San Diego, California, Measure B, Commission on Police Practices Amendment (November 2020)
| San Diego Measure B | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date November 3, 2020 | |
| Topic Local law enforcement | |
Status Approved | |
| Type Referral | Origin Lawmakers |
Measure B, a charter amendment related to police oversight, was on the ballot for San Diego voters in San Diego County, California, on November 3, 2020. It was approved.[1]
A "yes" vote supported amending the city's charter to replace 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 "no" vote opposed amending the city's charter to establish the Commission on Police Practices, thereby maintaining the Community Review Board on Police Practices. |
A simple majority vote was required for the approval of the amendment.
Election results
|
San Diego Measure B |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
468,051 | 74.60% | ||
| No | 159,365 | 25.40% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Measure B was as follows:[2]
| “ | Shall the City Charter be amended to dissolve the Community Review Board on Police Practices and replace it with a Commission on Police Practices, with members appointed by the City Council, its own staff, subpoena power, independent legal counsel, and authority to investigate police officer misconduct, review complaints against officers, and make recommendations on police officer discipline, police policies, and Police
Department legal compliance?[3] |
” |
Ballot summary
The ballot title for Measure B was as follows:[2]
| “ |
This measure would amend the San Diego City Charter (Charter) to dissolve the Community Review Board on Police Practices and establish a Commission on Police Practices (Commission), including key elements of the Commission’s structure and responsibilities. The Charter presently authorizes the Mayor and the City Council (Council) to establish a Community Review Board on Police Practices (CRB) to review and evaluate citizens’ complaints against members of the City’s Police Department and the Police Department’s administration of discipline arising from complaints. The CRB presently must review all deaths occurring while a person is in the Police Department’s custody and all police officer-related shootings. CRB members are appointed by the Mayor with Council confirmation. This measure would amend the Charter to dissolve the CRB and replace it with a Commission, established as an investigatory body of the City, with members appointed by the Council. The Commission would be staffed by an executive director, who is appointed by the Council; investigators and other City employees or contractors, who are independent of the Police Department and the Mayor; and legal counsel, independent of the City Attorney. If approved by the voters, the new Commission would be required to independently investigate all deaths occurring while a person is in the Police Department’s custody, all deaths resulting from interaction with a City police officer, and all City police officer-related shootings. The Commission may also investigate allegations against officers of inappropriate sexual conduct, physical assault, and domestic violence. The Charter amendments grant the Commission subpoena power to obtain witness testimony and documents, enforceable through contempt proceedings under state law. The Commission would also be required to receive, register, review, and evaluate all complaints against City police officers. The Commission may investigate complaints, unless the complainant has requested that a complaint be handled without investigation or where no specific allegation or police officer can be identified. The Commission would be required to review the Police Department’s compliance with reporting laws. The Commission would have authority to review and advise on Police Department investigations, policies, and imposition of discipline, but the City’s Police Chief retains authority to impose discipline of subordinate officers, as the Charter presently provides. The Commission would be required to make public reports of its activities. The Commission must act in accordance with applicable federal and state laws. Police officers may appeal a sustained finding of police misconduct by the Commission to the City’s Civil Service Commission. The Council authorized placement of this measure on the ballot after receiving the proposal from a community-based organization called “Women Occupy San Diego” and holding multiple public hearings. This measure requires approval by a majority of the qualified voters of the City of San Diego voting on the measure. If approved, the Charter amendments would become effective after they are chaptered by the California Secretary of State.[3] |
” |
Impartial analysis
The impartial analysis for Measure B prepared by the city attorney was as follows:[2]
| “ |
This measure amends the San Diego City Charter (Charter) to change civilian oversight of the City Police Department (Department) and its officers. Under existing law, the Mayor and City Council (Council) have established the Community Review Board on Police Practices (CRB), which reviews and evaluates citizens’ complaints against City police officers and the Department’s administration of discipline arising from complaints. The CRB may independently refer an investigation to the grand jury, district attorney, or any other governmental agency authorized by law to investigate the activities of a law enforcement agency. The CRB is also required to review all deaths occurring while a person is in City police custody and all police officer-related shootings, but the CRB does not independently investigate these incidents. If approved by voters, this measure would dissolve the CRB and replace it with a Commission on Police Practices (Commission). The Commission would serve as an investigatory body of the City, operating independent of the Police Department and Mayor. Commission staff would include an executive director, appointed by the Council, to serve at the direction and will of the Commission. The Commission must retain its own legal counsel, independent of the City Attorney. Commission staff must be employed in accordance with the City’s civil service rules and annual salary ordinance, and must follow City rules related to contracts and records retention, confidentiality, and disclosure. The Commission would have the power to subpoena witnesses and documents, enforceable through contempt proceedings under state law, and would retain the authority to refer cases to outside law enforcement agencies. The Commission would initially be composed of members of the CRB. The Council would formally appoint Commission members after establishing, by ordinance, the number, term length, qualifications, and method for appointments, and defining the circumstances and process under which Commission members may be removed for cause. The Commission would be required to investigate all deaths occurring while a person is in Department custody, all deaths resulting from interaction with a City police officer, and all City officer-related shootings. Investigations must be conducted in accordance with rights afforded to police officers under federal and state law. The Commission must also receive and review all complaints against City police officers except in specified circumstances. The Commission would have authority to investigate complaints against officers but must first consider specified factors. Also, the Commission may, but would not be required to, review, evaluate, and investigate allegations of inappropriate sexual conduct, physical assault, or domestic violence by officers. The Commission may make recommendations to the Police Chief on policies and discipline, but the Police Chief would retain existing authority under the Charter, including the authority to determine discipline of subordinate officers. The Commission also must review and evaluate the Police Department’s compliance with reporting laws and make public semi-annual reports regarding the Commission’s exercise of its duties and powers. The measure also authorizes the City’s Civil Service Commission to determine appeals by City police officers, following any sustained findings of police officer misconduct by the Commission.[3] |
” |
Full text
The full text of Measure B can be found here.
Support
Yes on Measure B led the campaign in support of Measure B.[4]
Supporters
- California Nurses Association[5]
- SEIU Local 221[5]
- San Diego & Imperial Counties Labor Council[5]
- San Diego County Building And Construction Trades Council[5]
- League Of Women Voters Of San Diego[5]
- NAACP San Diego[5]
- Planned Parenthood Action Fund Of The Pacific Southwest[5]
- San Diego Regional Chamber Of Commerce[5]
- San Diego County Democratic Party[5]
Official arguments
The official arguments in support of Measure B were authored by Monica Montgomery, San Diego councilmember; Andrea St. Julian, board president of Earl B. Gilliam Bar Association; Maresa Talbert, co‐chair of San Diegans for Justice; and Kate Yavenditti, Women Occupy San Diego:[2]
| “ |
The City of San Diego does not have an independent process for investigating complaints regarding police misconduct (such as in-custody deaths, shootings, excessive force, and perjury). This has contributed to trust in local policing reaching an all-time low. Measure B will fix this issue by creating an independent, community-led Commission on Police Practices. The Commission on Police Practices will create a trustworthy process for holding officers accountable that is fair and balanced. This Commission will:
As professionals, police officers should be subject to independent oversight and accountability, as doctors, lawyers, dentists, and other professionals are held to this standard. The independent oversight brought by the new Commission will strengthen community trust and has the potential to reduce the millions of dollars each year that The City of San Diego pays for lawsuits from police misconduct. www.sandiegansforjustice.com VOTE YES ON MEASURE B[3] |
” |
Opposition
If you are aware of any opponents or opposing arguments, please send an email with a link to editor@ballotpedia.org.
Official arguments
No official arguments were submitted in opposition to Measure B.
Background
George Floyd death and protests
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.[6] 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.[7] 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.[8] 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."[8]
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.[9]
Click here to read more about responses to the killing of and protests about George Floyd.
Related 2020 ballot measures
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 |
|
| California | Oakland | Measure S1 | Changes the powers, duties, and staffing of the Oakland Police Commission and creates the Office of Inspector General |
|
| 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 |
|
| California | San Francisco | Proposition D | Creates the Sheriff's Department Oversight Board and the Sheriff's Department Office of Inspector General |
|
| California | San Francisco | Proposition E | Removes the mandatory police staffing level from the city's charter |
|
| California | San Jose | Measure G | Authorizes the independent police auditor to review reports and records related to officer-involved shootings and uses of force |
|
| California | Sonoma County | Measure P | Makes changes to the powers and duties of the Independent Office of Law Enforcement Review and Outreach (IOLERO) | /
|
| 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 |
|
| 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 |
|
| 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 |
|
| 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 |
|
| Oregon | Portland | Measure 26-217 | Establishes a new police oversight board in the city's charter |
|
| 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" |
|
| Pennsylvania | Philadelphia | Question 3 | Creates a Citizens Police Oversight Commission to replace the Police Advisory Commission |
|
| Pennsylvania | Pittsburgh | Independent Citizen Police Review Board Charter Amendment | Requires police officers to cooperate with investigations conducted by the Independent Citizen Police Review Board |
|
| Texas | Kyle | Proposition F | Amends the city charter to authorize the city council to adopt procedures and a committee to review the police department |
|
| 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 |
|
| 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 |
|
| 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 |
|
| Washington | King County | Charter Amendment 6 | Gives the county council the authority to specify the duties of the sheriff |
|
Path to the ballot
This measure was put on the ballot through a unanimous vote of the San Diego City Council on July 7, 2020.[10]
See also
External links
Support |
OppositionSubmit links to editor@ballotpedia.org. |
Footnotes
- ↑ San Diego City Council, "Text of Ordinance 2020-130," accessed July 9, 2020
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 San Diego Elections, "Measure B," accessed Octobe 20, 2020
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Yes on B, "Home," accessed October 20, 2020
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 California Choices, "San Diego Ballot Measure Endorsements," accessed Octoebr 20, 2020
- ↑ Washington Post, "The death of George Floyd: What video and other records show about his final minutes," May 30, 2020
- ↑ The New York Times, "8 Minutes and 46 Seconds: How George Floyd Was Killed in Police Custody," May 31, 2020
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 USA Today, "Medical examiner and family-commissioned autopsy agree: George Floyd's death was a homicide," June 1, 2020
- ↑ CNN, "Protests across America after George Floyd's death," accessed June 2, 2020
- ↑ Times of San Diego, "Independent San Diego Police Oversight Board Approved for Nov. 3 Ballot," July 7, 2020
 |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
