Police chief tells committee Portland officers do not enforce immigration; explains camera use, Signal and phone policies

Mark Du Bois, chief of the Portland Police Department, briefed the Health, Human Services and Public Safety Committee on recent news coverage about a hotel incident and the department's operational practices, saying reporting had been misleading on several points.

"Local police, specifically the Portland police, but really all local police do not do that immigration enforcement," Chief Du Bois told the committee, repeating a point he said he had made publicly before. He framed the recent coverage as conflating separate matters and said the department responded to a substantial public‑safety disturbance at a hotel.

Du Bois said the department responded to more than 50 calls for service and made nine arrests over a six‑day period tied to disorderly conduct and disturbances. In describing an investigatory camera deployment, he said the device was used to observe vehicles in a parking garage to mitigate vandalism risks and "No people just in case, something was done." He emphasized the camera was a short‑term investigative tool deployed in a specific area, not a continuous public surveillance effort.

The chief also addressed reporting about the department's use of the encrypted messaging app Signal by the Special Response Team. "They switched to using Signal" for operational coordination because it handled mixed phone platforms, Du Bois said, and he disputed characterizations that the app was being used to delete or hide investigative material. He said investigative information is documented in body cameras, police reports and after‑action reports, and that the SRT commander documents Signal thread content when it is relevant to an investigation.

Du Bois said the department has moved to issue agency phones to officers to standardize applications and reduce reliance on personal devices. "About a year ago we recognized some concerns...so it was actually put in budget last year, and we issue everybody a phone now," he said, adding that the IT department vetted the phones and security posture.

Committee members pressed for detail on retention practices. Councilor Sarah McNavich asked how an auto‑delete function on Signal might be reconciled with records retention; Du Bois explained that while individuals can remove content from personal devices, the team commander preserves and documents relevant thread content and that other records (body camera footage, reports, search‑warrant narratives) capture investigative details.

Councilors also asked about using social media monitoring for safety planning. Du Bois said the department monitors open‑source social media to estimate crowd size and the potential need for officers at protests; he framed this as routine preparation and said monitoring helped the department staff appropriately for events.

The committee did not direct an audit or vote on departmental practices at the meeting. Council Chair Annabelle Bullitt and others expressed appreciation for the chief's detailed answers and for the steps to move personnel onto agency‑issued devices. Du Bois said he reviewed text messages, body‑worn camera footage and reports and felt the department's actions were professionally carried out.

The committee adjourned after remaining agenda items and set its next meeting for May 12.