OAKLAND — Days after the city approved a million-dollar settlement with a young woman who accused Oakland police of preying on her, a revamping of Oakland’s police oversight process is moving closer to reality.

Applications are being accepted for those willing to serve on Oakland’s first police oversight commission, and the city is reviewing a proposed ordinance from council members Dan Kalb and Noel Gallo to set up the commission to begin its work.

The ordinance covers a variety of details such as allocations for support staff and some of the rules under which the commission will operate.

Four of the commission’s seven seats, and one alternate, will be filled by a nine-member selection committee. The other three seats and a second alternate are at the discretion of Mayor Libby Schaaf.

Applications are due June 30.

Once potential members are chosen, the City Council will confirm them or consider an alternate panel, with an eye toward the commission starting as soon as October.

The council’s Public Safety committee on Tuesday will review a proposal from councilmen Noel Gallo and Dan Kalb that provides specifics on how the city’s first civilian police commission could function.

The commission, along with a civilian inspector general, are the result of an amendment to the city charter overwhelmingly approved by voters in November.

That was Measure LL, endorsed by more than 80 percent of voters. It replaces the city’s police oversight process with a civilian panel empowered to make police personnel decisions beyond what the mayor is allowed to do.

Rashidah Grinage, coordinator of the Coalition for Police Accountability, a driving force in drafting that measure, was not pleased the mayor is allowed to appoint three panel members.

She said she hopes the city will limit the number of appointments by the mayor to one of the three who will be on the commission’s discipline subcommittee on the most controversial cases.

“Some members of the community are very skeptical. It’s important that the commission be independent, fair, objective, transparent and free from political influence,” she said.

How and when that subcommittee, the discipline committee, is set up will be up to the commission to decide once it begins work. A new array of three of the seven committee members and two alternates could be named every month, or for every case, for instance.

The discipline committee would only be required in the most controversial, high-profile cases, and only if police and public investigations differ in their conclusions about a case.

Police accused of wrongdoing will no longer have to testify in person in front of the committee. Videotapes of statements and interviews collected while investigating a police misconduct complaint can be used, along with dash-cam or body-camera footage and recordings of dispatch calls.

Still to be determined is whether witness statements from other officers will only be provided in written form.

The binding arbitration process that reversed officer firings and other disciplinary measures in the past are still in place. But the commission will have the authority to fire the police chief, something that before the charter amendment only the city administrator could do.

The Coalition for Police Accountability advocated for a civilian oversight commission as far back as 2014, but agreed to step aside while voters decided on Measure Z that year, which funded anti-violence efforts and provided police with more than $10 million annually in parcel and parking tax revenue.

After numerous revisions in City Hall, Kalb and Gallo’s proposed charter amendment to create the new police commission made the ballot In 2016.

“It puts the residents of Oakland in charge,” Grinage said.

Contact Mark Hedin at 510-293-2452, 408-759-2132 or mhedin@bayareanewsgroup.com.