Opinion: The FACTS

Over the past months much discussion and debate has centered on “Civilian Oversight” for the Pasadena Police Department.

I will minimize my opinions on the merits and demerits for such a committee, addressing any isolated OIS case or any criticism of the PPD. From my remembrance, ALL recent officer involved misconduct issues have occurred with officers from previous administrations of Melekian, Roberson and Jerry Oliver. Reflect back and you will see more reforms, transparency and community engagement under Chief Phillip Sanchez than any of his predecessors. Whose administration sort a gang injunction and which PPD chief lifted it?

Regarding the “Civilian Oversight Committee”, and the allegations regarding a lack of trust and rubber stamping by councilmembers on the Public Safety Committee I do not subscribe to. Frequently, I hear spirited discussion and lively debate being shared by all members. Especially, John Kennedy, (past NAACP president) and Steve Madison, (Federal Attorney). Substantive matters from Community stakeholders have become more engaging. Meeting dates and locations are infrequent.

Now think about it, would “Trust” be elevated if a committee comprised of only one social, economic or ethnic group be a best practices for a oversight committee? What about an Independent Auditor at a cost of $350,000.00 annually to report the findings to the Public Safety Committee who say there is no trust? With the high single digits unemployment numbers in this city, would these funds be best utilized to increase employment?

What is further confusing are from those that speak for “African Americans only” and exclude concerns for other ethnic groups. Down thru the years, the Pasadena NAACP believed in Inclusion for anyone and all citizens who are disenfranchised. Was not Dr. King’s cadre of supporters ALL MEN, ALL Religions with no regards toward ethnicities? You know the speech as well as I.

The complaint form was modified out of concern for ALL complainants. The resurrection of a 4 year-old “resolved issue” seems to come forth to inflame others with rhetoric and hyperbole’. Unnecessary civil actions against those who may fabricate facts did not curtail reporting officer for inappropriate conduct while I served as president.

On the issue of the “document disposal resolution” recently passed by the Pasadena City Council……..I reviewed Government Code Section 34090 and it only requires files to be maintained for a minimum of two years. Pasadena extended its records keeping to 5 years. The Pasadena NAACP had archived records of files from most complaints for the past 24 years. I hope they still exist as a reference. Unless other Government Code Sections supersede section 1043/1045, the 5-year period on Internal Affairs files is being complied with. Integrity, OIS, sexual misconduct and Brady law violations have always remained indefinite. But, what other cities not under a federal court decree maintains such files this long? Has any legal cases come before the court “under penalty of perjury” signature box?

Searching other communities, I could not locate non-hire background files remaining with a prospective employee “Just in case”. Advocacy becomes reduced when sealing records and giving residents a 2nd chance is not at the fore-front. So which is it……allow civilians past misdeeds continue to hang over prospective employees forever.

My past encounters with the Police Protective League on issues in the Police Officers Bill Of Rights were “complaints more than 5 years are not issues for discussion or sharing” and, were upheld in a court rulings by Judge Yaffe, Div 61, Los Angeles Superior Court.

Advocacy and troubling the water is great when “facts” are included,

Joe Brown, Past President, Pasadena NAACP