As the City of Cleveland seeks to end federal oversight of police reforms, it’s still years behind in investigating some workplace complaints against officers. As many as 20 complaints filed between 2019 and 2024 are still unresolved, according to records shared by the Cleveland Community Police Commission.

The commission first raised the issue just over a year ago. At that time, records showed that the Cleveland Department of Human Resources had failed to investigate — in some cases for years — dozens of complaints brought by city employees against police officers, including allegations of sexual harassment, workplace violence and discrimination.

This year the commission asked the city for an update. The city responded with two spreadsheets showing that, since January 2025, the city has “closed” 29 cases. Almost half — 13 total — were closed because either the officer or the person who made the complaint were no longer employed by the city or because the complainant withdrew the accusation or failed to respond when contacted by an investigator.

The records don’t list reasons for the other cases being closed. 

It’s not clear how many cases are still unresolved because of discrepancies between the two lists the city provided the commission. It could be anywhere from 10 to 21 cases filed between 2019 and January 2025.

The city did not respond to Signal Cleveland’s questions about the status of the investigations.

Community Police Commission Co-Chair John Adams cited the ongoing delays as evidence that the city is not ready to withdraw from the consent decree, the 2015 agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice that is overseen by a federal judge.

“We are not in that place,” Adams said. “There are processes in place, but I think the efficacy of them is not always there.”

Community Police Commission opposes city’s settling some delayed cases

The delays matter because the city’s contracts with the unions that represent Cleveland police set limits on the time frames in which officers can be disciplined after a complaint. The contract with patrol officers sets a deadline of one year for these types of complaints. In the contract with supervisors, it’s six months.

In September, the city reached settlement agreements with two officers and a lieutenant accused in 2022 of harassing a fellow officer. The officers faced suspensions of 10 to 30 days, and the lieutenant could have received 20 to 40 days, under the discipline guidelines in effect at the time. Instead, they received three days and five days, respectively, in the settlement agreements.

The agreements state that they “fully and finally resolve” the 2022 complaints. But the city charter gives the Community Police Commission final authority over police discipline matters. The commission can review and decide whether to change any discipline decision if a party complains or on its own discretion. The commission used that power for the first time last year and is preparing to resume hearings in May.

Signal Cleveland asked the city if other delayed cases have been or could be settled in the same way but did not get a response.

Adams said he’s concerned that the city sees settlements as a “strategy” to get around the commission’s authority. “We need something in place that prevents that from happening,” he said.

In November, the commission asked the city’s Public Safety Inspector General to investigate how the settlement decisions were made. 

The latest report from the Monitoring Team that oversees the city’s compliance with the consent decree questioned the Inspector General’s independence from the director of the Department of Public Safety.