Civil Service Employment Subcommittee — Portland, ME
Date: 2025-06-23
Time: 18:00

City of Portland
 Police Citizen Review Subcommittee

 AGENDA
 June 23, 2025
 6:00 PM


1. Zoom information


 a. This meeting will take place remotely using Zoom pursuant to the Remote Meeting
 Policy adopted by the Police Citizen Review Subcommittee and as authorized under 1
 M.R.S. 403-B. Allow your computer to install the free Zoom app to get the best
 meeting experience. If you are not able to attend live, a recording will be available
 following the meeting.

 For public comment, you will need to use the "raise your hand" feature. To raise your
 hand via the telephone, please hit *9. You will be unmuted by the host when it is time
 for public comment.

 https://portlandmaine-
 gov.zoom.us/j/87657624911?pwd=NrLivX7sEIllsM1rn2naQktkkgWXgo.1
 Passcode: 656169
 Phone one-tap:
 +13052241968, 87657624911# US
 +13092053325, 87657624911# US

2. Call to Order


3. Approval of the 2024 Annual Report


 a. Attachment - 2024 Annual Report
4. Discussion of the new ordinance and letter to the City Council regarding the same


 a. Attachments: draft ordinance, 1st draft letter to City Council, letter notes to City Council,
 12/14/21 letter to the Charter Commission, and 8/29/23 PCRS letter to City Council
5. Public comment on agenda items


6. Adjourn

City of Portland
 Police Citizen Review Subcommittee

 AGENDA
 June 23, 2025
 6:00 PM


1. Zoom information


 a. This meeting will take place remotely using Zoom pursuant to the Remote Meeting
 Policy adopted by the Police Citizen Review Subcommittee and as authorized under 1
 M.R.S. 403-B. Allow your computer to install the free Zoom app to get the best
 meeting experience. If you are not able to attend live, a recording will be available
 following the meeting.

 For public comment, you will need to use the "raise your hand" feature. To raise your
 hand via the telephone, please hit *9. You will be unmuted by the host when it is time
 for public comment.

 https://portlandmaine-
 gov.zoom.us/j/87657624911?pwd=NrLivX7sEIllsM1rn2naQktkkgWXgo.1
 Passcode: 656169
 Phone one-tap:
 +13052241968, 87657624911# US
 +13092053325, 87657624911# US

2. Call to Order


3. Approval of the 2024 Annual Report


 a. Attachment - 2024 Annual Report
4. Discussion of the new ordinance and letter to the City Council regarding the same


 a. Attachments: draft ordinance, 1st draft letter to City Council, letter notes to City Council,
 12/14/21 letter to the Charter Commission, and 8/29/23 PCRS letter to City Council
5. Public comment on agenda items


6. Adjourn




 Page 1
 City of Portland Civil Service Commission:

Police Citizen Review Subcommittee (PCRS)
 2024 Annual Report




 Prepared By:
 Xavier Botana (Member)​
 Joey Brunelle (Vice Chair)​




 With Assistance From:
 Rachel Millette (Associate Corporation Counsel)​
 Tracy Boyd (Paralegal, Corporation Counsel)




https://www.portlandmaine.gov/698/Police-Citizen-Review-Subcommittee
 pcrs@portlandmaine.gov




 Page 2
 Table of Contents


1.​ What is the PCRS?
 a.​ History & Purpose
 b.​ Membership
 c.​ Duties
 i.​ Reviews of IA Investigation Procedures & Methods
 ii.​ Annual Reports
 iii.​ Public Hearings
2.​ Duties Performed in 2024
 a.​ Investigations Reviewed & Determinations
 b.​ Statistical Analysis
 i.​ How Complaints are Submitted to PPD
 ii.​ IA Investigation Duration
 iii.​ PCRS Response Time
 iv.​ IA: Allegations Investigated & Sustained 2020-2024
 v.​ IA: Common Allegations & Findings
 c.​ Recommendations/Proposals
 d.​ Community Outreach & Education
3.​ Looking Forward
 a.​ Waiting for the New Ordinance
 b.​ The National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement
 (NACOLE)
 c.​ Improvements to Statistical Analysis
 d.​ Review of Board Procedures
4.​ Appendices
 a.​ Appendix A - Committee Meetings, Topics & Video
 b.​ Appendix B - Membership in 2024
 c.​ Appendix C - Possible Outcomes of IA Investigations
 d.​ Appendix D - Overview of Cases Reviewed in 2024
 e.​ Appendix E - Demographics of Complainants (2020-2024)
 f.​ Appendix F - Overview of Allegation Types & Outcomes (2020-2024)
 g.​ Appendix G - The Origin of the Limited Scope of the PCRS
 h.​ Appendix H - How to File a Citizen Complaint with the Portland Police
 Department



 2


 Page 3
1. What is the PCRS?

a. HISTORY & PURPOSE

In November 2001, after a year of discussion, the Portland City Council
established the Police Citizen Review Subcommittee (PCRS). The PCRS was set up
to address the issue of public confidence in the Portland Police Department,
following a highly publicized case alleging police brutality.1

The City sought to "to have a body outside the Police Department review the
Internal Affairs (IA) investigative process, primarily to ensure public credibility of
the results reached as to whether any formal citizen complaint against an officer
should or should not be sustained."2

The City deliberated a variety of models for such a board, and received an
interpretative ruling from the Maine Labor Relations Board regarding whether
those models would require collective bargaining with the police unions.
Ultimately the City avoided bargaining by choosing a narrow scope and limited
powers for the PCRS.


b. MEMBERSHIP

The PCRS consists of seven (7) members, who elect a Chair and a Vice Chair
annually. All members are appointed by the City Council for terms of three (3)
years via the standard Legislative & Nominating Committee process.

Members are limited by the ordinance to serving a maximum of three (3) 3-year
terms, which is standard for City of Portland boards. Also, as per tradition with all
boards, the City Council automatically renews the appointments of existing

1
  PCRS 2001 Annual Report, Page 2
https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/7b17e8b4-b1c0-4f4a-b7e7-8ef564b22eeb (See Appendix G)
2
  From City of Portland brief, cited by the Maine Labor Relations Board in their June 27, 2001 interpretive
ruling, which can be found in the backup materials for the January 10, 2024 PCRS meeting:
https://portlandme.portal.civicclerk.com/event/6910/files/agenda/14443
 3


 Page 4
members when their 3-year terms are up (unless they do not wish to continue, or
unless there are serious problems with their service or behavior).

The PCRS has some of the most strict qualifications/disqualifications for serving of
any city board. Anyone who has themselves, or has a family member (spouse,
domestic partner, child, grandchild, parent, grandparent, or sibling) who has, in
the last ten (10) years:

 ●​ has filed a complaint with the Portland Police Department,
 ●​ been a Portland police officer,
 ●​ been arrested,
 ●​ or sued the City for something related to police conduct

is disqualified from serving on the PCRS.

In 2024 there were two (2) mid-term resignations and one (1) new member. One
(1) seat remained unfilled until 2025.

>> A complete list of PCRS members in 2024, including those who resigned or
joined and the dates thereof, can be found in Appendix B.


c. DUTIES

The PCRS has three main duties (as defined in City Code Chapter 2, Section 2-76)3:

i. Reviews of IA Investigation Procedures & Methods: The PCRS reviews police
investigations into complaints against police officers by members of the public to
determine if they were thorough, objective, fair, and timely by auditing the police
department’s Internal Affairs’ unit’s methods and procedures.

Note: The scope of the PCRS review is limited to whether IA investigation procedures and
methods are “objective, fair, thorough and timely.” The PCRS cannot make any
judgements regarding the merits of the complaint itself, nor the conclusions reached by
the investigation, nor any disciplinary actions that resulted from the investigation.
Furthermore, the PCRS only reviews after the IA process has been completed, disciplinary
3
  City Code Chapter 2
https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/33c0e8fb-d8ec-4b2b-a07f-8128d5052cb2
 4


 Page 5
actions are taken, appeals are resolved, and the original complainant has been notified
by the Police Department of the result of their investigation.4

In 2024 the PCRS reviewed fourteen (14) IA investigations and found that all
except two (2) were thorough, objective, fair, and timely. Detailed information
about cases and determinations appear in Section 2 of this report.

>> A complete list of cases can be found in Appendix D.

ii. Annual Reports: The PCRS submits a written report to the City Manager at least
annually on:

 ●​ its determinations regarding IA investigations;
 ●​ a statistical analysis of all cases reviewed, including an analysis of
 trends/patterns of complaints or results of investigations of complaints;
 ●​ any recommendations to improve the police IA investigation process,
 policies or training, and/or recommendations for enhancing public
 confidence in the methods and process of investigation of citizen
 complaints.​

>> Determinations, statistical analyses, and recommendations from 2024 appear
in Section 2 of this report.

iii. Public Hearings: The PCRS is to hold a public hearing at least annually to
receive comments regarding the police citizen complaint process.

In 2024 the PCRS fulfilled this requirement for a “public hearing” by taking public
comment at each of its monthly meetings, which were all held virtually over
Zoom. However, only one (1) comment was received this way in the entire
calendar year, and the commenter was an individual (Joey Brunelle) who was
about to join the board at the next meeting.

>> A complete list of meetings and topics discussed, including any public comment,
can be found in Appendix A.


4
 For more information about the origins of the limitations of the PCRS review process, please refer to
Appendix G.
 5


 Page 6
2. Duties Performed in 2024
a. INVESTIGATIONS REVIEWED & DETERMINATIONS

The PCRS reviewed fourteen (14) IA investigations in 2024. Committee members
typically received investigation materials from IA one (1) week before they were to
be discussed. These materials included:

 ●​ a copy of original complaint (hand-written or submitted online)
 ●​ audio, video and transcripts of interviews with the complainant (when
 available)
 ●​ audio, video and transcripts of interviews with the officers involved and
 (when appropriate and available) any witnesses
 ●​ criminal records of individuals involved (when appropriate)
 ●​ audio from 911 calls
 ●​ video and audio from body-worn cameras
 ●​ a complete timeline of the investigation
 ●​ the final disposition of IA, including disciplinary actions and the Chief of
 Police’s review

In accordance with state law, investigations were discussed in executive session to
protect the privacy of both officers and complainants. These executive sessions
primarily consisted of:

 1.​ One committee member “presenting” the case (this is a rotating
 responsibility assigned in advance by the chair);
 2.​ Committee members asking Police Department IA staff (including the IA
 lieutenant who presided over the investigation(s) being reviewed) questions
 regarding their investigation, and IA staff answering those questions to the
 best of their ability.

When the committee was satisfied that its questions had been answered, the
executive session was concluded, and members returned to the public meeting to
vote on whether the investigations had been thorough, fair, objective and timely.

Committee members did not discuss specifics of cases in the public meeting.
 6


 Page 7
However, in the December 11, 2024 meeting Associate Corporation Counsel
Rachel Millette clarified that PCRS members can discuss their votes in a public
session provided that the discussion does not in any way violate the privacy rights
of the employees or the individual making the complaint. Broad generalizations
are allowed, and questions can be asked during executive sessions regarding what
is allowable to say in the public meeting.

Of the fourteen (14) IA investigations that were reviewed, all except two (2)
were determined to have been thorough, objective, fair and timely:

 ●​ IA2024-005 was determined to not have been thorough, fair, nor objective.
 ○​ This investigation stemmed from a complaint from a Portland
 resident and pertained to officer “conduct toward the public.”
 ○​ This complaint was submitted via the online form.
 ○​ The IA investigation had concluded that the complaint was “not
 sustained,” meaning that IA found that no violation of Department
 rule, regulation or procedure or local, state, or federal law was
 proven.5 ​

 ●​ IA2024-006 was determined to have not been thorough.
 ○​ This investigation stemmed from a complaint from a Portland
 resident and pertained to offer “conduct toward the public” and
 “obedience to law6.”
 ○​ This complaint was submitted in writing at PPD headquarters.
 ○​ The IA investigation had concluded that this complaint was
 “unfounded,” meaning that IA found that reasonably credible
 evidence exists to indicate the complainant’s allegations are false.7

The PCRS did not discuss whether these cases point to any trends, nor whether
improvements or changes should be made as a result.

One case came to the PCRS without a standard IA number. This is because it was
conducted by an external investigator. For privacy reasons, we cannot give an
5
  For a complete explanation of the different possible outcomes of IA investigations, refer to Appendix C.
6
  “All employees of the Department shall obey the laws of the United States, the State of Maine, and the
laws of any state and local jurisdiction in which the employee is present.” - PPD SOP, Professional Conduct
and Responsibility, https://www.portlandmaine.gov/507/Standard-Operating-Procedures
7
  For a complete explanation of the different possible outcomes of IA investigations, refer to Appendix C.
 7


 Page 8
explanation publicly why this was handled in this way, however the PCRS reviewed
this investigation in the same way that it reviews all others.


a. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

i. How Complaints Are Submitted to PPD

Fully half - seven (7) - of all complaints handled by the PCRS in 2024 were
submitted electronically via the form on the City’s website. Four (4) were received
in person at PPD Headquarters, one (1) was received by mail, and one (1) was
received by email.




These numbers should not be construed to suggest a preference for online
submissions, since paper complaint forms are only available at the PPD
Headquarters on Middle Street. This presents a significant barrier to anyone who
does not possess technology skills or a suitable device, or even to someone who is
simply unaware of the existence of the online form.8
8
 Current instructions for how to file a complaint form can be found in Appendix H.
 8


 Page 9
Previous PCRS annual reports indicated that paper forms were also available at
PPD community policing centers, the Riverton Community Center (operated by
the Parks & Rec Department), the Portland Housing Authority central office, and
the City Manager’s office at City Hall. However an audit by a committee member
determined that none of these locations still have paper forms.

 ●​ At one community policing center, one member of the PPD said the form
 had been “moved online.”
 ●​ A non-police city employee at another location said that they had never
 heard of the complaint forms before.
 ●​ A member of city staff in the City Manager’s office at City Hall said that they
 didn’t think there was a formal complaint process at all, but that someone
 could walk down to Police Headquarters and “give feedback” there.

The lack of awareness at these locations suggests that paper forms have not been
widely available in many years.

Additionally, many years ago the PCRS worked with City Staff to translate the
complaint form into Arabic, French, Portuguese, Somali, and Spanish. These
translations were seen as a major achievement in making the complaint process
more accessible to all residents. However, these translations are now seemingly
only available on the PCRS’s website in PDF format, and they are not mentioned as
being available from the online form.9 It is unknown if paper versions of the
translations are available at the one physical location where one can fill out a
form, PD Headquarters. (The paper forms also need to be updated for content: at
least two had incorrect URLs for the online form.)


ii. IA Investigation Duration

According to data received from the PPD, IA investigations in 2024 took an average
of thirty-four (34) days, however there is a large spread in the data:

 ●​ The lengthiest investigation took ninety-five (95) days. PPD states that in

9
 Translations are at the very bottom of the PCRS page on the City’s website:
https://www.portlandmaine.gov/698/Police-Citizen-Review-Subcommittee
 9


 Page 10
 many of the lengthier investigations, there were “Timeline issues due to
 trainings, leaves, contacting witnesses, etc.”
 ●​ The fastest investigation (IA2024-007) was reported to have only taken one
 (1) day to complete. This complaint was concluded to be “unfounded,” and
 the PCRS determined that the investigation was thorough, objective, fair,
 and timely.




iii. PCRS Response Time

PCRS reviews take place only after the IA process has been completed, disciplinary
actions are taken, appeals are resolved, and the original complainant has been
notified by the Police Department of the result of their investigation. The
complainant receives an additional letter from the PCRS after the committee
determines whether the investigation was thorough, fair, objective and timely.

 ●​ In 2024, the median time elapsed between the conclusion of the IA
 investigation (either the “Initiation of Final Review” or, when applicable, the
 “Chief’s Decision”) was thirty-nine (39) calendar days.

 10


 Page 11
 ●​ The speediest turnaround was fifteen (13) days.
 ●​ Three (3) investigations, IA2023-017, IA2024-006, and an investigation
 conducted by a third-party, took more than two months.




iii. PCRS Deliberation Time

On average, the committee spent 18.7 minutes per investigation in executive
session discussions in 2024.




 11


 Page 12
iv. IA: Allegations Investigated & Sustained 2020-2024

In the last five years, PCRS reviewed 106 allegations. (Note that a single
investigation often includes multiple allegations, which are Department SOPs that
are alleged to have been violated.)

Of these, 8 allegations were sustained. Figure 1 presents a review of the number
of standard operating procedures (SOPs) that IA investigated as a result of citizen
complaints, along with the number of these allegations that were sustained (e.g. a
violation was confirmed) between 2020-2024.




 12


 Page 13
v. IA: Common Allegations & Findings

In the period 2020-2024, Conduct Towards the Public and Unsatisfactory
Performance were the two most common categories of allegations, with 27
allegations each across the five-year period.

Figure 2 highlights the most common types of allegations that internal affairs
investigated between 2020-2024 (combined) and how many of those allegations
were sustained (e.g. violation was confirmed). See Appendix F for a full accounting
of specific allegations in complaints between 2019 and 2023.




 13


 Page 14
c. RECOMMENDATIONS/PROPOSALS FOR IA OR THE COMPLAINT PROCESS

In 2024, the PCRS did not make any recommendations for improvements to the IA
investigation process, policies or training, nor did it make recommendations for
enhancing public confidence in the methods and process of investigation of citizen
complaints.

d. COMMUNITY OUTREACH & EDUCATION

In 2024 the PCRS fulfilled the requirement for a “public hearing” by taking public
comment at each of its monthly meetings, which were all held virtually over
Zoom.

In response to feedback from members of the public in late 2023, the committee
began inviting public comment both before and after executive sessions, to make
it easier for the public to participate. The Committee also made some
improvements to how public comments are recorded in the meeting minutes.

However, only one (1) comment was received this way in the entire calendar year.
That commenter was an individual (Joey Brunelle) who was about to join the
board at the next meeting.

There is a very clear need to improve when it comes to public engagement.
However, in 2023 and again in 2024, the committee frequently decided to forgo
addressing this issue because the new ordinance and board was perceived to be
“right around the corner.” Due to significant delays with the City Council and
bargaining with the police unions, this has yet to come to fruition, leaving the
PCRS in a kind of “limbo” that has hampered its ability to effectively do its job.



3. Looking Forward
a. WAITING FOR THE NEW ORDINANCE

The PCRS still awaits the new ordinance establishing its replacement, as required
by a Charter Amendment passed by voters in November 2022, and as
recommended by the Racial Equity Steering Committee in 2021.

 14


 Page 15
In 2024, the PCRS discussed the prospective new ordinance many times:

 ●​ The PCRS received updates from staff at each meeting regarding the status
 of the new ordinance, but most of these updates said that there were no
 updates due to the new ordinance being discussed in private with the police
 unions as part of collective bargaining.
 ●​ Multiple members asked whether there was a legal requirement to
 implement the Charter as amended by voters. Corporation Counsel staff
 indicated that there was not any such requirement, despite the Charter
 language saying that a new board should be established “promptly.”
 ●​ Members asked about the transition from the PCRS to the new board,
 however because details remain in flux, it is impossible to plan for a
 transition.
 ●​ Members discussed whether the PCRS should write another letter to the
 City Council with its opinion about the new ordinance, but this was never
 agreed to.

Because its demise and replacement has seemed, at times, to be imminent, the
PCRS has avoided tackling certain long-term projects like expanding public
engagement. This has been disruptive to the effective functioning of the
committee.

b. THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT

As Councilors continue to deliberate a draft ordinance, the PCRS would like to
refer them to the standards set by the National Association for Civilian Oversight
of Law Enforcement (NACOLE)10.

This esteemed, three-decade-old organization has published an easy-to-read
guide for meaningful oversight boards, which also includes common pitfalls when
creating a new oversight board.

This guide can be found here:
https://www.nacole.org/community_oversight_paves_the_road_to_police_accou
ntability

10
 https://www.nacole.org
 15


 Page 16
c. IMPROVEMENTS TO STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

New members on the PCRS have expressed an interest in doing a more
sophisticated statistical analysis in the investigation and complaint data, however
we first need to do a deep dive into:
 1.​ What data is available to us, and what additional data may be useful
 2.​ What statistical analyses are possible with that data
 3.​ What statistical analyses would be useful for the board, the public, and the
 department.

The Board intends to consult other civilian oversight boards and their reports, as
well as NACOLE best standards, to help answer these questions. In addition, the
Board would like to implement a more rigorous and thorough process of data
verification for our analyses.

The Board will also begin to include the full data set for our annual reports as an
attachment to the annual report, to enable future Boards to do their own
statistical analyses on historical data.


e. REVIEW OF BOARD PROCEDURES

The Board will also soon start a process of documenting our own internal
procedures, definitions and norms. This will include a holistic review of how we
currently operate, and potentially the introduction of changes or improvements.

The goal is to document our standard procedures for:

 ●​ Training
 ●​ Meeting Management
 ●​ Offline Communication/Collaboration
 ●​ Public Engagement

We believe documenting this information will systematize, regularize, and
strengthen the work of the Board well into the future.




 16


 Page 17
 APPENDICES

Appendix A - Committee Meetings, Topics & Video
Appendix B - Membership in 2024
Appendix C - Possible Outcomes of IA Investigations
Appendix D - Overview of Cases Reviewed in 2024
Appendix E - Demographics of Complainants (2020-2024)
Appendix F - Overview of Allegation Types & Outcomes (2020-2024)
Appendix G - The Origin of the Limited Scope of the PCRS
Appendix H - How to File a Citizen Complaint with the Portland Police Department




 17


 Page 18
 18


Page 19
Appendix A - Committee Meetings, Topics & Video

The PCRS has set the second Wednesday of each month at 6pm as its regular meeting time. The committee met
nine (9) times in 2024:

Green indicates investigations that were determined to be all four: thorough, objective, fair and timely.
Red indicates investigations that were not found to be all four, with the failed metric in (parentheses).
Note: These votes in no way indicate agreement or disagreement with the ultimate conclusions of investigations into complaints; the PCRS
ordinance does not allow the committee to make any determinations regarding the merits of complaints, conclusions reached, or disciplinary
actions taken.

 Exec.
  Date Cases Discussed Session​ Additional Topics Discussed Agenda & Video
 Duration

 Jan 10 IA2023-006 21 min - Adding additional content & timestamps to meeting minutes https://portlandme.portal.c
 IA2023-17 - No news about new ordinance ivicclerk.com/event/6910/fi
 les/agenda/14178
 IA2023-19 - 2023 Annual Report delegation
 Feb 14 IA2023-012 42 min - News about new ordinance​ https://portlandme.portal.c
 IA2023-013 - 2023 Annual Report delegation ivicclerk.com/event/7108/
 media
 an un-numbered case
 Mar 13 IA2024-001 23 min - 2023 Annual Report delegation​ https://portlandme.portal.c
 - De-escalation training from PPD for PCRS members ivicclerk.com/event/6912/fi
 les/agenda/14486

 Apr 10 cancelled

 May 8 IA2024-004 23 min - No news about new ordinance​ https://portlandme.port
 - No updates about the 2023 Annual Report preparation al.civicclerk.com/event/6
 - De-escalation training from PPD for PCRS members 914/files/agenda/14771

 Jun 12 None n/a - Review of 2023 Annual Report draft (Xavier & Gino) https://portlandme.port
 al.civicclerk.com/event/6

 19


 Page 20
 915/files/agenda/14896
Jul 10 IA2024-007 17 min - No news about new ordinance https://portlandme.port
 IA2024-008 - 2023 Annual Report draft still in progress al.civicclerk.com/event/7
 178/files/agenda/15002
Aug 14 IA2024-003 52 min - Approval of ‘23 Annual Report​ https://portlandme.port
 IA2024-005 - Election of Anne Hardcastle as Chair and Rev. Lewis as VC​ al.civicclerk.com/event/7
 (thorough, fair, - No news about new ordinance​ 179/files/agenda/15094
 objective) - Statutory requirements re: the new ordinance & Charter
 compliance
Sep 11 None n/a - Discussion of progress towards a new ordinance​ https://portlandme.port
 (IA2024-006 was - One public comment: Joey Brunelle, re: the new ordinance al.civicclerk.com/event/7
 postponed to October) 180/files/agenda/15168

Oct 9 IA2024-006 45 min - Discussion of progress towards a new ordinance https://portlandme.port
 (thorough) al.civicclerk.com/event/7
 181/files/agenda/15267
Nov 13 cancelled due to lack of quorum

Dec 11 IA2024-017 39 min - Discussion of progress towards a new ordinance https://portlandme.po
 - Presentation from Nicole Albert (Corp. Counsel) re: Use of rtal.civicclerk.com/eve
 Force Incident Review nt/7383/files/agenda/
 - Presentation from Rachel Millette (Corp. Counsel) re: PCRS 15500
 roles & responsibilities
 - Sending letters to complainants before PCRS process, not just
 after
 - Member interest in trainings​
 - 2024 Annual Report prep




 20


 Page 21
 Appendix B - Membership in 2024

Seat Name Joined Departed Notes

 1 Jean “Gino” Raymond 4/1/2022
 Medford-Desruisseaux

 2 Rev. Kenneth Lewis (Vice Chair) 4/1/2019

 3 Kaylin “Kay” Kerina 4/1/2020

 4 Reginald “Reggie” Parson (Chair) 4/1/2020 7/31/2024 Resigned (“moved to another municipality”)

 4 Joey Brunelle 8/1/2024

 5 Xavier Botana 4/1/2023

 6 Timothy “Tim” Smith 4/1/2024 10/9/2024 Resigned (“scheduling issues”)​
 Note: Seat not filled until 1/22/2025

 7 Anne Hardcastle (Chair) 4/1/2021



 Complete board member history can be found on the city’s website:​
 https://onboard.portlandmaine.gov/board/4371




 21


 Page 22
 Appendix C - Possible Outcomes of IA Investigations

 Sustained Sufficient evidence exists to indicate that the
 employee did, in fact, commit one or more of the
 alleged acts.

 Not Sustained No violation of Department rule, regulation or
 procedure or local, state, or federal law has been
 proven.

 Exonerated The incident occurred, but the employee’s actions
 were justified, lawful, and proper.

 Unfounded Reasonably credible evidence exists to indicate the
 complainant’s allegations are false.

Cleared Exceptionally Elements beyond the police department’s control
 prevents a final disposition.

 No Finding The officer left the department before a final
 disposition could be made.




 22


 Page 23
 Appendix D - Overview of Cases Reviewed in 2024

IA Case # Allegation (one line for each) Command Finding Thorough Fair Timely Objective
2024-006 Conduct toward the public Unfounded N Y Y Y
2024-006 Obedience to law Unfounded N Y Y Y
2024-006 Conduct toward the public Unfounded N Y Y Y
2024-001 Civil matters Unfounded Y Y Y Y
2024-004 Response to Resistance Unfounded Y Y Y Y
2024-004 Handcuffing Unfounded Y Y Y Y
2024-004 Response to Resistance Unfounded Y Y Y Y
2024-005 Conduct toward the public Not sustained N N Y N
2023-013 Conduct toward the public Unfounded Y Y Y Y
2024-007 Conduct toward the public Unfounded Y Y Y Y
2024-008 Conduct toward the public Unfounded Y Y Y Y
2023-012 Conduct toward the public Not sustained Y Y Y Y
2024-017 Preliminary Investigations Unfounded Y Y Y Y
2024-017 Discretion Exonerated Y Y Y Y
2024-017 Stop & Frisk Exonerated Y Y Y Y
2023-006 Conduct toward the public Sustained Y Y Y Y
2023-006 Body Worn Cameras - Mandatory Recording Sustained Y Y Y Y
2023-019 Unsatisfactory Performance Unfounded Y Y Y Y

 23


 Page 24
IA Case # Allegation (one line for each) Command Finding Thorough Fair Timely Objective
2024-003 Conduct Toward the Public Unfounded Y Y Y Y
2024-003 Impartial Attitude Unfounded Y Y Y Y
2024-003 Arrests Without Warrants Exonerated Y Y Y Y
2024-003 Conduct Toward the Public Not sustained Y Y Y Y
2023-017 General Responsibility Unfounded Y Y Y Y
2023-017 Handcuffing Unfounded Y Y Y Y




 24


 Page 25
 Appendix E - Demographics of Complainants (2020-2024)

 Total​
 Demographics 2020-2024

 Under 40 50

 Age Over 40 32

 Not reported 24

 Male 43

 Gender Female 42

 Not reported 21

 Black 7

 Race White 53*

 Not reported 46

 Portland 53

 Residency Non-Portland 51

 Other/Not reported 2

* For reporting purposes, cases involving individuals who were labeled as “mid-eastern” or “middle eastern” in Police
Department data set were included in the “white” column.
 25


 Page 26
 Appendix F - Overview of Allegation Types & Outcomes (2020-2024)


 Allegations Exceptional Exonerated Not sustained Sustained Unfounded Total
  Accident investigations and reporting 1 1
 Arrests Without Warrants 1 1
Body Worn Cameras - Mandatory Recording 1 1
 Civil matters 1 1
 Conduct toward the public 3 3 3 18 27
 Discretion 1 1
 EMS Response/Medical Aid 6 6
 Field stop 1 3 4
 General responsibility 2 2
 Handcuffing 3 3
 Impartial Attitude 1 1
 Obedience to law 2 2
 Operation of Police Vehicles 3 3
 Preliminary investigations 2 2
 Professional Conduct and Responsibility 3 3
  Professional Standards: Unsatisfactory
 3 3
 Performance

 26


 Page 27
 Allegations Exceptional Exonerated Not sustained Sustained Unfounded Total
  Accident investigations and reporting 1 1
 Arrests Without Warrants 1 1
Body Worn Cameras - Mandatory Recording 1 1
 Civil matters 1 1
Response Option Guidelines (Response to
 2 2
 Resistance)
 Response to resistance justifications*** 2 2
  Response to Resistance/Aid/Reporting 9 6 15
 Stop & Frisk 1 1
 Truthfulness* 1 1
 Unsatisfactory performance 6 3 15 24
 Grand Total 3 19 4 8 72 106




 27


 Page 28
 Appendix G - The Origin of the Limited Scope of the PCRS

In 2001, while crafting the ordinance that would create the PCRS, City
administration requested an Interpretive Ruling from the Maine Labor Relations
Board (MLRB) as to whether the establishment of a body to provide civilian
oversight of the Police Department would be a mandatory subject of bargaining
with the City's two police unions. The MLRB's answer was that, in general, such a
committee was indeed a mandatory subject of bargaining and therefore could be
established only upon agreement of the police unions.

However, the MLRB's decision noted that bargaining would not be necessary if

 1) the committee's purview was limited to only the IA investigation
 methods and procedures (and not the underlying complaints or ultimate
 conclusions or disciplinary actions), and

 2) the committee’s work occurred only after the IA process was fully
 completed.

From the MLRB’s interpretive ruling:

 "At the other end of the spectrum is a review committee that looks over the
 work of the Internal Affairs investigation after everything has run its course:
 after discipline has been imposed or the decision has passed, and after any
 grievance filed has completely run its course. Such a review would not be to
 pass judgement on Internal Affairs' handling of a particular case, but to
 perform a general audit of their investigative methods and the integrity of
 the disciplinary process. The target of that review would be Internal Affairs
 and Police Administration, rather than the officer who was investigated. In
 such a model, the relation of the process to working conditions or contract
 grievance arbitration procedures would be remote." 11

This is the model that the City of Portland subsequently chose, avoiding the need
for collective bargaining with the unions.


11
  PCRS 2001 Annual Report, Pages 2-3
https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/7b17e8b4-b1c0-4f4a-b7e7-8ef564b22eeb
 28


 Page 29
 Appendix H - How to File a Citizen Complaint​
 with the Portland Police Department


Online at https://portlandmaine-portal.app.transform.civicplus.com/forms/26747

In Person at Portland Police Headquarters, 109 Middle Street, Portland, ME 04101

By Telephone by calling the PPD Shift Commander at 207-874-8555

By Mail by printing out a complaint form (see links below) and mailing it to
Portland Police Department, Attn: IA, 109 Middle Street, Portland ME 04101

The complaint form is available in multiple languages:

English:
https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/4c5a2a5c-3770-42b8-9426-59f1a136fa33

Arabic:
https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/829177f9-db86-430c-bda7-cf8b77b84a27

French:
https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/1d748004-a28d-4b08-b590-5575597be77b

Portuguese:
https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/0b3f2b8a-31d7-443d-9333-a31b13d247a6

Somali:
https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/1a6293f2-be37-451e-ab92-5992a0f7bffa

Spanish:
https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/c3fd5a2c-f373-44e8-9e6d-4fe692c9bbdf

For updates about in-progress complaint investigations, call the PPD Internal
Affairs Lieutenant at 207-756-8354




 29


 Page 30
 CITY OF PORTLAND
 POLICE CITIZEN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE
 Emily West, Chair

 December 14, 2021

Dear Chairperson Kebede and members of the Charter Commission,

First we would like to thank Chairperson Lizanecz and members of the Departments
Subcommittee of the Charter Commission for their time in October in discussing the role of
police oversight and allowing a representative from the Police Citizens Review Subcommittee
(PCRS) to provide an important perspective.

We understand that the Charter Commission is tasked with the very significant role of
developing recommendations to reshape city government in Portland. As the structure of police
oversight is one of the key topics being reviewed, it is even more vital that perspectives of those
that are part of the PCRS on a day-to-day basis are brought to the table. We too are looking to
find ways to strengthen our current structure and believe we have relevant insights to share.
We look forward to sharing those insights and information in the near future. In the meantime,
please see the attached results from our Community Survey administered in Spring 2021, as well
as our latest Annual Report, which includes monthly meeting minutes with relevant discussions
on this topic.

Moving forward, we would like to invite you to attend the PCRS monthly meeting on February
9th, 2022 to further expand our initial discussion on police oversight, and more specifically the
learnings and insights gathered from the day-to-day activities of the PCRS. We also encourage
you to share any relevant updates with the PCRS you may have as to the work you are
conducting on alternative police oversight models for Portland.

Please RSVP by January 28th so that we can post our agenda for that meeting in a timely manner.
Additionally, if there are specific items that you would like included in that agenda, please let
the Chair know.

Thank you in advance for your prompt response to our request. We look forward to engaging in
a robust and productive conversation at the Charter Commission’s soonest convenience. Thank
you as well for your service to the City of Portland.


Signed,

Emily West, Chair
Reginald Parson, Vice Chair
Rev. Kenneth Lewis, Member
 389 Congress Street, Room 211, Portland ME 04101
 www.portlandmaine.gov / tel. 207.874.8480 / tty. 207.874.8936 / fax. 207.874.8497




 Page 31
Kaylin Kerina, Member
Anne Hardcastle, Member
Sarai Manyiel, Member
Tim Smith, Member
CC: Daniella P. West, Mayor Kate Snyder, Pious Ali, April Fournier, Roberto Rodriguez, Anna
Trevorrow, Victoria Pelletier, Tae Chong, Andrew Zarro, and Mark Dion




 389 Congress Street, Room 211, Portland ME 04101
 www.portlandmaine.gov / tel. 207.874.8480 / tty. 207.874.8936 / fax. 207.874.8497



 Page 32
 CITY OF PORTLAND
 POLICE CITIZEN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE
 Reginald Parson, Chair


August 29, 2023


Mayor Snyder and honorable members of the Portland City Council,

I submit this letter on behalf of the members of the Police Citizen Review Subcommittee
(PCRS). I write to provide our assessment regarding the proposed ordinance that will
implement provisions of the Portland City Charter to create the new Civilian Police
Review Board (CPRB).

At our regularly scheduled meeting on July 12, 2023, we discussed the proposed language
of the ordinance along with a memo prepared by Associate Corporation Counsel Rachel
Millette. We spent over two hours engaging in a very thorough and productive discussion
about many provisions of the proposed ordinance that led to the decision to write this
letter. On August 9, 2023, the PCRS discussed the contents within the letter and approved
the document to move forward with some additional modifications. Our hope is that you
will take into consideration our feedback on the provisions below as you continue to work
on this proposal in the coming months. Below please find our comments for your review:

Eligibility requirements:

During our deliberations, we expressed concerns about the length of time an individual
must wait to serve on the CPRB if they are or were an employee with the City of Portland
within the last 10 years. This caused some members on the PCRS to be concerned that
this 10-year cooling off period could disenfranchise members of our community from
serving simply because they worked for the City of Portland. Therefore, we recommend
the City Council look further into reducing the cooling-off period from 10 years to a
minimum of 1 year before becoming eligible to serve on the CPRB.

In connection with this, we would also ask the City Council to consider creating parity
for both City of Portland employees as well as Portland Public School employees with
respect to the eligibility requirements to serve on the CPRB. It is our understanding that
based on the interpretation of the current ordinance by Corporation Counsel, it allows for
a current or former Portland Public School employee to immediately become eligible to
serve on the PCRS while a City of Portland employee will be disqualified from serving
on the PCRS for at least for 10 years. Some members are unsure as to why this distinction
exists between the two organizations, given that a Portland Public School employee also
receives their compensation from Portland taxpayers similar to a City of Portland
employee. Therefore, we recommend the City Council examine whether this distinction
 389 Congress Street, Room 211, Portland ME 04101
 www.portlandmaine.gov / tel. 207.874.8480 / tty. 207.874.8936 / fax. 207.874.8497




 Page 33
creates an unintentional barrier for all Portland citizens to engage in serving their
community regardless of whether they worked for the Portland Public Schools or the City
of Portland.

Role of the Community Liaison and Police Liaison:

Our review of the proposed ordinance allows for a Community Liaison and Police
Liaison to assist the CPRB in its duties, such as receiving and referring complaints to the
Portland Police Department, along with other public facing functions on behalf of the
CPRB. However, questions remained about who the Community Liaison would report to
and how much of their role would be focused on service to the CPRB. In addition, our
assessment of the proposed ordinance leads us to believe there are two separate and
distinct roles that we hope the City Council will provide financial support for in future
municipal budgets. To provide better understanding, we ask the City Council and/or City
Officials to provide a position description of these roles that may provide clarity and how
they fit in the overall function of police oversight in Portland. In addition, we also ask if
there is any flexibility in allowing either the Community Liaison and/or Police Liaison be
a contracted person from outside the City and reports to the CPRB.

Review of Complaints and Criteria:

The proposed ordinance that was presented to the PCRS in August allows for the CPRB
to review “all final investigation reports submitted by internal affairs and/or police
command staff […]” Two questions were raised during our review: (1) what is the
definition of “all complaints'' as proposed in the ordinance? And (2) whether this will
include any complaints that do not receive an Internal Affairs (“IA”) number and are
addressed by the Portland Police Department informally?

Finally, the current ordinance requires PCRS to review cases in a timely, fair, thorough,
and objective manner. The proposed ordinance also calls for the same criteria to be used.
We appreciate the consistency between the current and proposed ordinance with regard to
the criteria. However, questions arose on whether the scope of our review will constrain
the CPRB to the four criteria standards as outlined in the ordinance or will there be any
flexibility in reviewing a case that allows for the four criteria to be used plus any other
factors that a member deems relevant during the review of a case. We also ask for the
City Council’s guidance on this question as well.

Appeal of the CPRB’s Findings:

As stated above, the proposed ordinance allows the City Council to review the findings of
the CPRB as to whether the Internal Affairs case was completed in a timely, fair,
thorough, and objective manner. The proposed ordinance also enables a complainant to
appeal the CPRB’s findings to the Portland City Council that will, then, issue its own
advisory opinion about the review of the CPRB’s findings.



 389 Congress Street, Room 211, Portland ME 04101
 www.portlandmaine.gov / tel. 207.874.8480 / tty. 207.874.8936 / fax. 207.874.8497



 Page 34
During our discussions, a question was raised about the effectiveness of the appeal
process given the uncertainty based on the language as written that the City Council will
be able to review the information that is only provided to members of the PCRS/CPRB.
While the appeals process may provide value to complainants that would like a second
review of the CPRB’s findings that a case may have met all, some or none of criteria, we
believe this provision as written will not achieve the goals that the Charter is attempting
to accomplish. Therefore, we ask the City Council to consider making significant
modifications to the proposed ordinance that will strengthen the process for all parties
involved.

Composition of CPRB with Voting and Non-voting Members:

Finally, we also ask the City Council to explore the option of reviewing the number of
voting and non-voting members of the CPRB including the selection of the non-voting
member on the CPRB. During our discussions, a concern was raised on how the Mayor
would select a non-voting member if there was less than the required number of voting
members to constitute a quorum. Without fully knowing the criteria the Mayor would
consider in appointing a non-voting member of the CPRB, some members expressed that
the selection of the non-voting member may be based on preference if they express
similar ideologies on matters of policing, etc.

In addition, some members were concerned that having six voting members may result in
a deadlock if members are split on the outcome of a case with a 3-3 tie for example. By
having more than six as voting members, it ensures the CPRB can conduct the work in a
manner that accomplishes both an opportunity to achieve a quorum if at least four voting
members are present and prevents potential issues of a tie, when voting to decide whether
a case is done in a timely, fair, thorough, and objective manner.

CPRB Status as Separate and Independent Agency:

Under the current City Code, the PCRS is constituted under the Civil Service Commission
as “two independent subcommittees constituting the commission.”1 While the recently
adopted provisions in Article 9 may not address whether the CPRB will be maintained as a
separate but independent body from other commissions, we ask the City Council to
consider separating the CPRB from the Civil Service Commission entirely, which will
strengthen the CPRB role as an independent body and further the intended purpose of the
new Board.

In sum, we would like to thank you for your consideration of our recommendations and
thoughts that we hope carries out the will of the public to create better police oversight in
Portland.




 389 Congress Street, Room 211, Portland ME 04101
 www.portlandmaine.gov / tel. 207.874.8480 / tty. 207.874.8936 / fax. 207.874.8497



 Page 35
Best,




Reginald Parson
Chair, Police Citizen Review Subcommittee




 389 Congress Street, Room 211, Portland ME 04101
 www.portlandmaine.gov / tel. 207.874.8480 / tty. 207.874.8936 / fax. 207.874.8497



 Page 36
City of Portland, Maine Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec.2-22 rev. 1-6-10

 Chapter 2 ADMINISTRATION*

----------
 *Charter reference(s)--Powers and duties, art. I, § 2.

 Cross reference(s)--Ordinances promising or guaranteeing the payment of money
for the city, or authorizing the issuance of any bonds in the city or any evidence of
the city's indebtedness, or any contract or obligation assumed by the city saved from
repeal, §1-4(1); ordinances making any appropriations saved from repeal, § 1-4(4);
ordinances prescribing the number, classification or compensation of any city officers
or employees saved from repeal, § 1-4(10); ordinances providing for retirement
benefits saved from repeal, § 1-4(11); uniform procedure for collecting assessments, §
1-16; elections, Ch. 9; general assistance, Ch. 13; planning board, § 14-16 et seq.;
administration and enforcement of zoning, § 14-461 et seq.; jurisdiction of board of
appeals for zoning, § 14-471 et seq.; board of appeals, § 14-541 et seq.; historic
preservation, § 14-600 et seq.; licenses and permits, Ch. 15; police, Ch. 20; special
police, § 20-16 et seq.; administration and enforcement of traffic regulations, §
28-11 et seq.; traffic division, § 28 et seq.; traffic engineer, § 28-21 et seq.;
parking division, § 28-41 et seq.
----------

Art. I. In General, §§ 2-1 —- 2-15
Art. II. Officers, §§ 2-16--2-30
 Div. 1. Generally, §§2-16—2-20
 Div. 2. Prohibition on Immigration Status Checks §§2-21—2-30
Art. III. Boards, Commissions, Committees, etc., §§ 2-31--2-40
Art. III-A. Portland Land Bank Commission; Fund, §§ 2-41—2-45
Art. IV. Civil Service, §§ 2-46--2-90
 Div. 1. Generally, §§ 2-46
 Div. 2. Civil Service Employment Commission, §§ 2-47--2-57
 Div. 3. Employment SubcommitteeFire and Police Department
Employment, §§ 2-58—2-75
 Div. 4. Police Citizen Review Subcommittee, §§ 2-76—2-90
Art. IV-A. Civilian Police Review Board, §§ 2-76—2-90
Art. V. Employee Benefits, §§ 2-91--2-200
 Div. 1. Generally, §§ 2-91--2-100
 Div. 2. Retirement, §§ 2-101--2-200
Art. VI. Funds Due to City, §§ 2-201--2-300
 Div. 1. Generally, §§ 2-201--2-220
 Div. 2. Provisional Payments, §§ 2-221--2-229
 Div. 3. Interest, §§ 2-230--2-300
Art. VII. Procurement and Contracting Procedures, §§ 2-301--2-400
 Div. 1. Generally, § 2-301
 Div. 2. Competitive Process for Contracts, §§ 2-302-2-312
 Div. 3. Sale or Disposal of Real or Personal Property §§ 2-
 313-2-400
Art. VIII. Civil Emergency Preparedness, §§ 2-401--2-415
Art. X. Exemption from Vehicle Excise Tax for Certain Military
Personnel, §§ 2-436--2-437

* * *




 Page 37
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-3 Rev. 1-6-10

 ARTICLE III. BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, COMMITTEES, ETC.*


----------
 *Cross reference(s)--Civil service commission, § 2-66 et seq.; planning board, §
14-16 et seq.; jurisdiction of board of appeals for zoning, § 14-471 et seq.; board of
appeals, § 14-541 et seq.; historic preservation committee, § 14-603 et seq.; friends
of the parks, § 18-10.
----------

Sec. 2-31. Oath of office.

 (a) All persons appointed by the City Council to membership on
any board or commission of the City shall, prior to taking office as
such member, be sworn to the faithful discharge of their duties by the
City Clerk, Justice of the Peace, or Notary Public.

 (b) The form of such oath shall be as follows:

 I, ________, do solemnly swear that I will support the
 Constitution of the United States and of this State, so long as I
 shall continue a citizen thereof, and that I will faithfully
 discharge, to the best of my abilities, the duties incumbent upon
 me as a member of ________, according to said Constitutions and
 the laws of this State and ordinances of this City.

 ____________
 State of Maine
County of Cumberland, ss. ____

 I, ________, certify that ________ personally appeared before
 me on this day and took the above oath.

 _____________
 City Clerk
 Justice of the Peace
 Notary Public
(Code 1968, §§ 204.1, 204.2; Ord. No. 478-73, 7-16-73)

Sec. 2-32. Limitation on term of service--Generally.

 (a) No person shall be appointed to, nor serve, more than three
(3) consecutive full terms or nine (9) consecutive-years, whichever is
greater, on the same board or commission of the city.

 (b) Except as otherwise specified in the Charter, Tthe foregoing
limitation shall apply only to service as a regular voting member of
the board or commission, and not to service as an alternate nor as a
nonvoting member.

 (c) To the extent that this Code provides for a different
limitation on the term of service for a specific board or commission,
the limitation provided in this article shall apply.

 Page 38
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-5 Rev. 1-6-10

(Ord. No. 301-91, 4-1-91; Ord. No. 118-08/09, 12-1-08)

Sec. 2-33. Applicability.

 (a) The above limitation on terms shall apply to the following
boards and commissions:

 (1) Board of appeals;

 (2) Board of assessment review;

 (3) Reserved;

 (4) Cable television committee (CATV);

 (5) Civil service commission employment subcommitteecommission;

 (6) Civil service commission police citizen review
 subcommitteeCivilian police review board;

 (7) Community development block grant allocation committee;

 (8) Friends of the parkParks commission;

 (9) Historic preservation committee;

 (10) Land bank commission;

 (11) Planning board; and

 (12) Portland public art committee;

 (b) Except as otherwise specified in the Charter, Tthe above
limitation on terms shall not be applied retroactively and shall apply
to any person serving on one (1) of the above-named boards or
commissions on the effective date of this section (5/1/91) beginning
with the expiration of the term in which they are so serving.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the limitation on terms shall be applied
to members serving on the boards and commissions identified in section
2-33, subsection (a), paragraphs 5,6,7 and 12, beginning with the
expiration of the term of any sitting board or commission member
following the passage of this amendment.

---------
 *Editor’s Note—In reference to Section 2-33(b) above, “passage of this
amendment” refers to Council Order 118-08/09, passed on December 1, 2008.
---------

 (c) Nothing herein shall prevent consecutive appointment of any
person to a different board or commission from that on which he or she
has served the maximum consecutive time.

 (d) In the case of the board of harbor commissioners, such

 Page 39
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-6 Rev. 6-4-2018

limitation shall apply only to the two (2) members appointed by the
City Council.

 (e) Any member on the above-named boards or commissions who
completes the maximum years of service prior to the expiration of his
or hertheir term shall be allowed to complete that term of service and
to continue to serve after expiration of that term until a successor is
appointed and qualified, provided such service shall not continue in
excess of one hundred twenty (120) days after expiration of the term.

 (f) If an individual who served as a member of the police citizen
review subcommittee is appointed to serve on the civilian police review
board, the years that the individual served on the police citizen
review subcommittee and the years served on the civilian police review
board will count toward the nine-year limitation in section 2-32(a).
(Ord. No. 301-91, 4-1-91; Substitute Ord. No. 233-99, §2, 4-5-99; Ord. No. 118-08/09,
12-1-08; Ord. No. 219-17/18, 6-4-2018)

Sec. 2-34. Period of ineligibility.

 Any person who completes the maximum terms or years of service on
a board or commission shall be ineligible for reappointment to that
board or commission for a period of three (3) consecutive calendar
years from the date of completion of such maximum terms or years of
service.
(Ord. No. 301-91, 4-1-91; Ord. No. 118-08/09, 12-1-08)

Sec. 2-35. Reserved.
Sec. 2-36. Reserved.
Sec. 2-37. Reserved.
Sec. 2-38. Reserved.
Sec. 2-39. Reserved.
Sec. 2-40. Tenure of Directors of the Board of the Greater Portland
Transit District.

 Each Director of the board of the Greater Portland Transit
District representing the City of Portland on the effective date of
this amendment, or thereafter, shall be appointed annually for a term
of one (1) year and until his or hertheir successor is appointed. Each
Director so appointed shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council.
(Ord. No. 659-86, § 1, 6-16-86)

* * *


 ARTICLE IV. CIVIL SERVICE*

----------
 *Charter reference(s)--Mandate for civil service, Art. VI, § 3.
 *Cross reference(s)--Commissions generally, § 2-31 et seq.

 *Cross reference(s)--32 M.R.S.A. § 7166 (Limitation on use of polygraph in
employment)


 Page 40
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-14 Rev. 1-6-10


 *Editor's Note--The Civil Service Ordinance was substantially reorganized
and revised by Council Order No. 89-02/03, 11-4-02.
----------

 DIVISION 1. GENERALLY

Sec. 2-46. Definitions.

 The following words and phrases, when used in this article, shall
having the meanings respectively ascribed to them unless the context
otherwise indicates:

 Cause. In the case of a member, "cause" shall mean just cause and
shall include any act or omission which constitutes legal cause and
includes, but is not limited to: violation of any departmental rule or
rules; incompetent or inefficient performance of duty; or inattention
to or dereliction of duties; insubordination; discourteous treatment of
the public or a fellow employee; violation of any provision of this
article or the rules adopted thereunder, whether such violation may
result in a forfeiture of office hereunder, or not; job suitability or
physical unfitness to perform the normal duties of the position which
the member holds; the use of intoxicating liquors, narcotics, or any
other drug, liquid, or preparation on duty, or to such an extent that
such use interferes with the efficiency or job suitability or physical
fitness of the member, or prevents the member from properly performing
the normal functions and duties of his or hertheir position;
misconduct; the commission of any disqualifying criminal offense;
failure to report to the appropriate superior; errors, incompetence,
misconduct, inefficiency, neglect of duty, or any other form of
misconduct or negligence of which the member has knowledge; and any
other acts or omissions which would tend to directly discredit or
injure the public service or would jeopardize the effective functioning
of the department. In the case of a civil service employment
commissioner or alternate, "cause" shall include any act or omission
which constitutes legal cause, and includes but is not limited to:
incompetent or inefficient performance of duty; unexcused absences from
commission meetings; violation of any provision of this article or the
rules adopted thereunder, whether such violation may result in a
forfeiture of office hereunder, or not; the commission or conviction
for any disqualifying criminal offense, or any action by the Civil
Service Commissioner or alternate intended to affect or influence, or
which could reasonably be expected to affect or influence any decision
of the City Manager, the Chief of either department, or the City
Council with respect to the department, or of any member of the
department with respect to the performance of his or hertheir duty.

 Charge means a written statement to the member describing the act
or omission constituting cause for action taken or proposed to be
taken.
 2-5
 Page 41
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-15 Rev. 2-5-2018


 Civil service commission means collectively the two independent
subcommittees constituting the commission, i.e. the employment
subcommittee and the police citizen review subcommittee.

 Demotion means any reduction in rank within the department but
shall not include any economic layoff.

 Director of human resources shall mean the person designated by
the City Manager to act as Director of Personnel for the City and his
or hertheir designees (also referred to herein as the "Director").

 Member means any firefighter, fire officer, police officer, or
superior officer appointed hereunder to any rank within the fire or
police departments, except the chiefs thereof.

 Promotion means any advancement in rank within the department,
other than the rank of chief.

 Rank means the position classification of any member to which he
or she has been appointed hereunder within the fire department or
police department but shall not include any contractual or other pay
differentials between functions or grades within each rank.

 Relative means grandfather, grandmother, father, mother, son,
daughter, grandson, granddaughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first
cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, domestic partner, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law,
sister-in-law, step-father, step-mother, step-son, step-daughter,
step-brother, step-sister, half-brother, or half-sister, whether by
half-blood or full blood, and whether by consanguinity or affinity.

(Code 1968, § 201.1; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 433-82, § 1, 3-15-82; Ord.
No. 299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No. 288-90, 4-2-90; Ord. No. 117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No.
184-97, 1-22-97; Substitute Ord. No. 83-01/02, § 4, 11-5-01; Ord. No. 143-17/18,
2-5-2018)

 DIVISION 2. CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYMENT COMMISSION*

Sec. 2-47. Created.

 There is hereby created a civil service employment commission,
also referred to in this article as the commission. The commission
shall consist of two separate and independent subcommittees as follows:
 the civil service employment subcommittee and the civil service police
citizen review subcommittee. Commissioners shall be appointed to, and
serve on, one of the two subcommittees only.
(Code 1968, § 201.3; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No.
288-90, 4-2-90; Ord. No. 117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No. 184-97, 1-22-97; Substitute
Ord. No. 83-01/02, § 3, 11-5-01)


Sec. 2-48. Composition.
 2-6
 Page 42
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-47 Rev. 1-6-10


 (a) The Civil Service Employment Subcommittee of the Civil
Service Commission shall consist of three (3) commissioners and one
(1) alternate who shall serve in the absence of any commissioner.

 (b) The police citizen review subcommittee shall consist of seven
(7) commissioners who shall serve in the absence of any commissioner.
(Code 1968, § 201.3; Ord. No. 89-80 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No.
117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No. 184-97, 1-22-97; Substitute Ord. No. 83-01/02, § 3, 11-
5-01; Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)

Sec. 2-49. Qualifications.

 (a) Qualifications of commissioners. Every civil service
employment commissioner and alternate shall be a resident of the City
of Portland. In addition, the following persons shall not be eligible
for appointment to, or service on the Commission:

 (1) Any present or former employee of the city or school
 department, who was employed by the city or school department
 within the previous one ten (10) year periods;

 (2) Any present or former member of the City Council or School
 Board, who has held that position in the previous one ten
 (10) years period; or

 (3) Any civil service employment commissioner who has completed
 three (3) consecutive full terms of three (3) years as
 provided in Chapter 2, Article III;

 (4) Any individual presently serving as a member of the civilian
 police review board; or.

 (5b) Any relative of a present member of the police or fire
 departments. Additional subcommittee eligibility
 requirements:

 (1) Employment subcommittee. The following persons shall not be
 eligible to serve on the employment subcommittee:

 any relative of a present member of the police or fire
 departments.

 (2) Police Citizen Review Subcommittee. In order to ensure an
 objective and unbiased audit of the police department’s
 internal affairs investigation process, any applicant for
 service on the citizen review subcommittee shall be
 disqualified from serving on said subcommittee if:

 a. any member of the applicant’s immediate family is or has
 been a Portland police officer in the previous ten (10)
 years;
 2-7
 Page 43
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-18 Rev. 2-5-2018


 b. the applicant or any member of his or her immediate
 family has been arrested by any member of the Portland
 police department within the previous ten (10) years, or
 has had the final disposition of any criminal
 proceedings resulting from such an arrest within the
 previous ten (10) years, whichever is longer;

 c. his or her immediate family has filed a complaint with
 the internal affairs unit of the Portland police
 department within the previous ten (10) years;

 d. the applicant or any member of his or her immediate
 family has brought suit against the City of Portland,
 the Chief of Police, the police department or any
 individual police officer for a cause of action arising
 out of an officer’s performance of his or her duties;
 within the last ten (10) years, or has had such a suit
 finally disposed of within the previous ten years,
 whichever is longer; and

 e. “Immediate family” as used herein shall mean and include
 spouse, domestic partner, children, grandchildren,
 parents, grandparents, and siblings.

 (bc) Failure to disclose any grounds for disqualification or
falsification of any information in the application process shall
disqualify the person from service on the commission and shall
constitute “cause” within the meaning of section 2-46.

 (cd) Any civil service employment commissioner or alternate who
becomes ineligible to serve during his or hertheir term shall resign,
and failure to do so shall be "cause" within the meaning of section
2-46. A commissioner or alternate on the employment subcommittee who
is a relative of any candidate for appointment under this article shall
inform the secretary in writing of such relationship and shall not
attend any meeting of the subcommittee commission dealing with such
candidacy, nor participate in nor attempt to influence any action by
the commission with respect to the position for which such relative has
applied.

 (de) Reasonable efforts shall be made to ensure that the
appointments to the civil service employment commission are diverse and
representative of the community.
(Code 1968, § 201.4; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299.86, 1-22-86; Ord. No.
370-91, § 1, 6-5-91; Ord. No. 117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No. 184-97, 1-22-97;
Substitute Ord. No. 83-01/02, § 3, 11-5-01; Ord. No. 118-08/09, 12-1-08; Ord. No.
143-17/18, 2-5-2018)

Sec. 2-50. Appointment.

 Civil service employment commissioners and the alternates shall be
 2-8
 Page 44
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-19 Rev. 1-6-10

appointed by the City Council. Such power of appointment shall be
exercised only after the City Clerk has published a notice announcing
such position or positions, describing the responsibilities thereof,
and soliciting applications by qualified persons in a newspaper of
general circulation within the city not less than fifteen (15) calendar
days in advance of action by such council. Applications may be
solicited whether or not there is a vacancy, and such applicants may be
considered for any vacancy which occurs within one hundred eighty (180)
days of the closing date for such applications. Such applicants may
also be considered for appointment as a commissioner pro tem pursuant
to section 2-55 below. Nothing herein shall limit the city's authority
to solicit applications whenever the City Manager deems that it is
necessary.
(Code 1968, § 201.4; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No.
138-92, § 3, 10-19-92; Ord. No. 117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No. 184-97, 1-22-97)

Sec. 2-51. Terms.

 (a) Term. Each civil service employment commissioner or alternate
shall be appointed to a three-year term, unless appointed to fill a
vacancy. Police citizen review subcommittee commissioners first
appointed hereunder shall be appointed for one-, two- and three-year
terms so that only two (2) are initially selected each year other than
by reason of resignation, removal or death. A commissioner or
alternate shall serve until his or hertheir successor is appointed and
qualified, but in no case longer than one hundred twenty (120) days
from the expiration of his or hertheir term.

 (b) Limitation on service. The term limitations of Chapter 2,
Article IIIii shall apply to service on each of the subcommittees of
the civil service employment commission.

 (c) Applicability. The limitation on terms provided by this
amendment shall apply to any person serving on the civil service
employment commission as of the effective date of this amendment
(7/5/1991) and to any person appointed after said effective date.
(Code 1968, § 201.3; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 275-83, 11-7-83; Ord. No.
299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No. 370-91, § 2, 6-5-91; Ord. No. 117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No.
184-97, 1-22-97; Substitute Ord. No. 83-01/02, § 3, 11-5-01; Ord. No. 118-08/09, 12-1-
08)

Sec. 2-52. Compensation.

 Civil service commissioners shall serve without compensation,
except that reasonable expenses incurred by any commissioner or
alternate incidental to his or her duties under this article may be
reimbursed.
(Code 1968, § 201.4; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No.
117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No. 184-97, 1-22-97)

Sec. 2-53. Removal.

 Any civil service commissioner or alternate may be removed from
 2-9
 Page 45
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-22 Rev. 1-6-10

office by the City Council for cause, after notice and the opportunity
to be heard.
(Code 1968, § 201.4; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No.
117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No. 184-97, 1-22-97; Substitute Ord. No. 83-01/02, § 3, 11-5-
01)

Sec. 2-54. Officers.

 Each subcommittee of Tthe civil service employment commission
shall annually elect one (1) of its members as the chair. Each The
commissionsubcommittee may, at its option, also elect one (1) of its
members as the vice chair, to serve in the absence of the chair. The
Director of Human Resources or his or hertheir designee shall serve as
secretary to the employment subcommitteecommission and shall furnish
any necessary administrative assistance. The corporation counsel or
his or her designee shall serve as secretary to the police citizen
review subcommittee and shall furnish any necessary administrative
assistance to that subcommittee.
(Code 1968, § 201.3; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No.
288-90, 4-2-90; Ord. No. 117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No. 184-97, 1-22-97; Substitute
Ord. No. 83-01/02, § 3, 11-5-01; Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)

Sec. 2-55. Commissioners pro tem.

 In the case of temporary absence from the city, temporary
disability of the civil service employment commission members and
alternate, or other circumstances, so that a quorum of a
subcommitteethe commission cannot be constituted without such action,
the City Council may appoint such commissioners pro tem as may be
necessary to constitute a quorum. Commissioners pro tem shall be
subject to the eligibility requirements of this division. A
commissioner pro tem shall possess the powers and discharge the duties
of a regular commissioner during the absence or disability for which he
or she has been appointed; provided, however, that a commissioner pro
tem shall have no authority with respect to rule-making by the
commission and shall not participate in any action or decision where a
quorum is otherwise present.
(Code 1968, § 201.4; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No.
117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No. 184-97, 1-22-97)

Sec. 2-56. Meetings.

 (a) Calling of meetings. Meetings or hearings of either
subcommittee of the Civil Service Employment Commission may be called
at any time by its Chair, or in the absence from the city or disability
of the Chair, by any member of the Subcommitteecommission. The Chair
of a Subcommittee shall call a meeting upon request from any
Subcommittee cCommissioner.

 (b) Quorum. A quorum of the Employment Subcommittee
 of the Civil Service Commission shall be two (2). The Subcommittee
Alternate may attend any hearing or meeting, but shall participate as a
Commissioner only during the absence or disability of any Commissioner
 2-10
 Page 46
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-25 Rev. 1-6-10

or whenever a vacancy on the Subcommittee Commission exists.

 A quorum of the Police Citizen Review Subcommittee shall be four
(4). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the quorum shall be reduced to
three (3) during any period when there is a vacancy on the
Subcommittee, including a vacancy in the position of alternate.
(Code 1968, § 201.5; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No.
117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No. 184-97, 1-22-97; Substitute Ord. No. 83-01/02, § 3, 11-5-
01; Ord. No. 247-03/04, 6-21-04)

Sec. 2-57. Prohibited practices.

 (a) Forfeiture of office. A determination by a court of competent
jurisdiction of a practice, or facts necessarily constituting a
practice prohibited by this section by any civil service employment
commissioner, alternate, member of a department, or any other person
shall result in the forfeiture of any office held by such person and
shall be a permanent disqualification for any office existing under or
governed by this article.

 (b) Nondiscrimination. No discrimination shall be exercised,
promised, or threatened by any person, in connection with any action
taken or to be taken under this article, in favor or against any
applicant or member of a department because of his or hertheir
religious beliefs, ancestry, national origin or veteran's status; race,
sex, sexual orientation, or color; because of age or physical or mental
disability, except where such requirements constitute a bona fide
occupational qualification or failure to meet the requirements poses a
safety hazard or cannot be reasonably accommodated; because the
applicant or member of the department, or member of his or hertheir
family, has or has declined to contribute to any political fund or to
render political service; or because of any lawful union activity or
membership. No person shall seek or attempt to use, nor shall the civil
service employment commission give consideration to, any political
endorsement, or any other factor prohibited by the preceding sentence.
To the extent consistent with law and with this article, it is the
policy of the city to encourage diversity in its work force and to use
affirmative action in its recruitment of applicants for positions
hereunder.

 (c) Falsification. No person shall make any false statement,
certificate, mark, rating or report with respect to any test,
certification or appointment made under any provisions of this article,
or in any manner commit or attempt to commit any fraud preventing the
impartial execution of this article and the rules and the regulations
adopted hereunder, or to cheat, or attempt to cheat, or abet cheating
on any examination.

 (d) Bribery. No person shall directly or indirectly give, render,
pay, offer, solicit, or accept any money, service, or other valuable
consideration for or on account of any appointment, proposed
appointment, promotion, or proposed promotion to, or any advantage in a
 2-11
 Page 47
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-26 Rev. 1-6-10

position, or in an examination for a position, in the departments.
(Code 1968, § 201.7; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No.
288-90, 4-2-90; Ord. No. 239-91, § 1, 2-20-91; Ord. No. 117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No.
184-97, 1-22-97)

 Cross reference(s)--Definitions and rules of construction generally, § 1-2.

 DIVISION 3. EMPLOYMENT SUBCOMMITTEEFIRE AND POLICE DEPARTMENT
 EMPLOYMENT

Sec. 2-58. Applicability; duties.

 (a) In general. This division shall govern the appointment,
reinstatement, promotion, demotion, layoff, suspension, resignation, or
removal of members of the fire and police departments of the city,
other than the chiefs thereof, except to the extent that the Maine
Public Employees Labor Relations Law and any collective bargaining
agreement made in accordance therewith provides to the contrary.

 (b) Duties. In addition to carrying out the duties described
elsewhere in this article, it shall be the duty of the employment
subcommitteecommission:

 (1) To establish a system of personnel administration for members
 of the departments based on competition, merit principles,
 and scientific methods, and to prevent unlawful
 discrimination based upon race or color, religion, age, sex
 (including pregnancy), sexual orientation, gender identity or
 expression, ancestry or national origin, physical or mental
 disability, veteran status, genetic information, previous
 assertion of a claim or right under Maine’s Workers’
 Compensation Act, previous actions taken protected under
 Maine’s Whistleblowers’ Protection Act, or any other
 protected group status as defined by applicable law, or
 political affiliation;

 (2) To oversee the process of creating lists of names of persons
 eligible for specific appointments; and

 (3) To make suitable rules, from time to time, which rules shall
 not be inconsistent with this article, applicable statutes,
 or regulations. Proposed rules shall be submitted to the City
 Manager and shall become effective when approved by the City
 Manager. All such rules shall be recorded in the office of
 the City Clerk.
(Code 1968, § 201.2; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299-86, § 1-22-86; Ord. No.
117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No. 184-97, 1-22-97; Ord. No. 174-05/06, 3-6-06; Ord. No.
143-17/18, 2-5-2018)
Sec. 2-59. Reserved.
Sec. 2-59.1. Minimum qualifications for original appointment to the
fire department.


 2-12
 Page 48
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-29 Rev. 1-6-10

 (a) Standards required. Each candidate for original appointment
to the fire department must meet the minimum requirements set forth in
this subsection. The deadline by which these requirements must be met,
the method of proving such requirements have been satisfactorily met,
and any additional requirements shall be established by rule of the
employment subcommitteecommission:

 (1) Age. Have reached the age of twenty-one (21), or have
 reached the age of twenty (20) with two years of post-high
 school education.

 (2) Good character. Be of good character; which includes a
 personal history of honesty, fairness, and respect for the
 rights of others and for state and federal law. No person
 shall be appointed who has a history which includes a
 disqualifying criminal offense or conviction.

 (3) Education and experience. Have a high school diploma or
 general equivalency diploma (GED);

 (4) Licensing. Possess a valid State of Maine Emergency Medical
 Technician license of EMT-B or higher;

 (5) Motor vehicle driver's license. Possess a valid motor vehicle
 driver's license for the three (3) years immediately
 preceding the date of application. If such license is from a
 state other than the State of Maine, the candidate must be
 qualified to receive a State of Maine driver's license; and

 (6) Citizenship or immigration status. Be a citizen of the United
 States or eligible to work in the United States.

 (b) Automatic disqualifiers. An applicant for original
appointment will be automatically disqualified from the hiring process
for any of the following characteristics, and as further established by
rule of the employment subcommitteecommission:

 (1) Disqualified Individuals. Disqualification from
 participating in federal funded health care programs under
 the Social Security Act.

 (2) Criminal Convictions/Conduct. Disqualifying criminal
 conviction;

 (3) Protection Orders. An active Protection from Abuse or
 Protection from Harassment Order (temporary or permanent)
 served on the applicant;

 (4) Military Service. Dishonorable discharge from the military or
 a bad conduct discharge from the military;


 2-13
 Page 49
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-29 Rev. 1-6-10

 (5) Tattoos or Body Art. Tattoos, branding, body art or body
 markings that (a) indicate a criminal gang affiliation, (b)
 depict sexually explicit art or nudity, (c) are associated
 with hate groups or supremacist groups such as swastikas,
 pentagrams, or (d) otherwise violate the rules promulgated by
 the Fire Chief.
(Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)

Sec. 2-59.2. Hiring process for original appointment to the fire
department.

 (a) Fire department hiring process. All applicants for original
appointment to the fire department shall satisfactorily complete the
minimum requirements in this section. The employment
subcommitteecommission may, by rule, establish processes and procedures
to implement these requirements, may set minimum passing scores, and
may impose additional requirements for original appointment.

 (1) Job-related aptitude capacity test. All applicants for
 original appointment must pass a job-related aptitude
 capacity test.

 (2) Physical fitness test. All applicants for original
 appointment must pass a physical fitness test.

 (3) Oral interview. All applicants for original appointment must
 satisfactorily complete an oral interview. The oral
 interview panel shall consist of one member of the employment
 subcommitteecommission and designees of the fire chief. No
 member of the panel may be a candidate for the position nor a
 relative of a candidate.

 (b) Conditional offer of employment. Upon successful completion
of the job-related aptitude capacity test, the physical fitness
assessment and the oral interview, the fire chief may evaluate the
candidates and make a conditional offer of employment to qualified
applicants, at his or hertheir discretion. The conditional employee
must successfully complete the following requirements. Failure to do
so will result in revocation of the conditional offer of employment.

 (1) Background check. All applicants for original appointment
 must satisfactorily complete a background check, including
 criminal history, driving record, and credit check.

 (2) Medical examination. The applicant must satisfactorily
 complete a medical exam to determine whether the applicant is
 physically capable of performing the essential functions of
 the job.

 (3) Job suitability assessment. The applicant must
 satisfactorily complete a job suitability assessment.

 2-14
 Page 50
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-30 Rev. 1-6-10

 (c) Rehire of former fire department member. In the sole
discretion of the fire chief, a fire department member who voluntarily
terminated his or hertheir employment on satisfactory terms may be
rehired to a vacant, entry-level position within one year of
termination without completing the full process required by subsection
(a) above. However, the member must satisfactorily complete a new
medical examination and job suitability assessment, and must complete a
new probationary period.

 (d) Transfer between public safety departments. Upon the written
request of the employee to the chief of his or hertheir department, an
employee in good standing within either department may be transferred
from one department to the other to an entry level position, subject to
the conditions and limitations established by rule of the employment
subcommitteecommission and with the approval of both chiefs and the
City Manager. Police officers requesting a transfer to the Fire
Department must successfully complete the Candidate Physical Abilities
Test (CPAT) and provide proof of a valid State of Maine Emergency
Medical Technician license. The Chief of Police may waive the police
entrance exam for firefighters. All other hiring requirements must be
successfully completed.

 (e) Waiver. During periods of difficulty in recruitment, the
employment subcommitteecommission may vary the requirements of this
section by rule, which rule shall not be effective for more than one
hiring cycle.
(Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)

Sec. 2-59.3. Disqualification and temporary withdrawal from fire
application process.

In accordance with rules promulgated by the employment
subcommitteecommission, an applicant may be disqualified, or
temporarily withdraw, from the application process as follows:

 (a) Disqualification. After notice and an opportunity to be
heard, the employment subcommitteecommission or the fire chief may
disqualify an applicant for original appointment.

 (b) Temporary withdrawal of applicants for original
appointments. An applicant for original appointment may, for
sufficient cause, temporarily withdraw from consideration for a
limited period of time with the prior approval of the fire chief.
During the period of temporary disqualification the applicant’s
eligibility for appointment shall automatically expire 12 months
after the date the applicant passed the aptitude capacity test.
(Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)

Sec. 2-59.4. Fire department promotional process.

 (a) Minimum qualifications. All candidates for promotion within
the fire department shall satisfactorily complete the minimum
requirements in this section. The employment subcommitteecommission
 2-15
 Page 51
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-32 Rev. 1-6-10

may, by rule, establish processes and procedures to implement these
requirements, may set minimum passing scores, and may impose additional
requirements for promotion.

 (1) Time in service. Promotional candidates must have the
 following amount of time in service to be eligible for a
 promotion:

 a. Six years of continuous service in the fire department
 for promotion from firefighter to lieutenant.

 b. One year of continuous service as a lieutenant for
 promotion from lieutenant to captain.

 (2) Training. Promotional candidates must possess the minimum
 amount of training, certification, and/or education for the
 rank to which he or she is seeking promotion.

 (3) Departmental officer candidate program. Promotional
 candidates must participate in and complete a fire department
 officer candidate program, which may include job-shadowing,
 mentorship, and similar requirements.

 (4) Assessment center exam. Promotional candidates must complete
 and pass an assessment center exam each year.

 (5) Oral interview. All promotional candidates must
 satisfactorily complete an oral interview. The oral
 interview panel shall consist of one member of the employment
 subcommitteecommission and designees of the fire chief. No
 member of the panel may be a candidate for the position nor a
 relative of a candidate. The president of the union, or
 histheir designee, shall have the right to observe, but not
 participate in, the interview.

 (6) Job suitability assessment. Candidates must undergo a job
 suitability assessment. Assessments within three (3) years
 from the date of examination may be used, or the fire chief
 may require an updated job suitability assessment at any
 time. Assessments may be taken into consideration in the
 promotional process.

 (b) Eligible promotion list. Promotional candidates shall be
placed on a ranked certified promotional list. A separate list shall
be made for each promotional rank.

 (1) The list shall be ranked based on a methodology established
 by the employment subcommitteecommission.

 (2) The employment subcommitteecommission shall also establish
 rules governing the validity of the list, including the
 minimum number of names required on the list, the duration
 and expiration of the list, and other requirements.
 2-16
 Page 52
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-32 Rev. 1-6-10

 (c) Promoting from ranked certified promotional list. Promotions
in the fire department shall be made from the ranked certified
promotional list in their order of ranking, unless the candidate
refuses the promotion, is disqualified for cause by the chief, or lacks
the particular skill set required by the promotional vacancy. If the
chief disqualifies a candidate for cause, he or she shall state the
reasons for disqualification in writing.

 (d) Command staff. The employment subcommitteecommission may
provide by rule for special procedures or different competitive
examination for appointment to fire department command staff because
such rank requires particular and exceptional qualifications of a
scientific, managerial, professional, technical, or educational
character and said rule may waive any requirement of this article in
such cases.
 (e) Waiver. When the number of employees eligible for promotion
to a particular vacancy is insufficient to permit meaningful
competition, the employment subcommitteecommission may vary the
requirements of this section by rule, which rule shall not be effective
for more than one promotional cycle.
(Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)

Sec. 2-59.5. Disqualification during fire promotional process.

After notice and an opportunity to be heard, the employment
subcommitteecommission or the fire chief may disqualify a candidate
from participating in the promotional process, or may remove a
candidate for promotion from the ranked certified promotional list.
(Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)

Sec. 2-59.6. Fire department appeals and rights.

 (a) Appeals from decisions of the fire chief. Except as otherwise
provided, an applicant, candidate for original appointment, or
candidate for promotion shall have the opportunity to appeal any
decision made by the fire chief under this division to the employment
subcommitteecommission, pursuant to rules established by the
subcommitteecommission. The subcommittee commission may, after
hearing, uphold or overturn the fire chief’s decision. The subcommittee
commission shall provide the fire chief and the appellant with written
notice of its decision and the reasons therefor.

 (b) Appeals from decisions of the employment
subcommitteecommission. An appeal of a decision of the employment
subcommitteecommission under this section may be taken to the city
council. The city council may, after hearing, uphold or overturn the
employment subcommitteecommission’s decision. The council shall provide
the subcommitteecommission, fire chief, and appellant with written
notice of its decision and the reasons therefor.

 (c) Applicant rights. If a decision is overturned with respect to
an applicant, the applicant shall continue through the remainder of the
application process or be considered eligible for hire, as applicable.
 In the event an applicant is reinstated pursuant to this section, he
 2-17
 Page 53
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-34 Rev. 1-6-10

or she shall have no right or entitlement to be considered for any
vacancy that exists at or prior to the date of said reinstatement.

 (d) Promotional candidate rights. If a decision is overturned
with respect to a promotional candidate, that candidate shall 1) be
allowed to continue through the promotional process; 2) be placed on or
reinstated to the ranked certified promotional list; or 3) be promoted,
as applicable. The decision maker shall specifically state the
appropriate remedy.

 (e) Vested rights. No rights shall vest in any person who is
deemed to be a qualified applicant or who is placed on the ranked
certified promotional list, and no names shall be carried over from one
eligible list to another, except as otherwise provided in this section.

 (f) Rulemaking. The employment subcommitteecommission may
promulgate rules to implement this section, including forms and
deadlines for appeal.
(Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)

Sec. 2-59.7. Fire department probationary period.

 (a) Each member who is originally appointed to or rehired in the
fire department, or who is promoted, pursuant to this division shall
be a probationary employee for one (1) year from the date of
appointment or promotion. This section shall not, however, apply to
an employee who is recalled after layoff, so long as he or she
completed the probationary period prior to layoff.

 (b) The fire chief may at any time during the probationary
period reject any person appointed or promoted. The fire chief must
state his or hertheir reasons for rejection in writing, and provide
those reasons to the employee and the employment
subcommitteecommission.

 (c) In the case of a promotional candidate, any candidate
rejected by the fire chief shall revert to the rank and pay status
from which he or she was promoted.

 (d) Any person rejected during the probationary period shall
have no right of hearing or appeal under this division.
(Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)


Sec. 2-60. Reserved.
Sec. 2-60.1. Minimum qualifications for original appointment to the
police department.

 (a) Standards required. Each candidate for original appointment
to the police department must meet the minimum requirements set forth
in this subsection. The deadline by which these requirements must be
met, the method of proving that such requirements have been
satisfactorily met, and any additional requirements shall be
established by rule of the employment subcommitteecommission:
 2-18
 Page 54
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-38 Rev. 1-6-10


 (1) Age. Have reached the age of twenty-one (21) by the date of
 appointment;

 (2) Good character. Be of good character; which includes a
 personal history of honesty, fairness, and respect for the
 rights of others and for state and federal law. No person
 shall be appointed who has a history which includes a
 disqualifying criminal offense or conviction.

 (3) Education and experience. Have a high school diploma or
 general equivalency diploma (GED) and meet the admission
 standards of the Maine Criminal Justice Academy.

 (4) Motor vehicle driver's license. Possess a valid motor
 vehicle driver's license for the three (3) years immediately
 preceding the date of application. If such license is from a
 state other than the State of Maine, the candidate must be
 qualified to receive a State of Maine driver's license.

 (5) Citizenship or Immigration status. Be a citizen of the
 United States or demonstrate a permanent right to work in the
 United States.

 (b) Automatic Disqualifiers. An applicant for original
appointment will be automatically disqualified from the hiring process
for any of the following characteristics, and as further established by
rule of the employment subcommitteecommission:

 (1) Criminal Convictions/Conduct. Any conviction for a
 disqualifying criminal offense or engaging in conduct that
 qualifies as a disqualifying criminal offense as defined in
 Maine law and the entrance standards of the Maine Criminal
 Justice Academy, including having no convictions for or have
 engaged in any conduct which would constitute Murder, Class A,
 Class B, Class C, or Class D crimes, or any provision of the
 Maine Criminal Code, Chapters 15, 19, 25, or 45 which include
 Theft, Falsification in Official Matters, Bribery & Corrupt
 Practices, and Drugs.

 (2) Domestic Violence. Any conviction for a crime of domestic
 violence or any active Protection from Abuse Order (temporary
 or permanent) served on the applicant.

 (3) Drug Activities. The use, purchase, or possession of illegal
 drugs or controlled substances within the five (5) years prior
 to the date of application.

 The trafficking in and/or furnishing of marijuana, as defined
 in the Maine Criminal Code, is an automatic disqualifier from
 the hiring process. The use of marijuana is not an automatic
 disqualifier. The use of marijuana by an applicant will be
 2-19
 Page 55
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-38 Rev. 1-6-10

 assessed on a case by case basis; including, but not limited
 to, the frequency and recency of the use.

 (4) Military Service. Dishonorable discharge from the military
 or a bad conduct discharge from the military.

 (5) Tattoos or Body Art. Tattoos, branding, body art or body
 markings that (a) indicate a criminal gang affiliation, (b)
 depict sexually explicit art or nudity, (c) are associated
 with hate groups or supremacist groups such as swastikas or
 pentagrams, or (d) are on the applicant’s face, neck or hands.
(Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)


Sec. 2-60.2. Hiring process for original appointment to the police
department.

 (a) Police department hiring process. All applicants for
original appointment to the police department shall satisfactorily
complete the minimum requirements in this section. The employment
subcommitteecommission may, by rule, establish processes and procedures
to implement these requirements, set minimum passing scores, and impose
additional requirements for original appointment.

 (1) Job-related aptitude capacity test. All applicants for
 original appointment must pass a job-related aptitude
 capacity test. The aptitude capacity test may be waived for
 a police applicant who is a full-time employee with law
 enforcement duties and arrest authority in another
 jurisdiction at the time of application and is certifiable by
 the Maine Criminal Justice Academy.

 (2) Physical fitness assessment. All applicants for original
 appointment must pass meet the Maine Criminal Justice
 Academy’s physical fitness assessment standards prior to the
 oral interview. or Applicants may take the fitness test at
 the Portland Police Department or produce a current, valid
 letter from the Maine Criminal Justice Academy stating that
 the applicant has successfully completed the Academy’s
 physical fitness assessment.

 (3) Oral Board. An oral interview will be conducted with all
 applicants who have passed both the aptitude capacity test
 and the physical fitness assessment.

 (b) Conditional offer of employment. Upon successful completion
of the job-related aptitude capacity test, the physical fitness
assessment and the oral interview, the Police Chief may evaluate the
candidates and make a conditional offer of employment to qualified
applicants, at his or hertheir discretion. The conditional employee
must successfully complete the following requirements. Failure to do
so will result in revocation of the conditional offer of employment.
 2-20
 Page 56
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-39 Rev. 1-6-10


 (1) Background check. A conditional employee must be
 fingerprinted and satisfactorily complete a background check,
 including, but not limited to, criminal history, prior
 substance abuse, driving record, and credit check.

 (2) Polygraph. A conditional employee, shall be required to
 submit to a polygraph examination to the extent such
 examination is permitted by law.

 (3) Medical examination. A conditional employee shall undergo a
 medical examination to determine whether the applicant is
 physically capable of meeting the standards established by
 the Maine Criminal Justice Academy.

 (4) Job suitability assessment. Candidates for police original
 appointment shall be given a post-offer job suitability
 assessment as required by the Maine Criminal Justice Academy.

 (b) Transfer between public safety departments. Upon the written
request of the employee to the chief of his or hertheir department, an
employee in good standing within either department may be transferred
from one department to the other to an entry level position, subject to
the conditions and limitations established by rule of the employment
subcommitteecommission and with the approval of both chiefs and the
City Manager. Police officers requesting a transfer to the Fire
Department must successfully complete the Candidate Physical Abilities
Test (CPAT) and provide proof of a valid State of Maine Emergency
Medical Technician license. The Chief of Police may waive the police
entrance exam for firefighters. All other hiring requirements must be
successfully completed.

Sec. 2-60.3. Disqualification and temporary withdrawal from police
application process.

 In accordance with rules promulgated by the employment
subcommitteecommission, an applicant may be disqualified, or
temporarily withdraw, from the application process as follows:

 (a) Disqualification. After notice and an opportunity to be
heard, the employment subcommitteecommission or the police chief may
disqualify an applicant for original appointment.

 (b) Temporary withdrawal of applicants for original appointments.
 An applicant for original appointment may, for sufficient cause,
temporarily withdraw from consideration for a limited period of time
with the prior approval of the police chief. During the period of
temporary disqualification the applicant’s eligibility for appointment
shall automatically expire 12 months after the date the applicant
passed the aptitude capacity test.
(Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)

 2-21
 Page 57
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-40 Rev. 1-6-10

Sec. 2-60.4. Police department promotional process.

 (a) Minimum qualifications. All candidates for promotion within
the police department shall satisfactorily complete the minimum
requirements in this section. Promotional appointments shall be made
from successive ranks. The employment subcommitteecommission may, by
rule, establish processes and procedures to implement these
requirements, may set minimum passing scores, and may impose additional
requirements for promotion.

 (1) Time in service. Promotional candidates must have the
 following amount of time in service to be eligible for a
 promotion:

 a. Three (3) years of continuous service in the police
 department for promotion from officer to the rank of
 Sergeant.

 b. Twelve months of continuous service as a Sergeant in the
 police department for promotion to the rank of
 Lieutenant.

 (2) Selection Components

 a. An annual professional development course.

 b. A job-related aptitude capacity test.

 c. Consideration of the candidate's last completed
 performance evaluation immediately prior to the date of
 the aptitude capacity test.

 d. Seniority in the department as of the date of the
 aptitude capacity test.

 (3) Oral interview. All promotional candidates must
 satisfactorily complete an oral interview. The oral
 interview panel shall consist of one member of the employment
 subcommitteecommission, a member designated by the president
 of each of the affected unions and three (3) members
 appointed by the police chief.

 (4) Job suitability assessment. Candidates for the position of
 Sergeant must undergo a job suitability assessment.
 Assessments within three (3) years from the date of
 examination may be used, or the police chief may require an
 updated job suitability assessment at any time. Assessments
 may be taken into consideration in the promotional process.

 (b) Promotion list. Promotional candidates shall be placed on a
certified promotional list. A separate list shall be made for each
promotional rank.
 2-22
 Page 58
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-40 Rev. 1-6-10

 (1) The list shall be prepared based on a methodology established
 by the employment subcommitteecommission.

 (2) The employment subcommitteecommission shall also establish
 rules governing the validity of the list, including the
 minimum number of names required on the list, the duration
 and expiration of the list, and other requirements.

 (c) Creation of certified list for promotional appointment.

 (1) When requested to do so by the Chief, the employment
 subcommitteecommission shall furnish a certified list of
 names from which a promotional appointment may be made.

 (2) There shall be one eligible list maintained for police
 promotion in weighted score order for each promotional rank
 and the certified list shall be made up from the eligible
 list in the weighted score order. The certified list for
 promotional appointment shall contain the names of a
 minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) applicants
 on the eligible list with the highest, aggregate scores.

 (d) Command staff. The employment subcommitteecommission may
provide by rule for special procedures or different competitive
examination for appointment to a sworn, non-union command staff
position in the police department because such rank requires
particular and exceptional qualifications of a scientific,
managerial, professional, technical, or educational character and
said rule may waive any requirement of this article in such cases.

 (e) When the number of employees eligible for promotion to a
particular vacancy is insufficient to permit meaningful competition,
the employment subcommitteecommission may vary the requirements of
this section by rule, which rule shall not be effective for more than
one promotional cycle.
(Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018
Sec. 2-60.5. Disqualification during police promotional process.

After notice and an opportunity to be heard, the employment
subcommitteecommission or the police chief may disqualify a candidate
from participating in the promotional process, or may remove a
candidate for promotion from the ranked certified promotional list.
(Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)
Sec. 2-60.6. Police appeals and rights.

 (a) Appeals from decisions of the police chief. Except as
otherwise provided, an applicant, candidate for original appointment,
or candidate for promotion shall have the opportunity to appeal any
decision made by the police chief under this division to the
employment subcommitteecommission, pursuant to rules established by
the subcommitteecommission. The subcommittee commission may, after
hearing, uphold or overturn the police chief’s decision. The
commissionsubcommittee shall provide the police chief and the
 2-23
 Page 59
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-42 Rev. 1-6-10

appellant with written notice of its decision and the reasons
therefor.

 (b) Appeals from decisions of the employment
subcommitteecommission. An appeal of a decision of the employment
subcommitteecommission under this section may be taken to the city
council. The city council may, after hearing, uphold or overturn the
employment subcommitteecommission’s decision. The council shall
provide the subcommitteecommission, police chief, and appellant with
written notice of its decision and the reasons therefor.

 (c) Applicant rights. If a decision is overturned with respect
to an applicant, the applicant shall continue through the remainder
of the application process or be considered eligible for hire, as
applicable. In the event an applicant is reinstated pursuant to this
section, he or she shall have no right or entitlement to be
considered for any vacancy that exists at or prior to the date of
said reinstatement.

 (d) Promotional candidate rights. If a decision is overturned
with respect to a promotional candidate, that candidate shall 1) be
allowed to continue through the promotional process; 2) be placed on
or reinstated to the ranked certified promotional list; or 3) be
promoted, as applicable. The decision maker shall specifically state
the appropriate remedy.

 (e) Vested rights. No rights shall vest in any person who is
deemed to be a qualified applicant or who is placed on the ranked
certified promotional list, and no names shall be carried over from
one eligible list to another, except as otherwise provided in this
section.

 (f) Rulemaking. The employment subcommitteecommission may
promulgate rules to implement this section, including forms and
deadlines for appeal.
(Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)
Sec. 2-60.7. Police department probationary period.

 (a) Probationary period. A specified period of time during which
the employee has no expectation of continued employment and may be
removed from employment for any reason, with or without just cause.

 (b) Original appointment. Except as otherwise provided below for
police lateral transfers, every person receiving an appointment as a
police officer shall be a probationary employee for a period of two (2)
years from the date of appointment.

 (c) Lateral transfers. A police lateral transfer who has two
years of post-academy, full-time, continuous service as a police
officer at the time of appointment shall be credited with up to twelve
(12) months of service toward completion of the department’s two year
probationary period. Eligibility for promotional appointment shall be
the completion of three (3) years of service in the Portland Police
 2-24
 Page 60
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-43 Rev. 1-6-10

department.

 (d) Promotional appointments. Every person receiving a
promotional appointment shall serve a probationary period of one (1)
year while occupying the position to which he or she has been
appointed.

 (e) Completion of probationary period. The police chief may at
any time during the probationary period reject any person appointed or
promoted to a position in the police department. The police chief must
state his or hertheir reasons for rejection in writing, and provide
those reasons to the employee and the employment
subcommitteecommission. In the case of a promotional appointment, the
officer shall revert to the rank and pay status from which he or she
was promoted.

 (f) No hearing or appeal. Any person rejected during the
probationary period shall have no right of hearing or appeal under this
section.
(Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)
Sec. 2-61. Reserved.
Sec. 2-62. Reserved.
Sec. 2-63. Reserved.
Sec. 2-64. Reserved.
Sec. 2-65. Reserved

Sec. 2-66. Physical standards and background investigation for
original appointment; Job suitability assessment for promotion, for
police lateral transfer and for police original appointment.

 (a) Physical standards for original appointment.

 (1) Medical examination. All candidates on the eligible list for
 original appointment shall undergo a medical examination by a
 physician specified by the employment subcommitteecommission,
 said medical examination to be done only after a conditional
 offer of employment has been made to the candidate. The
 examining physician shall report his or hertheir findings in
 writing to the subcommittee commission with respect to
 whether the candidate is physically capable of meeting the
 standards established by rule of the subcommitteecommission.
 If the physician's report indicates a disqualification which
 can be corrected, the candidate's name shall be returned to
 the eligible list except that such person shall not be again
 considered for appointment until such time as he or she
 furnishes satisfactory evidence that the disqualifying
 condition has been corrected. If the physician's report
 indicates a disqualification which cannot be corrected and
 which prevents the candidate from performing an essential
 function of the position with or without reasonable
 accommodation, the candidate's name shall be permanently
 2-25
 Page 61
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-49 Rev. 1-6-10

 removed from the eligible list pursuant to section 2-61
 above.

 (2) Physical fitness standards. In addition to the medical
 examination, the employment subcommitteecommission shall
 establish by rule minimum standards and procedures for a
 physical fitness assessment of candidates for original
 appointment, which standards shall be determined by the
 subcommittee commission to be a bona fide occupational
 qualification or failure to meet them poses a safety hazard
 or cannot be reasonably accommodated in an individual case.
 Such physical fitness assessment shall be administered to
 each candidate by the department as provided in section 2-
 65(a)(3) above, and the result thereof shall be provided to
 the chief.

 (b) Background investigation for original appointment.

 (1) Fingerprinting. Candidates for original appointment to
 either department shall be directed to the police department
 where they shall be fingerprinted. All candidates shall
 execute any necessary waivers for the background check. The
 fingerprints and records of each candidate shall be checked
 against the local police files, state police files and, if
 available, the files of the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
 in order to determine whether the candidate has been
 convicted of a disqualifying criminal offense.

 (2) Polygraph. Candidates for original appointment to the police
 department shall be required to submit to a polygraph
 examination to the extent such examination is permitted by
 law.

 (c) Job suitability assessment for promotional appointments, for
police lateral transfers and for police original appointments.

 (1) All candidates whose names appear on any certified list for
 promotional appointment may be required to be examined by a
 psychologist for job suitability, the results of which
 examination shall be used by the chief of the department and
 by the city manager. Examinations hereunder for promotional
 appointment shall be required every year, except that the
 chief may waive said requirement if such examination has been
 done within three years of the date of the candidate’s
 appearance on a certified list, and the results are available
 for use by the chief and the city manager. The extent of
 said examination shall be determined by a psychologist on an
 individual basis and may be either pre-offer or post-offer,
 depending upon the content of the assessment, the
 psychologist’s representation as to the purpose of the
 assessment and the department’s preference.

 2-26
 Page 62
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-49 Rev. 1-6-10

 To the extent permitted by law, the chief of either
 department may request that candidates on an eligible list
 undergo the job suitability examinations prior to drawing up
 a certified list if (1) doing so would overcome scheduling
 difficulties for a candidate and the candidate agrees to such
 scheduling and (2) doing so is necessary to ensure a timely
 appointment process. Nothing herein shall change a
 candidate’s position on the eligible list or give him or her
 any vested rights therein.

 (2) Candidates for police lateral transfer shall be given a
 post-offer job suitability assessment.

 (3) Candidates for police original appointment shall be given a
 post-offer job suitability assessment as required by the
 Maine Criminal Justice Academy.

 (d) Failure to pass polygraph test or job suitability assessment
for police original appointment or job suitability assessment for
police lateral transfer or job suitability assessment for police or
fire promotional appointment. Notwithstanding anything herein to the
contrary, any candidate for police original appointment who fails to
pass a polygraph test as required hereunder, or, in the case of a
police original appointment, police lateral transfer or police or fire
promotional appointment, who fails to meet the job suitability
assessment pursuant to this section, shall be removed from any list on
which the candidate appears pursuant to section 2-61 above, and shall
not be eligible to retake the written test until two years from the
date the eligible list from which the candidate was removed was made.

 (e) Failure to appear or complete hiring requirements. Any
candidate who fails to appear for, or to complete, any component of the
examination process, or any other requirement of the hiring procedure,
shall be disqualified as a candidate and removed from any list on which
he or she may appear. Such disqualification shall be reported to the
employment subcommitteecommission by the Director. Upon request of the
candidate, the employment subcommitteecommission may, in its
discretion, waive the disqualification herein if: (i) the subcommittee
commission finds that the candidate had sufficient excuse for such
failure; and (ii) it finds that any rescheduling necessitated by such
failure can be accomplished in a timely manner and with no disruption
of the hiring process. Any candidate disqualified hereunder may reapply
for any succeeding examination.

 (f). Temporary withdrawal of  applicants for original
appointments. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a candidate for original
appointment may, for sufficient cause, temporarily withdraw from
consideration for a limited period of time upon the prior approval of
the chief of the department. Any denial of a request for temporary
withdrawal by the chief may be appealed to the subcommittee commission
which may grant the request if (i) the subcommittee commission finds
that the candidate had sufficient cause for such request; and (ii) it
 2-27
 Page 63
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-49 Rev. 1-6-10

finds that any rescheduling necessitated by request can be accomplished
in a timely manner with no disruption of the hiring process. A
candidate who is permitted to withdraw temporarily shall retain his or
hertheir place on the eligible list but shall not be considered for
hire, or in the case of promotional appointment, shall not be placed on
any certified list requested during the period of temporary
disqualification. “Sufficient excuse” or “sufficient cause” as used
herein shall include, but not be limited to, death or serious illness
of a family member; temporary illness or disability of the candidate;
completion of an academic or training program, or similar excuse and
cause.

 (g) Duration of certified list. The certified list shall be
limited to the vacancy or vacancies for which it was requested. The
names of persons not appointed shall be returned to the eligible list
from which they were drawn. Each candidate for promotion who is not
appointed shall be given, upon request, a statement by the chief of the
department as to the reason or reasons why he or she was not
recommended for appointment; or if he or she was recommended, a
statement from the City Manager as to why he or she was not appointed.
(Code 1968, § 201.12; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No.
288-90, 4-2-90; Ord. No. 117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No. 184-97, 1-22-97 Ord. No. 220-99, §
4, 3-1-99; Ord. No. 121-99, 12-20-99; Ord. No. 174-05/06, 3-6-06; Ord. No. 298-05/06,
6-19-06 emergency passage; Ord. No. 126-09/10, 1-4-10)

Sec. 2-67. Working test period.

 (a) Except as otherwise provided below for police lateral
transfers or as otherwise provided for re-hires under subsection 2-
59(e), every person receiving any appointment or transferring pursuant
to section 2-59 above shall be tested for a working test period of one
(1) year while occupying the position to which he or she has been
appointed or transferred, except that the working test period for
original appointees or transferees to the police department shall be
two (2) years. The period of the working test shall begin immediately
upon appointment or transfer. The City Manager may at any time during
the working test period reject for reasons stated in writing any person
appointed to a position in either department. The City Manager shall
forthwith report to the employment subcommitteecommission in writing
each rejection during such working test period, stating the date of the
rejection and the reason for the rejection.

 (b) Any person rejected during the working test period shall have
no right of hearing, or appeal under this article, and in the case of a
promotional appointment, shall revert to the rank and pay status from
which he or she was promoted. No original appointment shall be
effective beyond the end of the working test period unless, within ten
(10) days preceding the end of the working test period, the City
Manager shall report to the employment subcommitteecommission in
writing that in the opinion of the City Manager, the employee's work
has been such as to indicate that he the employee is willing and able
to perform theirhis duties in a satisfactory manner. Upon delivery of a
 2-28
 Page 64
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-50 Rev. 1-6-10

favorable report from the City Manager, the appointment shall become
permanent.

 (c) A police lateral transfer who has prior service as a police
officer at the time of appointment shall be credited with up to twelve
(12) months of service toward completion of the department’s two year
working test period, provided, however, that eligibility for
promotional appointment shall continue to be completion of three (3)
years in the Portland police department.
(Code 1968, § 201.13; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No.
117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No. 184-97, 1-22-97; Ord. No. 174-05/06, 3-6-06; Ord. No. 126-
09/10, 1-4-10)

Sec. 2-68. Disciplinary action.

 (a) Action by chief of department. Unless otherwise governed by a
collective bargaining agreement, the chief of the department may, for
cause:

 (1) Suspend without pay any member for one (1) offense for a
 period of not more than fifteen (15) working days, resulting
 in the loss of not more than three (3) weeks' pay;

 (2) Issue a written reprimand to be included in the member's
 personnel file.

Suspensions without pay shall not be for more than thirty (30) working
days in aggregate in a calendar year. Upon imposition of any
discipline, the chief shall immediately file with the employment
subcommitteecommission a written statement of the disciplinary action
taken and the reason therefor. A copy of the statement shall be
delivered to the department member in person or by mail at the member's
last and usual place of abode. Actions of the chief taken within this
subsection shall be final and there shall be no appeal therefrom under
this article.

 (b) Action by subcommitteecommission. The employment
subcommitteecommission shall have the power and authority to demote,
suspend with or without pay, and remove members of the police
department and the fire department for cause and after presentation of
charges and hearing. The subcommittee commission shall have the right
to reinstate any such demoted, suspended or removed member of the
police department or fire department after a hearing upon
recommendation of the chief of the department to which the applicant
seeks reinstatement, provided the City Manager joins in such
recommendation for reinstatement.

 (c) Action by chief pending hearing. Pending a hearing before the
employment subcommitteecommission, the chief of the department or the
City Manager may, for the cause to be presented to the
subcommitteecommission, suspend any member, without pay, until the next
succeeding meeting of the subcommitteecommission; provided, however,
 2-29
 Page 65
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-51 Rev. 1-6-10

that no suspension without pay pending a hearing by the subcommittee
commission shall be effective for more than fifteen (15) days; no
suspension without pay shall be effective unless it is either preceded
by a filing of charges with the subcommittee commission or such charges
are filed within ten (10) days thereafter, Saturday, Sunday and legal
holidays excepted; and if the subcommittee commission determines that
no disciplinary action is warranted, it shall provide that any salary
which should have been paid during such period of suspension shall be
paid to the member.

A member may elect to waive a hearing before the employment
subcommitteecommission and accept disciplinary action determined by the
chief of the department. Said waiver shall be made in writing prior to
the implementation of the discipline. Prior to waiving a subcommittee
commission hearing, the member shall be provided with written notice of
the charges against him or her, a brief statement of the evidence
against him or her, and an opportunity for a hearing before the chief.
Said hearing shall be informal in nature and shall not be an
adversarial hearing, but the member may have counsel and/or a union
representative present. The member shall have the right to confer with
said counsel and/or representative during the hearing and to have them
speak on his or hertheir behalf. The hearing before the chief may be
tape recorded upon the request of either party.

 (d) Notice; opportunity to respond. Prior to suspending any
member without pay under subsection (c) above, the chief of the
department shall provide the member with notice of the substance of the
charges against him or her, a statement of the evidence, and an
opportunity to respond to said charges and evidence.

 (e) Hearings without formal charges. Whether or not charges are
filed with the subcommitteecommission, the subcommittee commission
shall within thirty (30) calendar days schedule a hearing to determine
whether disciplinary action should be taken against any member where:

 (1) The member fails or refuses to testify before the
 subcommittee commission at any disciplinary hearing; or

 (2) The member becomes the defendant in a pending criminal
 proceeding, the conviction in which proceeding would be a
 disqualifying criminal conviction.

Either party may request a continuance of such hearing, which may be
granted by the subcommittee commission upon such terms and conditions
as it deems appropriate. If the continuance is requested by a city
official, the member shall receive theirhis regular pay for the
duration of the continuance. However, if a suspended member requests a
continuance of the hearing, the member will not be paid for the
duration of the continuance period requested by himthe suspended
member.

 (f) No deferral of action. Disciplinary action by the
 2-30
 Page 66
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-51 Rev. 1-6-10

subcommittee commission for the same conduct which is the subject
matter of a pending criminal proceeding shall not be deferred unless
the subcommittee commission shall order such deferment at the request
of the member charged, in which case the subcommittee commission may
impose reasonable conditions, including but not necessarily limited to,
a continuing suspension without pay.

 (g) Result of collateral criminal proceeding. The acquittal of
the member on criminal or civil charges involving material allegations
which are substantially similar to the material allegations made in the
disciplinary proceeding shall not require abatement of a disciplinary
proceeding by the Subcommitteecommission. A final judgment of
conviction of a crime which is a disqualifying criminal offense shall
operate as a disqualification from office, and, upon proof of such
conviction to the subcommitteecommission, such member shall be removed.

 (h) Procedure at disciplinary hearings. All hearings of the
subcommittee commission shall be deemed to be civil in nature and shall
be informal in conduct. Such hearings shall be governed by this article
and by any rules of practice and procedure adopted by the
subcommitteecommission. In the conduct of such hearings, the
subcommittee commission shall not be bound to the technical rules of
evidence. No informality in any proceeding or hearing or in the manner
of taking testimony before the subcommittee commission shall invalidate
any decision of the subcommitteecommission. Disciplinary action shall
be taken only upon a preponderance of the evidence.

 (i) Decision. After hearing, the subcommittee commission shall
make written findings of fact with respect to any specific allegations
and shall determine whether such facts constitute cause for
disciplinary action, and if the subcommittee commission determines that
cause for disciplinary action exists, the nature of the disciplinary
action to be taken. Such decision may be appealed as provided by law.

 (j) Expenses. The subcommittee commission may, if it determines
that charges made were without substantial justification, recommend to
the City Council the payment of reasonable counsel and witness fees
incurred by any member in the defense of such unjustified charges.
(Code 1968, § 201.14; Ord. No. 89-80, 7-7-80; Ord. No. 299-86, 1-22-86; Ord. No.
288-90, 4-2-90; Ord. No. 117-95, 11-20-95; Ord. No. 184-97, 1-22-97; Ord. No. 174-
05/06, 3-6-06)

Sec. 2-69. Reserved.
Sec. 2-70. Reserved.
Sec. 2-71. Reserved.
Sec. 2-72. Reserved.
Sec. 2-73. Reserved.
Sec. 2-74. Reserved.
Sec. 2-75. Reserved.



 2-31
 Page 67
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-59 Rev. 6-17-10
 DIVISION 4. POLICE CITIZEN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE

Sec. 2-76. Functions and duties.

 (a) Duties. The duties of the police citizen review subcommittee
are as follows:

 (1) To determine whether police investigations into citizens’
 complaints by members of the public against police officers
 are thorough, objective, fair and timely by auditing the
 police department’s internal affairs’ unit investigative
 methods and procedures;

 (2) To report in writing to the City Manager periodically, but no
 less than annually beginning in January 2003, as follows:

 a. on the subcommittee’s determination as to the
 thoroughness, objectivity, fairness and timeliness of
 the police internal affairs’ investigation of citizen
 complaints against police officers; and

 b. any recommendations and/or proposals for improvements or
 modifications in the police internal affairs
 investigative process, policies or training, and for
 enhancing public confidence in the methods and process
 of investigation of citizen complaints against police
 officers.

 (3) To hold a public hearing at least annually to receive
 comments upon the police citizen complaint process.

 (4) Although it shall have access to individual internal affairs
 reports in order to review investigative methods and
 procedures, all reports of the subcommittee shall be done in
 such a manner that particular complainants, witnesses and
 officers are not personally identifiable.

 (5) Reports of the subcommittee shall be made available to the
 public to the extent consistent with the State Freedom of
 Access Act, 1 M.R.S.A. Sec. 401 et.seq.

 (6) To make suitable procedural rules, from time to time, for the
 conduct of its duties. Proposed rules shall be submitted to
 the City Council and shall become effective only when
 approved by the City Council. All such rules shall be
 recorded in the office of the City Clerk.

 (b) Complaints to be reviewed: The subcommittee shall review all
completed internal affairs investigations of citizen complaints.

 (c) Timing of review. All subcommittee reviews of citizen
complaints shall take place only after final disciplinary action has
been taken and all appeals exhausted or the case has been finally
 2-32
 Page 68
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-76 Rev. 2-5-2018
closed with no disciplinary action taken.

 (d) Notification of review. The subcommittee shall notify the
citizen complainant, in writing, of the subcommittee’s review and any
findings made by the subcommittee regarding the thoroughness,
objectivity, fairness and timeliness of the internal affairs
investigation.

 (e) Scope of authority. The subcommittee shall conduct its
duties solely to determine the thoroughness, objectivity, fairness and
timeliness of the police department’s internal affairs’ methods and
procedures in regard to citizen complaints against police officers, and
the subcommittee shall have no power or authority to subpoena or call
witnesses nor to impose or modify any disciplinary action, or lack of
action, against any police officer. The subcommittee shall make no
recommendations nor offer any findings or comments relative to any
disciplinary action, or lack of action, against any officer.

 (f) Training. Prior to assuming their duties hereunder,
subcommittee commissioners shall attend training by city staff as to
the subcommittee’s duties and responsibilities, applicable state and
local law and regulations, issues relevant to the conduct of the
citizen review function, accepted police practices and the department’s
internal affairs investigation process. Such training shall be
provided by the city at no cost to the subcommittee members.

 (g) Resources. To facilitate the effectiveness and objectivity of
the police citizen review subcommittee, the city shall make available
to the subcommittee the services of a technical advisor, as needed by
the subcommittee. The technical advisor may be used for the purposes
of training; briefing the subcommittee on accepted police practices,
applicable law and issues relevant to the discharge of the citizen
review function; and educating the subcommittee on aspects of the
internal investigation process. The advisor shall be retained by the
City Manager after consultation with the Chief of Police,
representatives of the police unions and the subcommittee chairperson.
 Any person who presently maintains any business or professional
affiliation with the police department shall be disqualified from
serving as technical advisor.

The city shall further make available all internal affairs
investigation reports and police documents relevant to such
investigations which are necessary for the subcommittee to conduct its
duties hereunder. In no case shall the subcommittee have access to
police officers’ personnel records except to the extent that they are
part of an internal affairs investigation report or are considered a
public document under the state Freedom of Access law.
(Substitute Ord. No. 83-01/02, § 3, 11-5-01; Ord. No. 143-17/18, 2-5-2018)

Sec. 2-77. Confidentiality.

 Each member of the civil service commission is obligated to
maintain the confidentiality of all information and documents either
 2-33
 Page 69
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-76 Rev. 2-5-2018
provided to or reviewed by them, in accordance with state law. Failure
to maintain such confidentiality will be cause for removal from the
commission. All reports and requests for disclosure of any information
shall be referred to the corporation counsel for review prior to
release.
(Substitute Ord. No. 83-01/02, § 3, 11-5-01)

Sec. 2-78 thru 2-90. Reserved.

 ARTICLE IV-A. CIVILIAN POLICE REVIEW BOARD

Sec. 2-76. Created.

 Pursuant to Article IX of the Charter, there is hereby created a
civilian police review board, the purpose of which is to increase
public trust and confidence in the Portland Police Department.

Sec. 2-77. Composition.

 The civilian police review board shall consist of ten (10) board
members. Seven (7) of the board members shall be voting members, and
three (3) of the board members shall be non-voting members.

Sec. 2-78. Qualifications.

 (a) Qualifications of commissioners. Every board member shall be
at least 18 years of age and a resident of the City of Portland for at
least three (3) months prior to the start of their term. The following
persons are not eligible to be members on the board:

 (1) Any present or former employee of the city or school
 department, who was employed by the city or school department
 in the previous five-year period;

 (2) Any present or former member of the City Council or School
 Board, who held that position in the previous five-year
 period; or

 (3) Any individual presently serving as a commissioner or
 alternate on the civil service employment commission;

 (4) In order to ensure an objective and unbiased audit of the
 police department’s internal affairs investigation process,
 any applicant for service on the civilian police review board
 shall be disqualified from serving on said board if:

 a. any member of the applicant’s immediate family is or has
 been a Portland police officer in the previous ten (10)
 years;

 b. the applicant or any member of their immediate family
 has been arrested by any member of the Portland police
 2-34
 Page 70
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-64 Rev. 1-6-10

 department within the previous ten (10) years, or has
 had the final disposition of any criminal proceedings
 resulting from such an arrest within the previous ten
 (10) years, whichever is longer;

 c. the applicant or any member of their immediate family
 has filed a complaint with the internal affairs unit of
 the Portland police department within the previous ten
 (10) years;

 d. the applicant or any member of their immediate family
 has brought suit against the City of Portland, the Chief
 of Police, the police department or any individual
 police officer for a cause of action arising out of an
 officer’s performance of their duties within the last
 ten (10) years or has had such a suit finally disposed
 of within the previous ten (10) years, whichever is
 longer; and

 e. “Immediate family” as used herein shall mean and include
 spouse, domestic partner, children, grandchildren,
 parents, grandparents, and siblings.

 (c) Failure to disclose any grounds for disqualification or
falsification of any information in the application process shall
disqualify the person from service on the board and shall constitute
“cause” within the meaning of section 2-82.

 (d) Any board member who becomes ineligible to serve during their
term shall resign, and failure to do so shall constitute "cause" within
the meaning of section 2-82.

 (e) Reasonable efforts shall be made to ensure that the
appointments to the civilian police review board are diverse and
representative of the community.


Sec. 2-79. Appointment.

 (a) Subject to the provisions of section 2-80, members of the
civilian police review board shall be appointed as follows:

 (1) Six (6) voting members appointed by the City Council;
 (2) One (1) voting member appointed by the Mayor; and
 (3) Three (3) non-voting members appointed by the City Council.

 (b) Such power of appointment shall be exercised only after the
City Clerk has published a notice announcing such position or
positions, describing the responsibilities thereof, and soliciting
applications by qualified persons in a newspaper of general circulation
within the city not less than fifteen (15) calendar days in advance of
 2-35
 Page 71
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-64 Rev. 1-6-10

action by the city council. Applications may be solicited whether or
not there is a vacancy, and such applicants may be considered for any
vacancy that occurs within one hundred eighty (180) days of the closing
date for such applications. Nothing herein shall limit the city's
authority to solicit applications whenever the City Manager deems that
it is necessary.

Sec. 2-80. Terms.

 (a) Term. Each board member shall be appointed to a three-year
term except as set forth in subsection (c) or unless appointed to fill
a vacancy. A board member shall serve until their successor is
appointed and qualified, but in no case longer than one hundred twenty
(120) days from the expiration of their term.

 (b) Limitation on service. No person shall be appointed to, nor
serve, more than three (3) consecutive full terms or nine (9)
consecutive years, whichever is greater, on the board.

 (c) Initial Civilian Police Review Board. For the first civilian
police review board appointed following its creation, the city council
and mayor shall first select from the current members of the police
citizen review subcommittee in making appointments to the board.
Additional vacancies shall be filled in accordance with the process
outlined in Section 2-79. On the first board, two (2) voting members
appointed by the City Council shall serve for a one (1) year term, two
(2) voting members appointed by the City Council shall serve for a two
(2) year term; two (2) voting member appointed by the City Council
shall serve for a three (3) year term; the one (1) voting member
appointed by the mayor shall serve for a three (3) year term; one (1)
non-voting member appointed by the City Council shall serve for a one
(1) year term; one (1) non-voting member appointed by the City Council
shall serve for a two (2) year term; and one (1) non-voting member
appointed by the City Council shall serve for a three (3) year term.

Sec. 2-81. Compensation.

 Civilian police review board members shall serve without
compensation, except that reasonable expenses incurred by any member
incidental to their duties under this article may be reimbursed upon
prior approval of the city manager.

Sec. 2-82. Removal.

 Any civilian police review board member may be removed from office
by the city council for cause, after notice and the opportunity to be
heard. "Cause" shall include any act or omission which constitutes
legal cause, and includes but is not limited to: incompetent or
inefficient performance of duty; unexcused absences from board
meetings; violation of any provision of this article or the rules
adopted thereunder, whether such violation may result in a forfeiture
 2-36
 Page 72
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-76 Rev. 2-5-2018
of office hereunder, or not; the commission or conviction for any
disqualifying criminal offense, or any action by the board member
intended to affect or influence, or which could reasonably be expected
to affect or influence any decision of the city manager, the chief of
police, or the city council with respect to the department, or of any
member of the police department with respect to the performance of
their duty.

Sec. 2-83. Officers.

 The board shall annually elect one (1) of its members as the chair
and one (1) of its members as the vice chair, to serve in the absence
of the chair. Whenever possible, non-voting members of the board shall
serve as the chair and vice chair. A member may not serve as chair for
more than three (3) consecutive years. The City Manager’s designee
shall serve as secretary to the civilian police review board and shall
furnish any necessary administrative assistance to the board.

Sec. 2-84. Meetings.

 (a) Calling of meetings. Meetings or hearings of the board may be
called at any time by its Chair, or in the absence from the city or
disability of the Chair, by any member of the board. The Chair shall
call a meeting upon request from any board member.

 (b) Quorum. A quorum of the Civilian Police Review Board shall be
a majority of the total number of voting members presently appointed to
the board. The board shall act by a majority of voting members present
and voting.

Sec. 2-85. Functions and duties.

 (a) Duties. The duties of the civilian police review board are
as follows:

 (1) To receive complaints of police misconduct by civilians and
 police as follows:

 a. Complaints received by the board, whether from civilians
 or police officers, shall be referred within twenty-four
 (24) hours after receipt to the police internal affairs
 department for investigation. When receiving complaints,
 the Board shall follow the police department’s standard
 operating procedures regarding interviewing the
 complainant and documentation requirements.

 b. To the extent that the police department receives a
 civilian complaint directly or through means other than
 referral by the board, the police department will
 provide the community liaison with a copy of the
 complaint within five (5) calendar days.

 2-37
 Page 73
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-76 Rev. 2-5-2018
 c. The board will not accept any complaints from police
 officers or their representatives regarding disciplinary
 actions or personnel matters.

 d. For purposes of this Article, complaint shall have the
 same definition as outlined in the police department’s
 standard operating procedure.

 (2) To review all final investigation reports submitted by
 internal affairs and/or police command staff for due process
 issues, including but not limited to, issues of fairness,
 thoroughness, objectivity, and timeliness, for both the
 complainant(s)/civilian(s) involved in the matter and the
 officer(s);

 (3) To maintain the confidentiality of all information and
 documents provided to and/or reviewed by the board in
 accordance with state law;

 (4) To hold a public hearing at least annually to receive
 comments upon the complaint process and to engage the City
 residents as to the board’s purposes and goals.

 (5) To provide a written annual report to the Mayor, City
 Council, City Manager, and Chief of Police that includes, but
 is not limited to, the following:

 a. the board’s  policy and  funding recommendations
 concerning the police internal affairs process, police
 policies, practices and procedures, and the board’s
 functions and duties; and

 b. the number of complaints submitted to the board and the
 number of complaints resolved during the previous year.

 (6) To ensure that all reports of the board shall be prepared in
 such a manner that particular complainants, witnesses, and
 officers are not personally identifiable.

 (7) To ensure that its reports are made available to the public
 but only to the extent permitted by the State Freedom of
 Access Act, 1 M.R.S.A. Sec. 401 et. seq. and other applicable
 law.

 (8) To propose, from time to time, suitable rules governing the
 board’s administrative procedures and board member roles.
 Such proposed rules will become effective only when approved
 by the city council.

 (9) To request additional funding from the city manager as part
 of the city’s annual budget process and at such other times
 as it deems necessary, though nothing in this Article shall
 require the city manager or the city council to provide any
 2-38
 Page 74
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-76 Rev. 2-5-2018
 particular amount of funding.

 (b) Timing of review. All board reviews of internal affairs
investigations shall take place only after final disciplinary action
has been taken and all appeals exhausted or settled or the case has
been finally closed with no disciplinary action taken. The police
department shall submit its report on the conclusions of any internal
affairs investigation no more than fourteen (14) calendar days after
the findings become final and after final disciplinary action has been
taken and all appeals exhausted or settled or the case has been finally
closed with no disciplinary action.

 (c) Notification of review. The board shall notify the
complainant, in writing, of the board’s review and any findings made by
the board regarding due process in the internal affairs investigation,
including but not limited to, issues of fairness, thoroughness,
objectivity and timeliness.

 (d) Scope of authority. The board shall have no power or
authority to subpoena or call witnesses or to impose or modify any
disciplinary action, or lack of action, against any police officer. The
board shall make no recommendations or offer any findings or comments
relative to any disciplinary action, or lack of action, against any
officer.

 (e) Training. Prior to assuming their duties hereunder, board
members shall attend training by city staff as to the board’s duties
and responsibilities, applicable state and local law, ordinances, and
rules and regulations, accepted police practices, the department’s
internal affairs investigation process, including the rights of
officers being investigated, and proper techniques for receiving
internal affairs complaints, including the process utilized by the
police department. Such training shall be provided by the city at no
cost to the board members.

 (f) Resources. To facilitate the effectiveness and objectivity of
the civilian police review board, the city shall make available to the
board the services of a technical advisor, as needed by the board. The
technical advisor may be used for the purposes of training; briefing
the board on accepted police practices, applicable law and issues
relevant to the discharge of the citizen review function; and educating
the board on aspects of the internal investigation process. The
technical advisor shall be retained by the city manager after
consultation with the chief of police, representatives of the police
unions and the chair of the board. Any person who presently maintains
any business or professional affiliation with the police department
shall be disqualified from serving as technical advisor.

 The City Manager shall designate a staff member to serve as the
civilian police review board’s Community Liaison. The Community Liaison
shall ensure that the public is aware of the methods for filing
complaints, and shall assist the board with carrying out its duties,
conducting outreach, and other duties as assigned by action of the
 2-39
 Page 75
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-76 Rev. 2-5-2018
board.

 The Police Department shall designate a staff member to serve as
the civilian police review board’s Police Liaison. The Police Liaison
shall be familiar with the police department’s standard operating
procedures and shall assist the board with questions concerning the
department’s standard operating procedures.

 The city shall further make available all internal affairs
investigation reports and police documents relevant to such
investigations which are necessary for the board to conduct its duties
hereunder. In no case shall the board have access to police officers’
personnel records except to the extent that they are part of an
internal affairs investigation report or are considered a public
document under the state Freedom of Access law.

Sec. 2-86. Confidentiality.

 Each member of the civilian police review board is obligated to
maintain the confidentiality of all information and documents either
provided to or reviewed by them, in accordance with state law. Failure
to maintain such confidentiality will be cause for removal from the
board. All reports and requests for disclosure of any information
shall be referred to corporation counsel for review prior to release.

Sec. 2-87. Appeals.

 (a) An individual aggrieved by the report on a complaint issued
by the civilian police review board may submit a notice of appeal of
the board’s due process determinations to the city council. Any such
appeal must be in writing addressed to the mayor, must state the basis
for the appeal, and must be filed with the mayor on or before the day
that is thirty (30) days after the date of the board’s report.

 (b) Within sixty (60) days after receipt of a notice of appeal,
the city council shall hold a hearing during which it shall review the
board’s report, the internal affairs investigation materials, and the
notice of appeal. After such hearing, the city council will provide an
advisory opinion regarding due process issues of the internal affairs
investigation, including, but not limited to, issues of fairness,
thoroughness, objectivity, and timeliness, for both the
complainant/civilian involved in the matter and the officer. The city
council’s review shall be de novo and will occur in executive session
where required by state law. The council’s advisory opinion will not be
legally binding on the city, the police department, police officers, or
individuals. The city council will have no power or authority to
subpoena or call witnesses nor to impose or modify any disciplinary
action, or lack of action, against any police officer. The city
council’s hearing will not address, and its advisory opinion will make
no recommendations nor offer any findings or comments relative to any
disciplinary action, or lack of action, against any officer or any
other personnel matter. The city council’s advisory opinion on any
appeal will be final and not appealable.
 2-40
 Page 76
City of Portland Administration
Code of Ordinances Chapter 2
Sec. 2-76 Rev. 2-5-2018

 (c) All such appeals to the City Council are subject to the same
confidentiality requirements that are applicable to members of the
police civilian review board. All reports or decisions of such appeals
and requests for disclosure of any information related to an appeal
shall be referred to corporation counsel for review prior to release.

Sec. 2-88. Reserved.
Sec. 2-89. Reserved.
Sec. 2-90. Reserved.




 2-41
 Page 77
PCRS
MEMO: New Ordance Collaboration & Engagement in Implementation
June 2025


Dear Portland City Counselors,

Thank you for you time and dedication to this great city and those you serve. At this time the
PCRS would like to extend an opportunity to relay thoughts, concerns, and recommendations
about the new Ordinance that wil shepherd this subcommittee forward into its new iteration.

As previously stated the “charter language for the new Citizen Police Oversight Board expands
upon the current model of a complaint review with several enhanced duties, including the ability
to make recommendations to the Council on a broad array of police matters. It is critical that the
new ordinance allows the Board, Council, and Staff to utilize the tools and resources necessary
to carry out the expansion of the new Board’s authority to the full extent as specified in the
Charter. The charter sets some minimal requirements of the Board; these should be seen as the
floor not the ceiling, so that if the Board or Council sees the need to exercise their authority then
they have the flexibility to do so” (Letter to the City Manager c. 2021).

As the structure of police oversight is one of the key topics being reviewed, it is even more vital
that perspectives of those that are part of the PCRS on a day-to-day basis are brought to the
table. We too are looking to find ways to strengthen our current structure and believe we have
relevant insights to share. We look forward to sharing those insights and information in the near
future.

Moving forward, we would like to invite you to attend the September 2025 PCRS Meeting to
further delve into the work that has been done in the past by previous members and the work
this current group is championing to set a foundation for the next group that will take over. We
also encourage you to share any relevant updates with the PCRS you may have as to the work
you are conducting on alternative police oversight models for Portland.

Thank you in advance for your prompt response to our request. We look forward to engaging in
a robust and productive conversation




 Page 78
Notes for PCRS Meeting to Discuss Letter to City Council in Response to Draft Ordinance

Relevant Documents:

 ●​ Question 7 Charter Amendment, as it appeared on the ballot, with summary
 ●​ Final Report from the Charter Commission which included a explanation of the police
 oversight amendment
 ●​ PCRS Ordinance from current City Code (starts at page 52)
 ●​ Final Report of the Racial Equity Steering Committee (2021), recommendation to
 totally dissolve PCRS, start from scratch to build a more effective oversight body, and
 remove all barriers to serving (second paragraph of page 11)

The 6 categories below represent areas in which PCRS members have identified
questions/concerns/observations about the current draft ordinance:


 1.​ SCOPE
 a.​ Expanded to include all internal and external complaints
 i.​ No longer being limited to only external complaints will allow board
 members access to evaluate and respond to a broader range and
 a larger amount of police department matters in relation to the IA
 process as well as broader police department topics.
 b.​ “Included but not limited to” language
 i.​ Pertains solely to “due process” and the IAs
 ii.​ Feels vague–what does and doesn't this include within the above
 criteria?
 1.​ Can it include discussion of IA categorization?
 2.​ What else could it possibly include? What else is in “due
 process?”
 c.​ Annual report
 i.​ Audience is expanded to include Mayor, City Council, City
 Manager, and Chief of Police
 ii.​ “Included but not limited to” policy and funding recommendations
 concerning the IA process; police policies, practices and
 procedures; and the board’s functioning and duties
 iii.​ Is the annual report the opportunity the Board is given to provide
 feedback on potential issues observed to be underlying IA cases?
 Is there any additional avenue for the Board to share this type of
 related feedback?
 1.​ The Charter states: “The civilian police review board shall
 be able to make policy recommendations to the mayor, the
 city council, and the chief of police.” << How exactly do we
 do that? What mechanism other than the annual report is
 there to do that in the current draft ordinance?




 Page 79
 iv.​ Is it possible to include in this section language such as “the City
 Manager must respond in XX days detailing actions that will be
 taken to respond to the problems/issues/areas for improvement
 raised in the report”?
 d.​ Receiving complaints directly from complainants
 i.​ See below “Complaint Process”
 e.​ Limits of scope
 i.​ Remains focused on the IA process with the exceptions of the
 above mentioned instances
 ii.​ The Charter languages specifically mentions things that are not
 reflected in the ordinance draft:
 1.​ The Charter says the new board has the power to
 recommend to the City Council changes "in the police
 internal affairs investigative process, policies or training,
 and for enhancing public confidence in the methods and
 process of investigation of citizen complaints against police
 officers." All of this is missing from the ordinance.

2.​ ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
 a.​ Ordinance imposes criteria that isn’t in the charter
 i.​ Is this ok, and if so, why?
 b.​ Changed from 10 to 5 years for city/school department employees, makes
 school and city employees both subject to the same restrictions–change
 from last draft. However the other barriers (e.g. has submitted a complaint
 to PD, etc) remain 10 years.
 c.​ The Charter amendment says in Section 1(c): “All candidates for the
 civilian police review board must be at least 18 years of age and must be
 residents of the City for a period of at least three (3) months prior to the
 date on or before which the board member is to be seated.” These are the
 only qualifications enumerated in the Charter amendment, and was 100%
 intentional - the Charter Commissioners wanted to, and did, completely
 eliminate almost all barriers to serving on this board. They thought this
 language accomplished that. However, these barriers have now been
 added back in.
 d.​ The Racial Equity Steering Committee also recommended in 2021 that all
 barriers to serving be eliminated for serving the PCRS.

3.​ COMPLAINT PROCESS
 a.​ We will need to create a process to receive complaints directly from the
 public, handle that information properly, and conduct our own
 interviews/and or research. We will need to determine what this will look
 like in practice once the new ordinance passes.
 b.​ The new ordinance says we must follow IA SOPs when receiving
 complaints directly. Does this leave no room for the new board to




 Page 80
 determine how exactly it should receive complaints, what information to
 collect, how to collect it? As long as IA’s needs are met, I don’t see why
 the committee should be prohibited from developing its own complaint
 process based on what it believes it needs, for example, maybe the board
 could collect some kind of demographic data that PD doesn't collect. The
 way the ordinance is currently written, that would not be permissible
 because it wouldn’t follow PD’s IA SOP.

4.​ APPEALS PROCESS
 a.​ The Charter mandates an appeals process, but does not state who the
 appeals board should be. It could be the city council, but the Charter says
 the Council could designate another body to do it. Is the Council really the
 best option here? A political body operating in a quasi-judicial capacity?
 b.​ Is the appeals process useful? Maybe this ship has sailed, but what
 exactly is being appealed here? The oversight board’s decisions about
 whether an investigation was timely, thorough, fair, and objective?

5.​ STAFF/RESOURCES
 a.​ Community Liaison
 i.​ Interfaces with the public about methods for filing complaints,
 assists board with carrying out duties, conducting outreach.
 ii.​ Is a city employee? Yes, the Charter says the Council decides
 whether this is an existing employee, or a new part-time or
 full-time one. It could be dedicated staff, but it sounds like the
 latest draft just assigns these duties to an existing staff member.
 b.​ Police Liaison
 i.​ Familiar with PPD SOPs and answering Board’s questions about
 such.
 ii.​ The current draft says the PD selects this person and that it must
 be a member of the Department; the Charter says the City Council
 selects this person and that it could be anyone, it doesn’t have to
 be a member of the department.
 c.​ Technical Advisor
 i.​ Assists with training and education on police practices, the law,
 and issues related to the citizen review process.
 ii.​ This could be a city employee, or a third-party consultant or expert
 d.​ IA reports and relevant documents
 i.​ Is the ordinance where we want to specify the need for increased
 security features for document sharing, as well as extended
 access for data-collection purposes?

6.​ BUDGET
 a.​ Board is able to request additional funding from the city manager as part
 of annual review process.




 Page 81
b.​ How are the 3 staff/advisor roles budgeted for?
 i.​ Currently they are not. The new board has zero budget for
 anything beyond the bare minimum staff time, and zero budget for
 its own duties.




 Page 82

APPROVED MINUTES
 POLICE CITIZEN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE
 June 23, 2025
 Meeting Held Remotely via Zoom

Members present: Joey Brunelle, Vice-Chair; Rachel Schlein; Keith Bidwell; Xavier Botana;
Randall Kilty; Walter Bihumugani

Members absent: Kaylin Kerina, Chair.

Staff present: Associate Corporation Counsel Rachel Millette and Tracy Boyd.

6:01 Call to order.

 Motion was made by Xavier and seconded by Rachel S. to approve 2024 annual Report.
Passage 6-0.

 Discussion of letter to City Council regarding the new CPRB ordinance

 Joey explained that instead of drafting a letter to the City Council, Rachel S. and he
created a list of topics regarding the ordinance for the subcommittee to discuss. The topics
included: scope, eligibility criteria, complaint process, appeals process, staff/resources and
budget. Rachel S. added the letter could include recommendations or just explain the
subcommittee’s thoughts on a topic whether there is consensus or not on a particular
recommendation. Xavier asked Rachel M. if had an idea of what direction the council was
heading in regards to the ordinance. Rachel M. responded that she’d just received confirmation
that the public workshop would be held on July 28, 2025, held via Zoom, but that she does not
have a sense of what the council will decide on the different elements of the ordinance, or
whether or not it get sent to a council committee. Rachel then gave the subcommittee a summary
of the ordinance’s history.
 After a lengthy discussion the group narrowed down what to include in the letter. Joey
and Rachel S. agreed to draft a letter for the subcommittee’s review. Rachel S. suggested
creating a timeline for drafting and review of the letter: complete draft of letter by 7/2, agenda
published with draft attached on 7/3, subcommittee feedback before the 7/9 PCRS meeting, final
editing after the meeting, then send to the City Council by 7/21.

 No public comment was offered.

8:22 Motion was made by Randall and seconded by Keith to adjourn. Passage 6-0.