Posts published in “Uncategorized”

11/28/2015: It’s been several years since UO promised to establish some sort of police oversight committee. John Ahlen and Juan Carlos Valle had an excellent Op-Ed in the RG in June, here:

Mistake No. 1: A healthy police oversight system contains two components missing from the UOPD model — a civilian review that has some teeth to it, and a professional independent auditing body. We’ve seen that a body of community members is being recommended to review certain allegations at the UO, but this is inadequate. They are advisory only and have no authority.

Our understanding is that only one person outside the UOPD, an administrative vice president, a position not expected to have experience administering a police department, has the authority to make changes or require additional investigation.

Mistake No. 2: Certainly it is not a good sign that there have already been UOPD misconduct cases under their watch that have already been overturned. Seeing the UOPD’s response to the “bowl of expletives” controversy — in which officers maintained a supposedly humorous list of enemies — didn’t give us much faith that they would be able to police themselves, as the underlying message seemed to be that boys will be boys. A professional, independent auditor is the way to make sure that allegations of misconduct are properly investigated.

Having an effective oversight system is not difficult at all for the city of Eugene, so why is it so challenging for UOPD?

Mistake No. 3: Of greatest concern is the question of why this wasn’t all sorted out before the department bought guns and was granted the authority to use them. The rush to become a police department before analyzing the new use of force policies in place (which were literally cut and pasted from a California policy company handbook) creates liability for the UO.

VPFA Jamie Moffitt has been promising to set up a review committee for years. Noah Mcgraw has the scoop on the latest delays in the Emerald, here. Some people think this committee’s workings should be transparent:

Helena Schlegel, ASUO President, disapproves of the CRC’s format. Schlegel is asking the university to “make their review panel representative of the community and its meetings and decisions transparent to the public.”

“The ASUO currently has no say in either UOPD policy or its internal reviews. We welcome the opportunity to participate meaningfully in police oversight and transparency issues on and off campus,” Schlegel said.

But UO’s Public Records Office thinks it’s not in the public’s interest to know, unless you’ve got $1600:

On WednesdayAug 5, 2015, at 4:28 PM, Thornton, Lisa <[email protected]> wrote:

08/05/2015

Dear Mr. Harbaugh: 

The University of Oregon has received your public records request for “copies of any ‘minutes, agendas, reports, and correspondence’ involving ‘boards and councils that function in an advisory capacity, standing and ad hoc committees and councils’ that primarily involve the UOPD. This request covers the period from 1/1/2011 to the present” on 06/24/2015, attached. The office has at least some documents responsive to your request.  By this email, the office is providing you with an estimate to respond to your requests.

The office estimates the actual cost of responding to your request to be $1,660.68. Upon receipt of a check made payable to the University of Oregon for that amount, the office will proceed to locate, copy, and provide the records you have requested that are not exempt from disclosure.  Your check may be sent to the attention of Office of Public Records, 6207 University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-6207.

10/22/2015: UO Campus Cops Lack Oversight