Site Navigation

Statewide Commission Creates Weak Discipline Standards,
Ignores Public

The law (HB 2930) described the LESC's makeup of 15 members, including the director of the Department of Public Safety Standards and Training (DPSST), the Attorney General (or a designee), two advisory members of the legislature and 11 members appointed by the DPSST director and the AG. Those eleven are: two chief law enforcement officers. two from law enforcement labor organizations, one from a federally recognized Indian tribe or association of tribes, two to represent the interests of cities and counties, a public defender, a prosecutor, and two people from historically marginalized groups.

So if you're keeping score at home, that is 13 people with jobs related to the criminal injustice system, and just two people who represent the community. The person chosen from a tribe is also a Chief of Police, which means the Commission actually has three chief law enforcement officers. Also, the two members who were most responsible for settling Portland Police Association's recent contract, Steven Schuback, a private labor attorney acting as a member of local government (the City of Portland), and Anil Karia, who represents police "unions," were the most active participants other than Co-chair Michael Slauson. Slauson, chief counsel of the Criminal Justice Division of the Oregon DOJ, ran most of the meetings.

The Commission was tasked with addressing standards for, at a minimum, the following seven behaviors: unjustified or excessive use of physical or deadly force; sexual harassment; sexual assault; assault; conduct that is motivated by or based on a real or perceived factor of an individual's race, ethnicity, national origin, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion or homelessness (AKA profiling); moral character; and the use of drugs or alcohol while on duty. They delivered their draft rules in an initial report to the House Committee on Judiciary on September 1 and they delivered their final rules by October 1, the deadline defined in HB 2930.

Before delivering the draft report, the LESC held 15 poorly publicized meetings between March 7 and August 16, during which time there was one public comment. That input came from the Chief of Police of Bend; not a single comment from the public. Between August 16 and September 14, they held four hearings where the Commission heard from the public. These meetings were held during the work week at 1 pm, shutting out Oregonians who work a standard 9-5 job, and the public was likely only informed of these meetings due to reporting by Oregon Public Broadcasting on August 1.

Only two of the 15 Commissioners appeared at any of the hearings, which included testimony from two mothers of people killed by police in Oregon. Another person reminded the Commission about a Portland officer who sexually assaulted a woman and was fired, then reinstated by an arbitrator, and within two weeks engaged in a high speed vehicle pursuit that led to a crash that killed the driver of the other vehicle (PPR #75). There were 140 minutes of public testimony and 547 pages of written testimony submitted to the Commission, nearly all of it demanding stricter standards for law enforcement in Oregon and a more representative Commission including members of the public who have been harmed by police or who have had family harmed or killed by police.

It is unclear whether any of the 13 members who did not appear before the public in the comment sessions watched any of the testimony, and the staff did not allow members of the public to comment at the two meetings held afterward despite there being time left over at the end of each of them.

What did the public get from the Commission's work, aside from feeling left out? Rules around the seven behaviors that the Commission was required to address, wherein five behaviors can be mitigated down to "written reprimand." In addition to excessive force, the other four are sexual harassment; sexual assault; assault; and the use of drugs or alcohol while on duty. Profiling can be mitigated down only so far as demotion. Demonstrating a lack of moral character is the only misconduct where termination will be imposed without potential for mitigation, however, the way the Moral Character rule is written, it may require the officer to be convicted of a crime for this to take effect.

January, 2023
Also in PPR #88

Portland Copwatch
PO Box 42456
Portland, OR 97242
(503) 236-3065/ Incident Report Line (503) 321-5120
e-mail: copwatch@portlandcopwatch.org

Portland Copwatch is a grassroots, volunteer organization promoting police accountability through citizen action.

People's Police Report #88 Table of Contents
Back to Portland Copwatch home page
Peace and Justice Works home page
Back to top