On the agenda: Eugene meeting — Flock camera (Oct 13)

City of Eugene

CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARD
It is the mission of the Civilian Review Board to provide fair and impartial oversight and review of internal
investigations conducted by the City of Eugene Police Department involving allegations of police misconduct, use of
force and other matters. The Board will strive to build trust and confidence within the community and to ensure that
complaints are handled fairly, thoroughly and adjudicated reasonably. The Board will encourage community
involvement and transparency in order to promote the principles of community policing in the City of Eugene.

Civilian Review Board Meeting Agenda
Hybrid Meeting
Tuesday, October 13, 2026 – 5:30pm
Attend in Person: 101 East Broadway, Suite 230 Eugene, OR
Attend Via Webinar: https://eugene-or-gov.zoom.us/j/86721887356
Passcode: Oct26CRB
Accessibility: The meeting will be held virtually. For the hearing impaired, an interpreter can be provided with 48
hours’ notice prior to the meeting. Se puede proveer interpretación al español con un aviso de 48 horas. To arrange
for these services / Para reservar estos servicios: 541-682-5016, [email protected].
A completed Request to Speak Form is required for providing Public Comment. Forms must be submitted by email
to [email protected] as early as 15 minutes before, but no later than 15 minutes after the meeting has
been called to order.

Item

Time (Starting)

1. Agenda and Materials Review

5 minutes (5:30pm)

2. Minutes Approval (Minutes from June and September meetings)

5 minutes (5:35pm)

3. Comments from Board Members and Commission Liaisons

10 minutes (5:40pm)

4. Training: DA Parosa on Brady Obligations and Officer Involved Shootings

30 minutes (5:50pm)

5. Break

5 minutes (6:20pm)

6. Case Review: Allegation of Misconduct: Attendance

30 minutes (6:25pm)

7. Discussion on Meeting Schedule

10 minutes (6:55pm)

8. Commendation Highlight

5 minutes (7:05pm)

9. Auditor Report

10 minutes (7:10pm)

10. Public Comment

5 minutes (7:20pm)

11. Closing Comments

15 minutes (7:25pm)

12. Adjourn

7:40pm

Next Meeting: December 8, 2026

101 E. Broadway Suite 230  Eugene, Oregon 97401
Phone (541) 682-5016  Fax (541) 682-5599
www.eugene-or.gov/policeauditor

INDEPENDENT POLICE AUDITOR'S OFFICE

MONTHLY UPDATE

IN THIS ISSUE:
Auditor’s Update
Community
Engagement &
Trainings | 3
Complaint & Use of
Force Volume | 4
EPD Commendation
Volume | 4
Open & Closed Case
Reports | 5
Upcoming Meetings &
Closures | 10

October Updates
Auditor's Update
We just passed the end of my first year as the
Independent Police Auditor for Eugene. From the
moment I arrived, I made it my top priority to get to
know the community. I have attended numerous town
councils, met with local elected officials, and
representatives of community organizations. I have
also attended the many cultural and community
events that take place to provide a chance for the
public to interact and get a chance to know me
better.
This outreach effort is continuing, and we continue to
schedule and attend events. Please let us know if
you are interested in getting something on our
schedule.
As I reflect over the past year about these meetings
one thing really stands out: The people of Eugene
really care deeply about their community and each
other. Another thing I have observed is that as a

eugene-or.gov/PoliceAuditor

[email protected]

541-682-5016

community they are desirous of robust oversight of the police department.
During the last year many of the individuals I met were not aware of our office and
our work. They were also not aware of the opportunity as a community member they
have to participate in this oversight process and to represent the community. I urge
readers of our newsletter to learn about the Eugene Police Commission, and the
Civilian Review Board and the important work that both commissions perform.
Craig Renetzky
Police Auditor

2

2

Community Engagement and Trainings
Our community engagement efforts did not
slow down towards the end of summer,
with our team tabling at two vibrant
community events: Lane Arts Council’s
12th Fiesta Cultural at the Farmers Market
Pavilion on September 4th, and the YMCA’s
5th Annual Welcoming Festival on
September 13th. Our shared City booths
allowed for engaging conversations with
residents about the different City of
Eugene departments and services.

This month included a strong focus on
professional development. Our staff
attended the IAPro Conference in
Phoenix, Arizona, gaining valuable
information on updates to our database
as well as a Professional Standards
training. We also renewed our Criminal
Justice
Information
Services
certification, attended various City of
Eugene
employee
trainings,
and
completed an accessibility review of all
our web pages to ensure compliance with
federal guidelines.

Ongoing relationship-building continued
through ride-alongs with officers and
Communications Center staff, as well as
meeting with the new police union
leadership.

2

3

Complaint & Use of Force Volume
Our office received 54 complaints in September and reviewed 13 reportable uses of
force. Overall, we have seen an increase in both complaints and uses of force (118
year-to-date, up from 102 at the same time last year).

Commendation Volume
Eugene Police Department employees also received a total of 22 commendations last
month.

4

5

Closed Cases
Report
October 2026
Classification

SubReceived
Disposition
Classification
Date

Narrative

Allegation of
Misconduct

Use of Force

07/06/2026

Within Policy

Officer A, violated POM 809.4.1 AUTHORIZED USE
OF THE TASER-when they discharged their taser
on Suspect A in a manner not authorized by said
POM as suspect in that based on the totality of
the circumstances known to the individual
officer at the time indicate that the application
of the Taser was not reasonable to subdue or
control.

Allegation of
Criminal Conduct

Conduct

09/10/2026

Dismissed-Other RP alleged an officer engaged in sexual
misconduct.

Opened Cases
Report

6

October 2026
Classification

SubClassification

Status

Received
Disposition
Date

Narrative

Service Complaint

Service level

Completed

09/01/2026

Dismissed-o/s
jurisdic

Service Complaint

Courtesy

Active

09/01/2026

Supervisor
Review-Closed

RP complained a social media
post made by EPD was
inappropriate and offensive.
RP complained about alleged
events occurring in Springfield,
OR.
RP complained an officer acted
improperly during an interaction
with them.

Service Complaint

Service level

Completed

09/02/2026

Dismissed-In
Policy/No FU

RP complained an officer refused
to take their police report.

Service Complaint

Service level

Completed

09/04/2026

Dismissed-In
Policy/No FU

Service Complaint

Service level

Completed

09/04/2026

Dismissed-o/s
jurisdic

RP complained a call for service
was labeled as civil.
RP complained an officer refused
to take a police report after an
alleged assault.
RP complained an officer's
attempted contact was excessive
and that the officer acted
improperly during a conversation.

Inquiry

Active

09/17/2026

Service Complaint

Courtesy

Completed

09/04/2026

Supervisor
Review-Closed

Service Complaint

Conduct

Completed

09/04/2026

Dismissed-In
Policy/No FU

Service Complaint

Performance

Active

09/05/2026

Service Complaint

Performance

Completed

09/05/2026

Dismissed-o/s
jurisdic

RP complained an officer acted
improperly during an investigation.
RP complained an officer acted
improperly when managing foot
traffic leaving Autzen Stadium.
RP complained about the traffic
patterns for events at Autzen
Stadium.

Service Complaint

Service level

Completed

09/06/2026

Dismissed-In
Policy/No FU

RP complained EPD officers did
not respond to a call for service.

Service Complaint

Performance

Active

09/09/2026

Supervisor
Review-Closed

RP complained an officer acted
improperly during an investigation.

Service Complaint

Service level

Completed

09/10/2026

Dismissed-In
Policy/No FU

RP complained EPD officers are
constantly following them.

Service Complaint

Performance

Completed

09/10/2026

Dismissed-In
Policy/No FU

Service Complaint

Courtesy

Completed

09/11/2026

Dismissed-In
Policy/No FU

RP complained an officer made
an improper arrest.
RP complained an officer acted
improperly and that they were
wrongfully arrested.

Supervisor
Review-Closed

RP complained officers did not
follow up with them after arriving
to investigate a call for service.
Auditor initiated complaint that
an officer did not call medics after
a use of force was used in an
arrest.

Service Complaint

Service level

Active

09/14/2026

Service Complaint

Performance

Completed

09/15/2026

7

Opened Cases
Report
October 2026
Classification

SubClassification

Status

Received
Disposition
Date

Service Complaint

Service level

Completed

09/15/2026

Service Complaint

Use of Force

Completed

09/16/2026

Service Complaint

Performance

Completed

09/16/2026

Service Complaint

Service level

Completed

09/16/2026

Service Complaint

Other

Completed

09/17/2026

Service Complaint

Use of Force

Completed

09/19/2026

Service Complaint

Other

Active

09/20/2026

Service Complaint

Performance

Completed

09/22/2026

Service Complaint

Service level

Completed

09/23/2026

Narrative

RP complained an officer
provided them with incorrect
information. RP also complained
Dismissed-o/s
officers acted improperly when
jurisdic
investigating the reports made.
RP complained an officer used
Dismissed-In
improper use of force during an
Policy/No FU
arrest.
Dismissed-alt
RP complained officers made an
remedy
improper arrest.
RP complained a call taker acted
improperly when reporting a call
for service. RP also complained
they were improperly arrested and
an investigation was not properly
Dismissed-In
completed.
Policy/No FU
RP submitted hateful comments
regarding EPD and the Chief of
Dismissed-Other Police.
RP complained they were
improperly arrested and excessive
Dismissed-Other force was used.
RP alleged officers are setting
them up and encouraging people
Dismissed-Other to lie.
RP complained officers have not
Dismissed-prev
responded to multiple calls for
reviewed
service.
RP complained an officer
conducted an inadequate
Dismissed-Timelin investigation and provided false
ess
information.

Service Complaint

Performance

Active

09/23/2026

Service Complaint

Performance

Active

09/23/2026

Service Complaint

Performance

Active

09/25/2026

RP complained a Eugene Police
Dismissed-EE Not Volunteer improperly operated a
Identif
marked vehicle.
RP stated an officer used
excessive use of force and
improperly detained them.
RP complained officers did not
Dismissed-alt
follow due process before towing
remedy
their vehicle.

Service Complaint

Performance

Active

09/25/2026

Dismissed-o/s
jurisdic

Service Complaint

Use of Force

Completed

09/26/2026

RP complained their property
wasn't released after an arrest.
RP complained EPD and Lane
Dismissed-Timelin County Sherriff's used excessive
ess
force while detained.

Service Complaint

Use of Force

Active

09/27/2026

RP complained excessive force
Dismissed-Other was used during an arrest.

8

Opened Cases
Report
October 2026
Classification

SubReceived
Status
Disposition
Date
Classification

Narrative

Policy Complaint

Completed 09/03/2026

RP complained officers damaged
their property during a welfare
Dismissed-Other check.

Policy Complaint

Completed 09/08/2026

Dismissed-In
Policy/No FU

RP complained officers improperly
used their sirens.

Active

09/09/2026

Dismissed-alt
remedy

RP alleged a search was unlawful
and officers used excessive use of
force.

09/12/2026

Dismissed-In
Policy/No FU

RP complained they were unlawfully
arrested and alleged officers stole
their property.

Policy Complaint

Completed 09/14/2026

Dismissed-In
Policy/No FU

RP complained officers improperly
used their vehicle lights in an
incident.

Policy Complaint

Completed 09/17/2026

Dismissed-In
Policy/No FU

RP complained officers improperly
handled a welfare check.

Policy Complaint

Active

09/24/2026

Dismissed-alt
remedy

Incident Review

Completed 09/15/2026

Supervisor
Review-Closed

Policy Complaint

Policy Complaint

Active

Allegation of
Criminal Conduct

Conduct

Completed 09/10/2026

Allegation of
Misconduct

Performance

Active

09/14/2026

RP complained officers unlawfully
removed a vehicle from their
possession.
Auditor initiated complaint that
multiple officers violated policy
during an investigation and
detainment of suspects.

RP alleged an officer engaged in
Dismissed-Other criminal conduct.
Employee A violated POM 103.5.7
Standards, Duties, Conduct Attendance when they did not show
up or give notice that they were
unavailable for a scheduled ride
along with Officer B.

9

Opened Cases
Report
October 2026
Classification

SubReceived
Status
Disposition
Date
Classification

Narrative
1) Officer A violated POM 103.4.1
JUDGMENT- failed to use their
training, experience, and
observations to make sound and
reasonable decisions in their action
involving individuals that were
videotaping their actions during an
arrest of another individual taking
place.

Allegation of
Misconduct

Performance

Active

09/23/2026

2) Officer A violated POM 103.4.2
PROFESSIONALISM- failed to act in a
professional manner to which they
failed to provide courteous service,
use carefully reasoned discretion,
and will ensure their conduct is
respectful, neutral, objective, and
unbiased manner in their involvement
with individuals that were
videotaping Officer A’s actions during
an arrest of another individual
taking place.

Legend
Alt Remedy

Alternate Remedy

EE Not Identif

Employee Not Identifiable

In Policy/No FU
O/S Jurisdic

In Policy/No Follow Up

Prev Reviewed

Previously Reviewed

Outside Jurisdiction

Meetings, Events, and Closures
this Month

Follow us to stay informed!

• Oct. 2nd - Desi Fest at the Farmers Market
Pavilion

@EugenePoliceAuditor

• Oct. 4th - Fall Family Festival at Emerald
Park

@Eugene_IPA

• Oct. 8th - Police Commission Meeting
• Oct. 13th - Civilian Review Board Meeting
• Oct. 14th - Council Work Session Community Safety Payroll Tax
• Oct. 15th - Equity and Community
Consortium at Kalapuya High School
• Oct. 20th - Human Rights Commission
Meeting
• Oct. 24th - Halloween Downtown

Independent Police Auditor City of Eugene

Contact us:
101 East Broadway, Ste. 230
Eugene, OR, 97401
541-682-5016
[email protected]

Walk-In Hours:
Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday
9:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m.

Submit complaints &
commendations 24/7
via our Public Portal

10

Civilian Review Board (CRB)
Held in person at 101 East Broadway Suite 230 Eugene, OR 97401
and via Zoom webinar
June 9, 2026
5:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Chair Jose Cortez, Vice Chair Elise Josephson, Clay Neal, Noah Coon, Rick Roseta, and
Joshua Burstein (online)
ABSENT: None
INDEPENDENT POLICE AUDITOR’S OFFICE STAFF: Police Auditor Craig Renetzky, Lindsey
Foltz, Amanda Cordova (online), and Beatriz Otero Hernandez
EUGENE POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFF: Officer Owen Griffith and Animal Welfare Supervisor
Deb Sporcich
OTHER GUESTS: Eugene Mayor Kaarin Knudson and Former Eugene Mayor Lucy Vinis
Chair Jose Cortez convened the Civilian Review Board (CRB) at 5:34 p.m. He read a land
acknowledgment statement.
1. Agenda and Materials Review
Chair Cortez provided an overview of the agenda.
2. Minutes Approval (Minutes from February and March meetings)
MOTION: Neal moved, Vice Chair Josephson seconded, to approve the May minutes.
VOTE: 6:0:0; PASSED
IN FAVOR: Chair Cortez, Vice Chair Josephson, Clay Neal, Noah Coon, Joshua Burstein, and
Rick Roseta.
3. Comments from Eugene Mayor Kaarin Knudson and Former Eugene Mayor Lucy Vinis
Mayor Knudson and Ms. Vinis acknowledged the tenure of the Independent Police Auditor’s Office
Associate Police Auditor Lindsey Foltz. They both took time describing Foltz’s professional history,
contributions, and positive influence in the community, specifically related to police oversight. Ms. Foltz
first began serving as Associate Police Auditor in January 2022. She was presented with an award.
4. Commission Liaisons
Neal reported from the May Police Commission meeting. He said there was robust discussion about an
incident involving body worn video (BWV) capturing an officer saying controversial remarks. Neal said
the Police Commission has confidence in the way the situation was handled and that the Police Chief’s
response was appropriate. He said there was discussion and minor refinement of BWV policy.
Civilian Review Board

June 9, 2026

1

5. Training: Operations Support Field Units
Eugene Police Department (EPD) Officer Owen Griffith and Animal Welfare Supervisor Deb Sporcich
provided a training on Operations Support Field Units.
Officer Griffith began by speaking about EPD officer placement at the Eugene Airport, which is required
by the Federal Airport Administration (FAA). Most commonly, the officers respond to reports of
disorderly passengers and/or drug seizures.
Officer Griffith described the duties of EPD bailiffs.
Supervisor Sporcich provided information about EPD’s Animal Welfare Unit via PowerPoint
presentation.
Supervisor Sporcich noted that while Animal Welfare Unit officers are not sworn officers, their reports
can result in jail time for animal-related crimes. They respond to dogs at large, sick or injured animals,
dog bites, found dogs, abandonment, abuse and/or neglect, animals in hot/cold cars, livestock at large,
barking dogs, dog waste, and park patrol. She provided further information specifically related to
potentially dangerous dogs (Policy 4.435), animal neglect (Policy 4.340), and animal abuse (Policy
4.335).
Supervisor Sporcich responded to questions from CRB members related to animal welfare and current
regulations within the City of Eugene. She pointed out that many residents are unaware that their dogs
must be licensed with the City.
6. Break
The CRB took a scheduled meeting break.
7. Comments from Board Members
Josephson praised CRB members and staff who are transitioning away from the Board.
Burstein also acknowledged CRB members and staff who are transitioning away from the Board. He
mentioned that the CRB will be represented at an upcoming City Club of Eugene discussion forum.
Roseta recognized Chair Cortez and Associate Police Auditor Foltz.
8. Case Review: Flock
Foltz provided a Eugene Flock Program summary and 2025 timeline (below). She referenced an
additional report detailing a synopsis of the Flock Program and associated complaints.
2025 Timeline

Civilian Review Board

June 9, 2026

2

March: Flock contract signed by City of Eugene
May: Cameras installed, begin collecting data
June: Federal agency searches and nationwide agency searches of Eugene data
July: End of national lookup
August: Only Oregon law enforcement agency searches logged
October: Council voted to turn off cameras
November: Continued searches of data through month
December: City Manager announced that Flock would delete all data and remove cameras – City removed
all cameras
Foltz identified five themes (i.e. concerns) that emerged from both public comment and filed complaints:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Program implementation without public notification or input
Data sharing, searches, security, and misuse
Privacy
Financial burdens and allocations of resources
Data gathering and searches after deactivation

Foltz acknowledged that through her research she learned that she had initially overlooked Policy 1206:
Emerging Technologies Consideration. She noted that community concerns related to the rollout of the
program may have been proactively addressed by following the policy.
Foltz described components of her analysis, including that every search made against EPD data was
logged; yet what information was returned to the agencies was not logged. She reported that search logs
demonstrate that there were 369,662 searches conducted.
She listed the following agencies as having conducted searches: Homeland Security Investigations, US
Border Patrol, US Postal Inspection Service, and national law enforcement agencies. She noted it does not
appear that EPD granted explicit access, but more likely that the searches were possible because of
nationwide lookup features. She added that a spot check of the logs shows that there were searches by
agencies with 287G task force with immigration and customs enforcement, suggesting that there was both
“front door” direct federal agency access and “side door” nationwide agency access to EPD data that
could have been queried for immigration-related purposes. Foltz analyzed search data to demonstrate the
volume, scope, and type.
Regarding privacy concerns, Foltz’s report does not contain legal analysis of claims that Flock violated
community members’ rights to privacy.
Regarding the funding of Flock programs, she noted that the contract was paid for by a grant to improve
policing programs and did not take funding away from other vital community programming.
Foltz provided details about the process and timeline of Flock camera deactivation.
In conclusion, Foltz recommended that the Auditor’s Office be consulted prior to any future
implementation of a similar program, emphasizing a need for effective oversight.
Complaint, Intake, Classification, and Monitoring Discussion
Civilian Review Board

June 9, 2026

3

Responding to a question posed by Neal, Foltz responded that in the past if policy complaints surface a
policy concern, they have been brought to her attention; but they were not in this case.
Neal acknowledged that it is an older policy and considered how to improve the process for the future.
Responding to a comment by Roseta, Foltz clarified that Policy 1204 – Automated License Plate Readers
was implemented after the Flock program started.
Roseta stated that, in his opinion, the privacy concerns are false.
Josephson asked if the Police Commission regularly reviews older policies.
Neal responded affirmatively and provided relevant information.
Responding to a question posed by Josephson, Foltz highlighted the benefits of EPD’s bifurcated
oversight system.
Training and Policy Considerations
Neal recommended reviewing older policies, such as Policy 1206 – Emerging Technology. He also
suggested considering Artificial Intelligence (AI) integration. He emphasized that technology, how it is
organized nationally, and the company itself, is proving to be the cause for the problems, not necessarily
EPD. He recommended receiving community feedback prior to future implementation of programs.
Roseta and Josephson agreed.
Chair Cortez reflected on the use of surveillance and recommended considering weighing efficiency with
and not against public safety.
Coon commented that perhaps if it were a different, localized company there would be less pushback
from residents.
9. Commendation Highlight
Auditor Renetzky highlighted recent coordination efforts leading the removal of illegally possessed
firearms and drugs from city streets, minimizing risks to many children and families, and conducted in a
professional and safe manner.
10. Auditor Report
Auditor Renetzky recognized Josephson for presenting on behalf of the CRB to Eugene City Council. He
acknowledged an Associate Police Auditor vacancy and stated that two individuals are expected to fulfill
the vacancy in July or August. He voiced positive reflections about Foltz’s tenure. He presented
certificates to Chair Cortez and Coon. Auditor Renetzky recognized Otero Hernandez and Burstein for
completing the Citizen Police Academy.

Civilian Review Board

June 9, 2026

4

11. Public Comment
Chair Cortez read the rules of engagement for public comment. He invited individuals to speak.
Hannah Silverman provided comments related to a case reviewed at the previous CRB meeting during
which numerous officers were reported and/or under investigation. She shared her perspective as a
criminal defense attorney. She said one officer was discussed and it was unclear if both officers that were
reported were also investigated. She said law enforcement judgement is crucial; if an officer does not
include or misinterprets the facts, an individual could be subjecellt to charges they would not otherwise
be. Ms. Silverman challenged the appropriateness of the charges and cited discrepancies between the
officer’s written report and their BWV.
Ky Fireside challenged CRB’s neutrality when it comes to EPD. They shared their perspective that EPD
has mishandled a number of situations.
Rob Eller provided comments. He expressed appreciation for members Chair Cortez and Coon, who are
transitioning out of the CRB. He thanked Foltz for her service as Associate Police Auditor and
highlighted her strengths.
Foltz read aloud testimony from a public commenter who wished to remain anonymous. Their comments
focused on concerns with EPD actions and behaviors toward citizens who utilize areas around
Washington-Jefferson Street Bridge. They cited violations of individual’s rights and misuse of cameras.
They suggested that police officers are unfairly targeting the area.
12. Closing Comments
Coon spoke about his positive experiences serving on the CRB.
Josephson encouraged continued public engagement in independent police oversight.
Chair Cortez reflected on the state of the nation and community, as well as his time serving as Chair for
the CRB. He acknowledged fellow Board members, staff, and partners.
Individual CRB members expressed appreciation for exiting CRB members and Foltz.
13. Adjourn
Chair Cortez adjourned the CRB meeting at 7:48 p.m.

Minutes transcribed by Terah Van Dusen, Lane Council of Governments (LCOG)

Civilian Review Board

June 9, 2026

5

Civilian Review Board (CRB)
Held in person at 101 East Broadway Suite 230 Eugene, OR 97401
and via Zoom webinar
September 8, 2026
5:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Chair Elise Josephson, Vice Chair Joshua Burstein, Clay Neal, Rick Roseta, Christine Silver,
Kimberlee Voorhies, and Amanda Walkup
ABSENT: None
INDEPENDENT POLICE AUDITOR’S OFFICE STAFF: Police Auditor Craig Renetzky, Amanda
Cordova (online), Associate Auditor Andrea Enright, Associate Auditor Megan Hooley, and Community
Engagement Analyst Beatriz Otero Hernández
EUGENE POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFF: Lieutenant Owen Griffith, Sergeant Kyle Williams, and
Sergeant John Jensen
Chair Josephson convened the Civilian Review Board (CRB) at 5:30 p.m. She read a land
acknowledgment statement.
1. Agenda and Materials Review
Chair Josephson reviewed the agenda. There were no adjustments.
2. Minutes Approval
Approval of the Minutes could not be completed due to a technical error during transcription and will be
approved at the next meeting.
3. Comments from Board Members and Committee Liaisons
Neal provided a brief update from the Police Commission, including that they will soon be reviewing a
case previously brought before the Civilian Review Board (CRB).
Existing Board members welcomed new members.
4. Tracking Internal Affairs Process
Internal Affairs Lieutenant Owen Griffith, Sergeant Kyle Williams, and Sergeant John Jensen presented
an Introduction to Internal Affairs (IA) via PowerPoint presentation.
Eugene Police Department (EPD) staff explained that the IA department reports directly to the Chief of
Police and works closely with the Police Auditor’s Office. Their department tracks and monitors all
complaints including forced responses, pursuits, crashes, and risk claims; and conducts IA investigations,
including identifying trends and lessons learned. Conduct is guided by the Law Enforcement Code of
Ethics and the Police Operations Manual.
Civilian Review Board

September 8, 2026

1

Lieutenant Griffith described the different types of complaints, provided examples, and explained how the
complaints are typically handled. Officer Jensen provided further context. Lieutenant Griffith described
incident reviews, allegations of misconduct, criminal allegations of misconduct, and force allegations.
Responding to a question posed by Vice Chair Burstein, Lieutenant Griffith confirmed that administrative
leave is standard when force allegations are involved. He provided further insight into the administrative
versus criminal side of investigations. He and Officer Jensen described what occurs if an officer resigns
during an active or pending investigation.
Police Auditor Craig Renetzky added that the Police Auditor’s Office reviews every use of force. He
noted that if an officer’s license is revoked, they can no longer work as an officer in the state of Oregon.
Some discussion about the process for reviewing backgrounds prior to hiring followed and Board
members expressed interest in a potential training topic.
Officer Jensen spoke to the investigation and adjudication process, highlighting definitions, timelines, and
the roles of the Chief of Police and the Police Auditor’s Office.
Silver requested to review the materials, specifically the flow charts.
Lieutenant Griffith agreed.
Chair Josephson asked if an officer can be subject to discipline following a mediated outcome.
Lieutenant Griffith responded no.
Responding to a question posed by Vice Chair Burstein, Auditor Renetzky responded that personnel
matters are typically not public. He mentioned that there are only two independent police auditors’ offices
in the state of Oregon (City of Eugene and City of Portland).
5. Break
The CRB took a scheduled meeting break.
6. Case Review: Three Service Level Complaints
Chair Josephson explained how service level complaints differ from typical cases. Ordinarily, the CRB
does not review service level complaints. On this occasion, the CRB will review two service level
complaints and one inquiry.
She described the stages of a typical case review: introduction, intake, classification and review, training
and policy, and adjudication (including adjudication recommendations from chain of command, Chief of
Police, and Police Auditor’s Office).
Auditor Renetzky presented the complaints for review, as follows:
Case #1 – Summary of Facts

Civilian Review Board

September 8, 2026

2

Reporting Party (RP) contacted Independent Police Auditor’s Office regarding a Eugene Police
Department (PD) officer acting improperly while on a scene at an incident they reported.



The RP alleged the officer was not properly investigating the ongoing sexual assault of their
daughter and acted improperly by having a casual conversation and laughing with the Red Hats.
Classified as a Service Complaint/Service Level and found to be within policy by the Independent
Police Auditor.

Materials Included for CRB








Complaint intake
IAPro report (database entry)
Related police reports
Related event reports
Body-worn video and 911 calls
Correspondence regarding complaint investigation
EPD Communications Center supervisor follow-up with Reporting Party

Group Discussion
Chair Josephson agreed with the classification. She provided her observations of the case and expressed
no reservations.
Silver said it was difficult for her to understand what RP wanted investigated and that the officers’
behaviors were reasonable.
Roseta pointed to inadequate communications on behalf of the RP.
Voorhies agreed with the classification and offered perspective based on her observation of the case.
Vice Chair Burstein agreed with the classification and had similar observations as other members.
Neal mentioned a time limit for voicemail complaints. He said the officers responded appropriately but
observed that the bedside manner was not great.
Walkup agreed with previous comments.
Case #2 (Inquiry) – Summary of Facts





RP contacted Independent Police Auditor’s Office regarding an interaction they had with Eugene
PD officers.
RP complained a EPD officer followed them, calling out to them, and eventually detaining them.
Sergeant A arrived and told the officers to release them and that they had detained the wrong
person.
Classified as an Inquiry and investigated by Sergeant A.

Materials Included for CRB





Complaint intake
IAPro report (database entry)
Event reports
Body-worn video

Civilian Review Board

September 8, 2026

3




Closing memorandum
Correspondence regarding complaint investigation

Group Discussion
Silver noted a discrepancy between officer comments made during the incident and what was reported.
She also noted a discrepancy between what people were wearing in the body-worn video versus what was
provided in the written report. She said ultimately there was a reasonable conclusion from the RP’s
perspective.
Roseta observed that it was difficult to tell whether the RP was happy about the outcome.
Voorhies said the officers were in a difficult situation, and they handled it with the best of their ability.
Vice Chair Burstein agreed.
Neal agreed that the officers were within policy; he also understood the RP’s complaint. He highlighted
the Sergeant’s positive interactions with a passerby and noted an opportunity for officer coaching.
Walkup also appreciated the Sergeant’s conduct. She wondered why the case was classified as an inquiry
and not a service complaint.
Auditor Renetzky said a lot of cases can fit multiple categories.
Neal added that it is not uncommon for CRB members to disagree with the classification.
On the topic of classification, Auditor Renetzky highlighted the FAQ located on the Independent Police
Auditor’s website located at https://www.eugene-or.gov/5178/Frequently-Asked-Questions. He provided
further context about the process for classification.
Chair Josephson agreed with the intake and provided observations about the intake method (in person).
She agreed with the classification. She noted the department’s use of exigency ping.
Case #3 – Summary of Facts



RP complained to Eugene PD officers forcibly removed them from their home, causing injury,
and used excessive force in their detainment.
Classified as a Service Complaint/Performance and dismissed as Within Policy by the
Independent Police Auditor.

Materials Included for CRB






Complaint intake
IAPro report (database entry)
Related police reports
Body-worn video
Correspondence regarding complaint outcome

Group Discussion
Roseta said the officers responded well to the situation; he provided his reasonings.
Voorhies agreed. She observed a discrepancy in the RP’s claims and evidence in the body-worn video.
Civilian Review Board

September 8, 2026

4

Burstein also agreed that the officers responded well. He mentioned the frequency of mental health crises.
Neal and Walkup had nothing further to add.
Chair Josephson said the case serves as a reminder of the difficulty of the job and pointed to the
importance of mental health care.
Silver agreed and said she observed a lot of speculation in the conversation.
7. Auditor Discussion on Policy Complaints
Auditor Renetzky provided information about policy complaints. He explained that there are instances
when their department determines something is “not right” – yet it is within policy. He provided insight
into approaching policies they might recommend adjusting. He said policies are determined by the Chief
of Police and the Police Commission.
Neal spoke about the role of the Police Commission, specifically that they act as civilian oversight of
EPD policy development. They do not write policy, but they do review policy recommendations from the
police department and the Auditor’s Office. The Chief of Police makes the final decision.
8. Commendation Highlight
On July 30, 2026, an off-duty officer provided medical aid for a passenger on an aircraft. The airline
thanked the officer for their medical expertise and assistance.
9. Auditor Report
Auditor Renetzky referenced the Auditor’s Report in the recent newsletter. He mentioned that CRB
members may request to review cases listed in the report. Auditor Renetzky reported his attendance at a
conference in August, specifically highlighting IAPro training.
10. Public Comment
There were none.
11. Closing Comments
Vice Chair Burstein brought attention to the relationship between the volume of complaints and office
accessibility.
Neal said the cases reviewed highlight a need for a stronger mental health system.
Chair Josephson mentioned the possibility of cancelling the November CRB meeting, or holding it
virtually, due to a scheduling conflict with the National Auditor Association training.
New members expressed excitement about joining the CRB.

Civilian Review Board

September 8, 2026

5

12. Adjourn
Chair Josephson adjourned the CRB meeting at 7:31 p.m.

Minutes transcribed by Terah Van Dusen, Lane Council of Governments (LCOG)

Civilian Review Board

September 8, 2026

6