While the new community-led police oversight system is finally on track, some commissioners are furious at a federal judge's decision to postpone board selection until a new council is in place. by Courtney Vaughn Four years after Portland voters approved a measure for a new community-led police oversight board, the city is finally on track to implement it. A 4-1 vote earlier this month by the Portland City Council paved the way for the new Community Board for Police Accountability to be codified into the city’s charter, but the bumpy path to get there underscores a lingering rift between police accountability advocates and the current council. In 2020, Portland voters approved Measure 26-217, which created a new citizen-led police oversight body with the authority to investigate complaints, subpoena witnesses, impose discipline, and even terminate police officers. The measure also called for at least one professional staff member to facilitate the board’s work. A city-appointed Police Accountability Commission was tasked with developing rules and parameters for how the new oversight board should operate.  Last year, the City Council reluctantly approved the commission’s recommendations, but not without a fight.  Members of the Police Accountability Commission said the final version of code language included changes that chipped away at several checks and balances. Among them: a requirement that new board members attend a police ride-along as part of their training. Critics say it could discourage people who’ve had negative interactions with police from applying. Members also balked at the addition of representatives from both Portland police unions to the nominating committee that will choose oversight board members. City commissioners had their own qualms. Mayor Ted Wheeler, along with Commissioners Dan Ryan and Rene Gonzalez, objected to Measure 26-217’s exclusion of current law enforcement employees and their immediate family members, as well as former police, from serving on the new oversight board. Wheeler suggested the exclusion of police and police families is “a blow to legitimacy” of the new oversight system and pushed back on opposition to the police ride-along requirement. “I’m not belittling people’s trauma, but if you are so traumatized by police activities that you cannot even be in the same vehicle with a police officer, how can you reasonably stand in judgment in an unbiased manner…?” Wheeler asked a city attorney. The proposed code language went through legal review and labor negotiations between the city and the police union, as well as community review. The result was key changes that both assuaged and angered the police union and police watchdogs. Among the changes: The new police accountability board will be housed in the city operations service area, rather than public safety. A complaint navigator will be assigned to anyone who files a complaint and any family of victims of fatal police shootings. The board nominating committee now includes a member of the Portland Police Association and Commanding Officers Association, both police unions, as well as a representative from the police chief’s office. In an attempt to balance concerns of added police influence on the nominating committee, the city added two members of the Citizen Review Committee and a representative from the city’s Office of Equity and Human Rights. Board members will have to undergo training on police practices, which includes a ride-along with an officer. Board members who are uncomfortable with the ride-along can request a federal judge to accompany them. Another bone of contention surfaced after a federal judge delayed the new board’s implementation. During an Aug. 29 fairness hearing to ensure the new police oversight board aligns with the city’s ongoing settlement agreement with the US Department of Justice, US District Judge Michael Simon ordered the city to enact the code changes within 21 days. Judge Simon also stipulated that a nominating committee to select the new board won’t convene until early January, when a new City Council is in place. The judge’s ruling effectively stripped the current council from having any more authority over the selection and implementation process. The ruling sent sparks flying.  In a statement released by the mayor's office, Wheeler likened Judge Simon’s actions to Sen. Mitch McConnell’s deliberate effort to block President Barack Obama from being able to appoint a Supreme Court justice in 2016.  Wheeler and Gonzalez lambasted the judge’s decision as “judicial overreach” and said the ruling means the city will have less than nine months to establish a nominating committee, select a board, hire a director and conduct training for new board members.  A delay in implementation also means uncertainty for the employees on the Independent Police Review and the volunteers of the Citizen Review Committee. Both groups will continue their work to investigate complaints until the new oversight board is operational, but it’s unclear how they’ll handle complaint investigations that spill over into the new board’s tenure. Commissioner Mingus Mapps questioned what the judge’s role is and should be, noting the judge’s ruling was a mix of “policy developments, intervention, and maybe some political advice.” “It’s not something which I traditionally think of as coming from the legal system,” Mapps said. That Sept. 4 meeting was supposed to be the first and only vote on codifying the new oversight board into the city’s charter. Lingering opposition to Judge Simon’s ruling led the council to delay voting on the code changes.   The following week, before the council voted to approve the new code package, Commissioner Gonzalez suggested Judge Simon was “enamored with protesters,” and acted with political motives when punting the implementation to the next council. Gonzalez was the only “no” vote on the new code package. Despite Wheeler’s and Gonzalez’s irritation, city attorney Heidi Brown said the city’s goal was to “fulfill the voters’ mandate.” “What we attempted to do, and I think we did successfully, is to implement the mission through this code language that’s before you today, which then leads to community-led investigations, something brand new for us.” Brown noted that even though the city currently has an Independent Police Review division, it has limited authority and its members are selected by council and city staff. “This will be a community board that will oversee the office that does investigations, and then the community board itself will make disciplinary decisions as to what’s appropriate,” Brown noted. The city has one year to get the new board implemented.