Expanded powers for police review on ballot

While attention has been laser focused on the presidential campaign ahead of Nov. 3, voters in Pittsburgh will have the chance to make their voices heard on the high- profile topic of investigating police misconduct.

Voters will see a ballot question asking them if they want to strengthen the city’s investigating agency by “expanding the powers of the Independent Citizen Police Review Board to allow the Board to require police officers to participate in investigations, conducting performance audits of the Police Bureau and preventing the removal of Board members except for just cause and with City Council approval.”

The referendum question was proposed by Councilman Ricky Burgess, and council in July unanimously approved an ordinance to let the voters decide.

If approved, new language and a new section regarding the scope of the review board’s power and duties will be added to the city’s Home Rule Charter — basically the city’s local constitution.

The seven- member independent board, appointed by the mayor and council, is currently empowered by the charter to investigate “selected” citizen complaints alleging police misconduct; establish a mediation process, provide recommendations to the mayor and police chief regarding disciplinary policies and police conduct; and hold public hearings and subpoena witnesses.

“The board already has significant powers to accomplish its work, but the idea was to strengthen it even more, and as much as anything to make a statement that police officers must participate. That’s been a continuing issue since the creation of the board,” said David Harris, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh and member of Mayor Bill Peduto’s community police reform task force.

The agency’s subpoena power has often been hampered by the Fraternal Order of Police Fort Pitt Lodge No. 1, the union representing the city’s officers.

But Beth Pittinger, the board’s executive director, said the referendum, if approved, will open new avenues to accountability, including forging partnerships with the city controller’s office as well as the city’s Commission on Human Relations, the local civil rights enforcement body.

“If somebody comes to the CPRB and says, ‘ I was profiled,’ the board is going to make sure the commission is aware of that,” Ms. Pittinger said. “It’s a guarantee to the public that those kinds of suspicions will be dealt with.”

Mr. Harris said independent police review boards often follow an either/ or model of handling complaints or auditing. Empowering the board to work with the city controller to conduct performance audits “will give them the full set of tools to function as both a complaint processing and investigating agency as well as an agency that can look at internal processes and functioning of the bureau apart from any complaint, and not all places have an agency that can do both of those things.”

As satellite locations for over- the- counter voting for the general election kicked off last weekend and mail- in voting is underway, volunteers for the the local Alliance for Police Accountability are busy knocking on doors, texting and calling.

“We’re urging voters to vote ‘ yes’ simply because the legislation is not harmful,” said Brandi Fisher, the alliance’s president and CEO.

But it’s also not strong enough, said Ms. Fisher, who serves on the mayor’s police reform task force.

Her organization wants to see a board “completely separate from the mayor’s office, no illusion of independence,” she said.

“If we had the time and capacity, we would have told people to vote ‘ no’ because this is not enough,” she said. “But for people who wouldn’t have had a chance to talk to us, they wouldn’t understand why we’re saying no. It would look like we’re ‘ anti anything.’ ”

Until the alliance begins the fight for further amendments, it is up against another challenge: “A lot of people we talk to aren’t aware that it’s on the ballot,” Ms. Fisher said.

While council originally agreed to mail the full text of proposed Home Rule Charter amendment to all voters, the legislative body agreed last week that the cost was too high.

Voters can read the full text by searching bill 20200447 on the city’s Legistar database at pittsburgh. legistar. com/ Legislation. aspx.

Department of Public Safety officials declined to comment on the referendum.

Robert Swartzwelder, the local Fraternal Order of Police president, could not be reached for comment.