CRB Appointment ProcedureCITIZEN REVIEW BOARD SELECTION MEMORANDUM FEBRUARY 1, 2021
Per the discussion at the Monday, January 25 City Commission meeting during Other Business,
and in light of Mr. Bengtson’s earlier memorandum, here are the procedural details on
selection of Salina Police Department Citizen Review Board members. The goal is for this
process to follow our existing Board appointment procedure as closely as possible while
allowing for additional input from the individual members of the governing body -- and avoiding
a serial meeting.
There are nine positions on the CRB. Eight positions are available for appointment -- one of
which is designated for a law enforcement officer at a sergeant rank or lower – so there will be
seven at-large, public positions available. The remaining appointment will be selected by the
Human Relations Commission from its membership.
1. The Commission has received copies of all submitted CRB Expression of Interest forms,
along with a list of each applicant. I have asked staff to update the list, removing
applicants who are ineligible per the adopted ordinance through the information
submitted on their Expression of Interest form:
a. City of Salina employees (not including the designed law enforcement position)
b. Non-Salina residents
c. Applicants who have disclosed a law enforcement family member
I have also asked staff to confirm the eligibility of both SPD applicants.
Applicants who currently serve on other City of Salina Boards and Commission will
remain in the applicant pool, with the opportunity to resign their current board position
if selected for the CRB.
2. Each commissioner should submit his selections for the CRB using the attached
worksheet by Monday, February 8. Please note that your worksheet, as well as any
comments that you choose to make, should be considered public documents, if
requested through the Freedom of Information Act.
a. Each Commissioner will select his top seven at-large candidates, in order of
preference from one (most preferred) to seven.
b. Each Commissioner will select his preference for the law enforcement position
(provided that both officers are eligible to serve).
c. Please keep in mind that the selection criteria as stated in Sec. 30-83 and 30-84
is fairly broad, but mentions the opportunity to create a board that is more
racially diverse than Salina’s demographics (highlighted in yellow in the attached
ordinance).
3. As Mayor, I will contact the top 12-16 candidates directly to assess their objectivity and
availability. The following items will be specifically discussed:
a. Their ability to bring an open mind and to apply critical thinking skills;
b. Their contribution to the overall diversity of the CRB;
CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD SELECTION MEMORANDUM FEBRUARY 1, 2021
c. Acknowledgement that as a start-up board, the CRB may require more time than
other City board commitments and to confirm their willingness and ability to do
so;
d. A review of other disqualifiers in Sec. 30-85 (highlighted in blue in the attached
ordinance);
e. And a review preconditions and requirements in Sec. 30-86 and 30-87
(highlighted in green in the attached ordinance).
4. Anticipated action on the CRB appointments will be on Monday, February 22. It is my
intention that at least one candidate from each Commissioner’s finalist list will be
included in the CRB appointments.
To avoid a serial meeting, your input should be provided through your selection
worksheet only. Any additional discussion about process can occur during the
Commission meeting on February 8 (with a request to add it to the agenda) or on the
anticipated action date of February 22. Thanks for your help,
Melissa Rose Hodges
CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD SELECTION MEMORANDUM FEBRUARY 1, 2021
Citizen Review Board Selection Worksheet
This worksheet is subject to Open Records requests
Rank your at-large CRB finalists from 1 (most preferred) to 7.
You may provide additional comments if you choose.
1. Rodrigo Bonilla
2. Keely Denning
3. Jon Fillipi
4. Alissa Foth
5. Julius Griffin
6. Fr. David Hodges
7. Teresa Hernandez
8. Scott Bergkamp
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Comments (optional)
CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD SELECTION MEMORANDUM FEBRUARY 1, 2021
Please select your law enforcement officer finalist
Don’t know choices
1.
Please submit completed worksheet by Monday, February 8, 2021 to
melissarosehodges@gmail.com or deliver your hard copy to the City Manager’s office.
ORDINANCE NUMBER 20-11046
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING NEW ARTICLE IV, CHAPTER 30 OF THE SALINA CODE
PERTAINING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF THE LAW
ENFORCEMENT CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Governing Body of Salina, Kansas:
Section 1. New Article. The Salina Code is amended by adding Article IV, Chapter 30 to
be numbered Sec. 30- 80 through 30-95, which article reads as follows:
Article IV. Law Enforcement Citizen Review Board
Sec. 30-80. Definitions.
As used in this article, unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the following
words and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section:
Adult means a person who has attained the age of eighteen (18) years.
Board means the citizen review board established under this article.
Chief of police means the highest ranking police officer and administrative head of
the police department as appointed and supervised by the city manager.
Citizen of the United States means a person born or naturalized in the United
States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD SELECTION MEMORANDUM FEBRUARY 1, 2021
Exonerated means that the act which provided the basis for the complaint or
allegation occurred; however, the investigation revealed that the act was justified, lawful and
proper.
Immediate family member means spouse, parent, child, or sibling; but does not
include (a) sibling as denoted by the prefix half, (b) parent, child, or sibling as denoted by
the prefix step, (c) foster child (d) any parent or child of a preceding or subsequent
generation as denoted by the prefix of grand or great, or (e) parent, child or sibling related
by marriage as denoted by the suffix of in-law.
Internal affairs unit means the internal affairs unit of the police department.
Not sustained means the investigation failed to disclose sufficient evidence to clearly
prove the allegation made in the complaint or to conclusively disprove such allegation.
Police department means the department of the city responsible for the prevention
or detection of crime and the enforcement of the criminal or traffic laws of the state and the
city.
Police officer means an employee of the city and member of the police department
whose duties include the prevention or detection of crime and the enforcement of the
criminal or traffic laws of the state and the city.
Sustained means the investigation disclosed sufficient evidence to clearly prove the
allegation made in the complaint.
Sustained against policy means the investigation revealed a faulty policy and/or
procedure.
Unfounded means the investigation conclusively proved that the act complained of
did not occur. This finding also applies when an individual employee named in the
complaint was not involved in the act which may have occurred.
Sec. 30-81. Establishment of the citizen review board.
By authority of the home rule powers granted to cities by the Kansas Constitution, there is
established the law enforcement citizen review board (the “board”). The board shall also
serve as a community advisory board pursuant to K.S.A. 22-4611b, and amendments
thereto, and as a training advisory board pursuant to K.S.A. 22-4610(c)(2)(B), and
amendments thereto.
Sec. 30-82. Role and Responsibilities.
The roles and responsibilities of the board are to:
1. Advise and assist the police department in policy development related to racial or
other biased-based policing by police officers and the police department pursuant to
K.S.A. 22-4610(c)(3)(A), and amendments thereto;
2. Promote, advocate, and educate citizens about the existence and purpose of the
board;
CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD SELECTION MEMORANDUM FEBRUARY 1, 2021
3. Assist the city manager, the chief of police, and the city commission in the
development of a racial or other biased-based policing comprehensive plan pursuant
to K.S.A. 22-4611a, and amendments thereto;
4. Provide recommendations resulting from board-initiated review of police department
policies other than those policies addressing topics such as intelligence information,
tactical plans, and resource deployment which are exempt from public disclosure
under the Kansas open records act; and
5. Review and advise the chief of police as to whether preliminary administrative
determinations of the pre-disciplinary status of all complaints of (a) excessive use of
force and/or (b) racial or other biased-based policing by police officers are supported
by substantial competent evidence.
Sec. 30-83. Membership.
The board shall be appointed by the mayor with the consent of the governing body. The
board shall consist of nine (9) members who (a) meet the qualifications for appointment to
the board set forth in section 30-84; (b) are not disqualified from appointment to the board
or ongoing participation as a member of the board based upon any of the criteria set forth in
section 30-85; (c) meet the preconditions of acceptance of appointment to the board set
forth in section 30-86; and (d) reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of the city of Salina
without limitation based upon comparison with local demographics, including:
1. One (1) current member of the human relations commission nominated by the
human relations commission from among its members whose term on the human
relations commission will remain in effect for the duration of the term on the board;
2. One (1) current member of the police department with (i) three (3) years of
experience as a member of the police department and (ii) the current rank of either
police officer or police sergeant; and
3. Seven (7) persons who have demonstrated interest or experience in police and/or
community relations.
Sec. 30-84. Qualifications for appointment to the board.
To qualify for appointment to the board, a person must be:
1. An adult;
2. A resident of the city; and
3. A citizen of the United States.
Sec. 30-85. Disqualifying criteria for appointment and continued service on the
board.
Any person shall be disqualified from appointment to the board, and from continued service
following appointment to the board, if the person is:
CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD SELECTION MEMORANDUM FEBRUARY 1, 2021
1. Currently an employee of the city (with the exception of the current member of the
police department to be appointed to the board pursuant to sec. 30-83);
2. An immediate family member of a current employee of the city;
3. An immediate family member of a current member of the city commission;
4. An immediate family member of a current law enforcement officer in any jurisdiction;
5. Currently subject to pending criminal charges in any local, state, or federal
jurisdiction or court of law;
6. Currently on probation, parole, or participating in a diversion or deferred judgment
agreement for any misdemeanor convictions for the following offenses:
a. Possession of controlled substances;
b. Battery or resistance of a law enforcement officer;
c. Crimes of dishonesty or false statements;
d. Crimes of moral turpitude, which include charges of prostitution, patronizing a
prostitute, promoting prostitution, sale of sexual relations, buying sexual
relations, soliciting for immoral purposes, indecent exposure, lewd and
lascivious behavior, sodomy, promoting sodomy for hire, patronizing a person
offering sodomy for hire, sexual battery, loitering for the purposes of
solicitation, indecent liberties with a child, incest, adultery, bigamy, promoting
obscenity, promoting obscenity to minors, displaying material harmful to
minors, and possession, sale or distribution of any illegal drug.
7. Registered as a sex offender with any state, county, or local government;
8. Convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor domestic battery offense as defined by
section 3.1.1 of the Uniform Public Offense Code as incorporated by reference under
section 25-1 of the Salina Code;
9. A party or representative of a party making a claim against the city for any action or
inaction of an employee of the city; or
10. Currently a law enforcement officer in any jurisdiction (with the exception of the
current member of the police department to be appointed to the board pursuant to
sec. 30-83).
It shall be the duty of any board member whose post-appointment status meets any of the
disqualifying criteria to resign from the board, with or without disclosing the reason for
disqualification. If a board member meets any of the disqualifying criteria but does not
resign, the board member shall be dismissed from the board by the mayor.
Sec. 30-86. Preconditions of acceptance of appointment.
CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD SELECTION MEMORANDUM FEBRUARY 1, 2021
As preconditions of acceptance of appointment to the board, a candidate for
appointment must:
1. Consent to and undergo a criminal background check in order to confirm the
candidate’s qualification for appointment; and
2. Enter into an agreement to maintain the confidentiality of all confidential information
received in the course of participating as a board member in the review of
complaints of excessive use of force and/or racial or other biased-based policing by
a police officer.
Sec. 30-87. Requirements and recommendations upon appointment.
a. Upon appointment to the board, a board member shall:
1. Complete board orientation and training pursuant to city policy; and
2. Complete training on fair and impartial policing and comprehensive plans for
law enforcement agencies in accordance with K.S.A. 22-4610(c)(3)(B), and
amendments thereto, within one (1) year of appointment.
b. Upon appointment to the board, a board member is highly encouraged to enroll in
and complete the ten (10)-week, forty (40)-hour citizens’ police academy offered by
the sheriff’s department and the police department within the second available police
academy session beginning after the board member’s appointment;
Sec. 30-88. Terms.
Those persons first appointed to the board shall be appointed for the following terms:
1. Three (3) members for a term of one (1) year, including the member of the human
relations commission;
2. Three (3) members for a term of two (2) years; and
3. Three (3) members for a term of three (3) years.
Upon the expiration of the term of each board member, subsequent terms shall be for a
period of three (3) years, with the exception of the member of the human relations
commission who shall be appointed annually for term of one (1) year. Any vacancy
occurring among the membership of the board shall be filled by appointment of the mayor
with the consent of the governing body.
Sec. 30-89. Meetings; Quorum.
The board shall meet as needed, particularly as may be necessary to expedite its review of
complaints of excessive use of force and/or racial or other biased-based policing by police
officers, but no less than quarterly. A simple majority of the members of the board
appointed and qualified at any given time shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of
conducting the business of the board.
CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD SELECTION MEMORANDUM FEBRUARY 1, 2021
Sec. 30-90. Staff liaison.
The city manager shall designate a staff liaison to assist the board. The staff liaison to the
board shall be designated from among the members of the city manager’s executive staff
other than the chief of police.
Sec. 30-91. Complaints relating to the conduct of police officers.
The police department shall maintain systems by which persons may file complaints relating
to the conduct of police officers through the internal affairs unit of the police
department. Board members may also receive complaints relating to the conduct of police
officers and shall report them to the staff liaison. The staff liaison shall report and monitor
any complaints received from board members to the internal affairs unit for
investigation. Board members may receive and communicate anonymous complaints to the
staff liaison, recognizing, however, that the ability of the internal affairs unit to investigate
anonymous complaints may be inherently limited.
Sec. 30-92. Board recommendations.
When fulfilling its roles and responsibilities as described in section 30-82(1 – 3), any
recommendations of the board shall be those as approved by a majority vote of a quorum of
the board.
Sec. 30-93. Advisory recommendations regarding complaints of excessive force
and/or racial or other biased-based policing.
When fulfilling its role and responsibility as described in section 30-82(4), all preliminary
administrative determinations by the chief of police regarding the pre-disciplinary status of
complaints of excessive use of force and/or racial or other biased-based policing by police
officers shall be reviewed by the board for the purpose of providing its advisory
recommendation to the chief of police pursuant to the following process and standard of
review:
a. The conduct of any police officer(s) against whom any such complaints are made
shall be investigated by the internal affairs unit and an investigative report
prepared.The investigative report shall be regarded as a confidential record
pertaining to an employee or employees of the city.
b. The chief of police shall consider the investigative report prepared by the internal
affairs unit and prepare a written preliminary administrative determination of the
status of the complaint as:
1. Unfounded;
2. Exonerated;
3. Not sustained;
4. Sustained; or
5. Sustained against policy;
CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD SELECTION MEMORANDUM FEBRUARY 1, 2021
including a statement of findings and conclusions with reference to the evidence
upon which those findings and conclusions are based. The preliminary
administrative determination of the status of the complaint shall be regarded as a
confidential record pertaining to an employee or employees of the city.
c. The chief of police shall inform the staff liaison of the anticipated date of completion
of the investigative report and his or her preliminary administrative determination of
the status of the complaint as soon as that date can be reasonably ascertained.The
staff liaison shall then consult with the board chair, board members, and the chief of
police to the extent necessary to schedule the board’s expedited review of the police
chief’s preliminary administrative determination of the status of the complaint as an
agenda item for either a regular or special meeting of the board.
d. The agenda of the meeting of the board at which the preliminary administrative
determination of the status of the complaint is to be considered will describe the
agenda item without identifying either the complainant(s) or the police officer(s)
against whom the complaint has been made.When considering the agenda item, the
board shall recess into executive session upon a motion made, seconded, and
passed, based upon the need to discuss personnel matters of non-elected
personnel, for the purpose of deliberating upon the subject of whether the
preliminary administrative determination of the status of the complaint by the chief of
police is supported by substantial competent evidence.The staff liaison and the chief
of police shall participate in the executive session as informational resources, along
with any other persons the board chooses to invite to participate as informational or
advisory resources relevant to its deliberations.During the executive session, the
board will be presented with the confidential investigative report prepared by the
internal affairs unit, the confidential preliminary administrative determination of the
status of the complaint prepared by the chief of police, and any other information
considered by the chief of police in preparing the preliminary administrative
determination of the status of the complaint. During the board’s deliberations in the
executive session, board members may ask questions and request any other
information relevant to the board’s consideration of whether the preliminary
administrative determination of the status of the complaint is supported by
substantial competent evidence.Upon completion of its executive session or
sessions, the board shall take public action by a majority vote of a quorum of the
board, without identifying either the complainant(s) or the police officer(s) against
whom the complaint has been made, advising the chief of police that the board:
1. Makes its advisory determination that the preliminary administrative
determination of the status of the complaint is supported by substantial
competent evidence;
2. Makes its advisory determination that the preliminary administrative
determination of the status of the complaint is not supported by substantial
competent evidence;
3. Postpones its advisory determination pending its review of additional
information relevant to the board’s consideration of whether the preliminary
CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD SELECTION MEMORANDUM FEBRUARY 1, 2021
administrative determination of the status of the complaint is supported by
substantial competent evidence in a subsequent executive session; or
4. Makes no advisory determination.
In the event of a tie vote of the board, the advisory determination by the board shall
be deemed to be “not sustained.”
e. After taking into consideration the advisory determination by the board, the chief of
police, in consultation with the city manager and staff liaison, shall determine and
document the final administrative determination of the status of the complaint. The
documentation of the final administrative determination shall be regarded as a
confidential record pertaining to an employee or employees of the city. The board
shall be advised of the final disposition of the complaint at the next following meeting
of the board. The police officer(s) against whom the complaint was made shall be
advised of the status of the complaint.The staff liaison shall by separate letter advise
the complainant(s) of the of the final disposition of the complaint by the city.
f. If the final administrative determination of the status of a complaint is that the
complaint is either sustained or sustained against policy, the chief of police shall take
appropriate corrective measures.Nothing in this section, however, shall affect the
rights of a police officer to either grieve or appeal a disciplinary action, as applicable,
in accordance with the policies and procedures of the city’s personnel manual.
Sec. 30-94. Confidentiality.
A board member shall neither disclose nor use confidential information received in the
course of participating as a board member in the review of complaints of excessive use of
force and/or racial or other biased-based policing by a police officer.
Sec. 30-95. Procedural guidelines.
The board may adopt additional procedural guidelines in accordance with general city policy
relating to volunteer citizen boards.
Sections 30-96 through 30-100. (Reserved).
Section 2. Effective. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its
adoption and publication once in the official city newspaper by the following summary:
Ordinance No. 20-11046 Summary
On December 14, 2020, the City Commission passed Ordinance No. 20-11046. The
Ordinance adopts new Article IV, Chapter 30 of the Salina Code pertaining to the
CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD SELECTION MEMORANDUM FEBRUARY 1, 2021
establishment and operation of the law enforcement citizen review board. The ordinance
describes the roles and responsibilities of the citizen review board, including to review and
advise the chief of police as to whether preliminary administrative determinations of the
status of all complaints of (a) excessive use of force and/or (b) racial or other biased-based
policing by police officers are supported by substantial competent evidence and describes
the process by which that review will occur. A complete copy of the Ordinance can be
found at www.salina-ks.gov or in the office of the City Clerk, 300 W. Ash, free of
charge. This summary is certified by the City’s legal counsel.
Introduced: December 7, 2020
Passed: December 14, 2020