NEW RELEASE: Audit of Oakland Police Oversight Agencies: The Oakland Police Commission, The Community Police Review Agency, and Office of the Inspector General 

On April 8, 1966, Oakland police officers entered the West Oakland home of Luther Smith, Jr. (photographed), without a warrant, and beat him and his family members. The case provoked immediate public outcry and demands for community police oversight. This photo shows Luther Smith, Jr., protesting police violence and calling for an Oakland police review board on 14th Street, in Oakland. Source: 1966, Oakland Post Photograph Collection, MS 169, African American Museum & Library at Oakland Public Library.

On March 10, 2026, Oakland’s Office of the City Auditor released a report about the City agencies tasked with providing independent oversight of the Oakland Police Department (OPD): the Police Commission, Community Police Review Agency (CPRA), and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG).  

Each of the three agencies has a distinct role in promoting constitutional policing in Oakland. After a 2003 Negotiated Settlement Agreement (NSA) requiring OPD to implement 52 reforms and bring OPD into federal oversight, the City established the police oversight agencies due to further misconduct. Voters approved Measure LL in 2016, establishing the Police Commission to oversee OPD’s policies and procedures, and CPRA to investigate complaints of police misconduct. In November 2020, voters approved Measure S1, which amended Measure LL, expanding the independence, authority, and staffing of the Police Commission and CPRA, and establishing the OIG to review OPD’s compliance with reforms mandated through the 2003 NSA. 

The objectives of the audit were to assess the extent to which each oversight body is acting in accordance with its City Charter and Municipal Code requirements; identify obstacles, if any, each oversight body faces in meeting the requirements laid out in the City Charter and Municipal Code; and evaluate the extent to which the oversight bodies provide effective oversight of OPD. The audit covered January 2020 through December 2025, and found: 

• • The Police Commission and CPRA have not yet implemented all previous audit recommendations from the Office of the City Auditor’s 2019 performance audit. 

• • The Police Commission, CPRA, and the OIG met 26 of 43 select City Charter and Municipal Code requirements. 

• • Vacancies, frozen positions, low minimum staffing requirements, and leadership turnover have hindered the police oversight agencies’ ability to fulfill their legally mandated duties. 

• • The City Charter and Municipal Code are inconsistent and conflict on the hiring and removal of the heads of CPRA and the OIG. 

• • Structural independence – functional separation from the City Administration in matters of budget and hiring, for example – would help to ensure the police oversight agencies have sufficient resources and administrative authority to meet their legal mandates. 

The audit report includes two recommendations to address the findings. The first calls for the City Attorney’s Office to independently analyze the agencies to identify the resources they need to meet their legal requirements. The City Attorney’s Office is independent, is uniquely positioned to factor legal requirements, and previously completed a similar analysis for the City Auditor’s Office. 

The second recommendation calls for the City Council to adopt revisions to the Municipal Code and pursue changes to the City Charter as needed, to resolve conflicts between the Municipal Code and the City Charter to resolve conflicting language. The audit notes that an earlier proposal to revise the enabling ordinances following the passage of Measure S1 has been pending Council consideration since early last year.  

The Office of the City Auditor will follow up on the statuses of the audit recommendations twice per year as part of its semiannual audit recommendation follow-up process. The City Charter also requires recurring audits of the Police Commission and CPRA by the City Auditor’s Office every three years. This audit brings the Office current on that requirement. 

You can read the full report here.

UPDATED: ANNUAL AUDIT WORK PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26

On February 19, 2026, my Office updated its Fiscal Year 2025-26 Annual Audit Work Plan.

Our initial FY 2025-26 Work Plan, released in August 2025, described audits in progress and also identified audits to launch in FY 2025-26.

We are revising the Audit Work Plan to:

• add compliance audits of Police Surveillance Technology (Flock), requested by the City Council by amendment to their vote to pass Resolution 91008, on December 16, 2025, and
• remove the audit of Oakland Zoo, Animal Care, Education, and Improvement (Measure Y). We are removing this audit, which is required by the measure, because the funds collected have not yet been spent and are pending litigation. Pending the results of that litigation, we will add the audit back to a future work plan.

We are earnestly working to complete our FY 2025-26 Work Plan and build our staff to full strength on a go-forward basis to enhance our capacity to meet Charter mandates and meet the community’s high expectations.

We also look forward to gathering input from city leaders and the public for our FY 2026-27 Work Plan, which will be issued in August 2026.

Click here to read the updated report.