Members of the public filed more than a dozen complaints about the Santa Ana Police Department in the wake of the agency’s supporting role during protests that took place in mid-May at UC Irvine.
But while those complaints have been reviewed by Santa Ana’s police department — and a member of the department has determined that they should not be made public — they have yet to be seen by members of Santa Ana’s newly formed Police Oversight Commission.
That apparent disconnect is prompting some city officials to look at the relationship between the long-sought commission and the agency it was created to oversee.
“The purpose of the civilian oversight is so that no one can undermine it,” said Santa Ana City Councilmember Jessie Lopez.
“So, if (the police department) has a role in receiving complaints, and is then making decisions to withhold information, then that undermines the function of the commission and the purpose of transparency that the commission is supposed to give.”
The commission, which started holding meetings earlier this year, was approved by the City Council as a way to “improve transparency, increase the accountability of and public confidence in the Santa Ana Police Department,” according to a city ordinance.
As part of that mission, the commission recently created a portal on the city’s website, a tool that allows people to file complaints about interactions with the members of the Santa Ana Police Department.
Such complaints, according to city documents, are supposed to go to the commissioners for discussion, who then are supposed to offer suggestions to police and city leadership on how to proceed.
But during the Oversight Commission meeting of June 13, Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Martinez told commissioners that the city has received at least 16 complaints specifically related to the police department’s presence at UC Irvine last month. Though Martinez did not offer details about the nature of those complaints, he said technical issues had prevented them from being shared with the commission.
Days later, police officials denied a public records request filed by The Orange County Register to see those complaints. Instead, the city provided a redacted record of what the department said was “not characterized as a complaint of misconduct against a Santa Ana peace officer.”
That redacted report was from a resident saying their bike had been stolen.
A city official said the “the person responsible for the determination to withhold and redact the records is Santa Ana Police Department Commander Jorge Lopez.”
A spokesperson for the Santa Ana Police Department later directed any questions about its decision to the city’s communications department.
City spokesperson Paul Eakins said via email that the oversight commission does operate independently of the police department, but that the city has a separate process to respond to public records requests.
“We will continue to use that process,” Eakins said. “The Police Oversight Commission does not have a role in that process.”
Eakins did not respond to other questions about the city’s public records request procedures, including why someone from the police department — and no one from the oversight commission — is included in that process.
City documents also suggest the oversight commission has an equal role with the police department when it comes to handling complaints against officers.
The ordinance stipulating the commission’s role says “a copy of each complaint, tort claim, and/or lawsuit that alleges misconduct…, regardless of where or how it is filed or submitted, shall immediately be forwarded to the members of the Commission, the Independent Oversight Director, the City Manager and the Chief of Police.”
Lopez, of the city council, said she wasn’t previously aware that oversight commissioners were not being notified about complaints. She also suggested that what’s transpired, so far, seems to run counter to the commission’s basic goals.
“Those public complaints, they are not (police department) records, they’re public complaints.”
At least one member of the seven-person oversight commission, Carlos Perea, also questioned why police personnel were allowed to make decisions about public disclosure.
“If the police department is making determinations around what is public and what’s not, and not the city attorney, then I do feel we have a very serious issue here,” Perea said.
“I don’t think the Police Oversight Commission can afford to be seen as a not very trustworthy entity.”
Santa Ana City Councilmember Johnathan Hernandez said he also finds it concerning that police department staff is making decisions on Police Oversight Commission business.
“This is supposed to be an independent body,” Hernandez said. “From my recollection, as one of the authors of the oversight committee and the ordinance, I don’t recognize this as procedure. It worries me when I hear that officers are inserting themselves into the process when it was very public, that was part of why we created oversight.”
The City Council approved formation of the oversight commission in 2022, following years of calls from the public asking for independent police oversight into possible cases of misconduct.
Perea said a key to the commission’s purpose is its independence.
“There needs to be a clear understanding that this commission is independent of the police department and that it is independent to be able to go over these complaints and work with the city attorney to address them,” Perea said.
“Having that line be blurred, even by perception, I feel that it will undermine the commission’s trust with the public.”
