Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Department Orders Awards topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission debates adding OCC review clause to awards policy; no final action taken
Summary
Commissioners debated inserting language into Department General Order 3.09 that would require the commission to consider OCC complaints related to incidents underpinning award nominations. Two roll‑call votes were held; the commission ultimately had insufficient votes to adopt the proposal or the order that evening.
The Police Commission spent extended time on proposed revisions to Department General Order 3.09 (Department Awards), focusing on a recommendation from the Office of Citizen Complaints (OCC) that the commission "shall consider OCC complaints arising from the incident for which an officer is being considered for an award." OCC and some commissioners argued codifying that information into the DGO promotes transparency and ensures complaints are considered before awards are finalized.
Department representatives and other commissioners warned that placing a mandatory "shall consider" clause in the general order could force the commission to rely on allegations rather than findings and risk prejudging officers before investigations are complete. Several commissioners suggested the matter is better handled as a commission policy or rule (and routed through the commission’s procedures) rather than embedded in the department’s general order, and noted the language could trigger meet‑and‑confer obligations with the Police Officers Association.
Commissioner David Campos moved to add the OCC‑recommended language; the motion was seconded and a roll call was taken. The roll produced a 2–3 tally against considering the change at that time (two yes: Campos, Lee; three no: Thomas Mazzuco, Teresa Sparks, Veronese), so the proposed modification failed to gain approval to be forwarded for meet and confer.
A subsequent motion to adopt the department’s original DGO as presented also did not receive the necessary support for final adoption. After the roll calls, the city attorney stated the commission did not have sufficient votes to adopt any motion on the item that night and that the item could be calendared again for future consideration. No final policy change or award‑rule amendment was adopted during this meeting.
The record shows commissioners requested a clearer, written process for how OCC information would be transmitted and reviewed by the commission prior to any award determination, and suggested that a separate commission policy or resolution could codify practice without mixing disciplinary findings and commendation procedures.
