Nickels backs police panel's 29 reforms

Stronger civilian oversight and more transparency in police discipline were among the top recommendations Tuesday from a panel appointed to review the Seattle Police Department's accountability system.

Mayor Greg Nickels quickly responded by promising to push for all of the panel's 29 suggestions in an effort to bolster an accountability system that was sharply scrutinized last summer over two high-profile misconduct cases in which officers were not disciplined.

The Seattle Police Accountability Review Panel's report urged stricter standards for officers accused of lying and procedural changes to erase potential loopholes in discipline. It suggested that the department's three levels of civilian review collaborate to report more frequently to the public on how the system is working.

It also recommended more independence for the Office of Professional Accountability, which investigates complaints of misconduct and is overseen by a civilian director. The director makes findings of fact that are forwarded to the police chief for a disciplinary decision.

Nickels said he would determine by next week which recommendations could go into effect immediately and which ones need to be negotiated with the Seattle Police Officers' Guild.

"Those that are clearly under the rights of the guild to bargain, we will bargain in good faith," he said. "But I want to make very clear that I intend to assert management rights very strongly."

The 11-member panel, which was headed by retired Judge Terrence Carroll, who previously served as police auditor, had the task of examining the accountability system after Chief Gil Kerlikowske was criticized for his handling of misconduct cases in which officers avoided discipline.

"We truly believe that the vast majority of police officers in Seattle are honorable, working hard day in and day out," said Jenny Durkan, a panelist and prominent attorney who once served on the department's firearms review board. "It only takes a few to sully that reputation and make it more difficult for the officers on the street."

Among the panel's recommendations:

Expand the civilian auditor's role to conduct more in-depth audits of department policies and procedures, in addition to reviewing ongoing internal investigations. Her findings should be more frequently reported to the public. The panel suggested that the auditor's first priority should be to examine the Police Department's relationship with communities of color, which are disproportionately represented in citizen complaints.

Expand the three-member OPA Review Board by two to four member and clearly define its role in the oversight process. The panel suggested that the OPA Review Board should serve as a "link to the community" and meet with citizens at least four times annually, while also researching trends and best practices in police accountability.

Allow OPA investigators to extend internal investigations if new information surfaces before the union-negotiated 180-day deadline. In some cases, officers who committed misconduct avoided discipline because the clock ran out.

Require the Police Department to adopt a policy that presumes an officer would be terminated for dishonesty. Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske would be mandated to explain in writing if he chooses a lesser punishment.

Require Kerlikowske to articulate his reasoning in cases in which he overrules the OPA director. In a small percentage of cases, the chief has exonerated officers despite initial findings of misconduct.

Adopt a policy prohibiting officers from using overtime or vacation pay to satisfy a suspension.

Establish more independence for the OPA director and enable her to attend officer disciplinary hearings. Currently, only the chief and the officer's guild representative are allowed.

The panel's work was the first extensive look at the disciplinary process since its predecessor in 1999 urged the department to adopt civilian oversight, which was then a nascent movement in law enforcement to guard against police protecting their own.

In a prepared statement, Kerlikowske said: "The Seattle Police Department has more civilian oversight than any law enforcement agency in Washington and these recommendations can only strengthen this system."

The panel conveyed concerns that the OPA was not as independent as envisioned and that too much authority in discipline had been ceded to the guild.

In a statement, Sgt. Rich O'Neill, the Seattle Police Officers' Guild president, pointed out that rank-and-file members voted to accept changes that accompanied the OPA's formation in 2001.

"The guild remains committed to having a fair and just accountability system for all involved," O'Neill said. "SPOG looks forward to discussing the recommendations with representatives from the city of Seattle at the appropriate time at the bargaining table."

Some of the panel's recommendations are already in practice, OPA Director Kathryn Olson said. For one, if an officer presents new material evidence during his hearing with the chief, then the case now is remanded to the OPA for reconsideration. That is intended to prevent an officer from withholding information to sway the outcome. Also, the director was granted more control over her own budget and hiring, which was another panel recommendation.

"It's a very complex system of oversight and it could always use tweaking. I think they've made some solid suggestions for improvement," she said.