������Ƶ

The Honolulu Police Commission doesn’t fully address public concerns about accountability and transparency in HPD and did not follow up consistently with the department about recurring issues surrounding officers’ activation of body cameras, according to the city auditor.

One of the deficiencies alleged by the audit, which was released Thursday, was the commission’s lack of a transparent complaint review process. In some cases, commissioners never found out whether the police took disciplinary or corrective action on complaints forwarded to the department.

“This ‘black box’ and lack of transparency about the status of many sustained complaints goes against the interests of complainants and the public for accountability for evidence-based complaints, while also limiting the commission’s ability to know if its efforts are resulting in necessary corrective improvements and responsive change,” .

The commission, which is made up of seven voluntary members who are appointed by the mayor, is tasked with investigating public complaints against officers and submitting reports of its findings to the police chief. Commissioners are also responsible for appointing chiefs, reviewing the department’s rules and regulations, and making recommendations about HPD’s budget to the mayor. The commission has the power to remove the chief as well. 

Commission Chair Doug Chin said in a letter to the auditor that commissioners work to balance their duty to be advocates for the community with their obligation in the city charter to “not interfere in any way” with the administrative matters of HPD. He declined to elaborate in an interview.

“Commissioners work very hard to provide oversight and transparency into HPD to the best of their abilities, while at the same time acknowledging they are lay citizens, and not sworn, trained law enforcement,” he wrote.

Complaint Review Process

City Auditor Arushi Kumar acknowledged that the commission’s ability to follow up on complaints is made more difficult by the fact that HPD isn’t always required to respond. She said auditors have recommended that the City Council change its ordinances to require the department to communicate more with the commission about what it does with complaints.

“Without that, it’s kind of left open ended and the public never gets that closure they deserve,” she said.

But auditors said this requirement to not interfere with HPD administration has caused commissioners to be too cautious and not do enough to exercise their authority and hold the department accountable.

“This lack of defined processes for each of the HPC’s responsibilities leads to inconsistent and ineffective oversight of the HPD,” .

Since 2021, the commission has referred 25 complaints that it determined were sufficiently supported by evidence to the Honolulu Police Department. Those are known as sustained complaints. But HPD is only required to respond when it disagrees with a complaint. 

In seven of the cases referred by the commission, HPD disagreed and sent a written response back. In the 18 other cases, the commission received no information about whether HPD had reviewed the complaints or took any corrective action, and there is no evidence to show commissioners tried to follow up, the audit said. 

It added that the commission also got little response from HPD after flagging officers who had received multiple complaints in a short period of time.

“Commissioners work very hard to provide oversight and transparency into HPD to the best of their abilities, while at the same time acknowledging they are lay citizens, and not sworn, trained law enforcement.” — Chair Doug Chin

According to the audit, between January 2020 and July 2022, the commission sent the police chief eight notices about officers who received three or more complaints within a 30-month period. Two of those notices were about one officer who had seven complaints within that time frame. 

In January 2021, the commission asked the department whether it had taken any action regarding the officers but received no response. Auditors found the department is not required to report back to the commission about officers with multiple complaints.

In his letter, Chin disagreed that the commission’s complaint review process lacks transparency and wrote that commissioners don’t have authority to manage HPD or recommend discipline for individual officers. 

It is the commission’s job to investigate complaints and forward findings to the chief, who then decides what action to take, Chin wrote. If the commission believes the chief isn’t overseeing officers properly or ignoring concerns of the public, that will be addressed in his or her annual evaluation. 

The other commission members are Carrie Okinaga, Kenneth Silva, Ann Botticelli, Elizabeth Char, Laurie Foster and Jeannine Souki.

Body Cameras

The audit also took aim at concerns about the use of body cameras. 

Between 2019 and 2022, 23% of officers in the complaints auditors reviewed had some kind of issue with their body camera use. Commissioners sent 12 memos to HPD about camera activation and the department’s policy during that time.

The commission also referred sustained complaints regarding body camera use about 16 officers to HPD but did not receive follow up on 13 of the cases. In three of the cases, the officers were given counseling, which is not considered discipline, according to the audit. 

“We believe that this incomplete resolution process ultimately undermines the HPC’s (commission’s) intent to address policy violations and curtails its complaint review and accountability efforts,” the audit says. 

A review by Civil Beat also found the department releases body camera footage to the public in only a fraction of deadly encounters involving police. While commissioners have encouraged police Chief Joe Logan in meetings to release footage in a timely manner, the department has yet to release videos from any of the four fatal officer-involved shootings that have occurred so far this year. 

Review Concerns

Auditors said the commission failed to issue an annual evaluation for Deputy Chief Rade Vanic when he served as interim police chief between June 2021 and 2022. The lack of a review for the interim chief also meant the commission didn’t evaluate the department’s performance as a whole during that time, auditors said. 

But Chin said in his letter that selecting the new chief took precedence over completing an evaluation of the interim chief.

“The Commission respectfully disagrees and takes issue with the Audit’s statement that not conducting the annual review of the Interim Chief somehow diminished the accomplishments or oversight of the Department,” the letter said. 

Although the audit described the hiring of Logan as a “prolonged selection process,” Chin said in his letter that the commission conducted “the most transparent and thorough chief selection process in HPD history.” 

The former chief Susan Ballard retired on May 31, 2021, and Logan was sworn in on June 14, 2022. 

Separately, the commission received criticism from some HPD employees and Mayor Rick Blangiardi after it gave Logan an overwhelmingly positive job review last week. Two days later, an internal, anonymous survey was released that raised serious concerns about the department, including leadership issues, communication failures and outdated police equipment.

Recommendations

Auditors also cast doubt on commissioners’ effectiveness at reviewing HPD policy and said that because HPD doesn’t regularly submit proposed rule changes to the commission, members usually only review rules after they are published. 

Many of these rules and policies are of significant interest to the public, such as the department’s rules on vehicle pursuits. A Civil Beat investigation in 2021 found that about 32% of police chases involved collisions. The department said it would review its pursuit policy that year, but auditors questioned the accountability of the review process. 

“Recent publicized events involving police pursuits raise questions about accountability for incidents that harm the pursued and others, and whether policy changes that could reduce the risk of harm to public safety have been made in a timely manner, or even considered,” the audit said. 

Without commission oversight, there is no guarantee that HPD is properly considering the public safety impacts of its rule changes, auditors said. 

“Taxpayers and community members deserve to have a fully effective voice in law enforcement issues.” — City Auditor Arushi Kumar

Chin wrote that the commission has worked with the department on policies and procedures that affect the public and has made recommendations to the chief regarding conflict of interest, use of force and de-escalation and body cameras. 

Auditors issued a series of recommendations to the commission, including establishing a formal process to review HPD rules and regulations, conducting annual performance reviews regardless of the chief’s appointment status, amending its internal complaint review criteria to align with HPD’s and developing an orientation and training program for commissioners.

“Taxpayers and community members deserve to have a fully effective voice in law enforcement issues,” Kumar said.

Read the audit below: