City Council Could Revisit Police Oversight at August 24 Meeting

It looks like civilian oversight of the Pasadena Police Department will get at least one more discussion before the City Council in August.

While the much-debated issue will not be a topic at this Monday’s scheduled 2 p.m. council session, the agenda for that meeting lists next Monday — Aug. 24 — as the next time the body will meet. That’s significant because, originally, that Aug. 24 full council meeting was ticketed “to be canceled.’’

This past Wednesday, the council’s Public Safety Committee, chaired by Councilmember John J. Kennedy, discussed the oversight issue at length and resolved to send it back to the full council for further discussion.

However, exactly when that discussion would take place was up in the air, with the Aug. 24, Aug. 31 and Sept. 7 full council meetings all listed as “to be canceled’’ – a typical late-summer scenario.

But now — with Kennedy and Mayor Terry Tornek both pushing for a full council vote on the oversight matter in August, in response to widespread public sentiment following the George Floyd killing in Minneapolis – the now-uncanceled Aug. 24 session figures to be the forum for the full council to resume discussions on the matter.

Kennedy told Pasadena Now shortly after last Wednesday’s committee meeting that he was assured by Tornek that “we’ll have at least one more meeting in August” – and that perhaps the council could meet on both Aug. 24 and Aug. 31. (Aug. 31 is still officially listed as “to be canceled.”)

“(Police oversight) won’t be on (this) Monday’s agenda, because we haven’t had time to absorb or react to what we’ve talked about today,’’ Tornek said last week.

“But it would be my intent to bring it back to the next council meeting following Monday to have a full discussion at the council and get guidance from the council about whether they’d want to have further study, whether they’d want specific questions answered or whether they’re prepared to take some definitive action to demonstrate that they think it’s important to move forward.’’

Pasadena, like cities around the nation, has grappled with various models for police reform since Floyd’s killing in Minneapolis on May 25 and the nationwide demonstrations that followed.

On Aug. 3, the Pasadena council rejected by a 6-2 vote a proposal by Vice Mayor Tyron Hampton for a charter-amendment measure to be sent to the voters in November, calling for a nine-member Community Police Oversight Commission and an independent police auditor, both with subpoena power.

During a lengthy and sometimes contentious session, the council that day also debated, but did not vote on, a second plan, co-authored by Tornek and Kennedy.

That plan calls for a 13-member Community Police Oversight Commission, coupled with an independent police auditor. However, both would fall under the purview of the city manager (who also oversees the police), and neither would have subpoena power. Hampton has criticized that set-up as falling “very short of true changes.”

The Tornek-Kennedy working model – both men have said it’s a starting point for the whole council to debate and massage — calls for 13 commissioners in all, with each council member as well as the mayor nominating one commissioner. There would also be nominations by the city manager (one); police chief (one); and community groups (three).

The composition of the panel, as well as the specific city office to which an auditor would report, were two of the biggest discussion points among Safety Committee members on Wednesday – and figure to be the focus of debate when the matter reaches the full council as well.

Hampton, for one, has been “adamant” that any auditor would need to work outside the aegis of the city manager in order for oversight to have real teeth. He has suggested the city could re-establish a city prosecutor’s office – which was merged into the city attorney’s office some 20 years ago – and that the auditor could answer to the prosecutor rather than the city manager.

Councilmember Margaret McAustin, for another, has said she thinks the appointment process suggested by Tornek and Kennedy might be too political in nature, but that she thinks, overall, the plan is a good starting point for possible reform.

Kennedy, meanwhile, has said that, with some changes, he believes he can garner the five council votes needed for some reform plan to pass.

He pointed to McAustin as well as Councilmembers Andy Wilson and Gene Masuda as having “intimated’’ they could possibly support some amended version of the Tornek-Kennedy proposal. Along with Tornek and Kennedy, that would potentially be the needed five votes.

Given the lengthy debates that police oversight has sparked in the past, it would not be a surprise if the council’s discussions stretched beyond that now-uncanceled Aug. 24 meeting. But now, it does appear the discussions will at least begin again on that date.