Who should police the police?

Editor’s Note: Kendall Stagg sits on a panel that is studying how citizen complaints are handled. In an 8-4 vote, the panel recently rejected the idea that Reno needs a civilian review board. In a 7-5 vote, a proposal to redefine the role of the city’s ombudsman was also rejected. Final recommendations will be presented to the Reno City Council in May.

Since the earliest of colonial times, there has always been a deep-seated concern about the necessary but awesome powers we delegate to police officers. The power to investigate, interrogate, detain, arrest and especially apprehend citizens cannot be permitted in a free society without the maximum amount of public accountability. For this reason, I genuinely believe that the police should not be solely responsible for policing themselves. Effective law enforcement requires the establishment of a truly independent review system.

I would be remiss if I did not commend Reno’s honorable officers who put their lives on the line for us every day. Indeed, we should be proud that police misconduct has not been a widespread problem here in Reno. Notwithstanding, in a free and democratic society, even the most well-respected police departments should be held to the highest level of public accountability.

Civil rights activists in Reno have unsuccessfully advocated for a civilian review board for more than 30 years. Opponents of civilian review have successfully argued that civilian review boards are too expensive. I concede their point. It is true that civilian review boards can be costly—draining precious dollars from city coffers during already difficult economic times. However, if financial constraints exclude the possibility of civilian review, there are other fiscally responsible options available.

Independent auditors and ombudsmen are examples of less expensive alternatives to civilian review boards. Either an auditor or an ombudsman could be given the power to issue subpoenas, review police investigations, hold hearings and make recommendations to the chief of police.

The city of Reno already has a vacancy for the position of ombudsman within the community relations department. This vacancy could provide a timely opportunity to redefine the role of the city’s ombudsman to include independent review of civilian complaints. If done promptly, the city of Reno could recruit and hire a new ombudsman with the qualifications needed to take on this added responsibility with little or no additional cost to the taxpayers.

In addition to accepting citizen complaints and independently reviewing their subsequent investigations, the ombudsman could also issue regular reports regarding citizen complaints against the police—providing the city council with statistical data, noting trends and making recommendations for policy changes.

Redefining the role of the ombudsman to allow for independent oversight is a realistic option. Due process rights of police officers wouldn’t be trampled on and the police department’s ability to conduct timely investigations wouldn’t be hindered. It’d be a proactive way of increasing accountability and the level of service that the city provides to its citizens.