Proposition F: Police Review

The 1988 San Diego Charter Review Commission has labored long and hard to produce Ballot Proposition F, which would create an independent Police Review Commission with a staff of investigators and subpoena powers to compel witnesses to testify. As a member of the Charter Review Commission, I voted against this proposal.

San Diego needs a police review function. It’s a healthy idea to monitor whether the Police’s own Internal Affairs Department is doing a good job, and to prevent possible cover-up of police misconduct.

We already have such a monitoring group, appointed by the city manager well over a year ago. They are a representative group of public-minded San Diegans, made up of volunteers from several ethnic groups. They have reviewed over 130 investigations by the San Diego Police Internal Affairs Department. The review board spokesman told us that they were unanimous in approving each of these internal affairs investigations of alleged misconduct. The board’s spokesman, a retired Marine general, said the discipline handed out by the police chief was severe. Hearing that from a Marine, I was impressed.

Unfortunately, most of the Charter Review Commission seem to think that we can reduce police misconduct by investigating it more thoroughly a second time. Some of us respectfully disagree. So long as we have a top-notch internal affairs department and honest citizens to monitor them, we can measure the amount of misconduct by the police. Reduction of police misconduct, however, will only happen by changing the way officers are selected, trained and supervised, and that is where we must spend money if we are serious about the problem. Spending tax dollars for more investigations misses the point, and just adds more bureaucrats.

The internal affairs budget is more than $1 million a year. The proposed review commission cannot independently investigate all of the same cases without spending at least this much money. If they don’t examine all the cases, then the opportunity for cover-up by the SDPD increases. If the Police Review Commission has a smaller staff, but tries to examine too many complaints, then they will develop a backlog, as has happened in San Francisco. Backlogs are great for job security, but not for justice.

Since California law prohibits the public disclosure of these investigations, I cannot understand how the public will even be able to judge the performance of the proposed commission.

According to testimony given the Charter Review Commission, we have one of the best internal affairs departments in the nation. We also have in place an honest, experienced and inexpensive review board to keep them honest. Why spend money where it won’t help? Vote No on Proposition F.

SAM L. WILHITE

San Diego