City of Oakland California

The Negotiated Settlement Agreement (the Agreement) requires the Oakland Police Department to conduct an in-depth review of its entire operation with the aim of becoming more responsive, effective and accountable.

Ensuring compliance with the provisions of the Agreement is one of my top priorities. Although tremendous progress has been made, we continue to encounter challenges as we work to become fully compliant with the Agreement. We have met—and will continue to meet—each challenge with solutions and a commitment to remain true to the Agreement.

Working collaboratively with the Court, Independent Monitoring Team, Plaintiffs’ Attorneys, employee unions, and other stakeholders, we have adopted new practices that have resulted in a much more accountable Department. We have seen dramatic improvement in the way the Department investigates complaints of misconduct and use of force. Our Personnel Assessment System pinpoints personnel who need intervention or extra supervision. It also identifies and encourages outstanding work.

These improvements will continue. As we enter the final phase of the Agreement, I believe the Department will meet the standards set forth in the Agreement, increasing our status as a premier law enforcement agency.

In July 2000, the Police Department discovered that four police officers who worked the night shift in West Oakland, the self-named “Riders,” had allegedly abused their authority by using unlawful force, planting evidence and fabricating police reports. The alleged conduct of these officers gave rise to a lawsuit brought by multiple plaintiffs seeking both monetary compensation and specific reforms in the Department.

In January 2003, the City of Oakland resolved the litigation by mutually agreeing to a court-approved Negotiated Settlement Agreement that required major changes in how the Department reports and investigates use of force. The February 4, 2004 version of the Agreement is available here.

The Agreement set up an effective system to identify potential problem officers, investigate complaints related to officer conduct and ensure that officers who train others are the best in the Department.

The Agreement also set up systems to strictly monitor officer performance and promptly and appropriately discipline officers who violate rules and policies or who fail to report rule-breaking by others. We have invested valuable resources so that citizens will have confidence in the system and know that their complaints are handled properly and without delay.

Our goals are . . .

• To enhance our ability to protect the lives, rights, dignity and property of the community we serve.
• To use the best available practices for police supervision, training and accountability.

The Agreement expired Jan 2010 and a two-year Memorandum of Understanding has replaced it, which requires continued, but more narrowly focused, oversight.

• Joint statement on the naming of Thomas Frazier as NSA Compliance Director in Oakland
• Quan, Santana, Jordan Respond to Judge's Order in OPD Case 
• City files opposition to plaintiffs' motion for receivership for the Oakland Police Department 
• Background Fact Sheet on Negotiated Settlement Agreement
• City of Oakland Filing in Response to Motion to Appoint a Receiver

On March 4, 2013, Judge Henderson appointed Commissioner Thomas C. Frazier (Ret.) as the Compliance Director. The Compliance Director was required to file a remedial action plan (“Plan”) within 30 days of appointment. The Plan is to:

• Address deficiencies that led OPD to noncompliance with the NSA
• Explain how the Plan will facilitate sustainable compliance with all outstanding tasks by December 2013 or as soon thereafter as possible.

The Remedial Action Plan is a living document. As knowledge, discovery, and awareness of the Department and of community concerns increase, commensurate revision of the Plan will likely occur. The Compliance Director Order makes clear that a document with substantially more specificity and benchmarking will be forthcoming 30 days after the due date of this Plan.

The Police Performance Solutions Independent Monitoring Team (PPS/IMT) consists of experts in law enforcement, police monitoring, auditing and evaluation, intergovernmental relations, civil rights compliance, constitutional considerations and best practices in contemporary policing. It was hired to monitor the Memorandum of Understanding.

Where appropriate, PPS/IMT builds on existing work of both the prior monitor and OPD. PPS/IMT focuses on several core areas including:

• Internal Affairs and Citizen Complaints
• Use of Force
• Discipline
• The Personnel Assessment System
• Span of Control
• Training
• Management and Supervision (Oversight, Auditing and Review Systems).

PPS/IMT determines compliance through:

• Examination of the creation of policies
• Implementation of practices that support each requirement in the Agreement. 

Police Performance Solutions, LLC
Independent Monitoring Team Quarterly Status Reports 2010 - 2013

On August 28, 2003, U.S. District Court Judge Thelton Henderson (Northern District of California) approved the appointment of an Independent Monitoring Team (the IMT) to monitor compliance with the Negotiated Settlement Agreement.

This team served during the seven years of the Agreement, from June 2003 through January 20, 2010. Its status reports provide a clear and comprehensive account of OPD’s status regarding compliance with the Negotiated Settlement Agreement over that time period. For more information, go to the Independent Monitoring Team’s own website).  

First IMT Status Reports, 2003-2010

The Negotiated Settlement Agreement requires that the City and OPD file regular status reports with the court, showing what OPD has done to comply with the provisions of the Agreement. Copies of these reports can be accessed below.