In my September newsletter I gave my thoughts on the issues 11 & 12 on your November ballots and i’m doing the same on Issue 13.
Issue 13 has a few components, first it will change the composition and board member appointment process of the Citizens Police Oversight Board (CPOB) . Currently there are 9 members; 3 appointed by the Mayor, and 6 by City Council. If Issue 13 passes, it will take 3 of council’s appointments away and these will be chosen by members of the oversight board itself from a list of applicants provided by a “ qualifying civil rights organization”.
My concern is this: Issue 13 shifts appointment authority away from elected representatives and creates a new selection process that raises important questions about transparency, accountability, and checks and balances. The current Mayor/Council appointment structure provides a direct connection between the board and the elected officials who are ultimately accountable to Akron residents. The people who serve on the CPOB matter, but so does the process by which they are chosen. When we appoint members of a public oversight board, residents have a clear line of accountability, can question us about these appointments and hold us responsible for our decisions. Issue 13 will weaken this direct connection by transferring a significant portion of appointment authority to “qualifying civil rights organizations” who are outside the normal electoral process.
Civil rights organizations, neighborhood groups, police representatives and residents can submit candidates for the CPOB now to the Mayor and Council. These groups and their candidates have valuable perspectives that matter in oversight issues. But providing meaningful community input is different from transferring formal appointment authority away from elected officials. As for the “qualifying civil rights organizations”, who will determine whether they meet the charter criteria , and will this process ensure a broad range of community perspectives? Are there any safeguards to prevent the selection process from being dominated by a narrow group of organizations or viewpoints? Before changing the charter, we need answers to these questions.
Issue 13 also proposes expanding the independent police auditor’s authority, including subpoena powers,( even to private citizens) and has time requirements for city officials to respond to these recommendations. These provisions deserve careful scrutiny as well. Strong oversight requires access to relevant information and timely responses, but new investigative powers should come with clearly defined limits, procedures, safeguards, and accountability. And let’s not forget a charter amendment is not just an administrative adjustment. Once this authority is transferred, and the new procedures are embedded in our charter, making corrections requires another ballot issue and not by your elected representatives.
I firmly support police accountability, but every proposed change to the system is not automatically the right one. I’m asking you to carefully consider these questions and potential outcomes when casting your vote on Issue 13.