Advisory panel wants more input on police review board

Adrienne Packer

Wednesday, Sept. 8, 1999 | 9:50 a.m.

It took several contentious debates before Las Vegas and Clark County officials hammered out guidelines for a new police review board: Leery residents told stories of police brutality, and officers feared for their safety.

Emotions tempered, and threatening phone calls aimed at Clark County commissioners tailed off in April when the board adopted an ordinance that satisfied most interested parties.

With all the controversy in the past, Tuesday's board meeting was expected to be easy. The commission figured it had one last task: to decide whether the Las Vegas city manager should have input on who is appointed the group's executive director.

Board members unanimously agreed to allow the city to have equal say, but they were less supportive of a last-minute push to also involve members of the advisory committee who helped form the ordinance.

Despite pleas from committee members, the board made no commitment. "We are at a critical juncture in this process," said Gary Peck, an advisory board member and the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern Nevada. "There is no more important decision than who the executive director of the board will be."

Federal Public Defender Franny Forsman, chairwoman of the 16-member citizens advisory committee, suggested her group be involved in recommending finalists for the position because it understands the purpose of the review board.

"The folks that know this so well know who will best carry it out," Forsman said.

Commissioner Lance Malone, a former Metro Police officer, was most vocal in his opposition to the idea of allowing advisory committee members to sift through applications and make recommendations.

Malone, offended that Forsman questioned whether the commission could make a nonpoliticized decision, said her group's role was to create an ordinance that would satisfy a diverse portion of the community. Now that it has, its job is done, he said.

"To enlarge your responsibility would be inappropriate," he said.

The independence of the police review board has been controversial since the ordinance was first pitched after a series of complaints of police brutality last year.

Elected officials and members of the advisory board haggled over whether former Metro officers or even their families should be permitted to serve on the 25-member review board.

While most county commissioners were uneasy about making some taxpayers ineligible, the advisory committee convinced them that permitting former Metro officers or their relatives would dilute residents' trust.

The advisory committee lost the battle to keep all retired police officers off the review board.

The County Commission could not have voted to include advisory board members in choosing an executive director because the topic was not listed on Tuesday's agenda. But Peck -- also a member of the advisory committee -- promised to further discuss the possibility with county officials.

Peck scoffed at Malone's concern that including members of the advisory committee would complicate the selection process.

"The notion that 25 people can't review applications and make a recommendation is ridiculous," he said. "We are not looking for people who are anti-police or pro-police; we're looking to make objective, sound decisions. The more community input we get, the better we will all be."

Of the 25 members of the review board, 12 will be appointed by the Las Vegas City Council and 13 will be selected by the Clark County Commission. The review board, expected to cost an estimated $200,000 a year, will be split into committees of five to hear cases.

archive