MADISON, Wis. — Interim Independent Police Monitor Aeiramique Glass is challenging the legitimacy of a 42-page employment review conducted by the Madison city attorney’s office, deepening a months-long dispute over the city’s civilian police oversight office. Glass told News 3 Now she believes only the Police Civilian Oversight Board can review her office. She declined to comment further. The review says Glass’s office has been slow to carry out one of its central responsibilities: hiring a full-time independent monitor. It also includes emails between Glass and City Attorney Michael Haas, including one in which Glass wrote that she did not have to follow administrative procedure memoranda except when she chose to do so in good faith. Common Council President Sabrina Madison said she sees value in the review. “I don’t know how them helping us to understand what’s happening would be illegitimate,” she said. The dispute between Glass and city officials has been unfolding for months and became more public after Madison police killed Corey Ruiz in July. The independent monitor’s office is intended to provide civilian oversight of law enforcement, but the disagreement has raised questions about how the office is governed and who is accountable for its work. Former Alder Isadore Knox, who said he supported creating the oversight office and served on its initial committee, said he believes Glass is misreading the independence built into the role. He said that independence was meant to support investigations, and argued that her interpretation has contributed to dysfunction. Knox also said the office did not appear productive during his time on the committee, while emphasizing that he believes Glass is sincere in her efforts. The review does not itself determine Glass’s employment status. It says decisions about extending her provisional appointment or taking other action rest with the Common Council. Madison said it was too early to say what the council might do, noting that she was still reviewing the document and had follow-up questions. The city attorney’s office declined to conduct media interviews about the review. The Police Civilian Oversight Board and several alders had not responded to interview and comment requests at the time of publication.