Lexington’s council questions cost, validity of a ‘post-action’ police disciplinary board
In response to calls for more police oversight, Lexington Mayor Linda Gorton announced in June the creation of a disciplinary after-action board to review approved officer discipline and recommend changes to policies.
On Tuesday, the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council heard more about the proposal and $50,000 needed for a consultant to determine the board’s makeup, the scope of what the board will review, what documents that board will have access to and how it will communicate its findings.
Susan Speckert, the city’s law commissioner, told the council’s Planning and Public Safety Committee on Tuesday the after-action review board would not reinvestigate closed cases or recommend changes in discipline after the fact. Cities with after-action review committees tend to look at major critical incidents, such as all police-involved shootings or disciplinary cases, after they happen and make policy recommendations.
Because after-action review boards do not investigate complaints and only recommend policy changes, no change in state law is needed, Speckert said. At the same time, the approach would allow citizen input, which is what community members have said they want.
“There is great variability in these committees across the country,” Speckert said.
After-action review boards are different than a police-citizen review board. Those boards review complaints and recommend punishment. For Lexington to have one, the state law would need to be changed and the Fraternal Order of Police Bluegrass Lodge 4, the union which represents Lexington police officers, would have to agree to the change.
But several council members questioned the cost of hiring a consultant and whether an after-action review is what the community wants.
Councilwoman Richard Moloney questioned why the city needed to spend $50,000 on a consultant if it could borrow best practices from other cities.
“If you have other cities doing something similar, I don’t see why we can’t cut the cost way down,” Moloney said. “You haven’t convinced me that we need to spend $50,000.”
Councilwoman Jennifer Reynolds echoed Moloney’s comments about the $50,000 price tag.
“I don’t understand why we need to spend $50,000 to set something up,” Reynolds said.
Councilman James Brown said people want a citizens review board that gives citizens a say in active police disciplinary cases. The post-action review board seems like “a consolation prize,” he said.
“I don’t think this is ultimately what the people want,” Brown said.
Councilwoman Amanda Bledose said she thinks an after-action review board is premature. The council should act as the after-action review board. It currently votes on the police chief’s recommendations for disciplinary actions. Bledsoe said it’s the council that has a say on policy.
“The day-to-day change is really in this body,” Bledsoe said.
Speckert said the city was trying to find a way to get citizen input within the current confines of what the law allows. The $50,000 is needed to ensure the city sets up a post-review board that is effective, she said.
Speckert said some cities have both a citizen review board and a post-action review committee.
Danny Murphy, an assistant dean at the University of Kentucky, said the post-action review committee is an opportunity for real policy changes and community input.
Murphy said it may not be a citizen review board, but it would “move the needle” and allow more community input.
Not everyone supports it.
April Taylor, one of the organizers of LPD Accountability, which is pushing for more oversight and accountability of Lexington police, said the proposed after-action review board is a “paper tiger with no teeth” or a “mirage in the desert.”
Gorton “has tried to make it appear as though it is some kind of citizens review board, but it’s not,” Taylor said. “It also is subject to the pitfalls of limited authority, no ability to affect discipline or reinvestigate closed cases even when there are red flags or glaring issues — meaning a complete inability to exact any justice whatsoever — and it’s also a waste of precious resources that could have been spent creating a real civilian review board/ process.”
If the council approves the $50,000, Speckert said it would likely take a year for the consultant to come back with recommendations.
Gorton has proposed using some of the money from $25 million the city has received in coronavirus federal reimbursements to pay for that consultant. The council’s Budget, Finance and Economic Development Committee is expected to take its first votes on how that $25 million will be spent at its meeting on Tuesday.
Councilwoman Susan Lamb cautioned that research has shown the post-action committee will not be effective if it is not set up appropriately.
The city of Minneapolis has three different civilian police oversight boards, prompted by a long history of police-involved shootings and other problems. Half of the Minneapolis Office of Police Conduct Review, one of those three boards, are police officers, according to The Center for Public Integrity. It has only upheld 19 percent of the roughly 2,000 complaints filed between 2013 to 2019, according to a June Center for Public Integrity report.
Louisville’s current Citizens Commission on Police Accountability is also limited. According to the Louisville city website the commission can “review closed police investigations in all police shooting cases and incidents involving loss of life due to police action.” It can recommend changes to policy.
In 2017, the Louisville Courier-Journal found the current board had reviewed 70 police-involved shootings since it was created in 2003 and had issued five recommendations, the last of which came forward in 2008.
Critics say the commission has not been effective, prompting calls for a new model that allows for full-time staff and subpoena power.
The National Association of Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement, a Maryland-based nonprofit that has tracked civilian police oversight structures since 1995, has recommended police oversight boards be independent from the police and have investigative authority that goes beyond just review of complaints.
Liana Perez, the association’s director of operations, said she is not aware of any studies of the after-action review boards’ effectiveness. Perez served as the police auditor for 20 years for Tucson, Ariz. before joining the association. She served on an after-action police review board in Tuscon. That board is composed of community members and law enforcement. All members have an equal vote in the findings and recommendations.
“I will tell you from personal experience that they can be of value in addressing issues with policies, tactics, equipment, supervision and training that may have contributed to an incident,” Perez said.
In addition to a post-disciplinary review board, Gorton’s Commission on Racial Justice and Equality is also expected to make recommendations on increasing transparency and oversight of police disciplinary procedures. The commission’s recommendations are expected to be released in the next few weeks.
This story was originally published October 20, 2020 at 4:43 PM.
