City staff on Aug. 12 presented a proposal to create a five-member Police Advisory Board to provide community input on policing, policy advice and outreach. The proposal, described by staff as a departmental goal for the fiscal year, envisioned a smaller, quarterly advisory body rather than a full-time commission.

Staff said the board is intended to "allow greater community engagement in the work of our police, not just in helping with policy development, but also with community relations, and improving community outreach," and recommended starting with five members meeting quarterly. Staff said initial community interest has already appeared and the council could increase membership if application volume supports it.

Scope and transparency
Council members pressed staff about the board’s scope. One council member asked whether the board could see department policy and whether policies would be posted publicly. An unnamed police representative said "90% of them will be" posted, but some policies related to tactics, building searches or bomb-threat procedures would be withheld in whole or posted as order names only for safety reasons; the police speaker said advisory-board members would be privy to those orders but they would not be published in full.

Several council members asked for clearer language limiting the board to advisory duties and for a recommended composition (for example, two residents, two business owners and one landowner) so applications reflect varied community perspectives; staff said it could add nonbinding composition guidance rather than codify strict quotas. Council members also discussed possible community roles such as participation in officer interview panels and other nonpolicy activities.

Why it matters: The board would create a formal channel for public input on police outreach and policies and could increase transparency while preserving operational security for tactical procedures. The council did not adopt an ordinance at the work session; staff said next steps include refining language, accepting applications and returning with a recommended structure for council consideration.

Key details
- Proposed size and cadence: five members, quarterly meetings; staff noted the city may increase seats if interest warrants.
- Policy access: staff estimated about 90% of department policies could be public; a limited set of tactical or safety-sensitive policies would be listed by name only and not published in full; advisory-board members could see them in a vetted setting. (police representative)
- Membership recommendation: council members suggested nonbinding guidance such as two residents, two business representatives and one landowner; staff said it can be recommended language rather than codified in ordinance.

Outcome
The council gave direction to staff to refine the draft language to clarify advisory-only powers, to include recommended composition guidance, and to start outreach for applicants. No vote to create the board was taken during the work session.