Make Oakland Better Now’s position remains emphatic that the NSA Monitor must be replaced, reiterating the following key points:
1. The Need for Transition of Oversight
The core issue at hand is the transition of power from an external, court-appointed Monitor to the civilian oversight bodies that Oakland voters themselves established: the Police Commission, the Inspector General, and the Community Police Review Agency (CPRA). These agencies were specifically created through two ballot measures to ensure transparency, accountability, and oversight of the Oakland Police Department (OPD) by the people of Oakland, not an outside entity.
2. Failure of the Current Monitor to Facilitate Transition
For the past 14 years, former Rochester Police Chief Robert Warshaw has served as the court-appointed Monitor and Compliance Director. His stated goal is to ensure that OPD holds itself accountable, and he has shown no evidence of willingness to transition the oversight responsibility to Oakland’s civilian agencies. There has been no public statement, no action, and no acknowledgment in Warshaw’s reports that he is preparing for a handoff of authority to the Police Commission, Inspector General, or CPRA. This is a fundamental flaw in his approach. If the goal is truly to empower Oakland to police itself, then the external monitor’s role should phase out, and local oversight should take over. The lack of any meaningful effort to transition the Monitor’s role to the city’s established agencies signals a failure in fulfilling the spirit of the NSA.
3. The Need for Accountability, Not Self-Policing
Police departments, by their very nature, struggle with self-policing. While the current Monitor’s goal is to ensure OPD can hold itself accountable, this ignores the reality that police cannot be trusted to monitor themselves. This is why external oversight is needed—just as banks, hospitals, and restaurants require independent inspections, so too should police departments be held accountable by external bodies.
Oakland has already made this point clear. Through two ballot measures, the people of Oakland overwhelmingly voted to create the Police Commission, the Inspector General, and the CPRA to provide this oversight. These bodies have demonstrated their ability to step in and hold OPD accountable, as evidenced by their investigation into the Tran affair, where OPD’s Internal Affairs failed to act, but the CPRA stepped in, conducted its own investigation, and levied discipline. This is the model of accountability that the NSA was supposed to lead to.
4. The City’s Ability to Petition for a New Monitor
Under the terms of the NSA, the City of Oakland has the authority to petition for a replacement Monitor at any time. Yet, in the 14 years that Chief Warshaw has held the position, the City has never once exercised this option. This failure to take action has allowed an external Monitor to remain in place far longer than necessary, preventing local civilian oversight from assuming its rightful role.
5. A New Monitor Must Actively Support the Transition
A new Monitor/Compliance Director must be someone who is not only capable of overseeing OPD’s compliance but is committed to transitioning oversight authority to Oakland’s civilian-led agencies. This individual must be willing to cede power, work closely with the Police Commission, the Inspector General, and the CPRA, and guide the shift in responsibility so that Oakland’s civilian oversight can fully take over. This is critical not just for the future of OPD oversight, but for the legitimacy of the NSA process itself. The goal should always have been to transition responsibility to locally accountable agencies. The current Monitor has failed to fulfill this goal, and the city must take decisive action to replace them with someone who will.
The Time for Change is Now
The people of Oakland have waited long enough for the oversight they created to be fully empowered. The current Monitor/Compliance Director has not facilitated this transition and has instead maintained control beyond what is necessary. It is time for the City of Oakland to replace the NSA Monitor and ensure that the civilian oversight structures that Oakland voters created—the Police Commission, the Inspector General, and the CPRA—are the ones to lead the way in holding OPD accountable. The NSA’s role has outlived its purpose. It is time for the City of Oakland to take the necessary steps to end federal oversight, empower civilian oversight, and restore trust between the Oakland Police Department and the people it serves.
MOBN’s position is clear: Warshaw has overstayed his role. The job of monitoring OPD should no longer be in the hands of an external individual with no real connection to the community or a vested interest in empowering local civilian oversight structures. OPD must be held accountable by the entities Oakland’s citizens have established and trust—and this can only be achieved by replacing the Monitor/Compliance Director with someone who will actively support and oversee the transition to these local agencies.