Basis set for citizen panel to review Metro

After eight months of intense debate and careful scrutiny, an advisory committee of civic leaders has hammered out a proposal to permit Clark County residents the power to examine Metro Police misconduct issues.

The proposal must now clear Metro's fiscal affairs committee and then meet the approval of the Las Vegas City Council and Clark County Commission before the highly sought creation can go into effect.

What the 16-member committee created were the guidelines by which a citizen police review board could operate -- membership, training, and direction on how the planned 25-member board would operated.

Unanswered by the advisory committee, however, is the degree of the proposed board's investigatory power -- an issue that wasn't clarified in last year's approved Senate Bill 39, which amended county code by creating an avenue for citizens to become involved in exploring public accusations against police.

At issue is whether the board can merely review the outcome of investigations done by Metro's internal affairs bureau and, if necessary, do more investigating themselves, or launch their own investigations based on complaints the public brings directly to the board.

The answer, committee members say, rests with the decisions of county commission and the city council.

The advisory committee did, however, lay the foundation for a board that can look into issues and recommend punishment or exoneration of accused officers. Its decisions, however, are not binding.

Qualified candidates must be Clark County residents living in Las Vegas without any ties, past or present, to Metro Police. Former or current police officers and civilian Metro employees, along with their spouses, children siblings and parents, therefore, would be deemed ineligible.

Further, potential board members cannot be involved in any lawsuits against the department, or against the city or county regarding the detention facility.

Applicants will undergo extensive background checks.

"I think the process was a good one," said Undersheriff Richard Winget. "It gave ample opportunity for all who were interested to voice their thoughts and opinions. What's come out of it contains more workable ideas to improve police and community relations."

Gary Peck of the Nevada branch of the American Civil Liberties Union who, with Winget, was responsible for filling the posts on the advisory committee, also left Saturday's all-day meeting pleased.

Admittedly uneasy that the committee could not reach agreement on the proposed board's investigative powers, Peck said that he is "heartened at the fact that we have developed an ordinance that we can feel good about in presenting to fiscal affairs, city council and the county commission."

archive