Editorial: Setting standards for review board

Sunday, March 22, 1998 | 9:31 a.m.

A 16-member advisory committee is drafting an ordinance that would establish the review board based on the parameters set by the Legislature. The advisory committee has generated comments from some of its members and the public that suggest they have an axe to grind. Sen. Joe Neal, the author of the legislation creating the board, is misguided in his opposition to any involvement by police officers on the advisory committee. Neal, who was an advisory committee member, was removed Thursday by that same committee after he missed every one of its meetings. Neal is unable to grasp that much wisdom can be gained from having law enforcement representatives on the advisory committee.

The executive director of the Nevada American Civil Liberties Union, Gary Peck, did acknowledge that law enforcement representatives belong on the advisory committee. "But after the ordinance is formed, they will have no place at the table. We do not believe that they should have any involvement in or influence over a police civilian review board when it is formed," Peck said. State law is clear that no peace officer may sit on the citizens review board. But despite Peck's view that police officers should have no input once the citizens review board is set up, the advisory committee should establish a committee of active police officers -- who have full knowledge of police work and several years of field experience -- to be available as advisers to the board.

Under statute, those selected to the board must complete training about law enforcement policies and procedures. Along with the statutory requirement of this training, the members should also be submitted to the same background check as the police officers they will be judging. In addition, the conduct of the board members should be subject to the ethical standards demanded of other public officials. In other words, if it's necessary, they also should be required to appear before an ethics board to answer for any questionable conduct.

A review board can only work and be accepted by the public if its conduct is fair and its decisions reflect the beliefs and needs of the general public, including those men and women given the power to protect its citizens.