GOP bill to take away subpoena power from Nashville's police oversight board clears House

The House on Wednesday passed a contentious bill despite opposition from Democrats, who say that if it becomes law, it would block Nashville's police oversight board from having subpoena power.

HB 658, sponsored by Rep. Michael Curcio, R-Dickson, to limit how community police oversight boards can operate across Tennessee, passed in a 66-26 near party-line vote.

The bill would strip Metro's 11-member civilian-led police review board — approved by 59 percent of the vote in November — of its authority to subpoena people and evidence, a move that would significantly hinder the group's ability to investigate alleged officer misconduct.

"We are not overriding anyone's vote," Curcio said, reiterating that his legislation simply puts in safeguards. "I do support these boards. If we've got boards in Tennessee, they've got to be the best in the business."

MORE:Police oversight board members push back on GOP bill, 'vendetta' comment

The House rejected an amendment by Rep. Mike Stewart, D-Nashville, for Davidson County to be excluded from the bill, as the bill would directly circumvent the "will of the people closest to the action."

"This bill is very much against small government," Stewart said. "(Nashville took a vote) and the people made their decision. The group in Nashville has the right to get information and evidence."

Stewart was supported by Rep. Harold M. Love, Jr., D-Nashville, who said state lawmakers have the duty to represent the people who voted for them.

"My concern is that when we diminish their right to vote on this type of referendum ... we are not a government for and by the people ... but for the state," Love said.

However, despite outcry from Democrats, Love — who had to leave ahead of the vote to preach at a funeral — and Rep. Darren Jernigan, two Nashville Democrats, did not vote against the bill. 

Rep. John DeBarry, D-Memphis, hit present instead of voting and Rep. John Mark Windle, D-Livingston, voted for the measure.

Four Republicans, including Reps. Martin Daniel, Bill Dunn and Justin Lafferty of Knoxville, voted against the bill. Rep. Jeremy Faison, R-Cosby, also voted against the legislation.

In support of the bill was Rep. Mike Carter, R-Ooltewah, who said oversight boards with subpoena power mimic and insult grand juries.

“What do we say to the grand jury when we create a community board that has the same apparent authority they have?” Carter said, adding that if boards don't have limits, it would "wreak havoc."

“Without them we can in very short time … create political and legal chaos," he said.

Senate bill moves forward with amendment

The Senate sponsored by Sen. Mike Bell, R-Riceville, advanced in a Senate committee last week, though with an amendment allowing a process for obtaining subpoenas.

Bell filed the amendment after consulting with officials in Knoxville, where an oversight board with subpoena power has existed for more than two decades. 

The amendment would allow an independent investigator employed by a community oversight board, chief of police or head of a police department's internal affairs division to file a petition with a judge to issue a subpoena.

That subpoena could compel the production of documents or witness testimony under oath, though the testimony would only go before the investigator, the police chief or the internal affairs head.

The petition for subpoena would be filed in chancery or circuit court, and any official authorized to serve process would deliver a copy to the witness or document custodian.

“It is working well in Knoxville,” said Rep. Gloria Johnson, D-Knoxville, who said that city has never had to issued a subpoena but has used its power to compel witnesses.

“We have an example in this state of a community oversight board that has operated for more than 20 years. Police chiefs agree with it. Mayors agree with it. The community agrees with it.”

Curcio said decades of research has shown that subpoena power "serves no useful purpose," and ultimately "undermines the reason why the board is formed," citing lengthy court battles, legal costs and "lasting poor relationships with law enforcement."

"Let's not fulfill that prophecy," Curcio said.

The House’s passage of the bill turns attention to the Senate, where the measure could be taken up on the chamber’s floor as early as next week.

On Thursday, Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson, R-Franklin, said while he had not made a decision on the bill yet, if subpoena power were granted to anyone, it should be through traditional mechanisms, like a judge or a district attorney.

Lt. Gov. Randy McNally, R-Oak Ridge, predicted the differences between the House and Senate bill will likely lead to a conference committee.

“They’ll probably come out with something that’s in the middle,” he said, without elaborating.

Reporter Natalie Allison contributed to this article. 

Want to read more stories like this? A Tennessean subscription gets you unlimited access to all the latest politics news, podcasts like Grand Divisions, plus newsletters, a personalized mobile experience and the ability to tap into stories, photos and videos from throughout the USA TODAY Network's 109 local sites.

Reach Yihyun Jeong at yjeong@tennessean.com. Follow her on Twitter @yihyun_jeong.