2016, 05-31 Study Session MINUTES
SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL
MEETING STUDY SESSION
Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers
Spokane Valley, Washington
May 31,2016
Attendance:
Councilmembers Staff
Rod Higgins, Mayor Mark Calhoun, Deputy City Manager
Arne Woodard,Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, City Attorney
Ed Pace, Councilmember Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney
Sam Wood, Councilmember Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Pro Tem Mike Stone, Parks&Rec Director
Eric Guth, Public Works Director
Morgan Koudelka, Sr. Administrative Analyst
Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-009 Avista Electrical Franchise—Cary Driskell
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title,it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded
that Council place proposed Ordinance 16-009 granting an electrical franchise to Avista Corporation on
a future agenda for a second ordinance reading. Mr. Driskell made brief comments about the franchise,
and that Avista is one of four electrical utility providers in the City, and that this would be similar to other
franchises granted by the City, and would be for a period of twenty-five years. Mayor Higgins invited
public comment.No comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None.
Motion carried.
Motion Consideration: Determine Interviews for Council Vacancies—Chris Bainbridge
City Clerk Bainbridge explained the process to fill Council vacancies, per the Council's Governance
Manual,and she explained the method to determine interviews for the two vacant positions.Ms.Bainbridge
also noted that the "public comment" on the agenda was placed there in error, as also per the Council's
Governance Manual, there will be no public comments during this entire process as the appointments are
strictly up to Council. Ms. Bainbridge said that as noted in the Governance Manual, a second is required in
order for the nomination to proceed. The following nominations were offered:
Councilmember Gothmann nominated Ben Wick;there was no second so the nomination did not proceed.
Councilmember Pace nominated Jonathan Collier; seconded by Deputy Mayor Woodard.
Councilmember Wood nominated Pamela Haley; seconded by Councilmember Pace.
Deputy Mayor Woodard nominated Michael Munch; seconded by Councilmember Pace.
Mayor Higgins nominated Michelle Rasmussen; seconded by Deputy Mayor Woodard.
Councilmember Gothmann nominated Frank Hutchison; seconded by Councilmember Wood.
Councilmember Pace had no further nominations.
Councilmember Wood nominated David Wiyrick; seconded by Councilmember Pace.
Deputy Mayor Woodard nominated Patrick Stretch; seconded by Councilmember Wood.
Mayor Higgins had no further nominations.
Councilmember Gothmann nominated Linda Thompson; there was no second so the nomination did not
proceed.
Councilmember Pace had no further nominations.
Councilmember Wood nominated William Bauder;there was no second so the nomination did not proceed.
Council Study Session:05-31-2016 Page 1 of 3
Approved by Council:06-28-2016
There were no further nominations. It was then moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and
unanimously agreed to close the nominations. Ms. Bainbridge stated that in order for the applicant to be
interviewed, a minimum of three votes are required.The following are the results of the votes to interview,
indicated by raised hands:
In favor of Jonathan Collier: all members of Council except Councilmember Gothmann.
In favor of Pamela Haley: all members of Council.
In favor of Michael Munch: all members of Council except Councilmember Gothmann.
In favor of Michelle Rasmussen: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Woodard, Councilmember Gothmann.
In favor of Frank Hutchison: all members of Council except Councilmember Pace.
In favor of David Wiyrick: Mayor Higgins, and Councilmembers Pace and Wood.
In favor of Patrick Stretch: only Deputy Mayor Woodard and Councilmember Wood.
In favor of William Bauder: only Deputy Mayor Woodard and Councilmember Wood.
To recap, Ms. Bainbridge said that the following six individuals will be interviewed for Council Positions
2 and 5: (1) Jonathan Collier; (2) Pamela Haley; (3) Frank Hutchison; (4) Michael Munch; (5) Michelle
Rasmussen; and (6) David Wiyrick. City Clerk Bainbridge said that she will notify all applicants of the
outcome of tonight's process.
NON-ACTION ITEMS:
3. Solid Waste Collection Request for Proposals Update—Eric Guth, Erik Lamb, Morgan Koudelka
Public Works Director Guth explained about the history leading up to the issuance of a Request for
Proposals(RFP)for a solid waste contract, as noted on his Request for Council Action form; said this RFP
is for competitive solicitation for curbside pickup, and tonight is part of the public outreach portion of
developing that RFP.In review of the questions for the solid waste survey,Mr. Guth added that this survey
will be on our website, can be completed on-line, and will be included in the Hot Topics newsletter which
will be mailed to all residents.After Mr.Guth went over the draft survey questions,discussion ensued about
recycling and sorted versus unsorted and possible cost savings; the idea of having a local call center for
customers; billing frequency, clean green and frequency of pickups. Mr. Lamb added that the ideal is
enhanced service with the lowest rates; and that we want to get a feel for what is most important so we can
seek those lower rates but retain enhanced services. Mr. Lamb noted the survey will be distributed mid-
June and they hope to get comments back by early July. Councilmember Gothmann asked about reduced
rates for seniors and universal or mandatory pickup. Mr. Calhoun added that reduced rates can be
accomplished by the use of a smaller can. Deputy Mayor Woodard noted that he does not want to eliminate
the capability for self-hauling, and it was noted that self-hauling would not be eliminated. The idea of a
smaller bin for recyclables was also mentioned. Mr. Lamb explained that we are mandated under the solid
waste regulations to include recycling, so we must provide that as part of the curbside collection; but said
it is possible to have an option to provide for an alternate program,but that would have to be demonstrated
to the Department of Ecology that such alternate plan works as well; he said he spoke with the consultant
who advised that no one has been able to achieve an alternate program on the west side. Mr. Lamb said we
have two local examples:Airway Heights and Cheney;said he doesn't know how Airway Heights achieved
not requiring curbside recycling, and that Cheney has their own recycling drop boxed provided free. Mr.
Lamb mentioned that they are looking for proposals that will include recycling at no extra change, and
flexible can size. Mr. Lamb said they have not looked at mandatory collection and Council concurred.
4. Public Safety Ad Hoc Committee—Cary Driskell
Cary Driskell introduced Mr. Rick Eichstaedt, Executive Director of the Center for Justice, and said that
when they last presented this topic April 19 there was discussion about some options for a citizens advisory
committee or oversight committee, not just for law enforcement but other contracts as well; and said that
Council ultimately determined to just focus on law enforcement.Mr.Driskell said there were some concerns
expressed at the April 19 meeting about our ability concerning how much oversight and/or influence we
could have over such a contract based on the interlocal agreement,as his concern was if we tried to tell the
Sheriff's Office how to do their job, it could raise an argument of interfering with the independent contract
relationship; and said he has some very serious concerns about breaching the contract, also concerns from
a labor standpoint and workplace for deputies if we argued about how they do their job; and if a deputy got
Council Study Session:05-31-2016 Page 2 of 3
Approved by Council:06-28-2016
hurt,we could potentially face liability; and Mr. Driskell went over those tasks of appropriate involvement
for a public safety advisory committee, as noted in his Request for Council Action.
Mr. Eichstaedt mentioned, and the Clerk distributed copies to Council, of the Oversight Review of the
Citizens Advisory Review Board, by Kathryn Olson of the Change Integration Consulting firm. Mr.
Eichstaedt briefly mentioned some of the content of that report and urged Council to look at the
recommendations; he said it is apparent that some changes are needed to address community concerns with
the current CAB (Citizens Advisory Board). Mr. Driskell said he too will look through this report and
mentioned that next week's Council meeting will include a thorough look at the current contract; he said
we already have significant oversight on this contract thanks to the work of Morgan Koudelka and John
Pietro. Deputy Mayor Woodard said the report mentioned a paid staff person, and he would assume that
would constitute a change in our cost and Mr.Driskell confirmed that the Sheriffs Office would look to us
to pay for whatever additional staff we would think necessary. Deputy Mayor Woodard said that after he
reads the report, he might want more discussion. Councilmember Gothmann added that since this report
was prepared for the Sheriffs Office, he would like to get their response to the report. Mr. Eichstaedt
mentioned that he intends to send a letter to the Sheriff's Office asking him to provide a response to these
changes, and/or to go forward and implement them.
5. 2016 LTGO Bond Issuance Update-Mark Calhoun
After Acting City Manager Calhoun gave a brief explanation of the bonding issue and bid award for the
new City Hall; he mentioned that the chart showing the payments for the lease compared with the fixed
bond payment, show after thirty years,that we would own the building and save approximately$7 million.
Mr. Calhoun said that the bonds are scheduled to close this Thursday. Mayor Higgins extended
congratulations to Mr. Calhoun and his staff; and Mr. Calhoun also extended thanks to Finance Director
Taylor,Community Development Director Hohman, and City Attorney Driskell and Deputy City Attorney
Lamb for a good job from them all.
6. Domestic Violence Advocacy- Chief VanLeuven, Detective Andrew Stockman
Police Chief VanLeuven introduced Detective Andrew Stockman. Detective Stockman went through the
PowerPoint presentation explaining about the Lethality Assessment Program and domestic violence; how
the program helps victims of domestic violence find their voice and their trust in the advocates; about the
work with the YWCA and the prosecutors, and how they all collaborate in personally looking over the
cases; said this program is an opportunity to prevent serious harm or even homicide. Chief VanLeuven
mentioned that this is a very successful program County-wide.
7.Advance Agenda-Mayor Higgins
There were no suggested changes to the Advance Agenda.
8. Acting City Manager Comments-Mark Calhoun
Mr.Calhoun noted that as Chief VanLeuven has announced his retirement effective June 30,interviews for
the Police Chief will be held next week. He also mentioned the City Hall groundbreaking will be held at
the new City Hall site next Thursday at 9 a.m.
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unani ously agreed to adjourn. The meeting
adjourned at 7:25 p.m. A,
4011140
ATT ST/ L.R. Higgin7W
�1'� / -et,z.i.4A1
ristine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Council Study Session:05-31-2016 Page 3 of 3
Approved by Council:06-28-2016
CITIZENS ADVISORY/REVIEW BOARD
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
OVERSIGHT REVIEW
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting, LLC
May 5, 2016
- � ;/
CITIZENS ADVISORY/REVIEW BOARD
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
OVERSIGHT REVIEW
By
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting, LLC
I, INTRODUCTION
The Citizens Advisory/Review Board (CAB) and the Spokane County Sheriff's Office
(SCSO) sought a peer review to consider whether the CAB is meeting its mission:To
create a forum of citizens and leaders from within Spokane County citizenry to
collaboratively address the immediate and future needs of the Spokane County Sheriff
by researching, planning, reviewing assigned cases and disciplinary actions, providing
oversight on department policies, and recommending solutions that will integrate and
prioritize the best case practices.1 The CAB engaged Kathryn Olson, Change Integration
Consulting, LLC (Olson), to interview stakeholders about concerns that oversight is
intended to address, share information about the range and pros and cons of oversight
structures, and outline oversight approaches and best practices to address stakeholder
concerns.2 This report summarizes themes from stakeholder meetings and Olson's
observations about ways the CAB's structure, processes, and authority could be
changed to enhance accountability and transparency.
In considering whether to adopt oversight or to modify an existing oversight approach,
the interests of the community, elected officials, government administrators, and law
enforcement commanders and officers must be considered. In taking the time and
effort to thoroughly consider the CAB approach to oversight and alternatives, and
engaging stakeholders in an exchange about the strengths and weaknesses of various
oversight functions, the Spokane County Sheriff's Office and the CAB help ensure that
oversight is realistic, has well-defined objectives, is appropriately resourced, and strikes
a balance among the competing interests involved.3
1 http://www.spokanecounty.org/sheriff/cab/content.aspx?c=3213
2 The purpose of this review was not to assess any particular SCSO incident and the Consultant has not
conducted an audit of SCSO policies and practices. The recommendations made below do not reflect an
evaluation of the Sheriffs Office,specific incidents,or individual SCSO deputies.
3 Farrow,Joe and Trac Pham.Citizen Oversight of Law Enforcement:Challenge and Opportunity;The Police
Chief,Vol 70,No.10(October 2003).
CAB Oversight Review
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting,LLC
II. BACKGROUND - CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT IN THE U.S.
Civilian oversight of law enforcement in the United States is an evolving governmental
function designed to provide the community with a means to influence police practices
and help ensure that law enforcement is conducted in a manner that is constitutional,
effective, and responsive to the standards, values, and needs of those served. Oversight
may be established in response to recurring law enforcement issues or developed
proactively to enhance police-community relations.
Oversight has become an integral part of municipal administrations in most large cities
in the U.S., with some smaller cities, counties, and states also developing mechanisms
for community members to weigh in on police matters.The National Association for
Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE) lists and provides links to
approximately 135 oversight agencies throughout the U.S., along with detailed profiles
of a sample of those organizations on its resource page.4
Civilian oversight organizations in the U.S. include a variety of different structures or
models, such as commissions, boards, inspector generals, auditors, monitors, and
investigative agencies. Whether an oversight body is labeled a "commission," "board,"
"auditor," or any other term, it could have authority to function in any or all of these
different capacities:
• Accepting and referring police misconduct complaints
• Investigating police misconduct complaints
• Monitoring or auditing a police department's internal investigations and findings
• Conducting reviews of patterns of misconduct
• Rolling out to critical incidents
• Conducting hearings and making decisions on police discipline matters.
• Making recommendations for improving police policy, practices, and training
• Reporting on oversight and its impact on policing
• Fostering community education and engagement about policing and oversight
• Facilitating alternative dispute resolution or community reconciliation
Most oversight organizations are multifaceted and work to improve policing and police-
community relations in a variety of different ways. As communities learn more about
policing and oversight, and needs change, the authority of an agency may evolve,
a See, http://nacole.org/resources/police-oversight-jurisdiction-usa According to current NACOLE
President Brian Buchner,the list is non-exhaustive and there are currently more than 200 oversight
entities in the U.S. NACOLE is in the process of updating its directory of oversight agencies.
CAB Oversight Review 2
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting,LLC
leading to the creation of new oversight powers to complement or replace the work of
the existing organization.5
III. PROCESS USED FOR CAB REVIEW
Olson reviewed a number of documents as she began her review of CAB, including
information available on the CAB's website such as its mission and purpose,by-laws,
meeting agendas, and case review summaries. As the review progressed, she was
provided other documents, including aggregate data on SCSO internal affairs complaint
statistics, an historical summary of Spokane's criminal justice system created by Bob
West and Smart Justice Spokane, a written summary of an oversight approach for the
SCSO that includes an ombudsman and the CAB, documents related to the work of the
Police Leadership Advisory Committee, various media articles and published opinion
statements, and written feedback forms.
Olson met with Spokane County stakeholders to share general information about police
oversight functions, invited stakeholder input about experiences with the SCSO and the
CAB, and discussed ways CAB's oversightfunctions could be enhanced to provide more
accountability and transparency, of both the SCSO and the CAB. Stakeholder meetings
were held in Spokane on April 11 and 12, 2016, with a goal to elicit input from a wide
sample of perspectives.
Meetings were held with:
• CAB Board Members
• Sheriff Knezovich, members of the SCSO staff, and a union representative
• Spokane Interim Police Ombudsman and Ombudsman Commission representatives and
staff
• City Council Member Breann Beggs
• Spokane Regional Criminal Justice Commission representatives
• Spokane Valley City Council representatives
• Organizational representatives including Center for Justice, WA Commission on
African American Affairs, Peace and Justice Action League (PJAL), Smart
Justice,NAACP, Police Leadership Advisory Council, and the Human Rights
Commission
• Community representatives meeting at a forum moderated by Todd Eklof at the
Unitarian Universalist Church of Spokane
Olson identified themes from this stakeholder input, which are discussed below.
5 Attard,Barbara and Kathryn Olson.Overview of Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement in the United
States;nacole.org/wp-content/uploads/Oversight-in-the-United-States-Attard-and-Olson-2013.pdf
(2013).
CAB Oversight Review 3
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting,LLC
IV. POSITIVE OVERSIGHT CONTRIBUTIONS BY THE CAB
AND BEST PRACTICES
At the outset, it should be noted that the majority of stakeholders voiced support for
Sheriff Knezovich and the work of SCSO deputies. Also, many people praised the Sheriff
and the CAB for being proactive in initiating this review.The CAB is committed to
identifying and following oversight best practices, with support from the Sheriff.
The CAB was established in 2000 by then Sheriff Mark Sterk, originally as a sounding
board for changes in SCSO policy and procedures, new equipment training, and to
provide feedback on cases of interest. After Sheriff Knezovich was first elected in 2006
and continuing forward, the CAB has evolved to fill a variety of functions. It has
commented on important policies including those involving the use of the vascular neck
restraint force technique and employee involved domestic violence. The CAB has
reviewed a number of high profile cases and commented on the quality of the SCSO
investigations involved. Sheriff Knezovich also has sought input from the CAB to
determine if his discipline was in line with community expectations. All of these efforts
by CAB's devoted volunteers, and the Sheriff's reliance on the CAB's input, contribute to
accountability and transparency,furthering constructive oversight of the SCSO.
The CAB took an important step forward when it updated its Bylaws in 2015. Having
clear protocols in place to guide the work of oversight is an important best practice to
ensure all stakeholders understand the organization's structure, purpose, and means of
operation.
Further, the CAB's commitment to continual improvement is evident in its decision to
seek out this review. Sheriff Knezovich's support of the project is indicative of his
appreciation about how oversight is integral to SCSO's relationship with the public. As
Sheriff Knezovich commented at the community forum held on April 12, 2016, "I am
accountable and invite feedback from the community."
Finally,the CAB is becoming much more involved with NACOLE. With support from the
Sheriff,three members of the CAB will be attending the 2016 NACOLE annual
conference. Also, the CAB expressed interest in hosting a NACOLE conference in
Spokane and Olson provided information about the extensive effort that is required.
The CAB's involvement with NACOLE and consideration of conference hosting
responsibilities illustrates its desire to be a learning organization and to participate in
the oversight practitioner arena on all levels possible.
CAB Oversight Review 4
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting,LLC
V. STAKEHOLDER THEMES ABOUT WAYS TO IMPROVE
CAB OVERSIGHT
While the CAB has strived over the years to make positive contributions to oversight of
the SCSO, there are always ways to improve. In soliciting feedback from stakeholders
about changes that could enhance the CAB's role, a number of themes emerged:
• Independence and Authority
A number of stakeholders emphasized the need for the CAB to be independent and
questioned whether its review of misconduct complaint investigations is handled in an
impartial and arms-length manner from the SCSO. Others expressed the opinion that
oversight of the SCSO could only happen through a structure that was completely
outside of SCSO, and by conducting separate complaint investigations rather than
reviewing the work of SCSO internal affairs. However, it is the understanding of many
that because the Sheriff is an elected position, he answers only to the citizens and could
not be beholden to a complaint investigation system completely outside SCSO.
• Transparency
There is a fair amount of confusion in the community about the role of the CAB. While
the CAB provides information about it's structure, authority and activities on its website,
many community members were unaware of its existence or unclear about the scope of
the CAB's work. As one stakeholder put it, "The CAB needs to advertise what it does!"
• Community Representation
The CAB Bylaws provide that members can be recommended by the Sheriff or apply
directly to the Board, and that members are appointed by a majority vote of the CAB.
CAB Bylaws Article VI.D.6 However, there is a perception held by some stakeholders
that members of the CAB are appointed by the Sheriff. Furthermore, while the Bylaws
provide that membership "shall be diverse and broad-based representation of the
community-at-large," some stakeholders believe that more effort should be made by
the CAB to diversify its membership. Setting term limits for CAB members also was
suggested. Finally, while prospective members are required to undergo a criminal
background check, there was a suggestion about the benefits of allowing someone with
a criminal background who can demonstrate he/she has been rehabilitated to
participate on the CAB.
6 For the full CAB Bylaws,see,http://www.spokanecounty.org/sheriff/cab/content.aspx?c=3220
CAB Oversight Review 5
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting,LLC
• Review Policies and Practices of SCSO
A number of stakeholders pointed out that the CAB could have more influence by
providing input on SCSO policies and practices. While it is important to have individual
misconduct investigations reviewed by the CAB, particularly when a case involves a
high-profile incident, review and feedback on polices and practices allows for a broader
scope of oversight influence and impact.The CAB Bylaws provide authority for review of
policies and procedures. CAB Bylaws Article V.D.
• Access to SCSO Information
Many expressed confusion about the types of SCSO information the CAB can access
when it does its reviews of complaint investigations and otherwise. The confusion is
partly due to the cursory summaries of cases posted by the CAB on its website and
appears related to the CAB being in a more receptive mode to matters referred to it by
the Sheriff, as opposed to taking initiative on its own to review incidents.
• Community Engagement
While the CAB has a website that provides a great deal of information and does some
outreach,there is a lack of understanding by many stakeholders about its oversight role.
This probably is partly due to the fact that the Spokane Police Department Office of
Police Ombudsman has received a great deal of media attention,while there has been
less focus on the CAB. The fact the CAB does not have paid staff to conduct more
community engagement likely also is a factor.
• Adequate Funding
Because the CAB is comprised of unpaid volunteers, it is limited in its ability to perform
certain oversight functions or to fully engage with stakeholders (both public and at the
SCSO)to increase its legitimacy with all concerned. A number of comments heard from
the stakeholders about the CAB tied into the CAB's lack of resources to meet community
expectations.
VI. WAYS TO ENHANCE ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY OF
SCSO THROUGH CAB'S OVERSIGHT
There are a variety of ways that the CAB's structure, processes, and authority could be
enhanced to provide greater accountability and transparency of both the SCSO and the.
work of the CAB. Also, as discussed below, as the CAB takes on additional
responsibilities, it is necessary to consider adding a paid staff person to support the
CAB's efforts and act as a liaison with SCSO and the community.
CAB Oversight Review 6
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting,LLC
A. CAB Structure
• Membership Recruitment and Selection
The CAB Bylaws provide that members of the CAB can be recommended by the Sheriff
or directly apply to the Board, and that members are appointed by a majority vote of
the CAB. CAB Bylaws Article VI.D. Nonetheless,there is a perception by some that the
Sheriff selects CAB members. This view might be supported by the Bylaws provision
that notes the Sheriff can make recommendations to remove CAB members. CAB Bylaws
Article VI.E.
Thus, it is important that the CAB create mechanisms for its own recruitment of
members. For example, it might actively solicit applicants from the various
organizations represented in meetings held with Olson during this review process.
Adoption of other recommendations below might also foster more confidence by the
community that the CAB is not the Sheriff's hand picked oversight body.
• Term Limits
The CAB Bylaws do not provide for term limits for membership on the CAB. It is
generally considered a best practice to have term limits, however, because the turnover
that comes with term limits helps ensure new energy and ideas, new members bring
new community connections and viewpoints, prospective members may be more
interested in serving if it is for a defined period of time, and a CAB member who was not
performing up to expectations will not serve indefinitely while the matter is otherwise
addressed.
• Member Diversity
While the CAB's Bylaws provide that members should represent the diverse interests of
the community, it would be useful for the CAB to be more specific about the diverse
demographics it strives to have represented on the Board. For example, it is common
for an oversight board or commission to seek membership that is diverse in terms of
income, race, ethnicity, age,gender, sexual orientation, and experience. Other boards
or commissions seek members representing specific neighborhoods or areas within a
law enforcement agency's jurisdiction. Another approach might be to recruit members
who represent social, economic and political interests reflecting the diverse community
involved.
• Consistency in CAB Name
Some stakeholders who question the CAB's authority to do truly independent reviews
may be confused because it sometimes refers to itself as the "Citizens Advisory Board"
CAB Oversight Review 7
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting,LLC
and, at other times, uses the name "Citizens Advisory/Review Board." As the CAB
strives to conduct independent reviews, yet also fills an advisory function for the Sheriff,
perhaps it should be called the "Citizens Advisory and Review Board." In any case,
consistency is paramount.
• Code of Ethics
The CAB Bylaws cover the handling of conflicts of interest involving members. CAB
Bylaws Article XV. First, because the Bylaws focus on "actual" conflicts, it would be
useful for the CAB to consider the impact of"perceived" conflicts and whether both
actual and perceived conflicts should be addressed.
Second, the CAB should consider whether to adopt the NACOLE Code of Ethics, in whole
or in part.' As noted in the Preamble to the Code of Ethics, the spirit of the standards
provided is to promote public trust, integrity, and transparency. Whether the CAB
adopts a Code of Ethics or not, it might find it helpful to refer to the standards outlined
by NACOLE to help guide the organization as it considers other recommendations made
to enhance CAB's role in promoting accountability and transparency.
B. CAB Processes
While some stakeholders define "independent" oversight to mean misconduct
investigations conducted by the CAB outside of the SCSO, the NACOLE Code of Ethics
takes a different approach. It defines "Independent and Thorough Oversight" to mean:
"Conduct investigations, audits, evaluations and reviews with diligence, an open and
questioning mind, integrity, objectivity and fairness, in a timely manner. Rigorously test
the accuracy and reliability of information from all sources. Present the facts and
findings without regard to personal beliefs or concern for personal, professional or
political consequences."8
Using NACOLE's approach to assessing independence, the CAB's work in reviewing
complaint investigations handled by SCSO internal affairs is considered to be
independent if the reviews are diligent, timely, and approached from a position of
openness, integrity, objectivity, and fairness. While an evaluation of the CAB's
processes with individual case reviews was outside the scope of this project, it is worth
noting that Olson attended a CAB meeting where a complaint investigation was
reviewed; she found the CAB discussion to be robust, with many questions raised,
respectful disagreement voiced in some instances, and a sense of open-mindedness
about the complex issues at hand.
7 See NACOLE Code of Ethics,http://www.nacole.org/nacole code of ethics
8 Ibid.
CAB Oversight Review 8
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting,LLC
Nonetheless,there are procedural changes that the CAB might consider to enhance
public perception about its independence:
• Better Description of the CAB Review Process
While the CAB posts on its website a summary of its case review, in the form of a letter,
it has acknowledged that this does not accurately reflect the depth and scope of the
evaluation it has conducted. Beginning with the current case under review,the CAB
intends to provide the public with more detail about its review process.This will serve
to enhance accountability and transparency for both the CAB and the SCSO.
• Clarify How Cases are Selected for Review
Some people are confused as to how cases are selected for the CAB's review.The
Bylaws provide that the Sheriff or his designee can request that the CAB review "specific
assigned cases, use of force inquiries, appropriate citizen complaints, disciplinary
actions, and provide feedback as to outcomes and findings." CAB Bylaws Article V.C.To
enhance accountability of the SCSO, it would be ideal if the CAB had authority itself to
request a review of a case, use of force inquiry, citizen complaint, etc. Given the CAB's
limited time and resources, it also needs the authority to prioritize which incidents it
reviews, whether at the Sheriff's request or on its own initiative.
• Review of SCSO Policies and Practices
The CAB has the authority to review SCSO polices and procedures and its community-
based philosophy of operation. CAB Bylaws Article V.D. However, it appears that any
assessment of SCSO policies taking place is primarily in the context of reviewing specific
misconduct complaint investigations. While relevant policies and procedures may
require revision separate from whether an individual deputy is engaged in misconduct,
it is also very useful to periodically target specific policies or practices for an in-depth
assessment outside of the complaint system.
Also,while the Bylaws provide that the CAB can respond to the Sheriff's request to have
the Board review a policy, it would be useful for the CAB to take the initiative to identify
policies to evaluate that are of concern to the community. However, as with expanding
how it reviews individual cases, doing a more expansive assessment of SCSO policies
might tax the CAB's limited time and resources.
• Clarify that CAB Can Accept Complaints
The CAB's Bylaws do not address the issue of its initial acceptance or referral of
complaints, or the standards it uses in reviewing cases. However,the CAB website home
page provides a link to a letter to citizens providing information about citizen complaint
CAB Oversight Review 9
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting,LLC
procedures.9 The letter provides a great deal of information, with the result that basic
complaint filing directions may be confusing for some. Also, though the letter refers to
the CAB conducting an "appellate review,"the CAB does not have authority to actually
reverse a finding made by SCSO, which is implied with "appellate review." It is advised
that the CAB clarify on its website and through other communications that it has
authority to review complaint investigations and findings and can concur or make
recommendations to the SCSO where it disagrees with outcomes.
Also, it is implied that if a citizen submits a CAB Appellate/Review Form (which is
underlined in the letter but not hyperlinked to the form), the CAB will review the case,
though under the Bylaws, it appears the CAB review only occurs if the Sheriff refers the
matter to the CAB. Clarification on this point is recommended.
It would be helpful to set up an easy to follow FAQs approach that simply and clearly
covers basic information such as: (1)the CAB accepts citizen complaints, but will refer
them to the SCSO for initial handling; (2) how citizens can file complaints, with the CAB
or SCSO; (3) the CAB can review investigations handled by SCSO and either concur with
findings and discipline or make recommendations where it disagrees with outcomes;
and, (4) the circumstances under which a citizen can request that the CAB review the
SCSO complaint investigation process. The FAQs link on the website for the Spokane
Police Department (SPD) Office of Police Ombudsman (OPO) provides a useful guide to
the types of information to include.1°
• Sharing Resources with Spokane Police Department Ombudsman Office
Given the CAB's limited resources, it is recommended that it explore joint training
opportunities with the SPD OPO. This might involve offering spots in the SPD and SCSO
Citizen Academies to members of each other's staff, Police Ombudsman Commission
members, and members of the CAB. The OPO and the CAB could brainstorm a list of
topics and invite local experts to brown-bag lunches to provide on-going training to the
two oversight structures. If representatives of the OPO or the CAB attend outside
training, such as through NACOLE,they could bring back information to share jointly
with the two groups.
• CAB Involvement in Citizens Academy
A CAB representative should be included in community training provided by the SCSO,
such as through the Citizens Academy. Providing time and a forum for the CAB to meet
community members and explain its role gives the CAB a way to advertise its oversight
9 See,http://www.spokanecounty.org/data/countysheriff/cab/CAB%2OComplaint%20Fi1IForm.pdf
10 See,https://my.spokanecity.org/opo/faqs/
CAB Oversight Review 10
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting,LLC
contributions and helps increase its legitimacy with stakeholders. Given confusion
among some about law enforcement jurisdiction of SPD verses SCSO, and the different
oversight functions of the OPO verses the CAB, it would be helpful to set up more joint
outreach involving all entities to help the community understand the varying authority
involved. This could happen through Citizen Academies or otherwise.
• Clarify Protocols with Officer-Involved Shootings where the Spokane Police
Department and Spokane County Sheriff's Office Investigates Each Other's
Incidents
The SPD and SCSO have an arrangement whereby the agencies investigate each other's
officer-involved shootings. This sort of arrangement often is made to avoid conflict of
interests that can arise if an agency criminally investigates its own officer-involved
shootings and provides more accountability overall for an incident that can result in
tragic outcomes. However, there seems to be confusion among some stakeholders as
to which agency should handle misconduct complaints that arise from such incidents. It
would be helpful for the SPD OPO and the CAB to clarify expectations with their
respective agencies and then jointly issue information for the public as to protocols
involved with complaints related to officer-involved shootings.
C. CAB Authority
• Expand to Non-Sworn
While the focus on the CAB's oversight role has been on reviewing misconduct
complaints involving SCSO deputies,the Bylaws do not limit it to considering matters
only with sworn employees. The public comes into contact with non-sworn employees
of the SCSO,too, and it could be useful to expand the CAB's authority to include
complaints made against civilian employees. Similarly, the Sheriff and CAB could
consider whether there are other matters involving non-sworn employees, such as
policies and procedures, where the CAB's input could be useful.
• CAB Access to SCSO Complaint and Use of Force Tracking Systems
As noted above, the CAB's role in enhancing accountability and transparency of the
SCSO will be enhanced if it can initiate review of cases and use of force incidents.
However,this requires that the CAB know what matters are under review by the SCSO.
It is recommended that the CAB be provided (read only) access to IAPro,the electronic
system used by SCSO for tracking investigations and use of force. This would allow the
CAB to better understand and confirm aggregate complaint and use of force data and
flag any particular incident of interest to explore for further review.
CAB Oversight Review 11
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting,LLC
• CAB Presence in IA interviews
While some stakeholders would like to see the CAB or some other oversight entity have
the authority to conduct complaint investigations separately from the SCSO internal
affairs process, there was concern expressed by others that the fact the Sheriff holds an
elected office presents legal complications for this approach and, in any case, likely
would require collective bargaining with the Spokane County Deputy Sheriff's
Association. Whether or not Spokane County ultimately decides to expand oversight to
allow for complaint investigations outside of SCSO, the CAB can provide more
accountability and transparency of SCSO investigations if it is permitted to attend
witness interviews.
This approach is used in other jurisdictions that have independent auditors or monitors,
and is followed by the SPD OPO. Usually,the oversight representative can attend
interviews of both sworn officers and civilian witnesses. In many jurisdictions, the
oversight representative can ask follow-up questions, but at the least, oversight's
presence during interviews and evaluation of the process provides the public with some
assurance that internal affairs investigations are thorough and respectful.
D. Paid Staff Position
Many of the recommendations made here, based on stakeholder feedback, require that
the CAB take on extra duties. This extra work might involve short-term projects, such as
updating the Bylaws or website, or entail regular and on-going demands, such as
conducting more outreach or attending interviews arranged by internal affairs. If SCSO
and the CAB decide to expand the CAB's oversight responsibilities, however, it is
recommended that serious consideration be given to funding a full or part-time staff
person to work with the CAB.
A CAB staffer could act as a liaison between SCSO and the CAB and between the
community and the CAB. The staffer could be tasked by the CAB to gather information
relevant to the CAB's review of cases or policies, relay questions from the CAB to SCSO
resources, participate in interviews, step up the CAB's outreach role, meet with
community members to accept complaints, and take on other responsibilities to help
increase the effectiveness of CAB's oversight efforts. While it is understood that
creating a CAB staffer position will require a commitment of resources that are already
scarce,the CAB's role in Spokane County has evolved to the point that paid personnel is
essential if the CAB is expected to evolve to meet community expectations about
oversight.
CAB Oversight Review 12
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting,LLC
VII. CONCLUSION
The CAB is comprised of members who appear genuinely interested in having a positive
impact on the SCSO and relations between the SCSO and the public. Some stakeholders
do not understand or appreciate the commitment made by CAB members and the role
they play in enhancing oversight of the SCSO. Also,there are ways that the CAB's
structure, processes, and authority can be enhanced to maximize accountability and
transparency, both for the SCSO and for the CAB itself. Many stakeholders have a desire
to see the CAB expand, even in limited ways, to provide more assurance that oversight
of SCSO is robust and reliable.
The CAB and Sheriff Knezovich should be commended for taking the proactive step of
evaluating the CAB's role in providing oversight for the Spokane County Sheriff's Office.
As the recommendations made in this report are considered, it will be important to
continue to elicit stakeholder input about contemplated changes and provide feedback
on the deliberation process. This is all towards helping the CAB meet its stated purpose
of"enhancing police/community relations, communications,transparency, and
community confidence."
CAB Oversight Review 13
Kathryn Olson
Change Integration Consulting,LLC