Town Square

Post a New Topic

Atherton council shelves police oversight idea

Original post made on Mar 24, 2010

A push to create a citizen oversight committee for the Atherton Police Department ran out of steam, as four of five Atherton council members voted to table the idea at the March 17 meeting.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 12:00 AM

Comments (3)

Like this comment
Posted by Jon Buckheit
a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on Mar 24, 2010 at 9:11 am

Here's another process/policy issue with the APD that the community should weigh in on.

It used to be that any complaint about an officer got put into that officer's personnel file.

In 1997, the California legislature, lobbied by police unions, changed the law so that "frivolous" complaints would not be put into the personnel file. I agree with this action.

In 2000, they were again lobbied to expand the categories of complaints not put into personnel files to include "exonerated" and "unsustained". They again changed the law.

This is all chronicled in Penal Code 832.5.

Guess what? Chief Guerra is using a conflicting provision in another part of the penal code to ensure that NO complaints (even sustained, or not sustained) are put into an officer's personnel file. I've asked him to explain his justification for this, but have not received an answer.

Certainly, sustained complaints should be included in a personnel file of anyone, including police officers. This creates a strong disincentive to engage in improper behavior as it can follow an individual to future employment. Not sustained complaints should be as well, as a future hiring agency might well consider such conduct to have been worthy of a sustained verdict, or simply the existence of too many complaints as a warning sign.

The issue for this community to ponder is: why won't APD even include sustained (and not sustained complaints) in an officer's personnel file?

Like this comment
Posted by Jon Buckheit
a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on Mar 24, 2010 at 9:17 am

(To clarify the above comment, the "conflicting provision in another part of the penal code" offers Chief Guerra the choice of whether or not to put sustained and not sustained complaints into the personnel file; he is choosing not to. There is nothing requiring him not to).

Like this comment
Posted by Lived in Atherton 30 years
a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on Mar 24, 2010 at 3:44 pm

Here's my awesome Atherton Police Dept Story:

A couple of years ago, my mom (also a resident of Atherton) called the police in the middle of the night because her alarm was going off and she thought she heard noises within the house.

The police dept raided the house across the street. Worth noting: both houses were correctly labeled with BOTH street addresses AND Atherton Alarm Tags. We'll call that house 'Home of Internet Executive A.' The police entered and 'cleared' that residence, finding the actual resident asleep in his bed with his wife (the police did NOT announce their presence upon entering this residence.)

Dispatch told my mom that the house had been searched and that it was safe to come out from hiding. Her: "Really? I didn't hear the police inside the house." Dispatch: "Yep. Your house has been cleared and is safe. You can come out." She came out and there was nobody anywhere. No police,.. no nothing. Turns out they went across the street and cleared that house instead. If there had, in fact, been an intruder, she would have been put at risk by the Police Department by telling her that everything was safe. That doesn't even address the fact that during this instance, the police entered ANOTHER persons house (Internet Executive A), disabled the alarm, and searched the residence for intruders, even though it WAS NOT the person who called in the alarm. 1) Why did the police tell my mom that everything was safe, when they were clearly in the wrong house? 2) Why did the police enter another house during the middle of the night for no reason? Let's be frank: if the police entered my house in the middle of the night (with no announcement and by mistake), someone is getting shot. Nothing against the police-- I think they generally do a great job. BUT, in this case, they risked their own lives by entering a house, unannounced, and for no reason, AS WELL AS risked my mothers life by telling her that her house had been deemed safe, when it had NOT been.

I pray for some oversight. Personally, I've had good experiences, but it seems like they are operating in a risky gray-area.

And hearing that there may possibly be officers on the force that are stealing from residents, with the council conveniently covering things up doesn't help one bit. Regardless of the fact that I rely on the Police for my protection, after hearing these consistent stories, there is no way I would ever provide access keys or my alarm code to this department. i hate to say it, but it's true. In fact, I gave the Atherton PD a fake alarm code that doesn't turn off my alarm at all-- it silently calls the San Mateo Sheriffs Office instead. If some corrupt cop breaks into my house, I don't want them knowing my actual alarm disarm code, and I want a county officer to come back me up against the locals.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Nobu Palo Alto eyes next-door expansion
By Elena Kadvany | 4 comments | 3,395 views

Are We Really Up To This?
By Aldis Petriceks | 4 comments | 1,852 views

Couples: Cultivate Love, Gottman Style
By Chandrama Anderson | 1 comment | 599 views

It's contagious
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 278 views

The Comp Plan EIR--Pluses and Minuses
By Steve Levy | 1 comment | 162 views