Lockwood Reportedly Wants Mostly Minorities on Police Panel

City Manager John Lockwood wants seven of 12 members of a proposed civilian police review board to come from minority communities and the remaining five picked from retired judges, former grand jurors, and the City Civil Service Commission, San Diego Councilwoman Celia Ballesteros said Saturday.

Ballesteros said she and Lockwood have been privately discussing the makeup of the panel and Lockwood is convinced that the Latino and black communities should each be represented by three members and the Asian community by one.

Lockwood is on vacation and unavailable for comment. George Penn, assistant to the city manager, would not confirm the figures used by Ballesteros but said Lockwood’s intent is “to make the panel as reflective of the population as possible.”

“We are quite aware that it (representation on the panel) is an issue that is acutely sensitive to the minority community,” Penn said. “But in terms of specific numbers, we can’t really say. It’s still too early.”

However, Ballesteros said she expects the seven minority panel members to be picked from the “established community groups.”

‘Demonstrated an Interest’

“Mr. Lockwood and I have talked about picking people who have demonstrated an interest in community programs and bettering relations with the police . . . people who have developed a lot of expertise in community issues,” Ballesteros said.

She expects debate on the proposed panel and its members to begin next month when the City Council’s Rules Committee schedules public hearings. Ballesteros is not a member but said she will ask the committee to allow her to participate. She added that she expects the review board to be in place before her term expires in December.

If a board is impaneled with more than 50% minority representation, it would be a radical departure from Lockwood’s original plan. Initially, Lockwood proposed monitoring the police only with a panel composed of retired judges, former members of the grand juries and the City Civil Service Commission.

Lockwood’s original plan evoked a rash of criticism from various community groups, which quickly pointed out that the review board, which would be responsible for monitoring the Police Department’s internal affairs unit, would be made up almost exclusively aof retired, white citizens.

Police Chief Bill Kolender said Saturday that he had not heard about Lockwood’s reported proposal to staff the review board with a majority of members from the city’s minority communities, but he said he is not opposed to the plan.

“If they are charged only with reviewing what I do, I see no problem,” Kolender said.

Independent Probes Opposed

However, Kolender and Lockwood oppose suggestions by Ballesteros and others that the review board be empowered to conduct independent investigations of police misconduct and calls for the board members to be appointed without Kolender’s consent.

Penn said Lockwood agrees with an opinion by the City Attorney that the City Charter gives Kolender the final say on who gets to sit on the civilian review board.

Ballesteros argued that giving Kolender the authority to decide who gets appointed to the board is an abuse of authority because “it leaves Kolender answerable to no one.”

“It doesn’t make any sense at all when, for example, the person (Lockwood) supervising the police chief cannot name the board members. The chief answers to the city manager, who is appointed by the City Council, but in this case the chief doesn’t answer to anyone,” Ballesteros said.

Penn, citing the city attorney’s opinion, defended Kolender’s authority to approve

or reject the panel members.

“The chief is the gatekeeper of the Police Department’s records,” Penn said. “If we want to impanel a group of citizens to review complaints, it would be prudent for this panel to have access to police records. Therefore, the chief, in the scheme of things, must be able to approve of whoever looks at these records,” Penn said.

Board’s Credibility

Ballesteros said that keeping Kolender out of the selection process would enhance the board’s credibility in the minority communities, where most charges of police brutality originate.

“I personally feel that the chief is a very honorable, caring person. But I think it’s important that the community feel comfortable with the police review process,” Ballesteros said. “Keeping the chief out of the selection process avoids any impressions of conflict of interest on his part.”

But Ballesteros acknowledged that Kolender will probably be put in an untenable position regardless of how the board is picked.

“It won’t matter how the board is picked,” she said. “Its decisions will put him in a position where he’ll probably be criticized by either the police or the community.”

Ballesteros and Penn said that La Raza Lawyers Assn., a group of Latino attorneys, has asked the state attorney general’s office to review the city attorney’s opinion that Kolender has the authority to dictate the makeup of the review panel.

Restricted Authority

Ballesteros also argued that the review board should be independent and authorized to conduct independent investigations of allegations of police abuse.

“I believe that the board should be completely independent. I think it’s important that the board should be able to investigate, gather information firsthand from the complainant and witnesses and not be given this information pre-digested by the police.”

Plans for the citizens board allow it only the authority to review investigations conducted by the department’s internal affairs unit.

“The intent was not to involve citizens in the investigation process but to involve them at a level that allows them to review what has been investigated,” Penn said. “They can make recommendations that internal affairs investigators go back and interview witnesses, for example, or to say that the investigation was not as complete as it should have been. But these are recommendations only and the internal affairs commander has the discretion to follow up on those recommendations or not.”

San Diego police officials initially resisted any form of citizen review of police, arguing that the department’s internal affairs unit was adequate to investigate rogue officers.

Recently, the department reluctantly agreed to a citizens review panel after a deep rift between police and the city’s black community that resulted from a violent confrontation between a young black man and two San Diego police officers. Sagon Penn, 25, was acquitted in two trials in the death of one officer and the shooting of another.

Penn said he acted in self-defense when he grabbed an officer’s service revolver and emptied it at the two officers and a civilian ride-along. Several witnesses testified that the officers initiated the deadly confrontation when they hurled racial epithets at Penn and beat him with their fists and batons.

Kolender said he would fight all attempts to impanel a review board with the authority to conduct independent investigations.

“If the board would have the authority to deal with the disposition of complaints or the discipline of officers, I would be opposed to it. The officer has rights, and I’m going to protect his and the citizens’ rights,” Kolender said. “The board has no authority to sit in judgment of police officers. This is not a kangaroo court.”