Police Review Board Procedures for Handling Citizen Complaints Against Sworn Members of the Police Department
The Chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley, having previously established a University of California, Berkeley, Police Review Board to administer citizen complaints against the sworn members of the University of California, Berkeley, Police Department and to monitor and review departmental policies and procedures, hereby promulgates the following revised procedures to govern the operation of the Board, effective as of August 1, 2001.
1. Application of Procedures:
The following procedures shall be employed by the University of California, Berkeley, Police Review Board (the Board) to govern the receipt and processing of citizen complaints against sworn members of the University of California, Berkeley, Police Department (UCPD) in the performance of their duties. Complaints against the Chief of Police (Chief), Assistant Chiefs of Police (Assistant Chiefs), or Captains are excepted from the Board's jurisdiction, except in such particular cases and in such limited manner as are provided for in Section Vl.3, and shall be reviewed as set forth in Section Vl, below. The Board shall receive and process complaints in accordance with these procedures and shall advise and make recommendations concerning its findings, through the Vice Chancellor-Administration to the Chief. These procedures shall also govern the Board in its audit and public reporting roles, as more fully spelled out in Section VIII hereto.
The following definitions shall apply in these procedures:
a. Complaint: An allegation of improper conduct against a sworn officer of the UCPD (other than the Chief or Assistant Chief or Captain) while engaged in assigned police functions.
b. Improper Conduct: Conduct that violates established practice, standards of professional behavior, departmental rules, guidelines or directives.
c. Aggrieved Person: Any person, other than a member of the UCPD, directly affected by the alleged improper police conduct.
d. Complainant: The Aggrieved Person filing the Complaint.
e. UCPD Member: A sworn officer of the UCPD. (Other UCPD employees' alleged improper conduct shall be investigated separately under UCPD's internal procedures.)
IX. Subject Officer: A sworn officer of the UCPD (Berkeley Campus) against whom a complaint is filed.
X. Board: The University of California, Berkeley, Police Review Board or, when specifically authorized under these procedures, a three-member panel of the Board.
XI. Departmental Representative: That UCPD Member designated by the Chief to appear at a Board hearing to speak on behalf of the UCPD.
XII. Investigator: An investigator hired by the Vice Chancellor Administration on a case by case basis and assigned to the Board.
XIII. Mediation: One or more informal sessions before one Board member, attended by the Complainant and the Subject Officer, to discuss the Complaint and to attempt to reach a mutually amicable resolution.
3. Composition and Training of the Board:
a. The Board will be composed of eight members appointed by the Vice Chancellor-Administration, as follows.
(1) Two students, one an undergraduate selected by the ASUC officers and confirmed by 2/3 of the members of the Senate and the other a graduate student selected by the Graduate Assembly officers and confirmed by 2/3 of the members of the Assembly.
(2) Two faculty members recommended by the Academic Senate (such faculty members need not be Academic Senate members).
(3) One member of the campus staff recommended by the Ombudsperson for Staff.
(4) One sworn police officer who has retired or resigned in good standing from active service as a police officer. Former UCPD police officers may serve on the Board, but shall not be eligible for service until at least five years after finishing their UCPD service.
(5) One member of the community bordering the Berkeley campus. Such member shall be selected by the Vice Chancellor-Administration from candidates nominated by relevant community organizations. In selecting a community member of the Board, the Vice Chancellor-Administration should ordinarily give preference to community members who have demonstrated connection to, and respect for, the values of the University community.
(6) A Chair, who shall be an individual of judicial temperament and background. The Vice Chancellor-Administration shall consult with the members of the Board before making a final selection.
b. All members will initially be appointed by the Vice Chancellor-Administration for one-year terms but will serve until their successors accept appointment The Vice Chancellor-Administration may reappoint members for one or two year terms at his/her discretion. In making appointments, the Vice Chancellor-Administration shall aim to ensure that there will be significant year-to-year continuity in the Board's membership.
c. All members of the Board shall receive regular exposure to Departmental policies and practices, which may include briefings on complaint procedures, briefings on policies governing police civilian contacts, the use of force, and crowd control, and observation of UCPD officers at work.
d. All information provided to or generated by the Board relative to individual officers is considered strictly confidential under University policies and state law. No member of the Board shall make public comment on pending complaints or disclose any confidential matters pertaining to a complaint or performance issues at any time.
1. Initiation of Complaints:
a. Complaints may be made by an Aggrieved Person. No Complaint will be deemed filed until it has been reduced to writing and signed by the Complainant. Complaint forms will conclude with the following words: "I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the statements herein are true." Should a Complainant not wish to file a formal written complaint, he or she shall be advised of informal departmental review procedures.
b. All citizen complaints against the sworn members of the UCPD, except the Chief or Assistant Chiefs or Captains (see Section Vl below), shall be processed under this procedure in accordance with the definitions and provisions thereof: no other campus review mechanisms or grievance procedures shall be applicable. Complaint forms may be obtained, and complaints filed, at any of the following offices:
- The Police Review Board in care of the Office of the Vice Chancellor-Administration & Finance, 200 California Hall, 642-3100
- UCPD, #1 Sproul Hall, 642-6760 or police.berkeley.edu
- ASUC Student Advocate, 204 Eshleman Hall, 642-6912
- Campus Life and Leadership, 102 Sproul Hall, 642-5171
- Campus Climate and Compliance, 200 California Hall, 643-7985
- Office of Community Relations, 2130 Center Street, 643-5299
All complaints shall be forwarded immediately to the Chief of Police.
The campus ombuds offices are also available to assist with informal resolution of complaints. Assistance provided by the ombuds offices is separate from the formal process.
- Faculty, 642-4226
- Staff and non-Senate Academics, 642-7823
- Students, including Postdocs, 642-5754
c. All Complaints shall be filed within thirty (30) calendar days of the alleged improper conduct, and any complaint not filed within thirty (30) calendar days shall be dismissed; provided, however, that a Complaint may be filed within an additional thirty (30) calendar days if the Complainant demonstrates to the Chair that failure to file the Complaint within the initial thirty (30) calendar day statutory period was the result of incapacity or excusable neglect. In the case of physical incapacity, and at the discretion of the Chair, a Complaint may be filed within one year. Lack of knowledge of the existence of the Board or its Complaint Procedures shall not constitute incapacity or excusable neglect in any case.
d. Complaints must allege facts establishing a prima facie showing of improperconduct. Complaints which do not establish a prima facie case of improper conduct shall be referred by the Chief to the Board for summary dismissal. If the Board disagrees, the Board may remand it to the department for further review or conduct an external investigation.
e. If no Aggrieved Person is able to initiate a Complaint alleging excessive force, or in any case involving the death of a person, the Board may, with four affirmative votes, authorize an investigation or such other action as it deems appropriate. If such an investigation results in a hearing, the Board may designate any person not a member of the Board to act in the role of Complainant.
2. Recording of Complaints and Informing Interested Parties:
a. Within two (2) working days after receiving a Complaint, the Chief shall forward a copy of the Complaint to the Complainant, the Chair of the Police Review Board, each identified Subject Officer, and the Vice Chancellor-Administration, along with written notice of the filing of the complaint, the allegations of the Complaint, and that an investigation will commence by the UCPD Complaint Investigation Unit.
b. This investigation is to be completed within forty-five (45) calendar days from the filing of the complaint. At the request of the Chief of Police, the Vice Chancellor-Administration may grant up to a seven (7) calendar day extension for just cause. Failure of the Department to comply with the timing rules for investigations does not deprive either the Department or the Board of jurisdiction.
a. In all cases except those alleging excessive force, the Chief shall inform the Complainant of the possibility of mediation as an alternative to investigation and a possible Board hearing. Mediation is an informal process. held before one Board member, and attended by the Complainant and the Subject Officer, for the purpose of fully, thoroughly and frankly discussing the alleged improper conduct and attempting to arrive at a mutually agreeable resolution of the Complaint. During mediation the time limit for UCPD investigation is suspended.
b. If the Complainant elects Mediation, the Chief of Police shall notify the Subject Officer of the Complaint, and of the Complainant's willingness to enter Mediation. The Subject Officer has seven (7) calendar days to accept Mediation. If the Subject Officer agrees, the Chief shall schedule a Mediation session at the earliest convenient time. If not, the Chief shall proceed with the UCPD investigation.
c. The Mediation session will consist of the Complainant, the Subject Officer, and one Board member chosen by the Chair. No other person may be present, and no tape will be made. Witness statements may be presented in writing.
d. Mediation sessions shall not extend beyond ten (10) calendar days from the first scheduled meeting. Within this ten (10) day period, Mediation will continue as long as the Board member and the parties feel that progress is being made in the resolution of differences between the parties.
e. Complaints resolved through mediation to the mutual satisfaction of the parties shall be deemed withdrawn. Otherwise the Complaint will be referred back to the Chief for UCPD investigation and a possible Board hearing.
4. UCPD Investigation:
When Mediation is not elected or does not resolve the complaint, the Chief or his/her designee shall interview the Complainant, each Subject Officer, and witnesses or other persons likely to have information concerning the Complaint, shall assemble all other relevant information, complete the investigation and share the findings with the Complainant in writing. In cases where the Complainant is a student and the Department believes it is likely to complete its investigation during a semester break, the Department shall obtain an address where the student can be reached during the semester break and shall mail its notice of disposition both to the address listed on the complaint and to the student's semester break address. The notice to the Complainant shall inform the Complainant of his/her right to appeal in writing to the Police Review Board, of the deadline for filing an appeal, and of location and address at which an appeal can be filed.
If the Complainant is not satisfied with the UCPD findings, the Complainant can appeal to the Police Review Board. All appeals shall be filed within thirty (30)calendar days of the UCPD findings, and any appeal not filed within thirty (30) calendar days shall be dismissed, provided, however, that an appeal may be filed within an additional thirty (30) days if the Complainant demonstrates that the failure to file an appeal within the initial thirty (30) day period was the result of excusable neglect; provided further, in the case of a student complainant, if the Complainant can establish that he/she failed to receive notice due to the Department's failure to comply with the notice requirements of Section II.4 with respect to investigations concluded during a semester break, the time to appeal shall be the longer of thirty (30) days after receiving actual notice of the Department's findings or ten (10) days after the end of the semester break in which the Department notified her of the disposition.
2. Timing Rules:
Rules governing the timing of Board decisions, investigations, and hearings are designed to encourage the prompt processing of claims, but failure to comply with those rules shall not deprive the Board of jurisdiction to decide an appeal timely filed under Section III.1.
3. Panel Review:
When an appeal is filed, a three member panel of the Police Review Board designated by the Chair will review the investigative findings of the UCPD and determine whether to summarily affirm the investigation, remand to UCPD with a request for further investigation or clarification, or refer the Complaint on to the full Board for an external investigation. In the event that the panel is unable to reach agreement on a course of action, it may, in consultation with the Chair, refer the matter to the full Board for decision. The panel shall render its initial decision on those issues within twenty-one (21) calendar days after the filing of the appeal. In cases of unusual significance, the Chair may, in its discretion, direct that the initial review of an appeal be conducted by the full Board rather than by a panel thereof, in which case the same timing rules shall apply.
4. Summary Affirmance:
The Board shall summarily affirm the Department's findings when it is readily apparent that the Department's investigation was complete and its findings correct on the evidence presented, so that further investigation or hearing by the Board would be highly unlikely to lead to a different conclusion than that reached by the Department. In the event of a summary affirmance, the Board shall prepare a letter explaining its decision, which shall be provided to the Complainant, the Subject Officer, the Department, and the Vice Chancellor-Administration.
5. Remand to the Department:
a. The Board may remand to the Department for further investigation or clarification where the Department's investigation appears incomplete, where aspects of the Department's reasoning or conclusions are unclear, or where there are issues arising from the evidence gathered by the Department which have not been addressed in the Department's reasoning and conclusions.
b. When a Complaint is remanded, the Department shall have thirty (30) calendar days to forward revised findings. Upon receipt of the revised findings, the Board shall have fourteen (14) calendar days to complete its review pursuant to Section III.2.
6. External Investigation:
a. Commencement of Investigation: In cases where the Board has recommended an external investigation, the Board shall seek to retain an investigator as promptly as possible.
b. Manner of Conducting External Investigations: The investigation shall be conducted in a manner designed to produce a minimum of inconvenience and embarrassment to all parties. When possible, UCPD members shall not be contacted at home, and others should not be contacted at their place of employment.
c. Exercise of Constitutional Rights: UCPD members, including those who are identified as the Subject Officer of a Complaint, have a duty to answer questions in any investigation or hearing conducted by the Board regarding conduct and observations which arise in the course of their employment, and may be subject to discipline for failure to respond. The exercise of any or all constitutional rights shall not in any manner be considered by the Board in its deliberations. Testimony compelled by the Board may not be used in a criminal proceeding against the Subject Officer.
d. Statements of Witnesses: Whenever the investigator takes a statement from any Complainant, Subject Officer, witness, or other person likely to have information concerning the Complaint, the investigator shall commence by explaining the nature of the proceeding and the issues involved, including their right to review and correct their statement and the confidentiality provisions governing the proceeding. The statement shall be tape recorded, whenever practicable. Furthermore, a summary shall be drafted by the Investigator, and whenever practicable, signed by the person who gave the statement. The Investigator shall make every reasonable effort to obtain the signature of each person on his or her statement. Each summary shall be mailed to the person giving the statement, who will have three (3) working days to notify the Investigator if he or she wishes to add to or modify the statement. All tape recordings, written statements or summaries, shall be kept and preserved according to established University procedures.
7. Investigation Timetable and Report:
a. The investigator's report shall be submitted to the Board within forty-five (45) calendar days after the investigator has been retained.
b. The investigator's report should identify the important issues in the case, set forth the evidence bearing on those issues, and aim to assist the Board in determining the need for and content of any hearing on the matter. When the evidence warrants, the Investigator may make recommendations regarding procedural issues or possibilities for summary disposition.
c. Any supplemental report will be given to the parties at least forty-eight (48) hours before the hearing:
8. Notification to the Parties:
a. Immediately after completion of the investigator's report, the Board shall provide to the Complainant the following:
(1) Written notice that the Complaint will be considered by the Board.
(2) Any Investigator's recommendations dealing solely with summary disposition or procedural matters.
(3) Written notice:
(i) that the Complainant may consult an attorney if desired,and that an attorney may represent him or her at the hearing, but that an attorney will not be required;
(ii) that the Complainant is entitled to testify and to present witnesses and other evidence at the hearing; and,
(iii) in cases where the Complainant's testimony is deemed material to the disputed issues, that the Complainant's failure to appear and testify may be grounds for the dismissal of the Complaint.
b. Immediately after completion of the Investigator's report, the Board shall provide to each Subject Officer and the Chief of Police the following:
(1 ) Written notice that the Complaint will be considered by the Board.
(2) Any Investigator's recommendations dealing solely with summary disposition or procedural matters.
(3) A copy of the Investigator's report and summary, including all attachments, transcribed statements and exhibits supplied to the Board.
(4) Written notice:
(i) that the Subject Officer may consult an attorney if desired, and that an attorney may represent him or her at the hearing, but that an attorney will not be required and
(ii) that both the Subject Officer and the Department have the right to attend, to testify, and to submit witnesses and other evidence at the hearing.
1. No Contest Response:
a. A Subject Officer may enter a written response of "no contest" at any time before a hearing. A response of "no contest" indicates that the Subject Officer accepts the allegations of the Complaint or the Investigator's findings as substantially true. The Subject Officer shall be bound by the terms of the no contest. response in any consideration of the Complaint by the Chief of Police.
b. Upon receipt of a "no contest" response, the Board shall refer the file and finding of no contest. to the Chief of Police for appropriate action.
2. Summary Dismissal:
After reviewing the Investigator's report, the Board may summarily dismiss a Complaint which it finds clearly without merit on the recommendation of the Investigator, its own motion, or that of the Subject Officer. Parties to the Complaint shall be notified of the summary disposition.
3. Summary Affirmance:
After reviewing the Investigator's report, the Board may summarily sustain a Complaint which it finds clearly meritorious on the recommendation of the Investigator, its own motion, or that of the Complainant. Summary affirmance will not occur over the objection of the Subject Officer, who shall be notified of the summary hearing, and may appear or make a timely objection in writing.
The Board, or any three-member panel designated to act in its stead, shall review the Investigator's report and the evidence gathered in connection therewith, hear testimony, prepare findings, and advise the Chief of Police of its conclusions. In the event that the Board does not summarily resolve the case after receiving the report of the investigator, the hearing shall be convened within thirty (30) days after submission of the report.
2. Composition of the Hearing Board:
A Board hearing shall be conducted by the Board as a whole, with a minimum of five Board members, or any three member panel designated by the Chair to act in its stead. The Chair will conduct the hearing.
3. Bias or Prejudice:
A Board member who has personal bias or prejudice in the outcome of a Complaint shall not sit on a hearing of that Complaint.
Hearings shall be strictly confidential in accordance with California law and University regulations.
a. Except as provided in these Procedures, no member of the Board shall discuss or listen to discussion of the facts or analysis of any matter which is the subject of a Complaint prior to its hearing.
b. No member of the Board shall make public comment on pending complaints or disclose any confidential matters pertaining to the Complaint at any time.
c. Failure to comply with this regulation shall be grounds for removing a member from the Board. Such an allegation may be brought to the Chair by a Complainant, Subject Officer or other Board members. Board members, in particular, will recognize an ethical obligation to report violations of confidentiality: Should the Chair find the allegation of breach of confidentiality to be true, the Chair shall recommend to the Vice Chancellor-Administration the removal of the offending member.
5. Presence at Hearing:
a. The Complainant, the Departmental Representative, and the Investigator shall be present and available to testify unless (a) otherwise directed by the Board, or (b) the Complainant's presence is in conflict with University rules of confidentiality. The Subject Officer has the right to be present at all sessions of the hearing and to offer testimony and evidence in his own defense. In addition, pursuant to Section III.4.b of these procedures, the Subject Officer is obliged to answer questions at the hearing if asked to do so by the Board.
b. No person who is present at a Board hearing or Mediation session shall become the subject of harassment or personal attack. If the Chair fails to maintain reasonable order, UCPD Members shall be excused without prejudice. The burden shall be upon the UCPD Member to establish to the satisfaction of the Chief that his or her reasons for leaving were sufficient.
c. In cases where the Complainant's testimony is material to the issues raised by the Complaint, the failure of the Complainant without good cause to appear at a hearing where his/her testimony has been requested by the Board shall result in the Complaint being dismissed and preclude the matter from future consideration by the Board.
The hearing need not be conducted according to technical rules relating to evidence and witnesses. Any relevant evidence shall be admitted if it is the sort of evidence on which responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs, regardless of the existence of any common law or statutory rule which might make improper the admission of such evidence over objection in civil actions. Evidence shall be taken in accordance with the following provisions:
a. The Board shall call and examine witnesses and receive exhibits on any matter relevant to the issues.
b. Oral evidence from UCPD members and other University of California employees need not be taken under oath, although such witnesses may elect to testify under oath. Testimony of other witnesses shall be taken under oath, and Complainants shall receive an admonishment substantially similar to that mandated by Penal Code §148.6.
c. Upon the request of either party, witnesses shall be excluded from the hearing until they are called to testify.
d. Irrelevant and unduly repetitious evidence shall be excluded.
e. The Subject Officer may elect to restrict questioning to no more than two Board members who shall be designated by the Chair.
7. Hearing Procedure:
a. The hearing will ordinarily proceed as follows. The Board will ask the Complainant to present the Complaint and will receive testimony from any witnesses the Complainant requests the Board to hear. The Board will then ask the Subject Officer to respond to the Complaint and will receive testimony from any witnesses the Subject Officer requests the Board to hear. The Board may vary the order of proof in its discretion for the convenience of the parties or to improve the accuracy, fairness or timeliness of the hearing process. At any time the Board may call additional witnesses on its own motion or may ask the Departmental Representative for relevant information or commentary. After the Board has taken all relevant evidence, each party will be given an opportunity to make a closing statement.
b. The hearing may continue from day to day, if the volume or complexity of the evidence so requires. If the Board considers that additional evidence is necessary to reach its findings, it will continue the hearing to a future date unless the parties agree to allow the Board to receive such material in writing without reconvening.
c. The opinion of the Assistant Chancellor-Legal Affairs will be sought whenever the interpretation of these Procedures is contested and pivotal in the case, or when a case raises substantial legal issues of first impression and shall be binding on the Police Review Board.
After the taking of evidence has been concluded, the Board will deliberate in closed session. During deliberations, the Board may consult the Investigator, the Departmental Representative, or the Assistant Chancellor-Legal Affairs for clarification of evidentiary or procedural matters, but such persons shall not be entitled to participate directly in deliberations. The Board shall not consider any evidence not received as part of the hearing. The Board may reconvene in the presence of all parties to ask further questions, and each party shall have the opportunity to respond to any such questions.
9. Majority Vote:
All action by the Board, including three-member panels thereof, shall be by majority vote, unless otherwise specified in these Procedures.
10. Standard of Proof:
No complaint shall be sustained unless it is proven by clear and convincing evidence presented at the hearing or otherwise contained in the record. 'Clear and convincing' is more than a 'preponderance of the evidence,' but less than "beyond a reasonable doubt."
11. Categories of Findings for Each Allegation:
a. If the investigation shows that the alleged act did not occur, the finding shall be "Unfounded."
b. If the investigation fails to support the allegation but the allegation cannot be shown as false, the finding shall be "Not Sustained."
c. If the investigation shows the alleged act did occur but was lawful, justified and proper, the finding shall be "Action Justified."
d. If the investigation supports the allegation and the action is not justified, the finding shall be "Sustained."
12. Report of Board Findings and Notification:
a. Within thirty (30) calendar days after the conclusion of the hearing, the Board shall submit written findings to the Chief of Police and the Subject Officer through the Vice Chancellor-Administration. Such findings shall discuss both the conduct of the Subject Officer and any relevant reviews of Departmental practice or policy. Any dissenting Board member may set forth the reasons for dissenting in writing, and such dissent shall be circulated in the same manner as the written findings of the majority of the Board.
b. The Vice Chancellor-Administration shall provide the Subject Officer with a copy of the written findings of the Board and notify the officer of the right to petition for a rehearing. The complainant shall be provided with notice of the final disposition of the matter (consistent with the rights of privacy of the Subject Officer) and notified of the right to petition for a rehearing.
13. Petition for Rehearing:
a. Within fifteen (15) calendar days of the mailing of findings to the Subject Officer and notice of disposition to the Complainant, any party to the Complaint may petition in writing, with grounds set forth, for a rehearing. Such rehearing may be granted by the Board if it is shown that there is newly discovered evidence that is material for the party making the application which could not have been, with reasonable diligence, discovered and produced at the hearing; or that there was substantial procedural error likely to have affected the outcome.
b. Upon receipt of a petition for rehearing by either party, a decision shall be made within fifteen (15) calendar days as to whether to grant or deny it. When a rehearing is granted, it shall be held within thirty (30) calendar days of the receipt of the petition.
14. Circulation of Findings to the Chief of Police:
a. The Board shall promptly forward copies of its findings together with the investigative packet to the Chief of Police, through the Vice Chancellor-Administration, for appropriate action. Within fifteen (15) calendar days of receiving the findings, the Chief of Police may notify the Board that the findings are inadequate. The Chief shall specify those matters which, in his or her opinion, require further elaboration, explanation or investigation.
b. The Board will decide whether to reopen the Complaint and any subsequent hearing shall be held within thirty (30) calendar days of the Chief's notification to the Board.
c. When there is a dispute regarding the findings of the Police Review Board and the Chief of Police, those findings will be provided to the Vice Chancellor-Administration who will then decide on the validity of the Complaint based on the information presented.
1. Allegations alleging improper conduct on the part of the Chief or an Assistant Chief or Captain may be made by an Aggrieved Person. Such allegations shall be set forth in writing, signed by the Complainant, and submitted to the Vice Chancellor-Administration, either directly or through the Campus Police Department.
2. Such Complaint shall be filed within thirty (30) calendar days of the alleged improper conduct, and any Complaint not filed within thirty (30) calendar days shall be dismissed; provided, however, that a Complaint may be filed under this subsection within an additional thirty (30) calendar days if the Complainant demonstrates to the Vice Chancellor-Administration that failure to file the Complaint within the initial thirty (30) calendar day statutory period was the result of incapacity or excusable neglect. In the case of physical incapacity, and at the discretion of the Vice Chancellor-Administration, a Complaint may be filed within one year. Lack of knowledge of the existence of the Board or its Complaint Procedures shall not constitute incapacity or excusable neglect in any case.
3. Upon receipt of a Complaint under this subsection, the Vice Chancellor-Administration, or his or her designee, shall interview the Complainant, each Subject Officer and witnesses or other persons likely to have information concerning the Complaint and shall assemble all other relevant information. The Vice Chancellor-Administration may seek the advice of the Board regarding any policy issues raised in the course of this investigation.
4. After the review is completed, the Vice Chancellor-Administration shall share the findings with the complainant and take such administrative action as may be warranted pursuant to established University and Campus Personnel Policies.
Back to Table of Contents
I. Authority of Internal Affairs of the Chief of Police:
Nothing in this procedure limits the investigatory authority of the Chief of Police to conduct internal review of the conduct of the UCPD and UCPD Members; provided, however, that in citizen complaints against Subject Officers, the Chief, or his designee, shall make every effort to cooperate in good faith with the Board and to avoid burdensome and duplicative investigations.
2. Exceptional Cases:
The Police Review Board may be requested by the Vice Chancellor-Administration to investigate any Complaint on a priority basis if it is determined by the Vice Chancellor-Administration that the nature of the Complaint requires an external review.
Any person who is a party or witness to a proceeding before the Board may waive any provision of these rules intended for her protection. Such waiver may be express, or, in appropriate circumstances, implied from conduct.
The Board shall maintain records of all proceedings conducted before it. To the extent permitted by law governing the confidentiality of the proceedings, the Board will make available to the public material on appealed cases in its annual report prepared pursuant to Section VIII of these procedures.
1. Receipt of Information from the Department:
a. In all cases in which the Department resolves a Complaint and in which no appeal is taken, the Department shall supply to the Board, in a timely manner, a copy of the Complaint and of the Department's Sufficiency Review Board report for the case. In addition, in any such case, the Chair of the Board may request a copy of the Department's entire investigative record in the case for the Chair's use in analyzing the issues raised in the case. In appropriate cases, the Chair may request from the Vice Chancellor-Administration permission to share all or part of the Department's investigative record with other members of the Board.
b. The Department shall prepare an annual report for the PRB that discusses and summarizes civilian complaints and inquiries that were resolved without a full investigation (for example, by a work-file memorandum), describing the location of the events involved, the nature of the interaction with the department, the precise character of the civilian concern, and the department's resolution and assessment of the matter. Information provided should not readily identify involved officers.
c. The Board shall have the right to pose questions to the Department based on the information received pursuant to subsections a. and b., and to comment on issues of policy or practice raised therein. In addition, the Board may request reasonable briefings concerning issues of Departmental policy relating to its areas of interest. Should the department believe that a request from the Board poses an unreasonable burden and should the Board disagree, the matter will be referred to the VC-Administration for resolution.
2. Public Reports and Meetings:
a. The Board shall prepare an annual report, reporting on the cases decided on appeal and on the information forwarded by the Department outside the appeal process. Such report shall focus on the Department's complaint procedures, tracking trends over time and making policy recommendations concerning the complaint as appropriate based upon the information supplied to the Board. The annual report will not disclose information concerning individual cases or officers that is confidential under California law.
b. Copies of the Board's annual report shall be submitted to the Vice Chancellor-Administration, shall be distributed to interested community members and organizations, and shall be freely available to the public through the website of the PRB.
The Vice Chancellor-Administration shall conduct a review of the effectiveness of these revised procedures to determine whether further amendments are warranted. The timing of such review shall be in the Vice Chancellor's discretion, but such a review shall commence no later than academic year 2004-2005. The Vice Chancellor-Administration shall make determinations regarding recommendations for amendment after receiving recommendations from the Board, which recommendations shall be based on input from members of the campus community, including the Chief of Police and UCPD members.