344.05, Bias-Based Policing/Profiling Prohibited
- ORS § 166.155, Intimidation in the Second Degree
- ORS § 166.165, Intimidation in the First Degree
- Oregon House Bill 2002, (2015).
- Oregon House Bill 2355
- Citywide Equity Goals and Strategies
- City of Portland Resolution No. 37277, Declare the City of Portland a Welcoming City, a Sanctuary City, and an Inclusive City For All
- DIR 310.00, Professional Conduct and Courtesy
- DIR 310.20, Discrimination, Harassment, and Retaliation Prohibited
- DIR 330.00, Internal Affairs, Complaint Intake, and Processing
- DIR 640.80, Mandatory Bias/Prejudice Crime Reporting
- DIR 810.10, Immigration Enforcement and Diplomatic Immunity
- DIR 1500.00, Training
- Bias-Based Policing: The differential treatment of any person or any group of persons and/or any discriminatory practices by the Bureau or its members that are motivated by prejudicial judgments of the individual on the basis of their membership in classes protected by law or Bureau policy.
- Equity: The process of creating policies and procedures to promote the fair and unbiased treatment of all individuals and to remove differences in treatment of Bureau members and community members based on membership in classes protected by law or Bureau policy.
- Law Enforcement Contacts Policy and Data Review Committee: A statewide, governor-appointed committee that is charged with the duties of assisting Oregon law enforcement agencies with stop data collection and analysis efforts, improving community relations, training efforts, and policy recommendations that pertain to ensuring equity in Oregon law enforcement.
- Probable Cause: A substantial objective basis for believing that, more likely than not, an offense has been committed and a person to be arrested has committed it.
- Profiling: Where a Bureau member targets an individual belonging to a class protected by law or Bureau policy when conducting stops or detentions unless the Bureau member is acting on suspect description or information related to an identified or suspected violation of a provision of law.
- Reasonable Suspicion: An objective test measured at the time and place the member acts and based on the totality of the circumstances, which requires a member to point to specific, articulable facts giving rise to a reasonable inference that a subject has engaged or is engaging in criminal activity.
- Stop: Temporary restraint of a person’s liberty by a sworn member who is lawfully present in any place.
1. The Bureau is dedicated to offering courteous and professional service delivery and providing equal protection, a fundamental right under the Constitution, to all members of the community. The Bureau endeavors to create an organizational culture that promotes nondiscriminatory and inclusionary practices, and its members shall strive to enforce laws and policies in an impartial and equitable manner.
2. Bureau members are committed to respecting and preserving the constitutional rights of all individuals. Members are prohibited from taking or refraining to take any police action motivated by bias or prejudice and should, when appropriate, strive to engage community members in a positive manner. Furthermore, members shall not profile or discriminate against any individual who is a member of a legally protected class. Legally protected classes, as defined by federal or state statute, as well as case law, include an individual’s race, color, national origin, citizenship, ethnicity, religion, sex, pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, actual or perceived mental or physical disability, language (spoken or signed), marital or familial status, veteran status or any other protected status under law.
3. While other classes of persons are not legally protected in that there is no basis in case law or statute requiring that they be treated in a non-discriminatory manner, the Bureau is committed to policing in the most impartial manner possible. Therefore, the Bureau shall also prohibit the profiling or any disparate treatment of any individual based on their membership in the following classes: housing status, lawful source of income, economic status, immigrant or refugee status, or political ideology or affiliation.
4. Public trust and confidence are the cornerstones of community policing. The Bureau recognizes that engaging in police acts that are rooted in bias is contrary to the values of the Bureau and erodes that trust and confidence, delegitimizes the Bureau, and ultimately undermines community policing efforts.
5. Members shall adhere to established legal, ethical, and best practice standards. The Bureau shall provide introductory and ongoing training to all sworn members that emphasizes developing an understanding of racial, ethnic, national, religious, cultural, and other differences and fosters the professional growth and continued development of members. Training of this nature is reinforced and incorporated throughout several disciplines and is intended to equip members with the necessary tools and techniques to police effectively, lawfully, and without bias, while also treating community members with dignity and respect.
6. The Bureau recognizes the reality of implicit bias, the scope of its potential influence on human behavior and, as it pertains to policing, how it can affect interactions and relationships between the Bureau and Portland’s diverse communities. Therefore, the Bureau is committed to offering resources and instruction that help members identify and acknowledge their own subconscious perceptions or associated stereotypes about or attitudes towards people about which they may not be aware. In an effort to both minimize discriminatory practices and strengthen its relationship with the communities it serves, the Bureau will continue to work with members on an individual and collective basis to address how implicit biases may directly impact their work.
1. Bias-Based Policing and/or Profiling.
1.1. Members shall police justly and impartially. Members shall not engage in bias-based policing or profiling.
1.2. Members who engage in, condone, or fail to report bias-based policing or profiling shall be subject to discipline, up to and including termination.
1.2.1. Pursuant to Directive 310.00, Professional Conduct and Courtesy, members have a duty to report misconduct, including bias-based policing and/or profiling practices.
1.2.2. Any supervisor who is informed that a member has engaged in profiling or bias-based policing, receives a complaint alleging such, or otherwise becomes aware of such action and fails to act or report the member’s behavior shall be subject to disciplinary action.
2. Permitted Use of Physical Traits and/or Individual Characteristics when Establishing Reasonable Suspicion or Probable Cause.
2.1. When executing a stop, detention, search, seizure of property, an arrest or any other police action, the member’s action shall be based on a standard of reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Members must be able to articulate and document specific facts and circumstances that establish reasonable suspicion or probable cause.
2.2. Members are permitted to consider status characteristics that are protected by law or Bureau policy when acting on a suspect description or information related to an identified or suspected violation of a provision of law.
2.2.1. Members shall only use the listed classification information in combination with other relevant and specific identifying traits or factors (e.g., description of clothing, height, etc.) when searching for a specific individual or group. In these circumstances, status characteristics that are protected by law or Bureau policy should not be the sole factor cited/identified.
2.3. For a bias crime, as defined in ORS §166.155 and 165.165, a member may consider an individual’s class status that is otherwise protected by law or Bureau policy to the extent they are formulating reasonable suspicion or probable cause to investigate or arrest.
2.3.1. When investigating or charging under one of these statutes, members shall document the protected class status considered and the reason for doing so to establish reasonable suspicion or probable cause.
2.4. When initiating consensual encounters that do not amount to legal detentions or when seeking consent to search, members shall not rely solely on status characteristics that are protected by law or Bureau policy.
2.4.1. Members are permitted to engage in voluntary and non-coercive conversations with community members for the purpose of building relationships, seeking or providing assistance, or exchanging information.
2.4.2. It is not the intent of this policy to impede legitimate community engagement based on a community’s protected status.
3. Complaint Intake and Processing.
3.1. Internal Affairs (IA) and the Independent Police Review (IPR) shall accept and process all complaints alleging profiling and bias-based policing, whether from a known, anonymous, or third-party complainant or from the Law Enforcement Contacts Policy and Data Review Committee, in accordance with Directive 330.00, Internal Affairs, Complaint Intake, and Processing.
4. Communication with the Law Enforcement Contacts Policy and Data Review Committee.
4.1. The IPR Director is the City of Portland’s responsible point of contact with the Law Enforcement Contacts Policy and Data Review Committee.
4.2. The IPR Director or designee will submit copies of all City-received profiling complaints to the Law Enforcement Contacts Policy and Data Review Committee and will intake any Committee-received profiling complaints from the Law Enforcement Contacts Policy and Data Review Committee.
4.3. The IPR Director or designee will notify the Law Enforcement Contacts Policy and Data Review Committee of disposition of the complaint.
4.3.1. The Law Enforcement Contacts Policy and Data Review Committee may collect and disseminate data regarding profiling and bias-based policing for statistical purposes, but is required to keep personally identifying information confidential.
4.4. The IA Captain or designee shall ensure that the appropriate profiling complaint data is provided to the Law Enforcement Contacts Policy and Data Review Committee as described above.
- Originating Directive Date: 04/12/12
- Last Revision Signed: 02/01/18
- Effective Date: 03/02/18
- Next Review Date: 09/02/18