1 Police Board Beats 2

Voters in the city of San Diego had two police review boards to choose from in last month’s election--one with independent investigatory powers and one without. Although both received a majority of the votes, the one without investigatory and subpoena powers got more votes and was declared the winner.

Now the proponents of the stronger board are considering filing a lawsuit challenging the city attorney’s decision, and Councilman Wes Pratt has suggested that both boards be impaneled.

Before the election, we supported the stronger police review board, and we still think that it would provide the most accountability. We were sorry to see it lose. But having two police review boards would be overkill.

Officers’ performance should be closely scrutinized, and it is by the Police Department’s internal affairs office and sometimes by the district attorney. The internal investigation should also be reviewed by a board of civilians. But adding a second board of review would be unfair to officers and would be more likely to create public confusion than to restore public confidence in the Police Department.

The community would be better served if the proponents of the losing Proposition F spent their resources trying to get state law changed so that the results of the reviews could be made public rather than trying to establish two review boards.

The voters made it clear that they want more accountability from the police. If the board that received the most votes fails to provide that, a stronger measure could be presented to the voters again.