Oakland, California, Measure S1, Police Oversight and Inspector General Charter Amendment (November 2020)

Oakland Police Oversight and Inspector General Charter Amendment
Election date November 3, 2020
Topic Local law enforcement
Status a Approved
Type Referral	Origin Lawmakers
List of California measuresCalifornia Proposition 13 (March)California Proposition 14California Proposition 15California Proposition 16California Proposition 17California Proposition 18California Proposition 19California Proposition 20California Proposition 21California Proposition 22California Proposition 23California Proposition 24California Proposition 25Submit

A charter amendment to change the powers, duties, and staffing of the Oakland Police Commission and create the Office of Inspector General was on the ballot for Oakland voters in Alameda County, California, on November 3, 2020. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported changing the powers, duties, and staffing of the Oakland Police Commission and the Community Police Review Agency and creating the Office of the Inspector General to review the policies of the police commission and review agency.

A "no" vote opposed changing the powers, duties, and staffing of the Oakland Police Commission and the Community Police Review Agency and creating the Office of the Inspector General to review the policies of the police commission and review agency.

A simple majority vote was required for the approval of the charter amendment.

Election results

Oakland Measure S1
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		154,314	81.27%
No		35,566	18.73%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Measure S1 was as follows:

“

Shall Oakland’s City Charter be amended to: (1) modify the powers, duties and staffing of the Police Commission and the Community Police Review Agency (“CPRA”), including empowering the Police Commission to hire and/or contract for one or more attorney advisors and empowering the CPRA’s Director to hire staff attorneys; and (2) create an Office of Inspector General to review and report on the policies and practices of the Police Department and CPRA?

”

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.

Measure design

Click on the arrows below to read about the changes proposed by the charter amendment.

Office of Inspector General: Creation of the office and duties

The measure would amend the city charter to create the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). The director of the Office of Inspector General would be hired by the Oakland Police Commission. The director may be terminated with an affirmative vote of five members of the commission after adopting a cause for termination. The director would be authorized to hire and fire staff. The amendment gives the commission, OIG, and Community Police Review Agency access to the same files and records, including the Department's Internal Affairs Division files and records. The OIG is responsible for reviewing lawsuits, complaints, and investigations involving the police department and agency. The OIG is also responsible for reporting on their audits of the police department and agency to the commission.

Community Police Review Agency: Changes to the agency

The measure amends the budget and staffing section increasing the number of full-time legal advisors for the Community Police Review Agency to two. The amendment requires that the city auditor perform a review of the agency at least once every three years. The amendment also prohibits the city administration from managing the agency. The amendment requires that the agency's director must submit written findings and proposed discipline with 48 hours of completing an investigation. Currently, the agency is required to have one line investigator for every 100 sworn officers in the police department. The agency was created with the passage of implementing ordinances in 2018 for Measure LL (2016).

Oakland Police Commission: Changes to the commission

Currently, the Oakland Police Commission consists of seven regular members and two alternate members serving three-year terms and serve no more than two consecutive terms. Members cannot be sworn police officers, current city employees, former police department employees, and current or former employees of associations representing police officers. The members are appointed by a selection panel consisting of members appointed by the Oakland City Council and mayor. The amendment would change how the city council fills vacancies on the selection panel. The amendment would also allow commissioners to be suspended by an affirmative vote of at least six members of the city council. Commissioners may be removed by a majority vote of the commission for felony convictions and other certain misdemeanors.

The amendment requires that the city auditor perform a review of the Oakland Police Commission at least once every three years. It also prohibits the city administration from exercising "managerial authority over Commissioners." The amendment prohibits the commission from issuing subpoenas to investigate any city employees other than police officers. It also allows the commission to contract with attorneys on any of its powers or duties. The amendment requires that the chief of police or a designee attend commission meetings. It also prohibits the interim chief of police from also holding non-sworn employment with the city or an elected office.

The amendment allows the commission to convene a discipline committee to investigate cases involving Level 1 uses of force, sexual misconduct, or untruthfulness when the agency or the police department has not completed an investigation within 250 days of the filed complaint.

Currently, the commission may propose changes to policies and procedures of the Police Department. Under the amendment, the city council must approve, modify and approve, or reject the proposals within 120 days of the commission's vote on them. If the city council does not take action on the proposals within that time period, the changes go into effect as is. The commission is also responsible for reviewing all policy changes proposed by the Police Department. If the commission rejects the proposed change, the change will then be considered by the city council. If the city council does not act on the proposed change within 120 days, the commission's rejection becomes final.

Currently, the Oakland Police Commission has the power to subpoena books, papers, and documents related to investigations of police officers concerning excessive use of force and other misconduct complaints. The commission is also responsible for reviewing the department's budget and holding one public hearing per budget cycle. The commission may hire or contract attorneys and are responsible for responding to any filed petitions or injunctions against the commission.

Support

Supporters

Officials

• Oakland mayor Libby Schaaf
• Oakland city councilmember Nikki Fortunato Bas (Nonpartisan)
• Oakland city councilmember Noel Gallo (Nonpartisan)
• Oakland city councilmember Dan Kalb (Nonpartisan)
• Oakland city councilmember Rebecca Kaplan (Nonpartisan)
• Oakland city councilmember Lynette Gibson McElhaney
• Oakland city councilmember Larry Reid
• Oakland city councilmember Loren Taylor (Nonpartisan)
• Oakland city councilmember Sheng Thao (Nonpartisan)

Arguments

• Regina Jackson, chair of Oakland Police Commission: "The council’s unanimous vote of confidence today is the latest of a string of victories that confirm the commission’s charter powers first established in 2016 and will stand the test of time. As chair, I am encouraged by every city council member’s decision to support the commission’s mission."
• Coalition for Police Accountability: "We are deeply thankful to the City Council for their unanimous decision to eliminate a disastrous provision that would have allowed the police chief to override all the rules and policies by simply asserting that ‘exigent circumstances’ required such action."
• Oakland City Council President Rebecca Kaplan: "This has been a long effort to clarify and codify the powers of the Police Commission to be independent of the chain of command of the Police Department. Both our city’s history and what we’re learning in this national moment reinforces the importance of accountability and oversight."

Opposition

Ballotpedia did not identify committees, organizations, or individuals opposing the ballot initiative. If you are aware of any opponents or opposing arguments, please send an email with a link to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Background

George Floyd death and protests

See also: Policy changes in response to the killing of and protests about George Floyd

On May 25, 2020, Minneapolis police officers arrested George Floyd, a black man, after receiving a call that he had made a purchase with a counterfeit $20 bill. Floyd died after Derek Chauvin, a white officer, arrived at the scene and pressed his knee onto Floyd's neck as Floyd laid face-down on the street in handcuffs. Both the Hennepin County Medical Examiner and an independent autopsy conducted by Floyd's family ruled Floyd's death as a homicide stemming from the incident. The medical examiner's report, prepared by Dr. Michael Baden and Dr. Allecia Wilson, said that it was "not a legal determination of culpability or intent, and should not be used to usurp the judicial process."

Floyd's death was filmed and shared widely, leading to protests and demonstrations over racism, civil rights, and police use of force. The first protests took place in Minneapolis-St. Paul on May 26. A protest in Chicago organized by Chance the Rapper and Rev. Michael Pfleger took place the same day, making it the first major city outside of Minneapolis to host a protest over Floyd's death.

Click here to read more about responses to the killing of and protests about George Floyd.

Related 2020 ballot measures

See also: Local police-related ballot measures following the killing of and protests about George Floyd (November 2020)

Ballotpedia identified 18 local police-related or law enforcement measures on the ballot for November 3, 2020, that qualified following the death of George Floyd. The local ballot measures were on the ballot in nine cities and four counties within six states. The local ballot measures concerned police practices, police oversight boards and auditors, police staffing and funding levels, recordings from police body and dashboard cameras, and other policies.

State	Jurisdiction	Title	Description	Result
California	Los Angeles County	Measure J	Requires that no less than 10% of the county's general fund be appropriated to community programs and alternatives to incarceration	a
California	Oakland	Measure S1	Changes the powers, duties, and staffing of the Oakland Police Commission and creates the Office of Inspector General	a
California	San Diego	Measure B	Replaces the Community Review Board on Police Practices with the Commission on Police Practices that would be appointed by the city council to conduct investigations and subpoena witnesses and documents related to deaths resulting from police interactions and complaints made against police officers	a
California	San Francisco	Proposition D	Creates the Sheriff's Department Oversight Board and the Sheriff's Department Office of Inspector General	a
California	San Francisco	Proposition E	Removes the mandatory police staffing level from the city's charter	a
California	San Jose	Measure G	Authorizes the independent police auditor to review reports and records related to officer-involved shootings and uses of force	a
California	Sonoma County	Measure P	Makes changes to the powers and duties of the Independent Office of Law Enforcement Review and Outreach (IOLERO)	a/ot
Illinois	DuPage County	Law Enforcement Budget Advisory Referendum	Advises the county to continue to consider law enforcement and public safety as its top budgeting priority	a
Illinois	DuPage County	Law Enforcement Injury Risk Training Advisory Referendum	Advises the county to continue to fund and support law enforcement training methods that decrease the risk of injury to officers and suspects	a
Ohio	Akron	Release of Recordings from Police Body and Dashboard Cameras after Use of Force Charter Amendment	Requires recordings from police body and dashboard cameras documenting police use of force that results in death or serious injury to be released to the public	a
Ohio	Columbus	Issue 2	Creates the Civilian Police Review Board to investigate alleged police misconduct, subpoena testimony and evidence during the investigations, make recommendations to the Division of Police, and appoint and manage the new position of Inspector General for the Division of Police	a
Oregon	Portland	Measure 26-217	Establishes a new police oversight board in the city's charter	a
Pennsylvania	Philadelphia	Question 1	Adds language to the Philadelphia City Charter calling on the police department to "eliminate the practice of unconstitutional stop and frisk, consistent with judicial precedent"	a
Pennsylvania	Philadelphia	Question 3	Creates a Citizens Police Oversight Commission to replace the Police Advisory Commission	a
Pennsylvania	Pittsburgh	Independent Citizen Police Review Board Charter Amendment	Requires police officers to cooperate with investigations conducted by the Independent Citizen Police Review Board	a
Texas	Kyle	Proposition F	Amends the city charter to authorize the city council to adopt procedures and a committee to review the police department	a
Washington	King County	Charter Amendment 1	Requires investigations into all police-related deaths and to provide public attorneys to represent the decedent's family in the investigation	a
Washington	King County	Charter Amendment 4	Amends the county charter to authorize the Office of Law Enforcement Oversight (OLEO) to subpoena witnesses, documents, and other evidence in its investigations of law enforcement personnel	a
Washington	King County	Charter Amendment 5	Returns the office of the sheriff from an elected position to an appointed position that is appointed by the county executive and confirmed by the county council	a
Washington	King County	Charter Amendment 6	Gives the county council the authority to specify the duties of the sheriff	a

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing local ballot measures in California

This measure was put on the ballot through a unanimous vote of the Oakland City Council on July 23, 2020.

See also

Local measures

• Local measures in 2020
• Local law enforcement on the ballot
• Local charter amendments on the ballot
• Alameda County measures

California

• November 3, 2020 measures in California
• Local ballot measures, California
• Oakland, California

News and analysis

• State and local preemption conflicts
• Measures advancing national agendas

External links

Suggest a link

• Search Google News for this topic
• Alameda County Elections Office website