Civilian Review Board

City of Eugene CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARD It is the mission of the Civilian Review Board to provide fair and impartial oversight and review of internal investigations conducted by the City of Eugene Police Department involving allegations of police misconduct, use of force and other matters. The Board will strive to build trust and confidence within the community and to ensure that complaints are handled fairly, thoroughly and adjudicated reasonably. The Board will encourage community involvement and transparency in order to promote the principles of community policing in the City of Eugene. Civilian Review Board Meeting Agenda Tuesday, December 12, 2023 – 5:30pm Attend Via Webinar: https://eugene-or-gov.zoom.us/j/82586199884 Passcode: CRBDec23 Attend by Phone: 971 247 1195 Attend in Person: 101 East Broadway Suite 230 Eugene, OR 97401 Item Time (Starting) 1. Agenda and Materials Review 5 minutes (5:30pm) 2. Minutes Approval (Minutes from October meeting) 5 minutes (5:35pm) 3. Comments from Board Members and Commission Liaisons 5 minutes (5:40pm) 4. Training Topic: Alternative Crisis Response 25 minutes (5:45pm) 5. Break 5 minutes (6:10pm) 6. Case Review: Use of Force – Flashlight Strike 45 minutes (6:15pm) 7. Chair/Vice Chair Elections 20 minutes (7:00pm) 8. Auditor Report 10 minutes (7:20pm) 9. Closing Comments 15 minutes (7:30pm) 10. Public Comment 5 minutes (7:45pm) 11. Adjourn (7:50pm) Upcoming Meeting: February 13, 2024 101 E. Broadway Suite 230 • Eugene, Oregon 97401 Phone (541) 682-5016 • Fax (541) 682-5599 www.eugene-or.gov/policeauditor  MINUTES Civilian Review Board Zoom Webinar October 10, 2023 5:30 p.m. PRESENT: Jose Cortez, Vice Chair; Rick Roseta; Clay Neal; Alan Leiman; Monique Griffin; Rob Eller; Lindsey Foltz; Leia Pitcher; Cindy Coleman; Sergeant Joel Peckels; Seargent John Jensen. ABSENT: Carolyn Williams, Chair, Bernadette Conover. Vice Chair Cortez convened the Civilian Review Board (CRB) at 5:30 p.m. The Land Acknowledgement was read, introductions were made, and a quorum was established. 1. Agenda and Materials Review There were no changes made to the agenda. 2. Minutes Approval (Minutes from September 2023, Meeting) Leiman made the following amendments to page three of the September 2023, meeting minutes: • Insert the words "need to" in the phrase, "Leiman said an officer would not need to seize the stereo and empty cups to prove there was noise and drinking." • Remove the words "with a retaliatory mindset" from the phrase, "At least two of the officers had warrant templates in their possession, which made it seem like the officers went into this situation with a retaliatory mindset. Replace those words with, "more likely to issue a warrant." MOTION: Griffin moved, seconded by Leiman, to approve the June 2023, CRB meeting minutes with amendments. The motion passed unanimously – 4:0. 3. Comments from Board Members and Commission Liaisons . Leiman said the police auditor presented the annual report at the last Police Commission meeting, and it was well received. He was glad to see the training topic on today's agenda and noted that it should be presented to the CRB annually. 4. Public Comment There was no public comment. 5. Training Topic – Office of Professional Standards Annual Report Coleman said Sergeant Joel Peckels and Sergeant Ryan Nelson investigated all the cases in 2022 and noted that Rick Webber was an integral part of the day-to-day functions of the Eugene Police Department (EPD). The complete Office of Professional Standards Annual Report was published on the City of Eugene website under EPD Publications. Report Highlights: Civilian Review Board October 10, 2023 0  • There were only 16 allegations of misconduct made in 2022. Allegations of misconduct required an EPD Internal Affairs (IA) investigation. If any of the allegations were sustained, a disciplinary phase would take place. • There were 286 supervisor actions in 2022. Supervisor actions were categorized as service complaints, policy complaints, or inquiries. While service complaints were slightly more in 2022 than in 2021, the incident reviews were slightly less. • There were 356 commendations made in 2022. • The EPD was below the 10-year average for IA cases in 2022. • In 2022, the auditor categorized most cases as performance-based cases. • Of the 16 allegations of misconduct made in 2022, nine were sustained. • Of the 16 allegations of misconduct made in 2022, nine were internal and seven were external. • Of the nine internal allegations investigated, five were sustained. • Of the seven external allegations investigated, two were sustained. • In 2022, there were two written reprimands, three oral reprimands, five documented cases of counseling, and two documented cases of coaching. • There were 28 incident reviews opened, all of which remained incident reviews at the time of their closure. • 57 of the supervisor actions were service complaints. • There were 10 vehicle pursuits in 2022. • There were 159 uses of force in 2022. Factors leading to a use of force included active resistance, attempts to flee, and possession of weapons. 91 percent of these incidents resulted in arrest. The average age of offenders was 36 years of age. • Taser use decreased by 20 percent in 2022. • There were 13 canine uses of force in 2022. • 102 shows of force were reported in 2022. A show of force is defined as an officer drawing or displaying any weapon. Vice Chair Cortez noted that it was 6:30 p.m. and that the CRB needed to move to the next agenda item. In closing, Coleman said all cases provided the EPD with an opportunity to gain experience, learn and evolve. 6. Break The CRB took a break from 6:30 p.m. to 6:35 p.m. 7. Case Review: Constitutional Rights, Body Worn Video (BWV) Summary of Facts • On July 22, 2022, Citizen 1 called the EPD communications center and requested police assistance. Officer A responded and went to Citizen 1's residence. Citizen 1 said they allowed an individual (the suspect) into their residence and allowed them to use their cellular phone. While inside the home, the suspect stole two other cellular phones and left. • Citizen 1 said they sent electronic messages to the suspect expressing a desire to recover the stolen phones. The requests were unsuccessful. • Citizen 1 told Officer A that they had gained access to the suspect's electronic messenger and email. (Note: when the suspect used Citizen 1's cellular phone, they signed into their account and did not sign out.) Citizen 1 informed Officer A that the suspect's electronic communication Civilian Review Board October 10, 2023 1  contained exchanges regarding illicit drug trafficking and that they had captured some of those discussions. Officer A questioned Citizen 1 about the suspect's drug activity. • Citizen 1 said they believed the suspect was staying with their parents (Reporting Party [RP]) and provided Officer A with their address. On July 22, 2022, Officer A went to the RP's residence. Officer B assisted Officer A with the investigation. • Officer A arrived at the front door of the RP's residence, opened the exterior screen / storm door, pushed the interior door open and announced, "hello, your door is open." (Note: when the officers arrived at the residence, the exterior door was closed, and the interior door was slightly ajar.) • Moments later, both officers entered the RP's residence. The officers conducted a limited residential search, exited the residence, and encountered the RP on the balcony outside of their front door. The RP expressed dissatisfaction that the officers entered their residence. • In their IA interviews, both officers asserted a warrantless entry into the RP's residence was justified by the community caretaking exception. Officer A acknowledged that they failed to activate their body-worn camera. Allegations: • Improper Search and Seizure and Failed Body-worn Video Equipment Deployment o 322.2 Search and Seizure: On July 22, 2022, Officer A entered the RP's residence without a search warrant or valid exception to the warrant requirement. o 1203.7.1 Body Worn Video: On July 22, 2022, Officer A failed to use their BWV system while they conducted an investigative encounter with the RP. o 322.2 Search and Seizure: On July 22, 2022, Officer B entered the RP's residence without a search warrant or valid exception to the warrant requirement. Adjudication Recommendations • Officer A – 322.2 Search and Seizure: Sustained by the EPD Chain of Command, the Auditor, and the Chief of Police. • Officer A – 1203.7.1 Body Worn Video: Sustained by the EPD Chain of Command, the Auditor, and the Chief of Police. • Officer B – 322.2 Search and Seizure: Sustained by the EPD Chain of Command, the Auditor, and the Chief of Police. This was an externally generated complaint. Eller noted that while the EPD Chain of Command, the Auditor, and the Chief of Police sustained the allegations, Officer A and B's Line Sergeant found their conduct to be within policy. General Discussion Leiman said this was the second search and seizure that had been reviewed by the CRB recently where the EPD Line Sergeant found sustained allegations to be within policy, which warranted some questioning as to why that happens. Regarding Officer A and B's assertion that their warrantless entry into the RP's residence was justified by the community caretaking exception, that exception would only be valid if there was an established threat of danger to any person or property, an intent to endanger any person was established, or a missing person was thought to be inside the premises. He noted that the exterior door was closed, and the interior door was only slightly open. He agreed with the sustained allegations. Civilian Review Board October 10, 2023 2 Vice Chair Cortez said he found the IA investigation to be thorough and comprehensive. Griffin concurred with Vice Chair Cortez and expressed appreciation for the EPD Chain of Command's review of this case and all cases. She asked if there was any impact from the RP's decision to eventually allow the officers into their residence. Pitcher said it made no impact on the allegations. Rosetta said he struggled with the credibility of the RP in that what they told the person at the EPD communication center was in contrast to what appeared in the video. He felt that there was no harm done by the officers entering the premises without justified cause. Neal said he disagreed with Rosetta's characterization of the RP because of the way that they responded to the officers. It was justifiable to feel like the officers invaded their privacy by entering their home. He noted that he thought the allegations were handled well. Complaint, Intake, Classification, and Monitoring Discussion Vice Chair Cortez said the classification was straightforward. Relevant Policies and Practices; Training Considerations Discussion Vice Chair Cortez asked CRB members what they thought about Officer A not understanding his right to enter a residence and if that was an important issue. He also asked if Officer A was a seasoned officer. Pitcher said Officer had been on the force for three years and Officer B had been on the force for two years. Neal said they read the report before they watched the video. As he was reading the report, he agreed with Officer A's decision to a welfare check because the door was partly open, and it was late at night. When he watched the video, it was clear that the intention to enter the residence was to look for something and not to check on the safety of someone and they were no longer in agreeance with the officer's decision. Lieman said this was a constitutional violation. The length of time that these officers were on the force was irrelevant. They should know the law. He was concerned that the EPD Line Supervisor thought it was okay for the officers to do so. There was nothing at the front door of that residence that presented any pending danger going on inside. Rosetta disagreed and said the officers should be allowed some discretion. If the officers did not enter the premises and there was a woman inside bleeding and dying, it would reflect poorly on the EPD. The suspect was described as being erratic and there was some reference to them having a gun. Leiman said there was no evidence that the suspect was even there. The law required there to be some indicator that danger or serious harm was being done to a person or the property, intent to endanger any person was taking place, or a missing person was believed to be inside the residence. Rosetta asked where in the EPD policy did it state that. Leiman said the constitution trumped the policy. Civilian Review Board October 10, 2023 3 Pitcher said the EPD policy required that officers followed the constitution. If the officers entered the residence unlawfully and found someone inside dying, it would not be admissible because they entered the premises without a valid reason. Vice Chair Cortez said the EPD Chief's sustained recommendation reflected the constitution. Griffin said there was nothing going on at the residence on that day that warranted entry of the RP's home. Neal said for the officers to not know their entry was unlawful should indicate the need for some training. It seemed like the officers cared about the community, and it was unfortunate that they made a poor decision. Leiman said the officers went above and beyond to locate the stolen items, which was surprising since the items were two cellphones. The officers were not acting under an emergency circumstance. His concern was that the EPD Line Sergeant thought their conduct was okay. This indicated that training was needed on this topic. It was important because it involved the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Griffin agreed with the adjudications. 8. Auditor Report The auditor's office was experiencing a substantial uptick in complaints, to which no unifying trend had been established. Staff was trying to work on their accessibility, and recent updates had been made to the auditor's office website. 10. Closing Comments Leiman thanked Sergeants Peckels and Jensen, Cindy Coleman, the auditor's office staff, and CRB members for the work that they do. Griffin expressed her gratitude for the experience of being a CRB member. Neal said his experience in the Portland Police Bureau was stressful and he appreciated being involved with the EPD. 11. Adjourn Vice Chair Cortez adjourned the meeting at 7:36 p.m. (Minutes recorded by. Diana Pamir Tisdale) Civilian Review Board October 10, 2023 4  Office of the Police Auditor October 2023 Open Case Report Allegations of Misconduct Incident type: IA Investigation Status: Active Received date: Oct 2, 2023 Class/sub-class: Allegation of Misconduct / Performance Disposition: 1203.7.1.a Body Worn Video: That Officer A failed to use his/her BWV system when he/she was about to make contact with a person who he/she had reasonable suspicion had committed a crime. 1203.7.1.a Body Worn Video: That Officer B failed to use his/her BWV system when he/she was about to make contact with a person who he/she had reasonable suspicion had committed a crime and who he/she subsequently arrested and took into custody. Incident type: IA Investigation Status: Active Received date: Oct 9, 2023 Class/sub-class: Allegation of Misconduct / Performance Disposition: 1. 103.5.19 Neglect of Duty: It is alleged that employee A was sleeping on duty on 9/20/23 in violation of policy. 2. 103.5.19 Neglect of Duty: It is alleged that employee A was sleeping on duty on 10/3/23 in violation of policy. 3. 103.5.19 Neglect of Duty: It is alleged that employee A was sleeping on duty on 10/9/23 in violation of policy. Inquiries Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 3, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-o/s jurisdiction RP alleged he/she was wrongfully arrested. Dismiss - outside agency. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 3, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: RP alleged officers acted improperly. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 3, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition:  RP alleged an officer acted maliciously towards his/her belongings. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 3, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-Other RP complained officers acted improperly and were discourteous. Dismiss - no policy violations occurred. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 6, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: RP complained a communications specialist failed to provide the appropriate assistance. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 9, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-Timeliness RP complained officers acted incorrectly. Dismiss - timeliness. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 9, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Supervisor Review-Closed RP alleged officers engaged in misconduct. Dismiss - no policy violations occurred. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 10, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-Timeliness RP complained an investigation was mishandled. Dismiss - timeliness. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 11, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: RP complained that a communications specialist was discourteous and officers' response time was slow. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 12, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: RP complained that a vehicle accident was mishandled by an officer. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 12, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: RP complained officers made an improper arrest. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 18, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-Other Disposition: Dismissed-Timeliness RP complained officers and the chief of police treated him/her unfairly. Dismiss - no policy violations. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 19, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-Other RP complained the automated telephone system at EPD made it difficult to speak to a live person. Dismissed-Other. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 19, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Supervisor Review-Closed RP complained an officer mishandled a traffic stop. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 20, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-Other RP complained officers failed to conduct a thorough investigation. Dismissed-Other. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 20, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-o/s jurisdiction RP complained an improper arrest was made by an officer. Dismiss - outside agency. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 23, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-o/s jurisdiction RP complained officers acted improperly during an arrest. Dismiss - outside agency. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 23, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-o/s jurisdiction RP complained his/her telephone calls were blocked by police and other city lines. Dismissed – outside agency. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 23, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: RP complained that an officer acted improperly. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 26, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-Timeliness RP complained officers made an improper arrest. Dismiss – timeliness. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 27, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-Other RP complained officers were discourteous. Dismiss – no violations occurred. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 27, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: RP complained officers improperly seized items and caused unnecessary residential damage. Service Complaints Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 4, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Disputed Facts Disposition: Dismissed-Timeliness RP complained officers made a wrongful arrest. Dismiss - Timeliness. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 5, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Performance Categories: Driving Disposition: RP complained an officer operated a marked unit improperly. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 5, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Service level Categories: Insufficient Follow-Up Disposition: Supervisor Review-Closed RP complained officer response time/assistance was substandard. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 5, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Courtesy Disposition: RP complained officers acted improperly and were discourteous. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 6, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Disputed Facts Disposition: Dismissed-o/s jurisdiction RP complained that an officer acted inappropriately. Dismiss – outside agency. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 9, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Disputed Facts Disposition: Supervisor Review-Closed RP complained an investigation was not properly prosecuted and complained unnecessary force was used against him/her. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 10, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Service level Disposition: RP complained that a request for service was ignored. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 10, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Service level Categories: Insufficient Follow-Up Disposition: RP complained officers failed to properly follow-up with him/her. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 10, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Service level Disposition: Supervisor Review-Closed RP complained his/her request for urgent police assistance went unanswered. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 11, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Performance Categories: Driving Disposition: RP complained that an officer drove dangerously. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 16, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Performance Categories: Driving Disposition: RP complained an officer drove his/her patrol unit recklessly. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 23, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Service level Disposition: RP complained police response time was excessive. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 30, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Performance Disposition: Dismissed-EE Not Identifiable RP complained that an officer ignored his/her request for vehicle towing. Dismiss – employee not identifiable. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 31, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Courtesy Disposition: RP complained officers were discourteous. Policy Complaints Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 6, 2023 Class/sub-class: Policy Complaint Disposition: Dismissed-Other RP complained officers parked patrol vehicles improperly. Dismissed-Other, no follow-up possible. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Oct 17, 2023 Class/sub-class: Policy Complaint Disposition: Supervisor Review-Closed RP complained that a person was cited in lieu of physical custody. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Oct 21, 2023 Class/sub-class: Policy Complaint Disposition: RP complained that a traffic policy needed revision. Incident Reviews Incident type: Incident Review Status: Active Received date: Oct 4, 2023 Class/sub-class: Incident Review / Conduct Disposition: RP complained that a community services officer acted improperly.  Eugene Police Department October 2023 Closed Case Report Incident type: IA Investigation Status: Completed Received date: Jul 18, 2023 Class/sub-class: Allegation of Misconduct / Conduct Disposition: Resigned during investigation Allegations: 1. 103.4.1 Judgment: That Communications Specialist A failed to use his/her training, experience, and observation to appropriately respond to a caller on July 17, 2023. 2. 103.5.9 Conduct: That Communications Specialist A engaged in conduct that brought the department into disrepute when he/she called a caller an "idiot" on July 17, 2023. 3. 103.5.8 Courtesy: That Communications Specialist A failed to use tact in his/her interactions, control his/her temper, or exercise patience and discretion when he/she shouted over a distressed caller on July 17, 2023. Incident type: IA Investigation Status: Completed Received date: Jul 27, 2023 Class/sub-class: Allegation of Misconduct / Performance Disposition: Sustained Allegation Officer A: 1. 1203.7.1.c Body Worn Video: that on June 18, 2023, Officer A failed to use his/her BWV system while he/she conducted an investigative encounter. Allegation Officer B: 1. 1203.7.1.c Body Worn Video: that on June 18, 2023, Officer B failed to use his/her BWV system while he/she conducted an investigative encounter.  Office of the Police Auditor November 2023 Open Case Report Allegations of Misconduct Incident type: IA Investigation Status: Active Received date: Nov 3, 2023 Class/sub-class: Allegation of Misconduct / Conduct Disposition: 1. 1. 103.5.18 Intoxicants: That Sergeant A possessed and/or used intoxicants while on duty without authorization. 2. 103.5.9.g Conduct: That Sergeant A failed to foster a safe work environment when he/she consumed intoxicants while supervising night training at the range. . Inquiries Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Nov 3, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-Other RP complained officers failed to conduct a thorough investigation. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Nov 3, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: RP complained officers failed to take appropriate enforcement actions after an incident. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Nov 7, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-Other RP alleged officers acted improperly. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Nov 10, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: RP complained officers mishandled an investigation and failed to provide timely updates. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Nov 13, 2023 : Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Supervisor Review-Closed  RP complained an officer acted improperly. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Nov 14, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: RP complained communication center specialists and officers failed to provide appropriate service levels. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Nov 15, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-Other RP complained officers were not properly equipped to provide proper service to a third party. Dismiss - no policy violations occurred. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Nov 15, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-Other RP alleged officers improperly sought assistance to aid a third party recover their property. Dismiss - no policy violations occurred. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Nov 20, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-EE Not Identified RP alleged an officer acted unethically. Dismiss – employee not identifiable. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Nov 21, 2023 : Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: Dismissed-alt remedy RP alleged an investigation was mishandled by officers. Dismiss – alternate remedy (courts). Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Nov 29, 2023 Class/sub-class: Inquiry Disposition: RP complained his/her request for police assistance were not properly answered. Service Complaints Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Nov 6, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Courtesy Disposition: Supervisor Review-Closed  RP complained officers failed to take appropriate action after an incident. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Nov 9, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Use of Force Disposition: Supervisor Review-Closed RP complained a taser was used in violation of EPD policy. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Nov 15, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Constitutional Rights Disposition: Dismissed-alt remedy RP alleged officers violated his/her constitutional rights. Dismiss – alternate remedy (courts). Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Completed Received date: Nov 15, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Performance Disposition: Dismissed-EE Not Identified RP complained a communications specialist acted improperly. Dismiss – employee not identifiable. Incident type: Supervisor Action Status: Active Received date: Nov 27, 2023 Class/sub-class: Service Complaint / Service level Categories: Untimely Patrol Response Disposition: RP alleged officers ignored his/her request for service and failed to properly address on-going criminal behavior. Incident Reviews Incident type: Incident Review Status: Active Received date: Nov 1, 2023 Class/sub-class: Incident Review / Constitutional Rights Disposition: RP complained officers handled two interactions improperly. Incident type: Incident Review Status: Active Received date: Nov 7, 2023 Class/sub-class: Incident Review / Performance Disposition: RP complained an officer failed to hold a third party accountable for an incident. Pending Classification Incident type: Internal Affairs Intake Status: Initial Received date: Nov 2, 2023 : Class/sub-class: Disposition: RP alleged an officer engaged in misconduct. Incident type: Internal Affairs Intake Status: Initial Received date: Nov 30, 2023 : Class/sub-class: Disposition: RP alleged a former officer engaged in misconduct.  Independent Police Auditor’s Report – December 2023 Auditor’s Letter We are continuing to experience higher I was delighted to serve as a member of complaint volume compared with 2022, with the NACOLE Annual Conference 45 received in October and 22 in committee, and I am hoping to continue November. We also continue to review uses on the committee next year. If any of you of force. In October and November these have any questions or interest in totaled 25; there were 123 reportable uses of attending (next year’s conference will be force between January and November which in October in Tucson, Arizona), please feel is about 20% lower than the same period in free to reach out. 2022. Upcoming Public Meetings In November, I was fortunate to attend the On December 12th, the Civilian Review Annual Conference of the National Board will hear from Chief Skinner about Association for Civilian Oversight of Law alternative crisis response. The CRB will Enforcement (NACOLE), along with Associate also be reviewing a case involving a Auditor Rob Eller. As civilian oversight has flashlight used to strike a suspect. become necessary and implemented in Please note, the CRB will not hold a jurisdictions across the country, NACOLE has January meeting, but will resume public grown to accommodate the growing field. meetings February 13, 2024. NACOLE offers training for oversight practitioners as well as community members Leia Pitcher advocating for meaningful civilian oversight, Independent Police Auditor and the conference was incredibly informative and helpful. Year to Date Complaint Volume 342 303 39 37 37 31 45 23 19 26 38 25 21 32 33 32 34 20 24 26 29 32 20 22 2022 2023 101 E. Broadway, Suite 230 • Eugene, Oregon 97401 Phone (541) 682-5016 • Fax (541) 682-5599 www.eugene-or.gov/policeauditor