The inaugural members of Oakland’s Police Commission hope to make sweeping changes to the city force in the new civilian body vested with broad authority over officer discipline and policy-making in the department.

The nine appointees awaiting City Council approval before beginning work in the coming weeks include a Harvard-educated lawyer, a probation manager, a grandfather of six, a former military attorney and a school administrator. They were chosen from a pool of 144 residents vying for a spot on the commission.

Based on interviews they gave with a selection panel and The Chronicle, commissioners in their first year are likely to take up issues of community policing, training, recruitment, racial profiling and uncompleted tasks spelled out in a 2003 negotiated settlement agreement overseen by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

One appointee said she wanted the Police Department to enact programs to improve interactions between officers and people who are homeless or mentally ill. Another said he wanted a better understanding of use-of-force policies during protests.

Councilman Dan Kalb, lead author of the ballot measure that created the body, said that with time, the commission will help increase the community’s level of confidence in police. It’s probably the most important citizen-led committee in the city, he said.

“We need to get to a point where everybody, no matter the color of their skin or their neighborhood, trusts the Police Department and officers, and we’re not there yet,” Kalb said. “When you’re talking about public safety and protecting people’s rights and reducing crime, it’s not surprising the Police Commission will be the most crucial city commission we have.”

The City Council is expected to confirm the seven appointed commissioners, plus two alternates, when it comes back from summer recess next month. Within some restrictions, commissioners will have the authority to fire the police chief, help select her successor, discipline officers and create new general orders for the department.

“The commission has the power to become the bridge for a stronger, more reflective, more problem-solving, de-escalating, culturally sensitive Police Department,” said Regina Jackson, president of the East Oakland Youth Development Center and one of the four commissioners appointed by Mayor Libby Schaaf. “I believe it’ll take a total disruption of police culture as it exists now.”

The Police Commission and the companion Community Police Review Agency it will oversee are the realization of Measure LL, which passed in November with the support of more than 8 in 10 Oakland residents. With their creation, the old civilian police board that served in an advisory capacity will be disbanded.

The police union is reviewing legislation that provides staffing and further details on the commission.

Suzy Loftus, a lawyer for the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department and former president of the San Francisco Police Commission, said the existence of the commission in and of itself won’t improve police-community relations.

Still, its members will “have an opportunity to set an aggressive agenda, including issues just below the surface that are impacting communities,” such as rape kit backlogs or traffic collision data, Loftus said.

The Community Police Review Agency, which will have a civilian inspector general, investigators and an auditor, will be required to probe incidents involving use of force, in-custody deaths, racial profiling and demonstrations. Commissioners can also ask them to look into other allegations of misconduct.

Beyond its powers to discipline officers, the commission will have control over the Police Department’s policies and procedures that govern use of force, profiling and public assemblies, subject to approval by the City Council.

The formation of the commission comes as a federal judge is demanding answers of city officials in response to a court-ordered investigation that found members of the Police Department’s command staff and internal affairs division botched the handling of sexual misconduct allegations. The events that spiraled into a national scandal when revealed last year halted much of the momentum in the department toward emerging from 14 years of federal oversight.

The judge has ordered city officials to file by Sept. 15 their response to the scathing June report by court-appointed investigators that faulted not only the Police Department for the sexual exploitation scandal, but Schaaf and City Administrator Sabrina Landreth for failing to review what went wrong.

Councilman Noel Gallo, co-author of Measure LL, said Oakland officials “can’t get our act together.” By insulating the commission from the whims of the City Council, the mayor, the Police Department and the police union, it can be a direct line and resource for the public, he said.

“All we do is make excuses, and it’s one lie after another lie,” Gallo said. “People lack confidence in law enforcement and city government. The commission is a step to have the voices of the public heard when their rights are violated.”

The City Council must approve or reject the entire five-person slate chosen by the selection panel — also composed of civilians — but can confirm the mayoral appointees individually.

Jim Chanin, a selection panel member and one of the attorneys who represented the plaintiffs in the Riders police-abuse scandal, said it will be essential for the commission to set deadlines so any punitive measures it wants to take against officers happen within California’s one-year statute of limitations for police discipline.

“Whether it’s fair or not, right now, there’s not sufficient confidence in the department’s discipline process,” he said. “The commission, by handing out discipline when appropriate, can act as a risk management tool to prevent the city from getting sued.”

Kimberly Veklerov is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: kveklerov@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @kveklerov