Letter: Establishing the Resident Oversight Board

An Open Letter to the Amherst Town Council and Amherst Residents

by The Community Safety and Social Justice Committee of the Town of Amherst

The following letter was sent to the Amherst Town Council on August 6, 2026.

---

We write to you openly, rather than only through a committee memo, because the question before the town — whether Amherst will finally establish a Resident Oversight Board (ROB) with real teeth — belongs in full public view. This is not a technical matter to be resolved quietly between the town’s legal counsel and the Town Council. It is a promise the town has repeatedly made to its residents for more than four years, and it is time to keep it.

The Community Safety and Social Justice Committee (CSSJC) was established by this council for exactly this purpose: to operationalize the recommendations of the Community Safety Working Group (CSWG) (see also here and here) and to hold the town accountable to the resolutions it has already passed in support of them. We are here to do that job, plainly and publicly.

The ROB the Town Committed To
The CSWG’s report Part A communicated the input they received from Town members, especially BIPOC residents.

Six key themes shown in the data: Fear, Dehumanization by the police, Distrust of the police, Lack of [Amherst Police Department] APD cultural competency, Lack of diversity in the police force, and Police disrespect for communities of color. Participants repeatedly identified racism and bias in police and their police work. (CSWG Report, Part A, p. 11)

The data then and the data gathered since reinforced the need for ROB. Part B of the report laid out a clear template for the ROB more than four years ago: a diverse board of at least five members, of whom four are BIPOC, and two are of African American descent; an adequate operational budget; training for board members; and — critically — full investigative authority. That authority must include the power to hire an independent investigator, to subpoena witnesses, to compel testimony under oath, and to access the documents necessary to resolve a complaint. This is the model the CSWG recommended, and it is the model we expect the council to adopt.

As the CSWG itself explained the stakes:

Resident oversight is beneficial to the police because it strengthens the relationship between a police department and its community and creates greater trust in the police. Oversight is beneficial to the community because it protects the civil rights of all members of the community, holds police accountable, ensures that community voices are heard and taken seriously, ensures that complaints will be heard and investigated fairly, and increases safety for all members of the community. In Amherst, resident oversight will also specifically address issues of bias, distrust and fear that are currently present in the relationship between the APD and local BIPOC communities. (CSWG Report, Part B, p. 12)

And as the CSWG defined the board’s mission:

…the [charge of the] Resident Oversight Board (Board) shall be to provide accountability and consultation so that equitable and effective public safety services are provided by the APD and that these services are provided in a way that contributes to eliminating systemic racism and white domination in Amherst. (CSWG Report, Part B, p. 12)

That mission cannot be achieved by a board with advisory status alone. It requires real investigative power. This is not a novel or untested idea — Springfield, Cambridge, and Boston all operate civilian oversight boards with exactly this kind of authority.

Responding Directly to the Concerns Raised at the June 23 GOL Meeting
At the Government, Organization, and Legislation (GOL) Committee meeting on June 23, 2026, Attorney Wendy Austin of KP Law raised a series of objections to establishing a ROB. We want to respond to each of them directly and in public, because residents deserve to hear both sides of this conversation, not just the version filtered through legal risk-avoidance.

A ROB is Not Redundant Now That the State Has POST.
It was argued that the Massachusetts Police Officer Standards and Training system (POST) makes a local ROB unnecessary. But Springfield, Cambridge, and Boston all created their civilian oversight boards before POST existed, and none of them has disbanded its board since. They recognized what remains true today: statewide certification and local, community-rooted oversight serve different functions, and Amherst residents deserve both.

The “Credible Report” Standard Is Itself the Problem.
Attorney Austin emphasized that POST investigates complaints under 555 CMR, which requires agency heads to act within two days of receiving a “credible report” of officer misconduct. But the regulation does not say who determines credibility. As it stands, that determination can rest with the very agency and officers the complaint is against — hardly a structure that builds trust with marginalized and BIPOC residents. We are aware of at least one instance in which an Amherst resident submitted a complaint to POST directly, only to be told, two years after submission, that POST did not handle it. This instance refers to the July 5, 2022, incident where BIPOC youth were told by the police that “they had no rights.” Per the response received by POST, “After a careful review of the facts and circumstances outlined in your complaint, our office has decided that no investigative action will be taken regarding this matter.” That is precisely the gap a local ROB exists to close.

Subpoena Power Is Not a Hypothetical — Other Massachusetts Boards Already Have It
It was suggested that a ROB could not be granted subpoena power, the authority to require sworn testimony, or access to anything beyond public documents. That is contradicted by existing Massachusetts precedent. The Springfield Community Police Hearing Board’s own website states plainly: 

The Board has the authority to review and recommend discipline of police officers, where warranted, on all civilian complaints involving allegations of harassment; use of unreasonable or excessive force, use of language that is insulting, demeaning or humiliating; discriminatory treatment based on a person’s race, religion, national origin, sex, age, sexual orientation or disability; or retaliation against a person for filing a citizens complaint. The Board is subject to open meeting laws, which provides that disciplinary hearings are open or closed at the option of the employee. The Board is authorized to subpoena witnesses, compel their attendance, administer oaths, take testimony of any person under oath and require the production of evidence relating to any matter before the Board.

Cambridge did the same by ordinance, granting its Police Review and Advisory Board these same powers under Municipal Code Chapter 2.74. 

Their Police Review and Advisory Board (PRAB) is a civilian-staffed agency with a board of five residents that provides oversight of the Cambridge Police Department (CPD). Created by city ordinance in 1984, the PRAB is authorized to receive, investigate, and mediate complaints and to review complaint investigations completed by the CPD’s Professional Standards Unit (PSU). Following its review, it then issues recommendations on investigative findings, discipline, and departmental policies and procedures.  

Lastly, Boston’s Office of Police Accountability and Transparency (OPAT) has three investigatory models. The model which is similar to what Amherst is looking for is the 

Civilian Review Board (CRB) reviews and investigates citizen-filed complaints of police misconduct. The CRB handles initial fact-finding and has the authority to issue subpoenas to force officers to appear for questioning during investigations. 

When you look at their dashboard on the website, you find that most resident complaints have been filed in BIPOC communities in Boston. 

Concerns About Board Training and Standards Already Have an Answer.
Questions were raised about how ROB members would be trained and vetted. Resident oversight boards operate across the country, and most participate in the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE), which publishes standards, training resources, and guidance specifically built for this purpose. Amherst would not be starting from scratch.

We also want to note something that was conspicuously absent from that meeting: when council members asked Attorney Austin how a ROB could be structured, or what it would take to stand one up, no answer was offered. What was offered, repeatedly, was a case for why the town should not build one at all. Residents are entitled to ask whether that advice was about what is legally possible, or about minimizing risk to the town at the expense of the accountability this community was promised.

What We Are Asking the Council to Do

• Establish the ROB as designed in the CSWG’s Part B report (pages 12–13), with no dilution of its investigative authority.
• Grant the board subpoena power, the authority to compel sworn testimony, and access to the documents needed to investigate complaints — consistent with Springfield, Cambridge, and/or Boston.
• Seat a board of at least five members, four of whom are BIPOC and two of whom are of African American descent, as the CSWG recommended.
• Fund the Board with an adequate operational budget and provide member training, drawing on NACOLE’s established standards.
• Confirm publicly that the existence of the statewide POST system does not substitute for, or diminish the need for, local oversight.

The Town Council’s own working group, convened to explore how to establish a ROB, did not conclude in its final recommendations that a ROB should not be created. Every serious body that has studied this question in Amherst has arrived at the same place: the ROB should exist, and it should have real authority. We ask the council to act on that consensus now, in the open, and without further delay.

The CSSJC remains ready to work with the council, town staff, and the community to see this through. We welcome continued public dialogue on this issue — that is exactly the spirit in which this letter is offered.

The Community Safety and Social Justice Committee (CSSJC)
Town of Amherst