Residents support Metro review board

Tuesday, Sept. 21, 1999 | 11:08 a.m.

An overwhelming majority of local residents support the formation of an independent board to investigate complaints against Metro Police, a concept that is close to reality.

Two-thirds of the respondents to a Las Vegas Sun/Las Vegas 1 poll answered affirmatively while only about 14 percent disagreed. Most everyone else in the poll of 401 adults randomly selected and interviewed by telephone by the UNLV Cannon Center for Survey Research said they were neutral. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points.

Slightly more than two-thirds of the respondents also agreed that current Metro officers should not serve on such a board. A bare majority also believed that former Metro officers should not be considered for board membership.

An ordinance approved this year by the Clark County Commission and Las Vegas City Council would establish a 25-member citizens review board to investigate alleged police misconduct. One hang-up is whether the independent advisory panel that helped write the ordinance should have a say in the selection of the board's executive director.

Sheriff Jerry Keller said he didn't believe the review board was necessary.

"There's not been one coverup," he said. "There's not been one allegation that wasn't investigated. We have not always met everyone's expectation based on their opinion or their emotion about an event, but we've always used the facts to establish the decisions and the path that we have pursued on allegations."

But he conceded that police in Denver have been supportive of a similar board in that city. Keller said he would be willing to work with the review board once it is formed locally.

"We're not concerned either as an agency or an administration about the impacts so long as it's a fair and impartial review, and it's based on facts and not emotion or opinion," Keller said. "We certainly welcome the scrutiny because this is one of America's finest police departments.

"If it gives the community more confidence in this police department, then that's where we're going to be, and we're looking forward to having that happen."

Younger respondents to the poll tended to be more supportive than their older counterparts of forming a review board.

There were even sharper differences on the question of whether former Metro officers should be on the board. A majority of respondents 63 and older -- 57 percent -- answered affirmatively, while a majority of individuals aged 18 to 62 responded negatively. The most negative response came from people 49 to 62 years old: 60 percent of them thought former Metro officers should not be allowed on the board.

Nearly two-thirds of the black respondents also were opposed to former Metro officers on the board, whereas only a bare majority of whites and Asian-Americans shared that opinion. Hispanics were evenly split on the issue.

Keller said he didn't think current or former Metro officers should serve on the board, but he noted that the ordinance permits up to five former law enforcement officers from other jurisdictions to sit on the board. He said he would support the inclusion of such former officers on the board.

But Keller also said the board will not get involved in criminal matters such as the 1996 shooting death of Daniel Mendoza by former Metro Officer Ron Mortensen, who was off duty at the time. Mortensen was convicted of murder and is serving a life term in prison without the possibility of parole. Former Metro officer Christopher Brady, driver of the getaway car, received a nine-year prison sentence for his role.

Keller also said the review board will not get involved in the hiring of Metro personnel, a power already vested in other citizens who sit on the Civil Service Board. Metro will also continue to conduct its own internal investigations of alleged police misconduct.

"The civilian review board will have three functions," Keller said. "Review the investigations when requested by the citizens, refer citizens to our agency for investigation when there may be a complaint, and make recommendations to this office about what should be done as far as sanctions if misconduct is discovered.

"One of our biggest fears that plague civilian review boards historically is that they are more lenient than are the police in decisions on sanctions."