Concept of Police Review Supported : Atty. Gen. Fails to Resolve Criticism of S.D. Civilian Board

The state attorney general’s office said Tuesday that a citizens review board has the right to inspect complaints against police officers when local ordinances permit such access. But the opinion stopped short of saying whether the new Civilian Advisory Panel on Police Practices in San Diego was properly established under the City Charter.

The opinion also failed to resolve criticism from some minority groups that the San Diego City Charter doesn’t necessarily require that Police Chief Bill Kolender participate in the selection of the 12 members and three alternates to the new review board.

Instead, the attorney general’s opinion responded to a broad request from Assemblyman Peter Chacon (D-San Diego) for general guidelines on whether individual city managers and citizen review boards should be allowed to monitor complaints of police brutality.

The opinion said that citizen reviews of police complaints must be granted when access is permitted under individual city charters, but that the confidentiality of those complaints must be maintained.

Jack R. Winkler, the assistant attorney general who researched the opinion, said that because his office by policy never interprets local city charters, the attorney general would not pass judgment on the San Diego police review board.

He said only a lawsuit would finally put to rest the question of whether Kolender or San Diego City Manager John Lockwood has the ultimate responsibility for naming the members to the new board.

“I suppose litigation is the answer now,” Winkler said. “A judicial determination would certainly resolve it with a degree of finality, more so than any attorney general’s opinion.”

The call for a citizens review panel in San Diego was made after the Police Department came under criticism by minority leaders who complained that officers were not being adequately disciplined for police brutality.

City Atty. John Witt ruled that the City Charter grants sole authority to Kolender for selecting members of the new review panel. His interpretation was then challenged by various minority groups. In September, Kolender and Lockwood jointly named the board members.

The board has been criticized by some minority leaders who say Kolender’s role in the selection process taints the board’s independence.

Coalition to Discuss Opinion

Robert A. Garcia, outgoing president of La Raza Lawyers Assn., said the Coalition of Hispanic Professionals will meet Thursday to discuss the attorney general’s opinion and decide whether to file a lawsuit to clarify the charter.

“Our opinion remains that the city manager can make the appointments,” he said. “He doesn’t need anyone else’s permission or approval.”

Daniel Weber, an attorney who is president of the San Diego chapter of the NAACP, said his group will meet Saturday to discuss what action to take.

Rather than seeking a legal remedy, he said, the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People is leaning toward speeding up its efforts to lobby the City Council to establish its own police review board.

He said the City Council should be the true authority for creating a review board because the council and mayor are the elected representatives of the people, whereas allowing Kolender to help select the review board members “does not lend itself to any credible results.”

“It is incredible to believe the police are not accountable to the people,” Weber said. “It is just unconscionable. What we have in place now is nothing but a sham.”

Kolender said Tuesday that he has had “no problems” with the work of the current police review board. “I am a public official in a public agency,” he said. “I am supportive of the way the board is currently constituted. I have no problems with the way things are going.”

But he reiterated that the panel is solely advisory and restricted to reviewing how police investigate citizens’ complaints. He said that any disciplinary action taken against officers remains his decision.