Vallejo oversight body approves new police complaint policy

VALLEJO – Vallejo’s police oversight body has approved a new policy for handling complaints submitted about Vallejo Police Department employees following over a month of input and discussion from multiple agencies and residents.

The Police Oversight and Accountability Commission voted unanimously Thursday to adopt the policy, requiring only one new change: editing the use of the word “frivolous” to “without merit” for complaints found to be meritless or filed to harass other people. 

The policy outlines the procedures for accepting, classifying, investigating and resolving complaints against Vallejo police personnel. The department has cited several changes in this policy, such as the use of complaint tracking software with the ability to monitor complaint expiration timelines.

The commission first reviewed the revised policy on March 30, which includes having a new online public portal where community members can submit complaints, available in multiple languages. The police department said its Professional Standards Division will still oversee the handling of all complaints and will perform annual audits of the process.

The policy was also submitted for feedback to the Jensen Hughes Group, the independent evaluator selected by the California Department of Justice to oversee police reform, and other city departments. 

The commission also gave feedback during a meeting on April 9, when Vice Chair Renee Sykes said she felt the members were in a time crunch to address many questions from the public and get their own comments to Police Chief Jason Ta by the May 10 deadline.

The Vallejo Police Department held a town hall on the policy on April 30. About 20 people attended and brought up concerns about how complaints about officers move forward in the legal process, including to the state Department of Justice, if necessary. Sykes also attended this meeting to hear from residents, as did City Attorney Veronica Nebb.

Housing and Community Development Commissioner Brianna Rogers asked at that meeting about the department’s policy to prioritize criminal investigations over administrative complaints. Noting the Oakland Police Department misconduct and sexual abuse scandals – where multiple officers were accused of tipping a woman off to prostitution stings in exchange for sex – she asked if the department prioritizes complaints which could indicate an officer might face criminal charges.

The department said the chief, when reviewing serious allegations, would likely remove the officer from active duty and place them on administrative leave and focus on criminal allegations ahead of an administrative complaint. The complaint policy requires supervisors to investigate personnel complaints and alleged misconduct to “with due diligence to investigate the complaint within one year.” Ta added the Police Oversight and Accountability Commission has the authority to independently investigate any complaint “within its jurisdiction.”

The Vallejo Police Department has a history of improperly handling internal affairs investigations. Former Vallejo police Capt. John Whitney testified that the department kept a separate filing cabinet for certain misconduct complaints that the department illegally withheld from attorneys requesting information to support a criminal defense. Former Deputy Police Chief Joseph Gomez alleged that the department had a backlog of officer misconduct investigations approaching the one-year deadline and he was fired when he tried to address it. That lawsuit was later dismissed. 

Other public comments received within the last month criticized that the complaint policy remained largely unchanged in structure. Sherianne Grimm wrote to the commission on March 30 that she thought the process was rushed, and that the revised complaints policy still relies heavily on internal control, as the chief retains final authority over disciplinary decisions and the Disciplinary Review Panel includes employees within the chain of command.

Grimm said she thinks this represents an inherent conflict of interest, which could only be addressed by having an independent police oversight body such as the nearby example in Oakland. She said that without having subpoena power or other tools the commission’s civilian oversight role is “largely symbolic.”

Grimm also criticized the lack of clarity in the policy expressing the commission’s specific role handling complaints, as it can recommend independent investigations at its discretion. 

The commission’s role and functions are defined by the municipal code “and are not intended to be substantively outlined within operational policies specific to the Police Department,” according to the department’s response to community questions posted in Thursday’s agenda.

This concern was echoed Thursday in public comment by Sana Sethi, an organizer for the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California. Sethi noted the ACLU’s March 30 letter outlining its issues with the complaint policy, and added the ongoing concern that during the April 30 town hall, the department did not discuss in depth how the commission will be involved.

“There are many reasons that language must be formally included,” Sethi said. “We urge POAC to make direct line edits to spell out all of POAC’s responsibilities and duties. Failing to do so does feel like a wasted opportunity.”

The police response to the ACLU’s concerns, posted with Thursday’s agenda, said the department will notify the commission about complaints being received and logged. Ta will forward complaints reporting serious incidents to the commission within two business days. 

The policy also requires that Ta provide a confidential quarterly report to the commission on all “disciplinary matters,” and report on any serious incident or bias incident, the department said. Ta cannot make a disciplinary decision on serious incidents until the commission makes a recommendation, and if he disagrees with any recommendation he would have to provide justification in closed session.

Resident Robert Schussel said in public comment Thursday that the commission’s lack of independent power renders the body “a dead fly without any power” and added, “I don't think the public has much faith in the policy.”