About the resolution to terminate Interim Monitor Glass' appointment
postedLast Tuesday evening, I introduced a resolution to terminate the appointment of Interim Monitor Glass, effective immediately. This item will be discussed at the October 20th Common Council.
What are the issues
Interim Independent Monitor (IIM) Glass was hired in December 2025 to run the Office of the Independent Monitor (OIM), to serve as the executive secretary to the Police Civilian Oversight Board (PCOB), and to serve as the hiring manager for the permanent Independent Monitor (IM). The original job posting anticipated that this would take 6-9 months.
I first met with IIM Glass in March 2026, just after she published her annual report. We discussed many things, including goals for the office, the budget, and the hiring process for the permanent IM. During our discussions, IIM Glass said that she wanted to improve things for a permanent IM, and the timeline she laid out matched closely with the original hiring plan put together by HR. That plan would have led to hiring the permanent IM in September 2026.
Last month, a survey for the new position was created. The following steps have not been completed
Approval of the Position Description (PD).
The job posting because there is no position description.
The equitable hiring plan meeting (an operational step not required by ordinance).
The hiring of a committee selection and finalized by the IIM and PCOB.
A completed candidate screening or interviews.
Candidate(s) referred to either the PCOB or the Common Council for
consideration.
The reason for the delay seems to be because the PCOB was looking at whether it was allowed to appoint IIM Glass as the permanent monitor. As Alder Vidaver notes in her blog:
> Because Ms. Glass was hired with the express purpose of finding her replacement, it was her responsibility to serve as the primary staff member to the Police Civilian Oversight Board (PCOB) and help guide them through this process. The PCOB has met four times this year, with an additional meeting on the books for December. The first agenda for this year that included the hiring plan for the new IM was held on June 18. At that meeting, the PCOB reviewed a plan that would include community listening sessions to be held between June-August, a job announcement posting in September, with the selection process completion by December, and final Council action on the recommended hire concluding in January of 2027. However, during that meeting, the PCOB also openly discussed the possibility of directly hiring IM Glass. Members appeared to be confused about whether this was an option, even though the job posting was clear about the Interim IM's ineligibility to apply for the permanent position. At any point in this discussion, IM Glass could have spoken up to dissuade the members from thinking they could consider her as a permanent hire, yet she did not.
Furthermore, it is my expectation that the full-time hiring manager and executive secretary of the PCOB would push the hiring process forward. This has not happened, and the hiring process was not on track even before the killing of Corey Ruiz. Additionally, at the most recent PCOB meeting, two members of the PCOB referred to themselves as the hiring managers. This is concerning, because it seems like the PCOB is creating a legal fiction that because they are the hiring managers and not IIM Glass, she is now eligible to be appointed. This is clearly not what the city intended when we hired IIM Glass as the interim monitor.
Alder Vidaver's blog goes into great detail on other issues, but I'm really focused on the failure to complete the search for the permanent monitor.
Yesterday, October 14, an email was sent to all alders from IIM Glass that laid out the hiring efforts taken to date. Notable was this section, which seems to confirm that she delayed the hiring process while the PCOB investigated if they could appoint her as the permanent (emphasis mine):
> late April or May 2026: After the strategic planning work, and because of it, I sent the Board a memo. I confirmed my commitment to the Board and the work. I said I was not interested in a competitive process for the permanent role, that I was willing to stay as interim as long as the Board needed, and that I would consider a direct appointment by the Board only with additional public engagement. I asked the Board to consider pausing the permanent hiring process so the work would continue, the Board would not have to worry about losing me in the middle of it, and when the time came the Board could hire the permanent Monitor on a solid foundation.
IIM Glass was hired to run the office and find the permanent monitor. The fact that she asked the board to delay hiring without communicating this to the Common Council until yesterday, is by her own admittance, abdicating one of her key responsibilities. It is even worse that the reason for the delay appears to be for the board to get clarity on whether they could appoint her to the position without going through a competitive selection process. Given the support shown for IIM Glass on social media by members of the PCOB along with the delays in hiring, it does not engender confidence that these requests did not have any effect on the hiring process.
Where do we go from here
Trust is low between the Common Council, the PCOB, and the public. Whatever steps we take next, it is going to take effort and time to rebuild trust and demonstrate that both the Common Council and the PCOB want competent police oversight.
The resolution states that the Common Council Chief of Staff, Dr. Kapusta-Pofahl, will be the supervisor until we can hire a permanent monitor. It is important that we continue processing complaints and other day-to-day operations of the office. The resolution also states that we will work with NACOLE to help rebuild trust with the community and ensure we are meeting best practices in police oversight.
I hope that people understand that what I am doing is what I think is best for the city. What is going on right now is clearly not working, and we need to do better.