlong debate in San Diego over whether citizens should play a role in overseeing the Police Department’s handling of complaints. It was widely assailed Wednesday as too weak and ineffective by minority leaders and members of a City Council-appointed citizen’s task force who studied the issue.

They said that Lockwood has effectively shut out minorities, who feel the strongest need for independent investigations of police misconduct.

‘Somewhat Disappointed’

“I applaud him for getting the community involved in the review process but I’m somewhat disappointed by the limited group from which the citizens can be picked,” said Murray Galinson, chairman of the Citizens Advisory Task Force on Police-Community Relations. “I would have liked to have seen him include community activists and community leaders because I’m concerned there won’t be as broad a spectrum representing the community as there should be.”

Attorney Daniel Weber, the head of San Diego’s NAACP chapter, said he did not know of a single retired black judge in San Diego.

“That group is not diverse,” Weber said. “It will not reflect Hispanics, blacks or other people of color. He is simply continuing the system as it presently is. If he has no better plan than that, then the City Council ought to ask for his resignation.”

Lockwood said he is confident that a pool of more than 100 former judges, grand jurors and Civil Service members will produce “an ethnic balance representative of the community.”

Lockwood’s plan was quickly endorsed by Police Chief Bill Kolender, who has been a harsh critic of civilian review boards. Under the plan, which does not require the approval of the City Council, Kolender will select the 12 consultants. They will have no authority to independently investigate complaints or recommend discipline.

The panel will be the only civilian review system of its kind in the nation that is appointed by the chief of police.

‘Think I’ll Work’

“I think it’ll work,” Kolender said. “I think we will be able to select 12 people who are representative of the community. I have no problem with them looking at what we did and how we did it.”

The San Diego Police Officers Assn. supports part of Lockwood’s plan, but remains opposed to any citizen review of misconduct cases, POA Treasurer Vince Krolikowski said. He called the addition of former judges and grand jurors “another cog in the wheel that we don’t feel we need.”

Kolender said he will send notices soon to retired Municipal and Superior Court judges, former grand jurors and ex-civil service commissioners who have served within the last five years to determine who would be interested in serving on the panel.

The 12 consultants, who would be paid a nominal fee and expenses, would periodically report to Kolender to offer comments and suggestions about police investigations, Lockwood said. At least twice a year the panel would issue public reports evaluating the internal affairs division. Details such as the number and the nature of investigations to be reviewed have yet to be worked out.

“As far as I’m concerned, it could be random,” Kolender said. “It could be a particular case that receives notoriety. We will let them know what the cases are and they can review what they wish.”

Mayor Maureen O’Connor was in New York on Wednesday and could not be reached for comment.

Lockwood’s plan is a far cry from a full-fledged police review board that would monitor police investigations of citizen complaints, launch its own independent inquiries and recommend discipline to the chief. Such a proposal was initially discussed by the citizen’s advisory task force but rejected by the city attorney’s office because it would violate provisions of the City Charter.

Task Force Proposal

Instead, the task force last month recommended that the police chief name 12 residents to monitor ongoing police investigations and recommended six changes in police procedures. These changes included suggestions by the Police Department to use the county grand jury to conduct monthly audits of randomly selected investigations and to sustain disputed complaints against officers on the basis of evidence of a pattern of prior unsustained allegations.

Lockwood rejected the grand jury proposal because he said the jurors would not have the time to review allegations of police misconduct. He also did not accept the proposal to sustain complaints based on a pattern of unsustained allegations because he said it would violate the officers’ rights. He said that prior allegations could be used as a counseling tool to correct officer misconduct.

He agreed to minor changes in police procedures, including upgrading the seriousness of citizen complaints such as rudeness and racial slurs.

But Lockwood did not follow the task force recommendation to involve citizens in the review process. He limited the consultants to former judges, grand jurors and Civil Service Commission members and restricted their oversight function to reviewing police reports and investigations after they have been completed.

The city manager said he recognized that his plan did not go as far as many community leaders would have liked.

“This is one of those things that has gone from the front burner to the back burner to the front burner for years and years and years,” Lockwood said. “There’s been a lot of talk and nothing has ever been done about it. This is an effort, at least. I would hope they would be patient and monitor this. . . . “

He added, “Most people are reasonably satisfied, I think, that we try to conduct proper business. I just felt some outside look would be reassuring to some people who might have some doubts.”

Lockwood said he decided to exclude citizens because to “start out with 12 people who have some knowledge and appreciation for the system is going to be a lot better than starting out from scratch.”

Concern for Morale

Lockwood said he also was concerned about the morale of rank-and-file officers.

“They have to have some confidence that this is fair,” Lockwood said. “I don’t think they are enthusiastic about it to begin with. I do think with judges, grand jurors and civil service members at least they are going to have some respect for the knowledge of people going in.”

He added that the consultants will “have some appreciation for what the officers’ problems are . . . without having some ax to grind.”

However, members of the citizen’s advisory task force said they felt it was important to include responsible citizens who could fairly evaluate police investigations.

“Why would an ordinary citizen have an ax to grind and these extraordinary citizens somehow not have the same thing?” asked Andrea Skorepa, a task force member. “It just doesn’t make sense. . . .

“I think (Lockwood) has missed an absolutely golden opportunity to rectify the kind of (negative) atmosphere and feelings about the Police Department that have been developing not only within the minority community but the community at large.”

Councilwoman Celia Ballesteros said that Lockwood, by only giving the consultants access to police reports, has failed to correct the public perception that police officials are not capable of thoroughly investigating their own officers.

“People need to have a firsthand view,” Ballesteros said. “They need to listen to some of the witnesses. You read police reports and the police will say one thing. Then you talk to four or five witnesses and it was a totally different situation. . . .

“With a limited pool and predigested information, I really wonder whether the public will feel confidence in this process.”