Solicitor ends review board dispute
Davis says police panel no longer needs to sign confidentiality deals
Baltimore residents on the panel that reviews police brutality and abuse allegations will not be required to sign confidentiality agreements, possibly ending a months-long standoff between the city’s Law Department and the Civilian Review Board.
But in announcing his decision Monday, city solicitor Andre Davis said the board’s volunteer members may have to face legal action on their own over any allegations of public leaks of police officers’ confidential personnel documents that they are authorized to review.
If a “claim for damages” is filed against board members for “an alleged improper disclosure” of records such as internal affairs records, the city’s Law Department that oversees the panel would have to determine if it should legally represent them, Davis wrote in a letter released Monday.
“Although I do not believe any member of the [board] intends to violate the law in the performance of his or her duties, it is difficult to imagine any other purpose underlying the remarkable refusal of those members who refuse to sign the Confidentiality Agreement,” Davis wrote in the Nov. 18 letter he sent to Mayor Catherine E. Pugh, board members and the Police Department.
The dispute began in July when members of the board that hears police misconduct complaints and makes recommendations on discipline refused to abide by Davis’ recommendation to sign confidentiality agreements. At the time, board chair Bridal Pearson said the recommendation was an effort to “strategically contain us” after the Law Department assumed oversight of the board from another agency.
The board members said Davis has a conflict of interest because he represents both the board and the police department. Davis said the confidentiality agreement was standard and would not change how the board functions.
After members refused to sign the agreements during a meeting with Davis in July, the board said it was unable to access the official police internal affairs records which they said were necessary to review cases.
This month, the board filed a lawsuit to force the city Police Department to turn over records.
Pearson said Monday he was pleased with the resolution, which will allow the board to get back to work.
It is unclear whether the review board will drop its lawsuit, but Davis said Monday that board members would immediately receive the withheld internal affairs documents now that he has allowed them not to sign the confidentiality agreements.
Board member Melvin Currie, who represents Southwest Baltimore, said it “appears to me that Andre Davis has, in a very roundabout way, relented.”
“We were always willing to continue what we had been doing before the investigative reports were denied to us” Currie said.
Board members have previously signed nondisclosure agreements, and no one on the board intends to wrongly release information, he said. But people make mistakes. And if they did, Davis’ legal representation of the board and the police would once again represent a conflict of interest.