Features

Concerns about the city attorney’s abrupt mid-September shutdown of the public process addressing complaints against police drew about a dozen people to the open portion of the joint City Council-Police Review Commission closed session Tuesday. 

The members of the public had come to call on the city to resume open hearings into complaints against the police. 

The meeting was called to address an unresolved 2002 Berkeley Police Officers Association lawsuit against the city, which argues that public hearings on complaints against police violate privacy mandates for police personnel issues. 

Berkeley City Attorney Manuela Albuquerque linked the recent California Supreme Court decision, Copley Press v. San Diego County, which concluded that police officers’ disciplinary records are confidential, to the BPOA lawsuit. 

During the public portion of the meeting, Albuquerque explained the need for the session to be closed. “What strategies we’ll employ (in response to the lawsuit) should not be disclosed,” she said. 

The future of PRC open hearings would not be discussed in the meeting, she said, but added, “Should the PRC decide to change its procedures, that will occur in open session.” 

PRC Commissioner Michael Sherman said in a phone interview Wednesday that he was satisfied that the closed meeting could not have been held in public without revealing the city’s possible strategy regarding the lawsuit. “We would not want to put our legal cards on the table,” Sherman said. 

Also on Wednesday, PRC Commissioner David Ritchie said he was hopeful that open hearings on complaints against police officers would resume as a result of the closed-door meeting. 

Speaking of the Copley case, Ritchie said it was very specific and addressed the need for confidentiality in matters of discipline for police officers. “It’s always been our position that we have nothing to do with discipline,” Ritchie said. 

The PRC investigates complaints and rules to sustain or dismiss the complaints. It is then up to the police chief to discipline officers, if he chooses to do so. 

In Tuesday’s public comment session preceding the closed-door meeting, a number of residents spoke out against the suspension of complaint hearings.  

Former PRC Commissioner Mark Schlosberg, who is police practices policy director for the Northern California chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, called for “open civilian oversight” of the police.  

“We should explore ways to keep the hearing process open,” he said. However, he added, if they must be closed, then as much information as possible should be disclosed. Schlosberg further called for a definitive legislative solution to Copley. 

Andrea Pritchett of Copwatch called on the council and PRC “to fight for open hearings.”  

And Jake Gelender, also of Copwatch, said, “I can’t believe in the middle of a massive police scandal, you’ve stopped the police inquiries.” Gelender was referring to a police sergeant who pled guilty to stealing drug evidence from the police drug vault and to two cases where two other police officers have been put on administrative leave, one for reportedly taking money from federal agents during a sting operation and the other for allegedly firing his service revolver while inebriated.  

Gelender also called on the body to hold an open meeting—rather than the closed session—to address the suspension of the hearings.  

Similarly, the Berkeley Daily Planet called for the council and PRC to hold public discussions on the question of closed hearings. 

The closed-door session will continue next Tuesday. “We’re willing to wait and see for the time being what our options are,” Ritchie said. 

The meeting will begin with public comment at 5 p.m. on the sixth floor of the administrative building at 2180 Milvia St.