The Madison city council voted earlier this week to restore funding for a new city police oversight agency but several alders are now calling for more oversight over the office and its board.
“Given the lack of any oversight in the past and and given their past performance, I do think that it’s appropriate that we consider reviewing that ordinance,” says Ald. Mike Verveer, referring to the 2020 measure creating the Office of the Independent Monitor and Police Civilian Oversight Board. “Personally, I don’t know what that happy medium at this point would be,” adds Verveer.
Madison Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway’s 2025 operating budget had proposed cutting $195,000 from the Office of the Independent Monitor and Police Civilian Oversight Board, but council members, including Verveer, voted on Nov. 12 to restore $127,210 of that funding.
The board and monitor office were created amid the nationwide Black Lives Matter protests over the police murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis. But they have struggled to get off the ground. The board took two years to hire an independent monitor — Robin Copley was hired in December 2022 — and Copley filled the monitor office’s data analyst position just within the last two months. Positions for four nonprofit representatives on the 13-person board remain vacant, and the board is still accepting applications for new members. The monitor office’s complaint form was not published until late October.
“We have started on the path of effective oversight with the OIM and the PCOB, but we’re not where we need to be,” Ald. Tag Evers says in an email. He says though he voted to provide funding for the agencies, “the trend line needs to point upwards. If it doesn’t, [the council] has the capacity and obligation to make changes to ensure that it does.”
The ordinance creating the police oversight agency and board forbids city staff or officials from using their position to “unduly influence or undermine the independence” of the monitor office. Still, Evers says the council must engage more with the office and board to ensure they stay on track. Copley “should appear quarterly before the council,” he says, and alders should meet with monitor office staff and members of the civilian board.
“Some are worried this amounts to meddling and undermines the essential independence of our oversight efforts,” Evers says. “To the contrary, stepped-up engagement demonstrates a commitment to excellence, which no one should be afraid of.”
Ald. MGR Govindarajan says while there has been “valid” criticism of the monitor office, he is in favor of providing some “extra leniency to a department that benefits underserved members of our community.” But he too hopes to see “additional measures put in place by the council to ensure that they’re meeting their goals.”
Ald. Bill Tishler voted against restoring funding for the office. He says given the lack of progress from the monitor office and board, he would have difficulty explaining to his constituents why the council would invest in them. Neither the council, the mayor’s office nor the public have yet received reports from the monitor office, Tishler says.
“If we were talking about any other department, I don’t think the council would be as generous as we saw on Tuesday,” Tishler says. In his view, given the community trauma caused by police killings and other failures, “there’s a lot of emotional attachment, and rightly so, to this,” making those on the council more amenable to funding the agencies.
Tishler says the monitor office’s delays may be due to it being “a little too independent.” He expects the council to be “more engaged and expect more results” from the monitor office in the future: “I don’t want to see the council micromanaging this by any means, but we do need to be able to ask for updates and reports. That is perfectly within the right of the council.”
Copley tells Isthmus they are “deeply relieved” the funding for the monitor office went through. They say it is ultimately the council’s “right and function” to change the ordinance which created the office, but would like to see the council approach that task cautiously, given the lengthy discussion and reports that preceded the ordinance’s creation. There is a difference between “oversight and authority,” Copley says, adding that more communication with the council would be beneficial for the monitor office.
“But I stand firmly that I don’t think that the council should have any kind of disciplinary authority or management authority over the office,” Copley says. “I think it’s really important that the office maintains its independence.”
Alds. Marsha Rummel, John Duncan and Sabrina Madison co-authored the amendment to restore funding for the police monitor office and board. Because it didn’t restore full funding, the data analyst position in the three-person office will become a part-time, rather than full time position.
The amendment passed 15-5 with Alds. Derek Field, Jael Currie, Barbara Harrington-McKinney and Charles Myadze joining Tishler in voting no.
The $432.5 million 2025 operating budget and $426.5 million capital budget both passed unanimously just before midnight on Tuesday. Funding for the board and monitor office took up most of the council’s deliberation, though how to distribute around $100,000 in additional funding for senior care contracts also received lengthy discussion. Of the five operating budget amendments before the council, the senior care and police oversight funding amendments were the only ones that received discussion. Both capital budget amendments — one to add Dane County funds to the Madison LakeWay project and another to obtain $6.3 million in traffic engineering grant funding — passed unanimously without discussion.
During council discussion of the budget, Ald. Madison asked Copley what the difference was between the police monitor office and the Police & Fire Commission, which also independently investigates complaints against the police.
Copley told the council the complaint process is just one of the monitor office’s many duties. They said once a data analyst position is filled the office will compile data on police department policy adherence, arrest disparities and more. The monitor office, Copley said, will determine if procedures were violated after receiving a complaint and what policies might need to change accordingly.
In public testimony before council debate, advocates for the police oversight office and board argued that constructing such a board is a long process. Maia Pearson, a member of the board, said similar boards nationwide have taken around “five years to get instituted.” In 2021, 160 such boards existed nationwide, according to a 2021 report from the Council on Criminal Justice — Madison is the only municipality in Wisconsin with a police oversight board. Copley said if Madison shuttered its office it would send a bad message to others.
“It’s no secret [Madison] is a very blue stronghold within the state, and we know that oversight offices are more likely to start in these bluer cities,” Copley said. “If Madison can’t stick to its values, if Madison can’t hold on to this promise that it made to the community, I don’t think that places like Fond du Lac or any other smaller towns in the state are going to look at this and feel any kind of confidence in building their own.”
