photo by: Journal-World Illustration

Lawrence Police Department logo, Lawrence City Hall

After multiple revisions aimed at ensuring the city’s new community police review board has sufficient access to police files and recordings, city leaders will again consider the ordinance to create the new board.

At its meeting Tuesday, the Lawrence City Commission will review the most recent changes to the ordinance, which deal with redactions to the police department’s internal investigation files connected to complaints of bias and any related audio or video recordings.

As proposed, the board will review racial or other bias complaints made against police when the person who made the complaint disagrees with the police findings.

Earlier this month, commissioners delayed approving the board because of concerns that the ordinance allows for the board to be denied access to the police investigation files and recordings. At that time, commissioners voiced concerns about the police department and city legal staff’s broad ability to redact investigation files, and the ability to withhold video and audio recordings from the board under some circumstances.

The city’s attorney’s office has since updated the proposed ordinance to include examples of specific circumstances when the file or recording can be redacted. The proposed ordinance still allows for recordings to be withheld in certain circumstances.

Assistant City Attorney Maria Garcia said the intent is to release the audio and video in every case and to comply with the spirit of the City Commission direction, but the ability to withhold the recordings remains in the ordinance to allow for instances when they cannot be provided.

“We are leaving that in because there might be limited circumstance where either redaction is not possible or entire audio or video cannot be released,” Garcia said. She said examples might be for reasons of national security or if immediately releasing the video to the board would interfere with an investigation.

Specifically, the proposed ordinance states that audio and video recordings shall be provided unless redaction is necessary and cannot be accomplished. In that case, it states that the city attorney, or his or her designee, “shall cause a summary of the recording to be made.” The ordinance states that redaction will be determined on a case-by-case basis, and that only information that is private; that would subject the city to civil or criminal liability; that would adversely affect the integrity of any ongoing investigation or civil action; or that is otherwise prohibited by law or policy may be redacted.

An addition to the ordinance states that “effort shall be made to provide as much information as possible to the board in its review of an appeal under this subsection.”

The ordinance also lists more than a dozen examples of information that can be redacted from files or recordings, including criminal history, medical records and information pertaining to victims of domestic violence or sexual crimes. The ordinance states that permitted redactions can include those examples, but are not limited to them.

Garcia said the kind of information that would be redacted shouldn’t subtract from the information in the file that the board needs, but that it was important the ordinance not limit the potential redactions.

“It’d be very difficult to have an exhaustive list in the ordinance,” Garcia said. “We don’t want to miss something, and then it comes up later and then it can’t be redacted even though it should be redacted.”

If approved, the board will have the ability to accept misconduct and bias complaints against the police from the public, which are forwarded to the police department for investigation. The police department’s Office of Professional Accountability conducts the investigations. The board’s review of appealed bias complaints would be done in closed session, after which the board would send its determination to the city manager for review.

The City Commission will convene at 5:45 p.m. Tuesday at City Hall, 6 E. Sixth St.