AGENDA REPORT
___________________________________________________________________________________
TO: FROM:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Councilmember Charlene Wang DATE: April 30, 2026
SUBJECT:
Receive a Bi-Annual Informational
Report from the Community Police Review Agency (CPRA)
regarding the Functions and Duties as required by OMC 2.46.030.
___________________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION:
Councilmember and Public Safety Committee Chair Charlene Wang recommend that the City Council receive and file a Bi-Annual Informational Report from the Community Police Review Agency (CPRA) regarding the Functions and Duties as required by OMC 2.46.030.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
To ensure transparency, accountability, and rigorous oversight of the Oakland Police Department, Councilmember Charlene Wang requests the formalization of the CPRA’s reporting schedule. While Oakland Municipal Code (OMC) Section 2.46.030 mandates reporting "no less than twice a year," this action establishes specific dates to receive CPRA’s required reporting mandate and ensures the Public Safety Committee and the residents of Oakland receive timely, data-driven updates on police misconduct investigations and agency performance.
BACKGROUND:
The Community Police Review Agency (CPRA) serves as a critical pillar of Oakland’s police oversight infrastructure. Under OMC Chapter 2.46.030, the Agency is legally required to provide the Public Safety Committee with comprehensive data regarding complaints, investigations, and disciplinary outcomes.
To date, the frequency of these reports has been inconsistent. By scheduling these reports for May and October, the Public Safety Committee aims to institutionalize a rhythm of oversight that aligns with the City’s broader public safety goals and provides the community with clear insights into the state of police accountability.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS:
Per OMC 2.46.030, each bi-annual report submitted by the CPRA must include, at a minimum, the following nine data points:
1. Complaint Overview: The total number of complaints submitted, a brief description of the nature of those complaints, and the Council District of origin.
2. Complainant Demographics: Demographic profiles of complainants, to the extent that information is voluntarily provided or exists in records.
3. Pending Caseload: The number of ongoing investigations and the specific types of misconduct currently being examined.
4. Completed Investigations: The number of investigations finalized, their results, and the total staff time spent on each.
5. Sustained Findings & Discipline: The number of sworn employees for whom misconduct was sustained and the specific level of discipline proposed.
6. Closed Cases (Non-Sustained): The number of closed investigations that did not result in sustained findings or disciplinary action.
7. Mediation: The number of cases successfully or unsuccessfully referred to the mediation process.
8. Statutory Deadlines: The number of cases that failed to meet:
a. The 180-day goal specified by City Charter Section 604(f)(3). b. The deadline specified by California Government Code Section 3304.
9. Non-Compliance & Subpoenas: The number of times a Department employee failed to comply with interview requests, document production, or valid subpoenas, and whether discipline was imposed for such non-compliance.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the scheduling of these reports. The data collection and reporting functions are already mandated duties of the CPRA under the Oakland Municipal Code and are covered within the Agency's existing biennial budget.
Prepared by: Bridget Ruiz Rivezzo, Policy Director for Councilmember Charlene Wang District 2 contact: [email protected]