ninth-report.pdf

Independent Monitoring Team Ninth Status Report of the Independent Monitor Delphine Allen, et al., v. City of Oakland, et al. May 13, 2006, to November 30, 2006 Page 2 During this reporting period, the IMT also spent considerable time off-site devoted to monitoring tasks. As during previous reporting periods, much of this time was spent conducting audits and reviewing materials relevant to the Settlement Agreement including: draft publications; training data; Internal Affairs investigative files and disciplinary records; promotions materials; MLL reports; management reports; arrest reports; officer-involved shooting reports and investigative files; OPD Management Assessment Program documentation; and information provided by citizens and OPD officers. In addition to reviewing these documents off-site, the IMT also participated in regular meetings and teleconferences with Plaintiffs’ attorneys and OPD officers, commanders, and managers to discuss policy development, training, and other compliance issues. As discussed in this report, the IMT assessed OPD’s progress on each of the 51 Settlement Agreement Tasks. As part of our assessment this reporting period, we conducted actual practice compliance reviews of 16 tasks: IAD Staffing and Resources (Task 1); Timeliness Standards and Compliance with IAD Investigations (Task 2); IAD Integrity Tests (Task 3); Complaint Control System for IAD (Task 4); Complaint Procedures for IAD (Task 5); Methods for Receiving Citizen Complaints (Task 7); Classifications of Citizen Complaints (Task 8); Contact of Citizen Complainant (Task 9); Summary of Citizen Complaints Provided to OPD Personnel (Task 11); Disclosure of Possible Investigator Bias (Task 12); Reviewing Findings and Disciplinary Recommendations (Task 15); Field Training Officer Program (Task 42); Consistency of Discipline Policy (Task 45); Promotional Consideration (Task 46); Departmental Management and Annual Management Report (Task 48); and Compliance Audits and Integrity Tests (Task 51). These tasks were selected for audit based on several criteria, including OPD’s having completed policies and staff training in place for a sufficient period of time to allow for adequate implementation of the new requirements. Additionally, as has been our practice during the last three reporting periods, we asked OPD to inform us of those tasks in which it believes it has attained compliance. To the extent possible, we adjusted our monitoring schedule to prioritize audits for such tasks. At the same time, to the extent possible, we delayed audits in those areas where the Department has acknowledged that it is not yet in compliance. OPD has made notable progress in all of the areas audited. As discussed below, OPD attained actual practice compliance with Tasks 1 and 15 and remains in compliance with Task 51. It also attained actual practice compliance with significant portions of Tasks 2, 3, 4, 8, 42, 46, and 48. In addition to these task audits, actual practice compliance reviews of the following four tasks are presently underway: Supporting IAD Process—Supervisor/Managerial Accountability (Task 16); Approval of Field-Arrest by Supervisor (Task 18); Unity of Command (Task 19); and Procedures for Transporting Detainees and Citizens (Task 36).