Portland, Oregon, Measure 26-217, Police Oversight Board Charter Amendment (November 2020)

Portland Measure 26-217
Election date November 3, 2020
Topic Local law enforcement
Status a Approved
Type Referral	Origin Lawmakers
List of Oregon measuresOregon Measure 107Oregon Measure 108Oregon Measure 109Oregon Measure 110Submit

A charter amendment establishing a new police oversight board was on the ballot for Portland voters in Multnomah, Clackamas, and Washington counties in Oregon, on November 3, 2020.It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported: amending the city's charter to establish a new police oversight board, giving the board the power to subpoena witnesses and request police documents and evidence to investigate complaints made against the Portland Police Bureau, allowing the board to impose disciplinary actions up to termination of law enforcement professionals, and authorizing the board to recommend policing policy to the Portland Police Bureau and Portland City Council.

A "no" vote opposed amending the city charter to establish a new police oversight board, thereby maintaining the existing Independent Police Review that was established by ordinance and operates under the city auditor.

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

Election results

Portland Measure 26-217
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		301,527	81.58%
No		68,088	18.42%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Measure design

See also: Text of measure

Purposes of the board

Measure 26-217 would add a new section to the city's charter to establish a community police oversight board. The three primary stated purposes of the board include:

• investigating Portland Police Bureau,
• imposing discipline on police personnel, and
• recommending policing practices and policies.

Currently, the Independent Police Review (IPR), a city agency under the city auditor, investigates complaints against police officers in conjunction with the Citizen Review Committee, its 11-member advisory board. It was created in 2001 and replaced the Police Internal Investigations Auditing Committee. It has the power to investigate police misconduct and issue reports, but it does not have the power to impose disciplinary action. The police commissioner is responsible for disciplinary decisions. IPR also has the power to make policy recommendations to the police chief and is required to publish them for public review. On its website, IPR lists 15 staff members as of August 2020.

Board membership and administration

The board would be appointed by the Portland City Council for a term to be determined by the implementing ordinance. Board members could be removed from their position before the end of their term for a cause. The amendment makes the board responsible for including individuals on the board who come from diverse backgrounds. The amendment excludes any individuals employed by law enforcement and their immediate family members and any individuals who previously were employed by law enforcement from serving on the board.

The amendment requires that no less than 5% of the Police Bureau’s Annual Operational Budget be dedicated to the board. For fiscal year 2020, 5% of the budget was $11.5 million.

The amendment requires that the board hire a director to manage administrative staff and hired investigators. It also requires that the physical office of the board be located outside of a Portland Police Bureau facility. The board is required to hold regular open meetings to report on the board’s activity.

Powers of the board

The board would investigate complaints and impose disciplinary action up to termination of police personnel. In compliance with state and federal law, the board would have the power to subpoena witnesses, request police documents and evidence, and request statements from police personnel to investigate complaints.

The board would recommend policies and directives to the Portland Police Bureau that the bureau may accept or reject. If the bureau rejects the policy, the board may ask the city council to vote on the policy or directive, which would become binding on the police bureau if passed.

The amendment gives the board the authority to investigate the following actions:

• deaths in custody and use of deadly force,
• complaints of force that result in injury,
• discrimination against protected classes,
• violations of constitutional rights, and
• other incidents of misconduct as determined by the board or city council.

Text of measure

Ballot question

The ballot question was as follows:

“

Shall Charter be amended to authorize new, independent community police oversight board to investigate complaints against Portland Police, impose discipline?

”

Full text

The full text of the measure can be read below.

Support

Supporters

Officials

• Portland mayor Ted Wheeler (Nonpartisan)
• Portland City Commissioner Chloe Eudaly (Nonpartisan)
• Portland City Commissioner Amanda Fritz (Nonpartisan)
• Portland City Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty (Nonpartisan)

Political Parties

• Multnomah Democrats

Arguments

• Portland City Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty: "I want to reiterate to Portland Police officers and their family, there should be nothing to fear in this reform if they’re committed to serving the community. This new measure will make them better and will make new officers who joined them better. This is about being accountable to each of us."
• Candace Avalos, a member of the Citizen Review Committee: "Over 60 days of protests have highlighted the frustration of a community that has spent decades asking - even begging - for meaningful reforms to our systems of police accountability. .... We owe it to Portlanders to respond to their nightly demands for justice with bold legislation, which addresses the heart of the protests: truly independent review of the police to hold them accountable for the harm they cause the community."

Opposition

Opponents

Officials

• Portland City Auditor Mary Hull Caballero (Nonpartisan)

Unions

• Portland Police Association

Arguments

• City Auditor Mary Hull Caballero: "You are being asked to refer an unvetted, unrefined model of oversight that throws out the best of what works in the current system for a hazy promise of something better down the road. It rests on a foundation of misinformation, repeated over and over, from here to there, with such constancy that the truth cannot compete. You are being asked to write with permanent pen instead of pencil, to imprint unvetted concepts in Charter that could easily be put in City Code and remedied if they prove to be unwise or unworkable. … A thoughtful schedule of Code changes, paired with a transition plan, would be a better course ahead than the chaos that will result in civilian oversight in the interim."
• Daryl Turner, the head of the Portland Police Association: "Sections 2-1002 and 2-1003 would cause the City to violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s requirements of equal protection of the laws. The complete absence of due process requirements in the way the Oversight Board handles disciplinary investigations would violate the due process requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment. ... [T]he proposed charter amendment would set up the Oversight Board as a kind of “super bureau” of the City. The Oversight Board would not be subject to the budgeting process, would not be subject to the rules of the Bureau of Human Resources, would do its own hiring and firing without regard to the City’s merit system, and would not be subject to scrutiny by the Auditor."

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 Oregon

This measure was put on the ballot through a unanimous vote of the Portland City Council on July 29, 2020.

See also

Local measures

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

Oregon

• November 3, 2020 measures in Oregon
• Local ballot measures, Oregon
• Portland, Oregon

News and analysis

• State and local preemption conflicts
• Measures advancing national agendas

External links

Suggest a link

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