>> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS LATONYA REEVES, AND I'M THE CHAIR OF THE COMMUNITY COMMISSION ON POLICE OVERSIGHT. BEFORE WE BEGIN, I WANT TO OFFER A FRIENDLY REMINDER TO ALL MEMBERS, STAFF, AND THE PUBLIC, BROADCAST LIVE TO ENABLE GREATER PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. THESE BROADCASTS INCLUDE
REALTIME CAPTIONING AS A FURTHER METHOD TO INCREASE THE ACCESSIBILITY OF OUR PROCEEDINGS TO THE COMMUNITY. THEREFORE ALL SPEAKERS NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF THE RATE OF THEIR SPEECH SO THAT OUR CAPTIONERS CAN FULLY CAPTURE AND TRANSCRIBE ALL COMMENTS FOR THE BROADCAST. WE ASK ALL SPEAKERS TO MODERATE
THE SPEED AND CLARITY OF THEIR COMMENTS. AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO CALL TO ORDER THIS REGULAR MEETING FOR MONDAY, MARCH 3RD, AND ASK THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL TO VERIFY THE PRESENCE OF A QUORUM. >> COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD. >> PRESENT. >> COMMISSIONER NEWMAN IS
ABSENT. COMMISSIONER CLEMENT IS ABSENT. COMMISSIONER SMITH-KOOIN. >> PRESENT. >> COMMISSIONER BASTICK. >> PRENT. >> COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> PRESENT. >> COMMISSIONER CANADAY. >> PRESENT. >> COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS-JOHNSON. >> PRESENT.
>> COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> PRESENT. >> COMMISSIONER STEWART. >> PRESENT. >> VICE CHAIR OLSEN. >> PRESENT. >> CHAIR REEVES. >> PRESENT. >> THERE ARE TEN MEMBERS PRESENT. >> LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT WE HAVE A QUORUM. COMMISSIONERS, THE AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING'S MEETING IS BEFORE
US. I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO E AGENDA. LET ME ASK IF THERE'S ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA FROM COMMISSIONERS? >> YES -- >> COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> YES, THANK YOU.
>> THE FIRST THING I WOULD DO IS I WOULD LIKE TO BRING A MOTION TO HAVE ALL WARDS WITH CURRENT VACANCIES -- >> POINT OF DER. WE'RE ADOPTING THE AGENDA, RIGHT? JUST A POINT OF ORDER. >> YES. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION
THAT ALL WARDS THAT HAVE CURRENT VACANCIES LISTED IN THE AGENDA GOING FORWARD JUST AS THEY ARE NOW LISTED IN THE MINUTES. SO ALTHOUGH I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY FOR THIS MEETING, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO MAKE SURE THAT WARDS THAT HAVE VACANCIES ARE LISTED IN THE
AGENDA. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, OUR SYSTEM THAT AUTOMATES THE AGENDA WILL NOT ACCOMMODATE THAT, I'M SORRY. IT LISTS BY MEERS. IF THERE'S A VACANCY, IT'S NOT GOING TO PRINT A VACANCY. >> COULD IT SIMPLY BE INSERTED? >> NO, IT PULLS AUTOMATICALLY OUT OF THE SYSTEM.
SO I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO WHICH IS WHY WE'VE DONE THAT IN THE MINUTES, I CANNOT DO THAT. THE SYSTEM IS AUTOMATED. >> OKAY. >> I HAVE A SECOND AMENDMENT FOR THE AGENDA. JUST LIK IN THE JANUARY MEETING, AT THIS MEETING MY NOTICE TO HAVE AN UPDATE ON
ALLISON LUCIER'S CASE HAS BEEN DENIED. THIS FLIES IN THE FACE OF THE MOON THAT WAS PASSED AT THE LAST MEETING IN FEBRUARY. QUOTE GUAN-SHERMAN MOVED THAT AN EXACT COPY OF WHAT WAS SENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL BY THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR BE SHARED AS PART OF THE MARCH 3RD MEETING, THE CCPO MEETING.
END QUOTE. YOU CAN'T SHARE SOMETHING IF IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA. SO I AM ASKING SOMETHING, MY MOTION IS AS FOLLOWS, TO AMEND THE AGENDA TO INCLUDE UNDER UNFINISHED BUSINESS AN UPDATE ON THE CCPO MEMO RELATED TO THE KILLING OF ALLISON LUCIER AND
ANY OTHER UPDATES. >> IS THERE A SECOND? THAT MOTION FAILS. ANYTHING ELSE, COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN? >> I JUST WANTED TO SAY, THAT IS SO OUTRAGEOUS. HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO GET
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THIS CASE IF IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA, AND WE PASSED MOTION THAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE PART OF THIS MEETING. IT SETS A PRECEDENT AND DISTRUST. WHAT ARE WE HIDING? >> I'LL SAY TO COMMISSIONER
GURIAN-SHERM AND TO THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS, IT IS THE PURVIEW OF CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE DONE. THAT WAS ON THEIR AGENDA AND THEY'VE TAKEN ACTION SO I WOULD ASK THE PUBLIC IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS ABOUT THE LUCIER CASE, AND I APOLOGIZE IF I SAID THAT WRONG, TO PLEASE GO
TO THE CITY COUNCIL WHO H PURVIEW OVER THE NEXT STEPS FOR THE CITY. CCPO DOES NOT HAVE PURVIEW OVER THAT. A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE FOR IT TO GO TO THE AUDIT COMMITTEE.AND TN AFTER THAT. SO THAT'S THE ACTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL. THAT IS TIR PURVIEW. THE CCPO BODY DOES NOT HAVE ANY
JURISDICTION OVER THA ANY FURTHER. >> THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMITTEE IS TO SEE THAT THE MOTIONS THAT WE PASSED ARE FOLLOWED. >> COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN -- >> WHAT WAS SENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD BE PRESENTED AT THIS MEENG FOR THE COMMISSIONERS TO HAVE AND FOR THE PUBLIC TO HAVE.
>> POINT OF ORDER. THE MOTIO WAS NOT SECONDED, SO THERE'S NO APPROPRIATE DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT. >> MADAM CHAIR - >> YES. >> I WILL APOLOGIZE, I SENT OUT TO ALL MEMBERS A COPY OF YOUR EMAIL TO THE COUNCIL AFTER THE
LAST MEETING AND I WILL ATTEMPT WHILE WE'RE IN PUBLIC COMMENTS TO HAVE COPIES PRINTED SO THAT THAT CAN BE SHARED WITH FOLKS. THE OTHER THINGS I WOULD OFFER THIS UPDATE, YOU CORRECTLY SAID THIS IS THE PUREW OF THE CITY
COUNCIL. THIS COMMITTEE ASKED THE CITY COUNCIL TO ASK THE AUDIT COMMITTEE TO CONDUCT AN AFTER ACTION REPORT. I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS BODY IS AWARE, ON MONDAY OFAST WEEK, THE AUDIT COMMITTEE APPOINTED THE NEW CITY AUDITOR, SO WE HAVE EN WITH AN INTERIM AUDITOR FOR ALMOST A YEAR. THE NEW CITY AUDITOR, HIS NAM
IS ROBERT TIMMERMAN WAS AAPPOINTED BY THE AUDIT COITTEE AT THEIR MEETING LAST MONDAY. I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE, BUT THE AUDIT COMMITTEES AN INDEPENDENT GROUP. IT SAYS COMMITTEE, BUT IT'S NOT A COMMITTEE OF THE COUNCIL. IT IS A COMMITTEE OF THE CITY THAT WAS CREATED UNDER THE CITY CHARTER. SO IT ISNDEPENDENT OF THE CITY
COUNCIL, DOES NOT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL. IT HAS THE EXCLUSIVE AUTHORITY TO APPOINT AND SUPERVISE THE AUDITOR. AND BASED ON THIS GROUP'S RECOMMENDAON, THE CITY COUNCIL FORWARDED TO THE AUDIT COMMITTEE A REQUEST FOR AN AFTER ACTION
REPORT INVOLVI THE SHOOTING OF DAVIS NOTORI AND ALSO THE DEATH OF ALLISON LUCIER. THE REQUEST TO ADD THE DEATH OF ALLISON LUCIER TO THAT AFTER ACTION REPORT WAS LITERALLY TAKEN UP LAST MONDAY. THE AUDIT COMMITTEE REQUESTED
THE AUDITOR TO CONDT BOTH OF THOSE AFTER ACTION REPORTS. AND TODAY SOMETIME THIS AFTERNOON THE AUDITOR DID SEND AN UPDATE TO BOTH THE AUDIT COMMITTEE AND COPIED THE CITY COUNCIL AND I'M READING TOYOU, THIS IS FROM ROBERT TIMMERMAN,
THE CITY AUDITOR. HE SAYS THIS MEM IS TO INFORM YOU, THE AUDIT COMMITTEE, THAT THE OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR HAS DECIDED TO CONDUCT SPECIAL REVIEWS OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES AROUNDHE EVENTS THAT LED UP TO THE SHOOTING OF DAIS NOT AORI A
AFTER THE DEATH OF ALLISON LUCIER. SO THE AUDITOR IS PREPARING TO TAKE UP THOSE TWO AFTER ACTION REVIEWS THAT WERE REQUESTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND DIRECT BID THE AUDIT COMMITTEE. UNTIL THEY FINISH THEIR REPORT, THAT IS IN THEIR PURVIEW, AS YOU POINTED OUT. BU AT LEAST TO CLOSE THE LOOP
PUBLICLY, I WANTED TO SHARE THAT INFORMATION. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT UPDATE. AND THANK YOU FOR MAKING COPIES OF THE EMAIL AND MAKING THEM AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. >> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE AN AGENDA ON THE FLOOR.
IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE AGENDA? SO MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. THERE'S A MOTION IN A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COUNCILMEMBER SCHANFIELD. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER NEWMAN IS ABSENT. COMMISSIONER CLEMENT. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH-KOOIMAN.
>> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER EWART. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> NAY. >> COMMISSIONER CANADAY. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS-JOHNSON. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> AYE. VICE CHAIR OLSEN. >> AYE. >> CHAIR REEVES. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE TEN AYES AND ONE NAY. >> THANK YOU.
WE HAVE A MOTION THAT'S ADOPTED. NEXT WE HAVE THE ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES FROM OUR FEBRUARY 3RD MEETING. MAY I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND TO ACCEPT THAT SET OF MINUTES.
>> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? >> YES, I HAVE A MOTION TO AMEND THE MINUTES. IT SAYS ON THE FEBRUARY 3RD MINUTES UNDER THE ALLISON LUCIER
MOTION BEFORE THAT MOTION WAS MADE, IT SAYS QUOTE GURIAN-SHERMAN REQUESTED CLARIFICATION REGARDING THEEMO SHE HAD DRAFTED REGARDING THE MATTER OF ALLISON LUCIER AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT MEMO WAS FORWARDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL, END QUOTE.
MY MOTION WOULD BE BECAUSE IT IS PERTINENT TO FOLLOW UP, THE MOTION IS TO CHANGE THAT PHRASINGO THE MEMO SHE WAS TASKED TO DRAFT PER THE NOVEMBER 18TH LUCIER MOTION AND THEN THE REST WOULD REMAIN T SAME. >> QUICK POINT OF DISCUSSION, I
THINK YOU VOLUNTEERED TO DO THAT, CORRECT? >> NO. I SAID I WOULD DO IT, AND THEN IT BECAME PART OF THE MOTION THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT I HAD . IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE YOUTUBE VIDEO, IT MAKES IT
PRETTY CLEAR THAT WAS AN OBLIGATION I FOLLOWED THROUGH ON. TO BE CLEAR I DIDN'T DO IT IN THE WEEK THAT I THOUGHT IT WOULD HAPPEN BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME PROCEDURAL THINGS THAT GOT IN THE WAY INCLUDING GETTING IN TOUCH WITH JANA WILLIAMS, MS. LUCIER'S AUNT, WHO HAS BEEN A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE FAMILY. TO MAKE SE THAT WHATEVER IT
WAS THAT I PUT IN THE DRAFT WAS SOMETHING THAT SHE APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED SINCE SHE IS THE FAMILY REPRESENTATIVE. SO THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. >> YOU SAID THAT YOU WOULD, SO DID SOMEONE TELL YOU TO DO IT OR YOU VOLUNTEERED AND THEN IT GOT ADDED TO A MOTION TO BE IN THE
AGENDA? >> I'M SORRY, COULD YOU REPEAT THAT. >> FROM YOUR EXPLANATION, YOU SAID THAT YOU WOULD DO . WERE YOU TOLD BY SOMEONE TO DO IT OR WOULD YOU SAY YOU WOULD DO IT AND THEN IT GOT ADDED TO A MOTION TO BE APPLIED TO THE AGENDA AND MINUTES? >> WE STARTEDALKING ABOUT IT. THE MOTION NEVER REALLY GOT
RESTATED SO I SAID THAT I WOULD DO IT AND THEN IT GOT MADE PART OF THE MOTION OF THE ACTUAL MOTION. IF YOU WANT I COULD READ THAT MOTION THAT WAS PASSED ON NOVEMBER 18TH. >> NO NEED, COMMISSIONE GURIAN-SHERMAN. IS THERE A SECOND TO HER MOTION TO CHANGE IT? >> YES, AND I CAN PROVIDE THE
COPY TO THE CITY CLERK. >> IS THERE A SECOND? I'M NOT SEEING A SECOND. THAT MOTION FAILS. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSEN TERMS OF THE MINUTES? ALL RIGHT, ERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD.
>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER NEWMAN IS ABSENT. COMMISSIONER CLEMENT. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH-KOOIMAN. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER BASTICK. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER STEWART.>> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> NAY. >> COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS-JOHNSON. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH.
>> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR OLSEN. >> YES. >> CHAIR REEVES. >> YES. >> THERE ARE TEN AYESND ONE NAY. >> THE MINUTES HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED. NEXT IN THE ORDER OF PUBLIC COMMENTS, WE'LL OPEN THE FLOOR TO ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC GIVING EACH SPEAKER TWO MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION. WE'LL BE TAKING SPEAKERS IN THE
ORDER THAT THEY'VE REGISTERED. IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION TONIGHT AND YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY DONE SO, YOU CAN REGISTER WITH THE CLERK. IF ANYONE HAS PRINTED MATERIALS, PLEASE GIVE THOSE TO THE CITY CLERK. WE ALSO INVITE FOLKS TO SUBMIT
WRITTEN COMMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORD AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO SPEAKING IN TONIGHT'S COMMENT SESSION. EACH SPEAK WILL BE GIVEN TWO MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION TONIGHT. WE HAVE A TIMER TO ASSIST SPEAKERS IN THEIR USE OF TIME. WITH THAT, OURIRST SPEAKER,
KIM IS IT MILLIARD? I HOPE I SAID THAT RIGHT. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M KIM MILLIARD, I'M HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE RACIAL JUSTICE NETWORK. MINNEAPOLIS ORDINANCE CHAPTER 172 PROVIDES THE PURPOSE OF THE COMMUNITY COMMISSION ON POLICE OVERSIGHT. ONE OF ITS SPECIFIC POWERS AS YOU KNOW IS TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE ANNUAL PERFORMAN REVIEW OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE.
THE ORDINANCE ALSO REQUIRES AN ANNUAL PUBLIC HEARING ADDRESSING POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES, RULES, SPECIAL PRACTICES AND ORDERS. THE COMMISSION SHALL DETERMINE WHICH POLICE DEPARTMENT RULES, POLICIES,PECIAL PRACTICES AND ORDERS SHALL BE SUBJECT OF THE ANNUAL HEARING. AT THE ANNUAL HEARING, MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE CCPO HAS DECIDED TO TAKE UP THE POLICE CHIEF'S PERFORMAN REVIEW. MY EXPECTATION IS THAT YOU WILL OPEN IT UP TO COMMENTS FROM THE PUIC REGARDING OUR OPINIONS ON THE CHIEF'S PERFORMANCE AND WHETHER HE SHOULD BE RETAINED, FIRED, OR HAVE HIS CONTRACT NOT EXTENDED. IF YOU FEEL THAT SHOULD BE ITS
OWN MEETING, THEN I WOULD REQUEST THAT THE CCPO MAKE A MOTION TO HOLD A SPECIAL MEETING FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THE CHIEF'S PERFORMANCE. I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS CHIEF'S WAYWARD HIRING PRACTICES AS WELL AS HIS LACK OF LEADERSHIP AND ACCOUNTABILITY.
WHEN MPD FAILS TO PROTECT PEOPLE IT KNOWS ARE FACING SPECIFIC THATS, ESPECIALLY WHEN THOSE PEOPLE ARE BLACK, BROWN, OR INDIGENOUS. CHIEF O'HARA WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR HIRING TYLER TIMBERLAKE WHO CAME TO MPD WITH A KNOWN USE OF
EXCESSIVE FORCE AGAINST A BLACK MAN IN VIRGINIA. WHEN THAT INFORMATION BECAME PUBLICO'HARA LIED PROFUSELY ABOUT WHAT HE KNEW AT THE TIME OF HIRING. WE KNOW HE LIED BECAUSE DOCUMENTATION HAS BEEN PUBLISHED TO PROVE IT. AND SO THAT STUFF DOESN'T GET BROKEN UP, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD
AND TURN OVER MY COMMENTS TO BILLY JEAN WHO IS NEXT. >> BILLY JEAN VAN KNIGHT. >> YES. I'M ALSO WITH THE RACIAL JUSTICE NETWORK. HELLO.
THE HIRING OF TYLERIMBERLAKE IS NOT THE ONLY POOR HIRING DECISI THAT CHIEF O'HARA MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR. IN 2022, LUCAS BELLAMY, A BLACK MAN, CRAWLED ON ALL FOURS IN THE
HENNEPIN COUNTY JAIL BEGGING FOR MEDICAL HELP. HE WAS DENIED. WHILE BELLAMY COULD BARELY CRAWL, A SHERIFF DEPUTY NAMED LUCAS WEATHERSPOON W SEEN ON VIDEO TURNING HIS HEAD SMILING AND TRYING TO STIFLE LAUGHTER. LUCAS BELLAMY DIED IN AGONY
WHICH WAS DETERMINED TO HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY PREVENTABLE HAD HE BEEN TAKEN TO A HOSPITAL. LUCAS WEATHERSPOON IS NOW AN OFFICER WITH THE MP CHIEF O'HARA IS WELL AWARE OF HIS INVOLVEMENT IN THE LUCAS
BELLAMY CASE AND THE $3.4 MILLION HE HAS ALREADY COST THE COUNTY, BUT HASOT REVERSED HIS DISTURBING HIRING DECISION. WE EXPECT AND DEMAND THAT THE POLICE CHIEF HIRE OFFICERS WHO
WILL HAVE MORE REGARD ANDARE FOR BLACK LIVES THAN LUCAS MBERLAKE AND WEATHERSPOON HAVE DEMONSTRATED. CHIEF O'HARA HAS ALSO MADE EXCUSES FOR MPD'S FAILURE TO PROTECT FOLKS LIKE DAVIS NOTORI
WHO WAS SHOT BY A RACIST WHITE NEIGHBOR DESPITE MPD'S KNOWLEDGE OF THE THREATS AGAINST HIM. HE HAS ALSO DEFENDED MPD'S FAILURE TO INVESTIGATE THE DEATH OF INDIGENOUS WOMAN ALLISON LUCIER AS A MURDER DESPITE 157
PAGES OF POLICE RECORDS DOCUMENTING MPD'S KNOWLEDGE OF HER PARTNER'S DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND THREATS TO KILL HER. CHIEF O'HARA IS NOT REVERSING OR CHANGING THE RACIST CULTURE OF MPD. HE IS PERPETRATING IT. AND THIS SHOULD BE WGHTED
HEAVILY AT HIS PERFORMANCE REVIEW. >> LIZZY PALMER.
>> HELLO, MY NAME IS LIZZY LMER. I'M WITH TWIN CITIES COALITION FOR JUSTICE. AT THE FEBRUARY 3RD CCPO MEETING, A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON ALLISON LUCIER'S CASE. WE ALL NEEDED TO KNOW WHAT
HAPPENED SINCE THEY ADDED ALLISON'S CASE TO THE AUDITOR'S AFTER ACTION REVIEW. ALTHOUGH FIVE COMMISSIONERS COWARDLY ABSTAINED FROM VOTING, THE MOTION STILL PASSED. LATER THERE WAS NO STRAIGHT ANSWER ON WHETHER A MEMO THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE INCLUDED WAS SENT BY THE CHAIR TO THE CITY
COUNCIL. COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN MADE ANOTHER MOTION TO GET AN EXACT COPY OF WHAT WAS SENT. THIS TIME ONLY ONE COMMISSIONER ABSTAINED AND EIGHT VOTED FO IT, THANK YOU. WE KNOW WHAT WAS SENT. CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TOLD US THE
CHAIR'S SHORT EMAIL DID NOT INCLUDE ANY IMPORTANT DOCUMENTED INFORMATION INCLUDING MPD'S FAILURES IN ALLISON'S CASE. FAILING TO SEND IT DELIBERATELY KEPT INFO FROM THE COUNCIL, THE AWE AUDITOR, AND THE PUBLIC.
LATONYA REEVES, YOU HAVE COMPROMISED YOUR INGRITY, SHOWING WHAT SIDE YOU ARE ON. POLICE COVER UP. NOT POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY, NOT POLICE OVERSIGHT. THE FAILURE OF THE CHAIR TO DO HER JOB HIGHLIGHTS THE NEED TO HAVE TRUE CONTROL OF THE POLICE
IN MINNEAPOLIS NOT ADVISORY COMMISSIONS WITH NO OVERSIGHT POWER WHICH IS ALL WE'VE GOT FOR PUBLIC OVERSIGHT. BUT WE DESERVE MORE. FOR YEARS THERE'S BEEN A CAMPAIGN IN MINNEAPOLIS TO ESTABLISH A DEMOCRATIC LED CIVILIAN POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY
COMMISSION. THEY WOULD IMPACT HIRING PRACTICES, TRAINING PROCEDURES, AND MPD MISCONDUCT SES. IF CPAC HAD BEEN ESTABLISHED, IT WOULD HAVE HELPED ALLISON LUCIER AND COUNTLESS OTHER VICTIMS OF POLICE MISCONDUCT. CPAC IS A TRANSPARENCY AND
FAIRNESS THAT THE CCPO IS NOT PROVIDING. >> NEXT UP, ALYSSA WASHINGTON. >> I'M ALYSSA WASHINGTON WITH THE WRONGFULLY INCARCERATED MINNESOTA. WE MAKE SURE CRITICAL
INFORMATION ABOUT ALLISON'S CASE GOT TO THE CITY COUNCIL. THANK YOU CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS WANSLEY AND CHAVEZ, AND PRESIDENT PAYNE FOR SUPPORTING A SEPARATE INDEPENDENT REVIEW FOR ALLISON'CASE. THEIR MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY TO THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE ON
FEBRUARY 13TH, THEN W SENT TO THE AUDITOR. LAST MONDAY, OUT OF THE BLUE, THE AUDIT COMMITTEE DECIDED TO DEY ACTION ON ALLISON'S AFTER ACTION REVIEW. IT WAS CONFUSING AND FELT LIKE A STABN THE BACK. WE EXPRESSED OUR DISAPPOINTMENT
AT THE COUNCIL MEETING LAST THURSDAY WITH TWO SIMPLE DEMANDS, NO DEY, NO BCA. DESPITE THE CHAIR'S ASSISTANCE TO DENY INFO TO COUNCIL AND AUDITOR, WE GOT IT TO THEM, DEM QUICK APPROVAL.
ALLISON IS BEING SEEN AND SO IS THE CCPO. WE APPRECIATE COUNCIL MEMBER WANSLEY AND PRESIDENT PAYNE SPEAKING WITH US AT DIFFERENT TIMES TO EXPRESS QUICK APPROVAL BY THE AUTOR. WHAT WAS DONE FOR DAVIS MATORI
MUST BE DONE FOR ALLISON LUCIER. CHIEF O'HARA ADMITS MPD FAILED MATORI, BUT HE CONTENDS THEY FOLLOWED PROTOCOL FOR LUCIER, DESPITE WHAT RECORDS SHOW.
NO WONDER HER FAMILY CAN'T TRUST FILING A COMPLAINT WITH MPD. IT'S NO WONDER THE CHIEF WANTS A NOTORIOUS CRIMINAL ING THE INVESTIGATION. WE ALSO CAN'T TRUST A BCA THAT WORKS AGAINST INDIGENOUS BLACK
AND BROWN PEOPLE WHETHER THEY ARE VICTIMS OF POLE ABUSE OR FALSELY ARRESTED BY THE POLICE. IF THE BCA GETS INVOLVED WITH ALLISON'S CASE, THEY'LL DO WHAT THEY'VE DONE BEFORE, COVER UP AND ABSOLVE POLICE. THIS IS PRECISELY WHY CHIEF O'HARA HAS ASKED THE BCA TO STEP IN.
NO BCA. >> NEXT UP WE HAVE IS IT BOB GONAN. I HOPE I'M SAYING THAT CORRECTLY. >> HEL EVERYONE.
I WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT SIN CITY, WITH WHOM THE CITY HAS A $500 CONTRACT IN CONNECTION WITH ALLISON LUCIER. NATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT HAS USED SIN CITY FOR EVERYTHING FROM CRITICISM OF POLICE
DEPARTMENT AND COMMUNITY OUTREACH OVER THE KILLING OF BLACK MEN. THERE IS A DISTURBING PATTERN OF POLICE DEPARTMENTS UTILIZING SIN CITY TO MONITOR COMMUNITY REACTION TO THE KILLING BY WHITE POLICE OFFICERS OF BLACK MEN. THIS WAS THE CASE IN KENT
COUNTY, MICHIGAN. THIS WAS THE CASE IN BROOKLYN PARK, MINNESOTA WHERE POLICE HAD KILLED DANTE WRIGHT IN NEARBY BROOKLYN CENTER. IN THE WAKE OF MPD'S KILLING OF GEORGE FLOYD, THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS NDUCTED A TWO YEAR
INVESTIGATION INTO THE MPD. IN JUNE 2022, THEY CONCLUDED THAT THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AND MPD HAD ENGAGED IN A DECADE LONG PATTERN OF RACIAL DISPARITIES IN THE USE OFFORCE, TRAFFIC STOPS, DISRESPECTFUL AND RACIST
LANGUAGE, AND COVERT SOCIAL DIA SURVEILLANCE OF RACIAL JUSTICE ACTIVISTS. IN JULY OF 2023, THE CITY OF MI SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT INCLUDING SETTLEMENT OF FUNDS TO ADDRESS THE ROOT CAUSES OF THESE SERIOUS HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS.
BUT RATHER THAN DOING SO, THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS APPROVED ITS CONTRACT WITH SIN CITY THE FOLLOWING OCTOBER. ALL OF THIS RELATES TO THE WAY IN WCH MPD HANDLED ALLISON LUCIER'S CALL FOR HELP AND THEIR
CK OF THOROUGHNESS IN INVESTIGATING HER DEATH. THE VIOLENCE AGAINST INDIGENOUS WOMEN IS VERY CLOSELY RELATED TO THE VIOLENCEGAINST BLACK PEOPLE AND OTHER COMMUNITIES OF PEOPLE FOR WHOM MPD IS AN OCCUPYING FORCE. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, JOEL MANU. APOLOGIES IF I SAID THAT WRONG. >> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS JO MANU. I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE SIN CITY CONTRACT AS WELL.
I WORK AND RESIDE IN MINNEALIS. I WAS IN THIS ROOM WHEN THEY REPORTED TO THE AAO COMMITTEE. AND I WANT TO START BY SAYING NOTHING THEY SHARED IN THEIR REPORT EASED MY MIND ABOUT THIS ISRAELI TECH FIRM CONTRACTED TO SURVEY US. MY ENDURING QSTIONS ARE, WHY
DID THEY CHOOSE TO CONTRACT WITH AN ISRAELI TECH COMPANY WITH ITS ROOTS IN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE INSTEAD OF A LOCAL COMPANY? THE FOUNDER SERVED IN UNIT 8200, THE ELITE CYBER INTELLIGENCE ARM OF THE MILITARY THAT ROUTINELY SPIES ON PALESTINIANS AND MAKES
THEIR LIVES MISERABLE. FORMER UNIT 8200 OFFICERS HAVE GONE ON TO DEVELOP THE MOST INTRUSIVE SPYWARE IN THE WORLD. HOW ARE WE TO TRUST THIS CPANY WITH OUR DATA?
IS MPD USING THIS CONTRACT WITH AN ISRAELI TECH COMPANY TO COMPLY WITH THE CONSENT DECREE? SHOULDN'T THE PUBLIC HAVE MORE OVERSIGHT ON HOW THE CONSENT DECREE IS IMPLEMENTED? LASTLY, I ND TO SAY HOW OFFENSIVE IT WAS TO HEAR THE LAWYER BRAG THAT THEY EM
EMPLOYED PALESTINIANS LING IN THE OCCUPIED WEST BANK QUOTE THROUGHOUT THE WAR ON GAZA. THIS IS AN ATTEMPT AT WASHING AWAY APARTHEID. NEVER MIND THEY'RE STATELESS PEOPLE LIVING UNDER MILITARY RULE, DID HE SAY THIS TO MEAN WE SHOULDN'T MIND THAT A ISRAELI
TECH FIRM HAS BEEN CONTRACTED BY E CITY TO SURVEY US? I REMAIN DEEPLY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS CONTRACT AND DEMAND THE CITY CUT ITS TIES.
>> GREGORY VANDERPLOW. APOLOGIES IF I SAID YOUR NAME WRONG. >> THANK YOU. I'M REPRESENTING MYSELF AS A
CITIZEN OF MINNEAPOLIS. THIS IS RETURNING TO THE UNITED STATES NOW. WE DO NOT WANT TO HAVE SURVEILLANCE. THIS IS A ROAD TO TAKING AWAY O.
THIS WILL LEAD TO A SUPREMIST SOCIETY. WE DO NOT WANT OUR RIGHTS TAKEN AWAY. THIS COMPANY IS SPYWARE COMPANY. THEY ARE USING THIS FOR SOCIAL MEDIA.
WE DO NOT WANT AT. YOUR PARENTS FOUGHT AGAINST SUPREMACY. YOUR GRANDPARENTS FOUGHT AGAINST SUPREMACY. WE HAVE TO FIGHT AGAINST SUPREMACY.
THIS IS COMING TO THE UNITED STATES NOW. THEY WANT TO HAVE JUST LIKE ISRAEL, THE UNITED STATES WILL BE JUST LIKE ANOTHER ISRAEL WHERE THEY'RE ATTACKING MINORITIES. YOU'RE QUEER, I'M A QUEER PERSON, THEY'LL ATTACK MARGINAL OPLES, THEY'LL ATTACK
MINORITIES. LET'S STOP THIS. I HAVE JEWISH HERITAGE. JEWS HAVE NO CONNECTION WITH SUPREMACY HISTORICALLY FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS. THEY'RE NOT SUPREMISTS.
THAT'S WHAT JUDAISM IS. SAME FOR CHRISTIANITY. DO NOT ALLOW THEM TO USE THESE NAMES FOR JEWISH OR CHRISTIANS. THIS IS A NIGHTMARE THAT THIS OCCURRED.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDAISM. IT WAS AN IDEOLOGY, TRAGICALLY MISGUIDED THAT CAUSED IT TO HAPPEN. PLEASE STOP THIS EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM IS PEACEFUL, THEY WANT PEACEFUL
SSENT. THESE ARE NOT VIOLENT. EVERYONE I MET IS NONVIOLENT. THEY WANT PEACEFUL DISSENT DISCUSSION, WE WANT THAT TO OCCU >> THANK YOU. >> AND REMEMBER YOUR PARENTS AND REMEMBER YOUR CHILEN.
YOUR CHILDREN AS YOUR GRANDPARENTS DID, THEY WILL NOT BE SUPREMISTS. >> THANK YOU. SEEING NO FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS, WE'LL COMPLETED ALL COMMENTS, THANK YOU. THE NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS REPORTS. WE'LL BEGIN WITH THE REPORTROM
THE OFFICE OF POLICE CONDUCT REVIEW WHICH WILL BE PRESENTED BY DIRECTOR FUJISAWA.
>> GOOD EVENING. TAKING A QUICK LOOK AT OUR AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING, JUST SOME QUICK UATES ON THE CCPO RECRUITMENT, I KNOW WE'VE TOUCHED ON IT BRIEFLY. OUR USUAL TAKE UPDATES AS WELL AS OUR ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATIONS UPDATES. WE'LL DISCUSS SOME UPDATES WITH
STAFFING AS WE TRY TO WRAP THAT UP AND OUR MONTHLY REVIEW OF REVIEW PANELS. CCPO RECRUITMENT, T APPLICATION AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW IS CURRENTLY OPEN UNTIL THE 16th OF MARCH.
WE ARE WORKING TO EXTEND THAT DEADLINE TO MATCH UP WITH THE OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS JUST TO ALLOW US ADDITIONAL TIME TO GET MORE MATERIALS OUT INTO THE COMMUNITY,LLOWING TIME FOR OTHER APPLICATIONS NOW THAT THE
MAIN CYCLE HAS OPENED AND BEGAN WHICH WE'VE ENGAGED IN THE COMMUNITY TO DATE. I KNOW A NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS WERE AT THE COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS CONFERENCE AND HAD AN OPPORTUTY TO ENGAGE THE PUBLIC, PROVIDE SOME
INFORMATION, ENCOURAGE APPLICATIONS. THE CIVIL RIGHTS DEPARTMENT HAS POSTED ON ITS VARIOUS SOCIAL MEDIA CHANNELS. WE VIEW CITY COMMUNICATI AND CHANNELS SUCH AS PRESS RELEASES TO PROMOTE THE UPCOMING CYCLE
FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE SEATS. AND WE'VE PARTICITED IN PROMOTIONAL INTERVIEWS WITH LOCAL CULTURAL RADIO STATIONS HERE IN MIEAPOLIS. ADDITIONALLY, WE'VE DISTRIBUTED PHYSICAL MATERIALS AND PAMPHLETS AT THESE LOCATIONS. OBVIOUSLY MANY MORE, THIS IS NOT COMPREHENSIVE LIST, BUT JUST
TO GIVE YOU A SENSE OF WHERE WE HAVE BEEN EXNDING OUR OUTREACH. YOU CAN SEE MINNEAPOLIS MAD DADS, SAMMY'S AVEE EATERY, AS WELL AS THE MINNEAPOLIS AMERICAN
INDIAN CENTER. TAKING A LOOK AT OUR INTAKE UNIT, YEAR TO DATE SO JANUARY AND FEBRUARY, WE'VE HAD 31 COMPLAINTS FILED. OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN SEE FROM THE CHART HERE THA WE'VE HAD MANY
MORE INQUIRIES. SO OUR OFFICE CONTINUES TO FIELD A LARGE NUMBER OF CONTACTS FROM THE COMMUNITY. WE DO OUR BEST TO TRIAGE ALL OF THESE TO THE APPPRIATE PLACES TO REFER WHERE APPROPRIATE AND THEN TO INVESTIGATE WHERE IT'S
NEEDED. CURRENTLY WE HAVE 85 COMPLAINTS IN OUR INTAKE QUEUE. OF THOSE 85, 70 ARE OVER OUR 30 DAY TARGET AS MANDATED BY THE TTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND THE CONSENT DECREE. I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO
NOTE THOUGH IN TS NEXT BULLET, THE AVERAGE DURATION OF OUR INTAKE INVESTIGATIONS CURRENTLY IS 21 DAYS. THE INVESTIGATIONS THEMSELVES ARE WITHIN COMPLIANCE, IT'S JUST THE AGE OF E COMPLAINTS THAT IS PUTTING US OVER THAT THRESHOLD RHT NOW. SO WE CONTINUE TO CHIP AWAY AT
THE REMAINING INTAKE CASES AND WE'RE MAKING GREAT PROGRESS EVERY MONTH, PRIORITIZING THE CLEARANCE SO THAT WE CAN GET IN COMPLIANCE AND STAY IN COMPLIANCE. AS HIGHLIGHTED PREVIOUSLY, WE HAVE 0 COMPLAINTS IN OUR INTAKE BACKLOG.
THE COMPLAINTS THAT DO REMAIN IN OUR BACKLOG ARE THOSE THAT WERE EMED ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATIONS. SO I THINK IF YOU REMEMBER FROM OUR OCTOBER MEETINGHERE IT WAS PRESENTED THAT THERE WERE 264 COMPLAINTS ITHE BACKLOG QUEUE, OF THOSE 264, YOU CAN SEE 120
BECAME ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATIONS. THREE OF WHICH ARE CARED AND YOU CAN SEE AS YOU LOOK DOWN, YOU SEE THE NUMBER THAT ARE CURRENTLY ASSIGNED, PENDING ASSIGNMENT, AND IN DIFFERENT STAGES OF THE REVIEW CYCLE. SO EITHER SITTING WITH THE
REVIEW PANEL OR IN QUEUE TO BE SCHEDULED, IN THE SUPERVISORY REVIEW PERIOD. BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO SEE THAT OF THOSE 117 INVESTIGATIONS THAT REMAIN, CURRENTLY 58 ARE ASSIGNED AND BEING WORKED ON AND A NUMBER OF OTHERS ARE IN THE REVIEW PROCESS OR READY TO BE
REVIEWED BY A PANEL. AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT T NOTE THIS BULT HERE THAT IT
HAS GONE THROUGH FINAL REVIEW BY THE CHIEF OF POLICE. I MENTIONED THAT WE ARE WORKING TO COMPLETE THE STAFFING WITHIN OPCR. CURRENTLY WE ARE RECRUITING FOR THREE INVESTIGATORS.
THAT WILL BE ACROSS THE TAKE AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION SIDE. THIS IS OBVIOUSLY TO FILL OUT THE TEAM, BUT ALSO TO INSULATE US FROM SHOCKS AND PUBLIC EVENTS HISTORICALLY THAT HAVE CREATED THIS BACKLOG. SO ONE, IT WOULD HELP US WORK THROUGH THE VOLUME THAT WE HAVE
NOW. BUT IT WILL ALSO PREVT US FROM BEING A SITUATION SIMILAR TO THE ONE WE'RE CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING. TWO ADDITIONAL OPCR VACANCIES HAVE ALSO BEEN FILLED WE'VE
DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY. ONE IS DEVOTED PARTICULARLY TO THE REQUIRENT IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND PARTICULARLY TO THE CCPO AND THAT POLICY AND RESEARCH COORDINATOR, AS WELL AS A MANAGEMENT COORDINATOR TO SUPPT THE POLICY WORK, THE MANAGEMENT, THE ANALYSIS, AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS ON
INTERNAL OPCR POLICIES, MPD POLICIES AND JT OUR GENERAL OPERATING PROCEDURES. IN FEBRUARY, WE HAD 23 CASES IN
QUEUE FOR THE MONTH OF WHICH NINE BELONGED TO INTERNAL AFFAIRS AND THE REMAINING 14 WERE FROM OPCR INVESTIGATIONS. WE'VE HAD SEVEN PANEL SESSIONS SCHEDULED, BUT ONLY FOUR SESSIONS WERE ULTIMATELY HELD. WE WERE ABLE TO REVIEW THREE CASES FROM OPCR AND ONE FROM INTERNAL AFFAS.
AND THE DISCREPANCY THERE BETWEEN WHAT WAS SCHEDULED AND WHAT WAS ACTUALLY HELD WAS DUE TO A CANCELLATION DURING THE HOLIDAY WEEKEND AND SO WE'RE AWARE OF THAT AND THE CHALLENGES THERE IN HAVING CASES SCHEDULED AND PREPARED. BUT ALSO I THINK I'VE MENTIONED THIS IN THE PAST, THE ADOPTION
OF THE CCPO CALENDAR WITH THOSE SET DATES ALLOWS FOR US TO MOVE THESE CASES JUST TO THE NEXT SESSION. IT'S NOT IDEA BUT IT'S THE BENEFIT THAT WE HAVE IN HAVING AN ESTABLISHED CALENDAR. WE CONTINUE TO TRY TO ADD
ADDITIONAL REVIEW PAN DATES IN BETWEEN THOSE SCHEDULED DATES. JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE A MINIMUM OF FOUR EACH MONTH DOES NOT MEAN WE WILL ONLY HAVE FOUR WHEN WE'RE ABLE TO FULLY SEE A PANEL.
WE ARE REQUESTING CCPO MEMBERS TO SIT ON THOSE PANELS. PLEASE GO AHEAD AND SIGN UP SO WE CAN GET ADDITNAL CASES LINED UP, GET MATERIALS TO YOU ALL SO THEY CAN BE REVIEWED WITH AMPLE TIME AND SO WE CAN KEEP
MOVING THROUGH THAT PROCESS. I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN SOME QUESTIONS AND INFORMATION AROUND THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, THE CONSENT DECREE, BYLAWS. I DON'T EXPECT PEOPLE TBE ABLE TO GO TO THESE LINKS AND GO TO THESE LOCATIONS RIGHT NOW. BUT WE WANTED TO PROVIDE THIS AS
AN IMPORTANT RESOURCE FOR YOUR CONTINUED WORK. I KNOW WE'VE VERY DEEPLY HAVE WORKED WITH AND ENGAGED WITH THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. THERE CONTINUE TO BE CONVERSATIONS AROUND THE CONSENT DECREE, BUT THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE EFFORTS.
SO IT'S IMPORNT TO FAMILIARIZE YOURSELF WITH WHAT IS THERE,HE DISTINCTIONS IN ONE AGREEMENT VERSUS ANOTHER, BUT WHAT WE ULTIMATELY ARE WORKING TOWARDS. OBVIOUSLY WITH THE ORDINCE AND ABC ORDINANCE CODES, IT'S ALWAYS
IMPORTANT TO STAY UP TO SPEED ON THOSE AND OUR OPERATION OF THOSE ST AS A BODY. AND OBVIOUSLY THE CLERK'S OFFIC PROVIDING THE MATERIALS OR PROVIDE US WITH THE APPROPRIATE
RESOURCES WHEN NEEDED. HERE'S SOME OF THE CHANNELS THROUGH WHICH WE'VE PROMOTED THE CCPO RECRUITMENT AS WELL AS OUR OTHER WORK AND OTHER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. WITH THAT, I HAVE SOME TIME FOR QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER BASTICK.
>> DIRECTOR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR SPEEDY RESPONSE TO MY FAIRLY FREQUENT EMAILS. A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. THIS IS VERY POSITIVE. I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I THOUGHT THAT DIRECTOR PHILLIPS IDEA TO SORT OF INCREASE OUR
POOL FOR PANELISTS WHICH WE HA ALL TALKED ABOUT, I THINK THERE'S GREAT CONCERN ABOUT, TO TAKE ELIGIBLE MEMBERS FROM THE CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION, INSPIRED, FABULOUS IDEA. I JUST WANTED TO ABSOLUTELY BE SURE, IT SEEMED FROM HER EMAIL
THAT THE INDIVIDUALS FROM THE CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION, THAT'S A BIGGER GROUP, A NUMBER OF WHICH ARE ATTORNEYS, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE IDEAL TRAINING, AND THEY HA TO GO THROUGH THE IDEAL BACKGROUND CHECK? >> CORRECT. >> WONDERFUL.
AND CAN YOU TELL ME, HOW MANY PEOPLE, INDIVIDUALS, FROM THE CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION ARE ACTUALLY NOW IN OUR POOL THAT ARE BUMPING UP OUR POOL? >> SEVEN HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED, THREE HAVE COMPLETED THEIR BACKGROUND CHECK AND ARE NEARLY
COMPLETED WITH THEIR TRAING. I THINK THERE IS ONE REMAINING REVIEW TRAINING TO BE HELD THAT WILL ALSO GET OTHERS UP TO SPEED AND ELIGIBLE TO SIT ON THE PANEL AS WELL. SO CURRENTLY IT IS THREE HAVE PASSED BACKGROUND AND THERE ARE FOUR REMAIN TO COMPLETE THE REST OF THEIR TRAINING. >> VERY EXCITING. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY, SO WE HAVE COME TO TIME.SO WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO M MOTION TO EXTEND THE CONVERSATION ON THIS TOPIC? >> I WOULD LIKE A MOTION TO EXTEND THE CONVERSATION BY TEN MINUTES SO THAT COMMISSIONERS HAVEHE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME TO ASK QUESTIONS AS THE PRESENTATION. >> ALL RIGHT, THERE'S BEEN A MOTION
IS THERE A SECOND? >> I WOULD SECOND THAT OR MODIFY THAT DOWN TO FIVE. >> FRIDLY AMENDMENT IS NOT ACCEPTED. I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME TO ASK QUESTIONS AND MAKE COMMENTS AS THE PRESENTATION. WE DIDN'T NEED TO HEAR ABOUT HOW
TO CONTACT THE OPCR, WE'VE KNOWN THAT FOR 18 TO 20 MONTHS. WHEN WE HAVE MORE TIME FOR PRESENTATION THAN QUESTIONS, WE'RE NOTLLOWED TO DO OUR JOB. SO MY MOTION IS TEN MINUTES. >> YOU'VE MADE YOUR MOTION. TEN MINUTES. IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION FOR TEN MINUTES? >> SECOND. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> I WOULD PREFER FIVE SO I'LL PROBABLY VOTE NO. >> OKAY. SO THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR TEN MINUTES TO EXTEND THE CONVERSATION. CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL >> COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD. >> NO. >> COMMISSIONER CLEMENT. >> NO. >> COMSSIONER SMITH-KOOIMAN. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER BASTICK. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER STEWAR >> NO. >> COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN.
>> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER CANADAY. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS-JOHNSON. >> NAY. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> NO. >> VICE CHAIR OLSEN. >> NO. >> CHAIR REEVES. >> NO. >> THERE ARE FOUR AYES AND SEVEN
NAYS. >> IS THERE ANOTHER MOTION? >> I MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND FOR FIVE MINUTES. >> IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> THANK YOU. ANY DISCUSSION? CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD. >> AYE. >> CLEMENT. >> YEAH, AYE. >> SMITH-KOOIMAN. >> AYE. >> BASTICK. >> AYE.
>> STEWART. >> AYE. >> GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> AYE. >> CANADAY. >> AYE. >> WILLIAMS-JOHNSON. >> E. >> SMITH. >> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR OLSEN. >> AYE. >> CHAIR REEVES. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE 11 AYES. >> EXCUSE ME,YES. COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD.
>> QUICK QUESTION, DIRECTOR, THANK U SO MUCH FOR YOUR REPORT. WHEN YOU SAID THAT THE DEADLIN MIGHT BE EXTENDED COULD YOU JUST SAY TO WHEN AND WOULD THAT APPLY TO THOSE OF US W HAVE TO REPLY FOR OUR ROLES AS WELL?
>> WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF EXTENDING SINCE THE NORMAL PERIOD HAS ENDED AS WELL. WE'RE TRYING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE MOST ALT OF TIME WE CAN TO HAVE IT OPEN TO HAVE THE MOST ROBUST RECRUITMENT POSSIBLE. IN TERMS OF THE SECOND PART OF YOUR QUESTION, I WILL DEFER TO
CLARIFICATION ON THAT PIECE. >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, I'LL SAY FILLING THE CURRENT THREE VACANT SEATS. SO I AM PLEASED TO BE ABLE TO ANNOUNCE THAT JUST BEFORE COMING IN HERE, I CHECKED IN OUR ONLINE QUEUE, AND WE DO HAVE AT LEAST, I THINK, 2 OR 3 APPLICANTS IN
EACH OF THE WARDS. WE'RE CURRENTLY LACKING COMMISSIONER FOR 1,11, 12. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'LL NEED TO EXTEND THAT TOO MUCH LONGER. WE WILL OBVIOUSLY KEEP THROUGH THE END OTHE RECRUITMENT CYCLE WHICH IS MARCH 31ST FOR THOSE
SEATS THAT ARE DUE TO BE REAPPOINTED AT THE END OF MAY OF THIS YEAR. AND SO THERE ARE A NUMBER OF HER SEATS WHO ARE COMINGP ON THEIR FIRST ENDING OF AN APPOINTMENT PROCESS. SO THOSEHO WISH TO BE
CONSIDERED FOR THOSE SEATS SHOULD FILL OUT A MEMBERSHIP PROFILE AND REPLY. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THAT PORT. I APPRECIATE IT. I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THE EMAIL THAT WE GOT FROM CIVIL RIGHTS DIRECTOR PHILLIPS.
AND I SEE THAT SHE'S COME INTO THE ROOM SO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS, I DON'T THINK THEY'RE ALL GOING TO BE ANSWERED SO I'M GOING TO START WITH ONE AND THEN I'LL JUST LIST THE ONES AND I'LL SEND THEM TO YOU. I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IN DIRECTOR PHILLIPS' EMAIL THAT
SHE SENT TO US, AFTER THE FACT, AFTER THE ORDINANCE WAS INTRODUCED TO HAVE MORE PEOPLE SERVE, WHO EXACTLY ARE THE STAKEHOLDERS THAT WERE INVOLVED IN COMING UP WITH THIS? I'M ASSUMING THAT OUR LINDA WESTBROOK WAS ONE OF THEM BECAUSE BACK ON DECEMBER 17TH,
SHE TEXTED ME DO YOU HAVE TIME FOR A CALL TO DISCUSS THE POSSIBILITY OFCCPO BEING EXPANDED, END QUOTE. I RESPONDED THE SAME DAY, IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING THAT WOULD PASS THE CCPO, THEN YOU SHOULD SEND SOMETHING TO THE ENTIRE PO, THEN HAVE IT ADDED
AS AN AGENDA ITEM TO GIVE A PRESENTATION TO FLESH OUT IDEAS AND TIONS. I FIND IT INCREDIBLY DISCONCERTING THAT THE ONLY PEOPLE IN TH ENTIRE CITY THAT HAVE EXPERIENCE SITTING ON REVIEW PANELS HAVE NOT BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS DISCUSSION.
INSTEAD I SAT IN O A FULL COUNCIL MEETING, HEARD THIS ORDINANCE BEING INITIATED AND FELT INVISIBLE. WE ARE THE COMMUNITY COMMISSION ON POLICE OVERSIGHT.
COMMUNITY OVERSIGHT AND WE WERE BYPASSED. I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE SEEING THIS HAVE ANY TRUST THAT WE ARE ACTING TRANSPARENTLY, THAT WE ARE BEING INVOLVED, THAT WE ARE MOVING TOWARDS ENGAGING THE PUBLIC AND THOSE O US WHO HAVE VOLUNTEERED ON THIS
COMMITTEE. SO I WANT TO KNOW WHO WERE THE STAKEHOLDERS. I DON'T THINK YOU'LL BE ABLE TO GIVE IT TO US THIS MEETING, BUT I'M EXPECTING IT THE NEXT MEETING. >> I'M LOOKING AT THE TIME AND WE HAVE TWO OTHER QUESTIONS. >> I'LL LIST MY QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD.
WHY WEREN'T CCPO COMMISSIONERS AS A WHOLE INVOLVED, WERE SOME COMMISSIONERS INVOLVED AND NOT OTHERS? UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES WERE THEY CONTACTED? WERE MEETINGS HELD BEHIND CLOSED DOORS? MY CONCERN I WANT TO EXPRESS ABOUT THE CIVIL RIGHTS
COMMISSIONERS, ALTHOUGH I THINK THEY'RE REALLY WELL QUALIFI AND I LIKE THE IDEA TO GO TOWARDS THAT, I'M CONCERNED. THEY WERE NOT VETTED TO REVIEW TO GO INTO DOING REVIEWPANELS. >> COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOUR QUESTION.
>> MY QUESTION IS WHY NOT HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT ALLOWS ANY REDENT WHO OTHERWISE FITS THE QUALIFICATION FOR CCPO COMMISSIONER TO BE ON REVIEW PANELS? WHY IS THAT NOT PART OF WHAT HAS GONE TO THE CITY COUNCIL? AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT --
>> COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN -- ONE MOMENT. COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN -- >> POINT OF ORDER, PLEASE. >> I WOULD ASK THAT IF YOU HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS, THAT YOU SUBMIT THEM BY EMAIL. WE WANT TO GET THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO DID NOT GET A CHANCE TO ASK A QUESTION. >> THAT'S WHY I ASKED FOR TEN
MINUTES. >> WE DIDN'T GET TEN MINUTES, WE GOT FIVE MINUTES. I WANT EVERYONE TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK THEIR QUESTIONS. I WOULD ASK PLEASE SUBMIT THEM BY EMAIL. COMMISSIONER CANADAY THEN COMMISSIONER BASTICK. >> CHAIR, IF I MAY REALLY QUICKLY AND WE'VE ALREADY ASKED THE CLERK TO GO AHEAD AND STOP
THE TIME SO I CAN BE CLE ABOUT THIS. THERE WERE SEVERAL CONCERNS OVER SEVERAL MONTHS ABOUT THE BANDWIDTH OF THIS COMMISSION. I LISTENED AND I DID TALK TO MANY STAKEHOLDERS AND I'VE SAID THAT TO THIS BODY I WOULD BE
LOOKING AT DIFFERENT AVENUES. THE CITY COUNCIL HAS THE ABILITY TO AMEND ORDINANCES, NOT ME. I WENT FORWARD TO CITY STAKEHOLDERS WITH AN IDEA TO HELP WITH THE BANDWIDTH
UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE IS A BACKLOG IN OP AND A BACKLOG IN IA WHICH THEN MEANS THAT THERE WILL BE A BACKLOG AT THE FEET OF THE PANEL. WITH THAT SAID, NOBODY THOUGHT
ABOUT T BANDWIDTH OF THIS BODY AT THAT TIME. THERE WILL BE CONSIDERATIONS AS YOU ALL KNOW, AND COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN SAID ELOQUENTLY, THAT THIS IS ONLY ONE PROVISION. THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE IS CURRENTLY OPENED AND THERE ARE MEMBERS OF CI COUNCIL WHO ARE LOOKING AT THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE
TO HELP SUFFICE THAT ENSURE THAT YOU ALL HAVE THE ADDITIONAL BANDWIDTH THAT YOU NEED MOVING FORWARD. I APPRECIATE THE GRACE AND PATIENCE AS WE CONTINUE TO WORK THROUGH THIS PROCESS. THERE ARE GROWING PAINS. I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER BEING TRANSPARENT. AND FOR THOSE WHO DO HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VETTING
PROCESS, EVE CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSIONER AS EVERY CCPO COMMISSIONER ELIGIBLEO SIT ON PANELS WILL GO THROUGH THE SAME EXACT PROCESS. AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT DIRECTOR FUJISAWA AND MYSELF WILL CONTINUE TO ME SURE THAT WE DO WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF ALL
STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED. THANK YOUO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION. >> COMMISSIONER CANADAY. >> IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I'LL JUST BE VERY BRIEF IN FLAGGING WHAT I WAS SEPARATELY PLANNING TO SAY ABOUT THIS ISSUE WHICH IS I WAS NOT PART OF ANY GROUP IF THERE WAS ONE THA HAD ANY
DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS. I'M KEEPING AN OPEN MIND ABOUT IT, AND I APPRECIATE THE REASONS PRESENTED AS TO WHY THIS CHANGE HAS BEEN SOUGHT WHICH IS ARGUABLY FOR OUR PROTECTION. BUT MY CONCERN RELATES TO THE FOUNDING PRINCIPLEF THIS
COMMISSION BEING THAT THIS GROUP IS GOING TO HEAR THE INFORMATION IN THOSE REVIEW PANELSND WE ARE NOW ARTIFICIALLY SPREADING THAT OUT, SO I THINK IT WAS WORTHY OF A DISCUSON. >> IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, WE DID RUN OUT OF TIME. BUT WE CAN JUST LET HER ASK HER ONE QUESTION IF COMMISSIONERS ARE AMENABLE TO THAT.
COMMISSIONER BASTICK. >> I APPRECIATE IT. ALEFA MONITORS HAVE SHOWED UP AT A COUPLE OF REVIEW PANELS. IF YOU COULD JUST QUICKLY CLARIFY THAT THEY HAVE TO MAKE THEMSELVES PRESEN THEY CAN'T BE THERE BEHIND THE SCENES AND ARE THEY ALLOWED TO
ACTUALLY PARTICIPATE, ASK QUESTIONS, ANYTHING LIKE THAT? >> THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. AND YES, THEY ARE ALLOWED TO ATTEND AND THEY ARE THERE TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND OBSERVE AS THEY ARE FOR THE REST OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. SO IN TERMS OF REVIEWING THE
OPERATIONS AND THE PROCESS, THEY ARE THERE TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL GUIDANCE AND ASSISTANCE THROUGH THEIR OBSERVATIONS IF THEY SEE A FAULT IN THE PROCESS OR SOMETHING THAT CAN BE IMPROVED, WE WELCOME THAT FEEDBACK.
AND THEY ARE VISIBLE PARTICIPANTS, THEY ARE VISIBLE ATTENDEES IN THOSE VIRTUAL SESSIONS. THEY ARE NOT BEHIND THE SCENES. SO THEY ARE IN ATTENDANCE. >> BUT AGAIN, ARE THEY ALLOWED TO ACTUALLY JOIN IN THE DISCUSSIONS?
THAT'S WHAT I WAS REALLY GETTING AT. SO THEY'RE HERE, B THEY HAVE TO BE SILENT? >> SO TO PROVIDE THAT TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE IN TERMS OF HOW TO REVIEW A CASE AND NOTHING SPECIFIC IN NOT PRODING RECOMMENDATIONS ON TERMS OF HOW TO MAKE A DECISION, BUT IN TERMS
OF LOOKING AT THE CASE AND THE PROCESS AND THE REVIEW PROCESS, PROVIDING GUIDANCE IN TERMS OF HOW PANELISTS CAN AND SHOULD BE DOING THAT IN AN OBJECTIVE AND COMPLIANT WAY. OKAY.
>> IT'S A QUALITY ASSURANCE ON THE PROCESS BECAUSE THE REVIEW PANEL IS A CRITICAL PART OF THE. AND TO REVIEW AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE INVESTIGATIONS THAT ARE WRITTEN AND ALEFA IS THERE TO PROVIDE
THAT RECOMMENDATION FOR TECHNICAL CHANGES THAT SHOULD BE MADE IN THE OBSERVATION OF THAT. >> ARE THEY SITTING WITH THE FIVE PANELISTS? >> ONE MOMENT. WE HAVE WENT OVER TIME, I WOULD ASK THAT -- WE GO ON TO THE NEXT
ITEM. >> I'M ASSISTANT ATTORNEY, THE ANSWER IS THEY DO NOT PARTICIPATE IN DELIBERATIONS. >> THANK YOU SO CH. >> CAN YOU ANSWER ARE THEY PHYSICALLY IN THE ROOM WITH THE FIVE PANELISTS?
I WOULD LIKE THEAR THIS FROM THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY. >> I WOULD ASK THAT WE NOT SHOUT OUT, PLEASE. I WOULD ASK YOU BE CALLED UPON. WE ALL KNOW ROBERT'S RUL. THEY HAVE ASKED THE QUESTION. IF THERE'S ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, PLEASE SUBMIT THEM BY EMAIL. THEY JUST STATED THEY WERE ALLOWED TO BE IN THE ROOM.
>> PLEASE TELL ME IF TS IS OUT OF ORDER, CAN WE JUST ADD AN AGENDA ITEM FOR OUR NEXT MEETING TO HAVE MORE ROBUST DISCUSSION ABOUT ALEFA? >> I THINK IT'S COMPLETELY IN ORDER AND WHEN WE ASK FOR AN AGENDA ITEM REQUEST, YOU CAN SUBMIT THAT. THANK YOU.
I'LL ASK THE CLERK TO RECEIVE AND FILE THATREPORT. NEXT UP IS THE MONTHLY REPORT FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S INTERNAL AFFAIRS DIVISION. I'LL INVITE MS. HASTINGS TO COME
UP AND PRESENT. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. HERE'S OUR MONTHLY REPORT FROM MPD INTERNAL AFFAIRS. MY NAME IS LILY HASTINGS, I'M
THE CASE MANAGER IN INTERNAL AFFAIRS. TONIGHT, JUST GOING OVER OUR TABLE OF CONTENTS. WE'RE GOING TO BRIEFLY TOUCH ON SOME TRAINING UPDATES. WE'RE GOING TO GO TOUGH BACKLOG UPDATES SINCE OCTOBER 2024 VERY BRIEFLY AND T AND TRENDS.
JUST ON TRAINING UPDATES, NOW THAT WE ARE BECOMING PRETTY CLOSE TO FINALIZING OUR SOP WITH OUR CITY STAKEHOLDERS AND ALEFA AND STILL WORKING ON DRAFTING
2-100 POLICY THAT OUR SUBCOMMITTEE HAD REVIEWED. WE ARE NOW SWITCHING GEARS TO EATING A TRAINING PLAN FOR THOSE DOCUMENTS. WE HAVE CREATED A TRAINING PLAN FOR EACH OF THOSE DOCUMENTS AND EN WE ALSO HAVE TO CREATE A TRAINING PLAN FOR TRAINING ALL OF MP ON THE NEW CHANGES, LIKE
ALL OF MPD, NOT JUST THE PEOPLE IN IA THAT ARE WORKING, BUT EVERYBODY ACROSS THE WHOLE MPD ENTERPRISE. SO WE'RE WORKING ON DRAFTING THOSE TRAINING PLANS. AND JUST SO WE ARE VERY CLEAR ON THE OCESS, THAT IS GOING TO
REQUIRE THE SAME LEVEL OF REVIEW AND APPROVALS THAT THE SOP AND TH DRAFTED 2-100 POLICY ARE REQUIRING. SO WE DO STILL HAVE TO MEET WITH OUR CITY ENTITIES, OUR CITY STAKEHOLDERS, LIKE IA, OPCR, AND CITY IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, OUR POLICY
WRITERS, ALEFA. WE DO STILL HE TO HAVE WORKING SESSIONS WITH ALEFA, MDHR, ALL OF THOSE SAME THINGS THAT WE DID FOR THE SOP AND THE POLICY WE WILL HAVE TO DO FOR OUR TRAINING PLAN. AND WE'RE JUST IN THE VERY EARLY
STAGES OF WORKING ON THAT. MOVING ON TO OUR BACKLOG UPDATE; SO BUILDING OFF OF THE GRAPH THAT WE HA STARTED TO SEE IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS HERE AT THIS MEETING, WE WERE AT 112
BACKLOG ADMIN INVESTIGATIONS BACK IN AND AROUND OCTOBER 2024. AND NOW AS OF LAST WEEK, WE ARE AT 39 BACKLOG ADMIN INVESTIGATIONS. JUST ADDING SOMETHING HERE AS COMING SOON. I KNOW THERE WASN'T A GRAPH
HERE, THAT WASN'T AN ERROR ON OUR PART. IN OUR CONVERSATIONS WITH ALEFA, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO SHOW IS THE RESPONSIBILITIES THROUGH IA. OBVIOUSLY WE KNOW THERE ARE RESPONSIBILITIES BEYOND IA LIKE THE REVIEW PANEL, CHIEF'S
OFFICE, GRIEVANCE AND ARBITRATION, THOSE THINGS. AND THOSE THINGS CONTRIBUTE TO OUR BACKLOG CLEARANCE RATE. BUT BEING ABLE TO SHOW WHEN IA'S RESPONSIBILITIES FOR OUR BACOG ARE COMPLETED AT THAT POINT. THAT IS SOMETHING WE ARE ACTIVE WORKING ON PROVIDING
DATA FOR AGAIN THROUGH OUR CONVERSATIONS WITH ALEFA. SO I WOULD ANTICIPATE TO SEE THAT FAIRLY SOON AND WE WIL SHARE THAT WITH THIS BODY AS WELL. AGAIN, BUILDING ON A GRAPH THAT WE'VE SEEN THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS. YOU'LL SEE AGAIN OUR CLEARANCE
RATE IS STILL 36%. SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THAT REQUIRESS TO GET THE REVIEW PANEL,CHIEF'S OFFICE, GRIEVANCE AND ARBITRATION IF THERE ARE ANY. SO AGAIN, THIS IS KIND O COMBATING THE NEED TO SHOW WHEN IA'S RESPONSIBILITIES ARE DONE VERS WHEN THE CITY'S
RESPONSIBILITIES ARE DONE WITH THESE CASES. MOVING ON TO OUR STATISTICS AND TRENDS, YOU WILL SEE LOTS OF NEW STUFF HERE. I BELIEVE MANY OF WHICH WERE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ASKED BY THIS
BODY AND REQUESTS ASKED BY THIS BODY AT PREVIOUS MEETINGS TO INCLUDE. SO WE'RE GOING TO START WITH OUR NORMAL SLIDE. SO WE HAVE OPEN INTAKES AS OF THE END OF LAST WEEK. WE HAD 20 CASES, OUR AVERAGE AGE WAS 26 DAYS WHICH IS UP TWO DAYS
FROM THE PREVIOUS MONTH. AND THE AVERAGE DURATION TO COMPLETE THE INTAKE PHASE IS 25 DAYS AND SIMILAR TO LIKE YOU HAD JUST HEARD FROM DIRECTOR FUJISAWA, WE DO HAVE 30 DAY TO COMPLETE THE INTAKE. SO WE'RE STILL WITHIN OUR 30 DAY RANGE.
OPEN INVESTIGATIONS IN IA, AGAIN THESE ARE ADMIN INVESTIGATIONS. SO AS OF LAST WEEK, WE HAD 61 TOTAL CASES. OUR AVERAGE AGE IS 335 DAYS WHICH IS DOWN 14 DAYS FROM THE PREVIOUS MONTH.
WE HAVE 39 OF THOSE 61 THAT ARE CONSIDERED BACKLOG AND WE HAVE 22 THAT ARE CONSIDERED CURRENT CASES. 53 OF THOSE 66 ARE ASSIGNED. AND EIGHT OF THOSE 66 ARE UNASSIGNED. UNASSIGNED CASES ARE CASES TT ARE CURRENT. THEY'RE NOT BACKLOG CASES THAT HAVE JUST BEEN SITTING THERE
WAITING. I BELIEVE THAT NUMBER IS ACTUALLY LOWER. I THINK IT'S ALMOST AT 0, I'M NOT GOING TO SAY IT'S QUITE AT 0. BUT I THINK IT'S ALMOST AT 0 AFTER WE'VE DONE SOME ASSIGNMENTS THIS WEEK AFTER OUR INVESTIGATORS HAVE TURNED IN THEIR ISR'S FOR THEIR BACKLOG
CASES. EXPEDITED DISPOSITNS, AS OF LAST WEEK, WE HAD 126 CASES. 87 OF THE 126 ARE CONSIDERED BACKLOG. 39 OF THOSE 126 ARE CONSIDERED CURRENT. WE ARE STARTING TO SEND MANY OF THESE CASES TOUGH NOW.
WE HAD TO COME UP WITH A TEMPORARY SOLUTION WITH CHIEF'S OFFICE TO FIND THE RESPONSIBLE PERSON TO HELP US HANDLE THESE CASES UNFORTUNATELY JUST DUE TO STAFFING TURNOVER. WE DO HAVE A SOLUTION IN PLACE RIGHT NOW. WE HAD A MEETING TO DISCU HOW
THIS WAS GOING TO GO, WHAT ARE ALL OF THE RESPONSIBILITIES. SO YOU'LL START TO SEE TT NUMBER DECREASE HERE VERY SHORTLY. JUST WITHIN THE PAST WEEK, I BELIEVE WE HAD SENT TEN CASES OVER TO THEM AFTER THIS FEBRUARY 26TH DEADLINE.
SO YOU'LL START TO S THIS NUMBER ACTUALLY LOWER FINALLY. AND THEN THE LAST ONE ON THIS SLIDE IS OPEN ADMIN INVESTIGATION CASES AND SUPERVISORY REVIEW. WE HAD 43 CASES THAT ARE IN SUPERVISORY REVIEW, AND JUST AS A REFERENCE, THIS DOESOT INCLUDE OUR EXPEDITED
DISPOSITION CASES. THOSE 126ASES STILL NEEDED TO GO THROUGH THE SAME LEVEL OF SUPERVISORY REVIEW. AND WE HAD PRIORITIZED THOSE CASES THROUGH SUPERVISORY REVIEW, SO THOSE ARE COMPLETED AND NOW WE'RE WORKINGN OUR ADMIN INVESTIGATION SUPERVISOR REVIEWS.
MOVING ON, YOU'LL SEE WE'RE KEEPG THE SAME TREND ADDING TO THIS GRAPH. SO IN FEBRUARY WE RECEIVED 22 INCOMING COMPLAINTS AND WE ONLY OCESSED 12 OF THEM IN FEBRUARY. SO THIS WAS A RELATIVELY LOW MONTH FOR US.
UNFORTUNATELY WE HAD A LOT OF STAFF NOT BE ABLE TO BE IN THE OFFICE THIS MONTH. SO YOU'LL SEE WHY THAT NUMBER IS SIGNIFICTLY LOWER THAN USUAL. OUR TOTAL NUMBER OF OPEN IA INVESTIGATIONS, THIS IS THE SAME
THIN THAT YOU'VE SEEN BEFORE SPLIT OUT BY CURRENT AND BACKLOG. WE JUST TALKED THROUGH THIS IN THE TWO PREVIOUS SLIDES. I'M GOING TO KEEP MOVING THROUGH THIS ONE. NOW WE GET TO SOME NEW STUFF. SO WE'VE GOT OUR INTAKE DATA.
THIS IS SPECIFICALLY THOSE 12 INTAKE CASES THAT WERE COMPLETED BETWEEN FEBRUARY 1ST AND FEBRUARY 26TH. SO WE'VE BROKEN EVERYTHING OUT INTO INCIDENT DATE. SO YOU SEE THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE CASES, 50% WERE CASES WHERE THE INCIDENT ACTUALLY
HAPPENED IN JANUARY 2025. THEN YOUL SEE SOME OTHER INCIDENT DATES THERE WITH OUR OLDEST ONE BEING FEBRUARY 2024. I'M SURE THERE IS A QUESTION AS TO HOW WE CAN BE COMPLIANT WITH DATE LIKE THAT. JUST A REMINDER THAT WE ARE NOT
THE ONLY CITY ENTITIES, OPCR AND IA, THAT HAVE BACKLOGS. WE HAVE BACKLOGS IN OUR TRAFFIC INVESTIGATIONS, WE HAVE BACKLOGS IN PURSUIT INVESTIGATIONS, AND WE HAVE BACKLOGS IN OURORCE INVESTIGATIONS AS WELL.
SO AS THOSE INVESTIGATIVE UNITS START WORKING THROUGH THEIR BACKLOG, THE SAME WAY THAT WE HAVE, YOU'LL STILL CONTINUE TO SEE CASES WHERE THERE IS LATER INCIDENT DATE THAN THE MOST RECENT WITHIN 30 DAYS. WE DID ALSO SPLIT OUT OUR
INCIDENTS BY PRECINCT SO THAT WOULD BE THE LOCATION OF THE ACTUAL CALL. TYPICALLY SOMETIMES THINGS CAN CHANGE AND THEY MIGHT MOVE A PRECINCT, SO THIS IS A STARTING PRECINCT. AND THEN JUST A CAVEAT THAT WE HAVE THINGS LIKE OUTSIDE OF
MINNEAPOLI AND NA. NA IS THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING VIRTUALLY, LIKE A SOCIAL MEDIA OR AN HOURS WORKED THINGS LIKE THAT WHERE THERE ISN'T REALLY A LOCATION IN MIND. WE BROKE OUT OUR INTAKE DATA WITH THOSE 12 COMPLETED CASES BY
OUR TOPIC CATEGORIES. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS NEW WITH OUR DRAFTED SOP. SO YOU'LL SEE THESE FAIRLY FREQUENTLY AGAIN WITH OUR DIFFERENT CATEGORIES THAT ARE BEING ALLEGED WITHIN THIS VIOLATION. YOU CAN BE IN MULTIPLE
CATEGORIES. SO YOU MIGHT NOTICE THAT THE TOTALS DON'T QUITE ADD UP. THE TOPIC CATEGORY ATTACHES TO EACH ALLEGATION, NOT A CASE ITSELF. SO YOU'LL SEE THE VAST MAJORITY OF OUR ALLEGATIONS WITHIN THOSE INTAKES ARE IN VEHIC OR
DRIVING-RELATED CONDUCT. THE NEXT SLIDE IS JUST A DEEPER DIVE INTO THOSE VEHICLE OR DRIVING-RELATED CONDUCT LEGATIONS SO WE CAN SEE EXACTLY WHERE THOSE ALLEGATIONS ARE AND WHAT TYPE.
JUST TO HIGHLIGHT, WE HAVE A FOURTH OF THAT WAS PREVENTABLE COLLISIONS MEANING AN OFFICER WAS IN AN ACCIDENT THAT OUR AFFIC REVIEW COMMITTEE HAD DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN PREVENTABLE. SOMETHING LIKE BACKING INTO A
POST OR GOING THROUGH A STOPLIGHT OR A STOP SIGN, LIKE ROLLING THROUGH ONE AND ACCIDENTALLY GETTING HIT OR HITTINSOMEONE ELSE. >> MADAM CHAIR.
>> YES, COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE A MOTION FOR TEN MORE MINUTES SO THAT MS. HASTINGS CAN FINISH HER PRESENTATION AND WE CAN BE ALLOWED COMMENT AND QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, CLERK CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. >> COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD. >> YES. >> COMMISSIONER CLEMENT.
>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH-KOOIMAN. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER BASTICK. >> YES. >> COMMISSIONER STEWART. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER CANADAY. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS-JOHNSON. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR-OLSEN. >> YES. >> CHAIR REEVES. >> YES.
>> THERE ARE 11 AYES. >> THANK YOU. CONTINUE. >> SO THE LAST PART OF OUR INTAKE DATA IS WE JUST WANT TO SHOW OUR ROUTING DECISIONS SO THE VAST MAJORITY OF OUR INTAKE CASES KIND OF ALIGNED WITH THOSE VEHICLE AND DRIVING PURSUITS. RELATED CONDUCT IS EXPEDITED
DISPOSITION. THEN WE MOVE INTO INVESTIGATION DATA. SO THIS IS ALL RELATING TO OUR OPEN ADMIN INVESTIGATIONS. SO NOT JUST OUR BACKLOG BUT ALL 61 OF THOSE OPEN INVESTIGATIONS AS O OUR FEBRUARY 26TH DATE.
THIS ONE SHOWS GENERALLY OUR INCIDENT DATE. YOU'LL NOTICE A LOT OF TM ARE FROM 2024, 2023. AND AGAIN THERE'S STILL OLDER CASES DOWN THERE BACK IN 2020. THESE ONES ARE FLOATING THRGH IN OUR INVESTIGATION BACKLOG. THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE
BEING PRIORITIZED THE HIGHEST ARE 2020, THEN 2021, 2022 AND SO ON. OH AND JUST TO NOTE THIS IS SEP CAN SEE TRENDS OR ATTEMPT TO SEE TRENDS WITHINHE COMING MONTHS OF HOW MANY WE'RE GETTING PER MONTH.
WE ALSO DID THE SE THING WITH INVESTIGATIONS, JUST SEPARATING OUT BY INCIDENT LOCATION PRECINCT, SOOU CAN START TO SEE THOSE TRENDING DATA AS WE PRESENT THEM IN THE COMING MONTHS. AND THEN THE LAST ONE, I BELIEVE, IS TOPIC CATEGORY AGAIN JUST FOR OUR INVESTIGATIONS, NOT
JUST INTAKE. AND I THINK THAT'S IT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ARE THERE ANY -- I'M GOING TO GO TO SMITH-KOOIMAN. THANK YOU SO MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. >> YEAH, I WAS JUST WONDERING,
CAN YOU QUICKLY GO OVER WHAT THE VIEW PROCESS IS FOR THE TRAINING BECAUSE YOU SAID IT WOULD BE A SIMILAR PROCESS AS THE SOP IN THE 2-100. JUST WONDERING QUICKLY WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE? >> AS WE WERE DOING THE SOP AND
2-100, WE HAD TO -- SOMEONE WAS DESIGNATED AS A POINT PERSON TO START DRAFTING. WE HAD TO THEN DO ROUNDTABLE MEINGS WITH OUR VARIOUS CITY STAKEHOLDERS. ONCE WE WERE SOLID AS OUR CITY STAKEHOLDERS WITH A GOOD DRAFT, THEN WE SEND OVER INFORMAL
DRAFTS TO ALEFA TO START SOME WORKING SESSIONS. ONCE WE FEEL LIKE WE ARE AT A GOOD STAGE, THEN WE START TO INVITE IN OUR FORMAL WORKING SESSIONS THAT WE DO WITH ALEFA
AND MDHR. THEN WHEN WE GET TO FINAL A DRAFT, WE GET APPROVALS FROM ALEFA AND AND SAM, YOU MIGHT WANT TO HELP ME ON THAT ON I DON'T THINK IT'S AN APPROVAL FROM MDHR. RIGHT. SO WE JUST GET ANPPROVAL FROM
ALEFA, WE STILL GET INPUT FROM MDHR. BUT ONCE WE HAVE OUR STAMP OF APPROVAL FROM ALEFA, THEN WE MOVE FORWARD ON ACTUALLY DOING A TRAINING FOR OUR STAFF ON THOSE DOCUMENTS. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BASTICK. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THE EXPEDITING PROSS WHICH AS I UNDERSTAND IT AND I AM QUALIFIED TO SIT ON A REVIEW PANEL IS WHEN AN OFFICER DOES A VIOLATION AND THE OFFICER GOES MEA CULPA AND IT SPEEDS UP THE WHOLE PROCESS AND SOME SUITABLE CSEQUENCE TO THAT.
IF YOU KNOW THIS, DID THAT PROCESS EXIST IN 2020? SPECIFICALLY MORE TO THE END OF 2020? OR IS THIS A NEWER THING? >> THIS IS A NEWER THING. TO MY UNDERSTANDING, IT EXISTED
SOMETIME AROUND 2022 IN ITS VERY FIRST EXISTENCE AND THEN THAT KIND OF WENT AWAY FOR A PERIOD OF TIME. AND NOW IT'S BEING REARTED AGAIN. IT JUST WASN'T UTILIZED IN 2022 LIKE TY HAD ANTICIPATED, THE STRUCTURE WASN'T SET UP CORRECTLY. SO IT WAS THERE,T WASN'T BEING
UTILIZED AS AN OPTION, AND NOW AS WE COME IN THROUGH THE SETTMENT WHICH DICTATES THAT WE CAN HAVE SOME TYPE OF EXPEDITED DISPOSITION PROCESS, WE RESTARTED, ADDED OURANGUAGE INTO THE SOP AND POLICIES TO COMPLY WITH THAT SETTLEMENT
AGREEMEN AND THAT'S PART OF THE SOP AND 2-100OLICY WE'RE STILL WAITING FOR APPROVAL ON FROM ALEFA. >> THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I NEEDED TO KNOW. SO IF I WAS AN MPD OFFICER RIGHT NOW AND SOMEBODY FILES EITHER
INTERNALLY OR EXTERLLY A COMPLAINT, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT OFFICERS ARE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR THAT THAT'S AN OPTION FOR THEM? >> I BELIEVEHAT WE ARE. WE HAVE COMMUNICATED WITH THE FEDERATION AS WELL AND THEY HAVE SENT OUT EMAILS TO WHICH WE'VE SEEN COPIES OF THOSE EMAILS TO THE BROAD MEMBERSHIP THAT THAT
IS AN OPTION FOR OFFICERS. WEILL ALSO ONCE THE 2-100 POLICY GETS APPROVED, THERE WILL BE A IEF'S MEMO THAT GOES OUT IN A SPECIAL ORDER DETAILING THAT THERE ARE SOME CHANGES IN HERE. AND THAT GOES OUT TO EVERY SINGLE MPD EMPLOYEE SWORN AND
CIVILIAN. >> SUPER, THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MS. HASTINGS, YOU PREVIOUSLY WERE WITH THE OFFICE OF POLICE CONDUCT REVIEW AND NOW YOU'RE WITH INTERNAL AFFAIRS, RIGHT? >> YES. >> JUST SO PEOPLE WATCHING MAYBE FOR THE FIRST TE, OPCR HANDLES
COMPLAINTS THAT COME FROM CIVILIANS. INTERNAL AFFAIRS HANDLES COMPLAINTS THAT COME FROM OTHER POLICE OFFICERS OR STAFF, BUT OTHERWISE THEY GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS? >> CORRECT. >> SO WHEN YOU WERE WITH OPCR, YOU WERE IN A HIGH LEVEL POSITION, DID YOU SIT IN ON REVIEW PANELS?
>> I CAN'T SPEAK VERY HEAVILY TO MY TIME AT OPCR. I WAS A SUPERVISOR FOR A BRIEF PERIOD A OPCR, AND I DID DO REVIEW PANEL WORK AT THAT TIME. >> DID YOU ACTUALLY SIT IN ON THE REVIEW PANELS? >> I CANNOT ANSWER TO THAT PART.
>> NOW THAT YOU'RE WITH INTERNAL AFFAIRS, DO YOU ACTUALLY SIT IN ON THE REVIEW PANELS LIKEALEFA DOES? >> IN INTERNAL AFFAIRS, WE ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REVIEW PANEL PROCESS. WE ARE RESPONSIBL OPCR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REVIEW PANEL, WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
CHIEF'S OFFICE SIDE OF IT. SO JUST THE SAME AS HOW OPCR HELPS AND FACILITATES THE REVIEW PANEL, WE DO THE SAME FOR THE CHIEF'S OFFICE. >> I REMEMBER THAT YOU DID REVIEW PANELS TT I SAT ON AND YOU SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT OPCR WILL NOT EVER SIT IN ON A REVIEW
PANEL. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THE PUBLIC POLICY WAS AROUND THAT AND WAS IT AROUND THE FACT THAT IF YOU HAVE STAFF INVOLVED IN THE REVIEW PANELS THAT IT'S PIERCING THE CONFIDENTIALITY AND CAUSING A CHILLING EFFECT FOR ANY OF THE PANELISTS, THE THREE CIVILIANS
OR THE TWO POLICE FICERS? >> I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE POLICY AT THAT POINT. UNFORTUNATELY I AM NO LONGER EM EMPLOYED WITH OPCR, SO I CAN ONLY SPEAK TO CURRENT POLICY THAT REGARDS IA. >> DO YOU KNOW OF THE PEOPLE WHO AREITTING ON WITH ALEFA, ARE
THEY FORMER POLICE OFFICERS? >> TO MY KNOWLEDGE, I DON'T KNOW WHICH ALEFA MEMBERS ARE PRESENT OR NOT PRESENT. >> GOING TO A DIFFERENT TOPIC ENTIRELY AND THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR THE CITYCLERK, DO WE KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE BEEN APPLYING FOR THE CCPO
POSITIONS AND BY WHAT WARD? >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, I'LL JUST SAY WE HAVE RECEIVED SOME APPLICATIONS FOR THE VARIOUS WARDS THAT ARE OPEN BOTH IMMEDIATELY THE THREE VACANCIES AND THEN THE ADDITIONAL SIX THAT END IN MAY. I DON'T HAVE A TOTAL NUMBER THAT I COULD SHARE.
>> OKAY, AND THEN JUST ANOTHER QUESTION AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS FOR MS. HASTINGS OR THE CLERK, FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO APPLY TO THE CCPO BUT DO N LIVE IN THE WARDS WHERE THERE IS AN OPENING, ARE THEY BARRED FROM APPLYING? IN OTHER WORDS CAN YOU ONLY
APPLY FOR A WARD THAT YOU LIVE IN? >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, I'LL TAKE THAT ONE. NO, YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO LIVE IN THE WARD. THE WARD BASIS IS FOR THE NOMINATING PROCESS, NOT FOR THE
RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT. >> THANK YOU, THAT'S A HUGE QUESTION I'M GETTING. THANK U VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE YOUR QUESTION, I APPRECIATE YOUR GRAPHS. I THINK WE ALLEARN DIFFERENTLY WHEN I READ YOUR REPORTS, WHEN I CAN SEE THE GRAPHS, I CAN REALL. AND LET ME JUST SAY THAT I LEARN EVEN MORE AFTER THE MEETING WHEN
I GO BK AND REVIEW THE MATERIALS AFTER HEARING WHAT YOU'VE SAID. SO APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH AND ALSO WANT TO SAY THE SAME TO THE OPCR DIRECTOR THESE MATERIALS ARE VERY HELPFUL, THEY'RE VERY DENSE AND IT DOES TAKE ME SEVERAL TIMES TO REALLY GET THROUGH WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT.
AND I APPRECIATE YOU BOTH KEEPING AT IT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. >> THANK YOU. I ALSO CONCUR, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE INTAKE DATA AND CIDENTS BY PRECINCT IS HOW YOU BROKE THE INFORMATION DOWN IN TERMS OF WHAT'S OUT THERE IS VERY HELPFUL. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS?
OKAY, THANK YOU. I'LL DIRECT THE CLERK TO RECEIVE AND FILE THAT REPORT. NEXT WE'LL TAKE UP REPORTS FROM OUR STANDING COMMITTEES. I'VE ALLOCATED 15 MINUTES TO EACH COMMITTEE. THE FIRST REPORT I FROM OUR POLICE POLICY RESEARCH AND RECOMMENDATIONS COMMITTEE, THAT
REPORT WILL BE GIVEN BY THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHAIR. I WOULD FIRST LIKE TO CELEBRATE. THE ENTIRE PPRR COMMITTEE IS HERE TONIGHT. SHOUT OUT TO YOU, THANK YOU. AND THANKFOR ALL OF YOUR HARD WORK. EXCITED TO HAVE SOME MEATY REPORTS TO SHARE WITH YOU WHAT
WE'VEEEN UP TO. AND IF THERE IS ANY TIME AT THE END, PERHAPS WE CAN START THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE CYCLE OF REVIEW BETWEEN THE COMMITTEES. THAT'S SOMETHING I'M HOPING THAT WE CAN EVENTUALLY FIGURE OUT.
SO FIRST, A BIG SHOUT OUT TO COMMISSIONER BASTICK, CANADAY, OLSEN, AND WILLIAMS-JOHNSON. THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR PARTICIPATION FOR YOUR HELP IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS AND ALSO A BIG SHOUT OUT TO CLERK CARL AND MS. STAR FROM OPCR AND
FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY OFFICE. THEY HAVE BEEN INSTRUMENTAL AND MR. WALDMAN FOR HELPING US MAKE THIS COMMITTEE, EXECUTE THIS COMMITTEE. A SPECIAL SHOUT OUT TO LIEUTENANT ROBINSON FROM THE MINNEAPOLIS IMPLEMENTATION UNIT.
HE ATTENDED OUR LAST MEETING AND IT WAS REALLY POWERFUL TO HAVE HIM THERE IN PERSON. WE WERE ABLE TO HAVE A DIALOGUE AND FIGURE OUT WHICH POLICIES AND THE TIMING OF WHICH WOULD BE THE MOST IMPORTANT FOR US TO DO OUR JOB OF POLICY REVIEW. SO WT YOU SEE IN THE PACKET
HERE IS OUR, IT SHOULD SAY DRAFT ALL OVER IT BECAUSE IT'S A DRAFT. IT IS OUR CMENTS ON THE FOUR POLICIES THAT WE REVIEWED.I WOU WE WERE EXPERIMENTING. THE FIRST MONTH IN JANUARY WE REVIEWED POLICIES THAT WERE UP
FOR REVIEW AS YOU'LL REMEMBER ON THE PUBLIC WEBSITE. AND LAST MONTH, WE THOUGHT WELL WE DON'T KNOW WHICH ONES ARE COMING UP AND WE ASKED SEVERAL TIMES AND WERE TOLD THA IT WAS UNKNOWN WHICH WERE NEXT SO WE JUST TOOK A SHOT OR TOOK A GUESS AND WE LOOKED AT SOME OF THE
ACTIVE POLICIES. AND WE STARTED REALIZING BY GETTING THE BALL ROLLING, WE'RE ABLE TO GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY AND FROM THE IMPLEMENTATION UNIT AS WELL AND
FIGURE OUT WHAT THE RIGHT ORDER IN MOVING FORWARD WOULD BE. RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A PROCESS. HOPEFULLY WE' FINISH IT IN OUR MEETING IN MARCH OF LAYING OUT WHICH POLICIES WE'LL REVIEW WHE CAN PROVIDE INPUT ANDHERE WILL
BE SORT OF A STANDING APPROACH OR MHODICAL APPROACH TO HOW WE'RE GOING ABOUT THIS. SO THE FEBRUARY DRAFT IN YOUR PACKETS IS THE FOUR POLICIES, IN PARTICULAR THE LONG AND REALLY
MEATY POLICY IS 7-805 FOR CROWD MANAGEMENT. AND WE HAD A LOT TO SAY. AND I WILL SHOUT OUT PEOPLE WHO WERE PART OF THE PICE POLICY RESEARCH AND RECOMMENDATIONS GROUP LAST YEAR AS WELL BECAUSE A LOT OF THE WORK WE DID IN LOOKING AT OTHER CITIES CAME IN
REALLY HANDY. SO WE WERE ABLE TO COMPARE POLICIES MPD IS PUTTING FORWARD OR HAS IN ACTION RIGHT NOW WITH SOME OTHER CITIES, ESPECIALLY CITIES UNDER CONSENT DECREEND CITIES OF A SIMILAR SIZE SO THAT WE COULD REALLY SAY THIS IS IN THIS POLICY AND IT'S NOT IN MPD'S.
HERE'S WHERE WE THINK THERE MIGHT BE SOMELACE FOR IMPROVEMENT. SO YOU'LL HAVE THIS FOR REVIEW. MY HOPE IS THAT THE COMMUNITY ENGEMENT COMMITTEE WILL NEXT BE ABLE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT,
THE JANUARY REPORT, AND THE FEBRUARY REPORT, AND PRODE ANY FEEDBACK TO US SO WE CAN SUBMIT IT APPROPRIATELY. WE SUBMITTED THE JANUARY 1 BECAUSE THERE WAS A DEADLINE. THE GOOD NEWS WEEARD DIRECTLY FROM LIEUTENANT ROBINSON IS THAT MPD IS REQUIRED TO REVIEW ANY FEEDBACK WE PROVIDE AT ANY TIME.
SO EVEN THOUGH WE MISSED A DEADLINE ON THE PUBLIC-FACING WEBSITE, IN FACT THOSE A WHEN THEY HAVE TO HAVE THEIR DUCKS IN A ROW FOR THE OVERSIGHT MONITOR. BUT THAT ANY FEEDBACK COMING IN IN AN ONGOING MANNER FROM US LL BE CONSIDERED SO WE WERE REALLY GLAD TO HEAR THAT AND
THAT GOES FOR THE PUBLIC AS WELL. SO AT THE END OF OUR REPORT, I PROVIDED A QR CODE AND A LINK F WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK ON THE POLICY, WE WELCOME YOUO DO THAT. AND PLEASE KNOW IT WILL BE
CONSIDERED. IT'S A BIT LABORIOUS TO GO THROUGH THE POLICIES LINE BY LI HELPING TO MOV POLICE WORK FORWARD. WITH THAT, ANY COMMISSIONER HERE TONIGHT IN GENERAL WHO SIT O THE DISCIPLINE PANELS, I'M GOING
TO SET UP A SHARED FOLDER FOR US THAT IF YOU ARE IN A REVIEW PANEL AND YOU NOTICE A POLICY THAT SEEMS UNCLEAR OR IS POORLY APPLIED OR DOESN'T SEEM TO FIT
OR IS TOO SHORT, TOO LONG, YOU'VE GOT SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT IT, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU PUT IT IN THE FOLDER SO THE COMMITTEE KNOWS THAT'S AN IMPORTANTNE TO PRIORITIZE AND TO LOOK INTO. I HOPE THAT THAT IS -- WE WANT TO INCLUDE EVERYBODY IN THE POLICY REVIEW AS MUCH AS
SSIBLE. SO THAT IS THE NEXT STEP. AND THEN I HAVE A REMINDER, TALK FAST, GOOD. I HAVE A REMINDER FOR THE MEETING, IT'S PROBABLY IN THE AGDA LATER ON, BUT THERE IS AN
ALEFA POLICY INFORMATION SESSION BEING HELD NEXT WEDNESDAY AT 6:00 P.M. AT THE UKRAINIAN AMERICAN CENTER, 301 EAST MAIN STREET. AND THE PPRR WILL BE REPRESENTED THER BUT WE INVITE EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY AND THE COMMISSION, ANYONE IS WELCOME. AND WE WOULD LOOK FORWARD TO
DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT AFTERWARDS WITH YOU. SO BECAUSE THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF TIME LEFT, FIRST I'D LIKE TO INVITE ANY OF E OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO SHARE ANYTHING I FORGOT AND THEN PERHAPS WE COULD HAVE A SHORT, SHORT CONVERSATION ABOUT THE REVIEW PROCESS AND WE'LL GO IN
ALPHABETICAL ORDER. BASTICK. >> TNK YOU. YOU DO AN AMAZING JOB CHAIRING THIS. AND ALSO SHOUT OUT TO THE CITY CLERK WHO TAKES OUR MINUTES. I HAVE NO CLUE HOW YOU FOLLOW ALONG AND YOU GET THOSE MINUTES OUT TO US BECAUSE IT'S TRULY, TRULY REMARKABLE AND MUCH
APECIATED. I HAVE A COMMENT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO ASK YOU IF YOU COULD LET US KNOW. WE CURRENTLY HAVE FIVE MEMBERS AND THERE'S ROOM FOR MORE MEMBERS, I THINK WE'RE ALLOWED TWO MORE, BUT I'M NOT SURE?
>> THAT'S RIGHT. >> FANTASTIC. SO THE POINT THAT MARA MADE, IF YOU'RE ON A REVIEW PANEL AND THERE'S A POLICY THAT YOU'RE NOT CLEARON, OR CLEARLY ONE OF THE OFFICERS BEING REVIEWED IS NOT
CLEAR ON AND YOU FORWARD IT TO US, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THIS, THAT THE BIGGEST GAIN THAT I HAVE BEING ON THIS COMMITTEE, AND I KNOW IT'S A LOT OF WORK, 'S A LOT OF EXTRA TIME, IS AS A PANELIST, I HAVE FOUND IT ENORMOUSLY USEFUL TO BE PART OF
THIS PROCESS. I HAVE LEARNED SO MUCH FROM TAKING A LOOK AT THESE POLICIES AND I CAN TAKE THAT INFORMATION WITH ME ONTO A PANEL AND I CAN MUCH, MUCH BETTER UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS. AND IT'S JUST SUPER HELPFUL.
SO WE WOULD LOVE MORE HELP AND REALLY IT'S A SUPER PLUS IF YOU'RE ON A REVIEW PANEL, IT REALLY IS HELPFUL. >> CANADAY. >> NOTHING TO ADD EXCEPT MY COMPLIMENTS. >> OLSEN. >> I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER
CANADAY. >> WILLIAMS-JOHNSON. >> I AGREE WITH EVERYONE. >> THINK THEY'RE SAYING TEAMWORK MAKES THE DREAM WORK, I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING. I WIL SAY, COMMISSIONER BASTICK, YOUR COMMENTS REMINDED ME TOO THAT WHEN MS. HASTINGS WAS UP HERE AND SHE WAS TALKING
ABOUT THE 2-100 POLICY, I HAPPEN TO REMEMBER THAT IS AN INVESTIGATIONS SET OF POLICIES. SO WE ARE LEARNING A LOT. THOSE MEETINGS ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, THEY DON'T SEEM TO BE PARTICULARLY POPULAR, BUT WE WELCOME ANYONE WHO WANTS TO DIG
IN AND REVI POLICY WITH US. I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE NEXT REPORT FROM THE NEXT COMMITTEE AND LOOKING FORWARD TO SOME COLLABORATION. WE'VE HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT THAT REVIEW CYCLE COULD LOOK LIKE. SO WOULD LOVE ANY THOUGHTS ABOUT HOW I CAN BE HELPFUL AS THE PPRR CHAIR, WHAT WE CAN PROVIDE TO
THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT COMMISSION, THAT CONVERSATION I THINK IS AN IMPORTANT ONE. SO PERHAPS YOU'LL TOUCH ON THAT, COMMISSIONER SMITH, WHEN IT'S YOUR TURN. YES, PLEASE. >> FIRST, I JUST WANT TO SAY, COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD, WHEN YOU STARTED CHAIRING THIS COMMITTEE WHICH WAS FIRST THE
WORK GROU IT WAS LIKE HERDING CATS. SO CONGRATULATIONS. YOU HAVE LEARNED HOW TO HERD CATS. I JUST THINK THIS IS AN EXCELLENT REPORT. I LIKE THE PROCESS WHERE WE CAN GET IT, WE CAN STUDY IT. I DO WAN TO MAKE A SPECIFIC COMMENT ABOUT THE CROWD MANAGEMENT.
AND I WANT TO PREFACE THIS WITH SOMETHING SOMEBODY CE TO ME AS A COMMISSIONER AND RELATED A VERY DISTURBING EVENT THAT HAPPENED IN DECEMBER. A GROUP OF PEOPLE WENT TO SENATOR OBUCHAR'S OFFICE TO MAKE A POINT USING THEIR RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH.
THE MPD SHOD UP. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY THERE WERE. I DON'T KNOW IF THE NUMBER OF 50 WASEXAGGERATED. THE PEOPLE WERE LEAVING SO THEY WERE ABIDING BY THE ORDER TO LEAVE. ONE PERSON WAS ARRESTED ON
FELONY RIOTING CHARGES. I WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT AN ARREST, NOT EVEN A CONVICTION ON YOURECORD FOR FELONY RIOTING HAS WHEN YOU'RE A YOUNG PERSON, ANYPERSON. THE REASON THEY DID THAT WAS SO
THEY COULD HOLD THIS PERSON FOR TWO DAYS AND TEACH THEM A LESSON ABOUT EXERCISING THEIR RIGHTS TO FREE SPEECH. SO WHEN YOU HAVE IN THE POLICY ABOUT CROWD MANAGEMENT AND HOW CIVIL DISTURBANCE CAN BE HARD TO RELATE WITH CIVIL UNREST AND UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY, I THINK WE
NEED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FREE SPEECH, AND I DON'T SEE THAT HERE. I'M NOT CRITICIZING IT, BUT I THINK TT WHEN WE ONLY TALK TO POLICE OFFICERS ABOUT CIVIL DISTURBANCE AND WE ARE NOT
TEACHING THEM AND MAKING CLEAR THAT PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO PROTEST AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO LIKEHE SPEECH, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO ARREST SOMEBODY AND TEACH THEM A LESSON AND BASICALLY SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO
GO THROUGH WITH THOSE CHARGES. AND BY THE WAY, THOSE CHARG HANG OVER THIS PERSON AND CAN BE INITIATED INTO CHARGES AT ANY TIME. THE ONE THING WANT TO SAY ABOUT JUST THE PROCESS AS A
WHOLE, I'M STILL VERY CONCERNED ABOUT MISSING DEADLINES. AND I UNDERAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT'S GOOD THAT MPD AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS WILL CONSIDER FEEDBACK AFTER A DEADLINE GOES. BUT MY UNDERSTANDING AS A LAWYER AND READING THE MDHR SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT IS THAT IT IS HENNEPIN COUNTY DISTRICT COURT JUDGE THAT HAS THE FINAL SAY ON WHETHER THESE POLICIES ARE GOING TO PASS MUSTER. YOU SEND THIS TO THE JUDGE AND THEN LATER ON THERE'S FEEDBACK.
I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF LUCK GETTING THAT ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK BEFORE THE JUDGE. AT THAT POINT, THIS JUDGE WHO HAS MANY OTHER CASES, COMPLEX CASES, AND THIS HAS GOT TO BE ONE OF THE MOST COMPLEX ISN'T GOING TO TAKE KINDLY TO
REVIEWING SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE AND ONLY BEEN ASKED ONE TIME. SO I STILL REMAIN INCREDIBLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE 120 DAYS AND THE 40 DAYS. AND MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS HOW IT IS THAT WE GET FEEDBACK AFTER
IT'S GONE AND BEEN APPROVED BY THE JUDGE. I'M GLAD THAT MPD WILL LISTEN TO IT, BUT IT LITERALLY HAS NO EFFECT IF THE JUDGE SAYS UH-UH, YOU WASTED MY TIME BY COMING TO ME WITH SOMETHING AFTER T FACT. WE HAVE TO GET A HANDLE ON THAT. SO I HATE TO SAY IT, BUT THAT'S ANOTHE JOB FOR THE COMMISSION
OF HERDING CATS THAT WE HAVE TO REALLY SETTLE. I DON'T THINK IT IS. >> I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT TO BE REAL ISSUE IN OUR TIMELINE. I DON'T THINK THINGS ARE GOING TO THE JUDGE. WE'VE GOT PLENTY OF TIME TO PROVIDE OUR INPUT BEFORE MPD
FINALIZES THEIR VIEW OF THE POLICY THAT THEN GOES O FOR APPROVALS. I DON'T THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GETTING INVOLVE AFTER A JUDGE APPROVES A POLICY. >> THAT'S RIGHT. AND ALSO WHAT WE LEARNED IS THAT THE POLICIES, I BELIEVE, UNDER THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT HAVE TO
BE REVIEWED REGULARLY. SO THE IDEA WAS IF IT DOESN'T GN THE NEXT ROUND. SO THE FEEDBACK IS ALWAYS BEING COLLECTE BECAUSE THE POLICIES AS YOU CAN SEE WHEN WRE SERVING ON PANELS, IT WILL SAY WHEN IT WAS LAST UPDATED AT THE TOP OF THE POLICIES.
SO IT'S AN ONGOING PROCESS. AND THAT REMINDS ME, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP, COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. IN THE THIRD TO LAST PAGE, PAGE FOUR IN OUR COMMITTEE REPORT AND THEN THE VERY, VERY LAST PAGE OF YOUR PACKET, THAT'S PROBABLY THE
EASIEST VISUAL. WE DO HAVE A VISUAL BECAUSE THE CITY ATTORNEY EXPLAINED TO US THE TIMELINE FOR POLICY REVIEW AND WHAT THE DIFFERENT DEADLINES AND TIMES MEAN. SO WE KINDLY ASK THEM OR THEY KINDLY AGREED TO MAKE A VISUAL FOR US. SO THERE'S AN EXPLANATION AT THE
END OF OUR REPOR AS WELL WHICH ESSENTIALLY CLARIFIED TO US THAT MOST OF THE POLICIES THAT MPD IS PUTTING UP FOR REVIEW BECSE OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ARE FOR 30 DAYS. AND THAT THEY ARE ELEING TO
PUT, THEY'RE CHOOSING TO PUT UP MORE POLICIES AND THOSE VOLUNTEERED POLICIES WERE POSTED AS WELL. >> MADAM CHAIR, I'M GOING TO INTERRUPT BECAUSE TIME IS RUNNING OUT. WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS ITEM TEN ON THE AGENDA AND THER.
>> I DIDN'T SEE IT ON THERE. STAY TUNED FOR MORE. THANK YOU FOR THE TITLE OF CAT HERDER. I THINK I WILL YIELD MY TIME, THANK YOU. >> I'LL JUST SAY, THANK YOU FOR THIS VERY, VERY DETAILED REPORT. I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS ONGOING POLICY REVIEW
AND THAT IS NOT A STAGNANT TIME. AND IF I GOES IN FRONT OF WHOMEVER IT GOES IN FRONT OF, WE CAN CONTINUOUSLY A INPUT AND PROVIDE INPUT TO MPD ON POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS WHETHER THEY COME THROUGH THE PPRR GROUP OR PRIDE FEEDBACK PER THE QR CODE
WHICH IS A NICE 2025 ADDITION TO THE AGENDA. BECAUSE IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTANDS WHAT THE POLICIES ARE, THATHEY HAVE INPUT. SO THIS IS A GREAT THING. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. WE HAVE 35 SECONDS. COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> THIS IS JUST A QUICK QUESTION ON ACRONYMS. FE I THINK IT'S INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT. THAT'S WHY WHENEVER I TALK ABOUT OPCR, I ALWAYS TRY TO SAY OFFICE OF POLICE CONDUCT REVIEW. IT'S NOT INTUITIVE. I WOULD SAY THAT THE POLICY A PROCEDURE MANUAL IS STILL BEHEMOTH.
AND I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT -- IF I READ IT WRONG, LET ME NO --HAT THERE WOULD BE ACRONYMS AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH SECTION. I THK THAT MIGHT ADD A LOT OF EXTRA PAGES AND I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE I ANOTHER WAY OF REFERRING TO THE LIST OF ACRONYMS LIKE ACRONYMS IN THIS
PARTICULAR SECTION OR BY NUMBER AS OPPOSED TO LISTING THEM JUST SO THAT WE'RE REALLY CAREFUL ABOUT NOT ADDING TO MORE PAGES -- I THINK IT'S 700 PAGES THE MPD POLICE AND POLICY REVIEW. >> IT IS. NOTED. >> ALL RIGHT, SEEING NO OTHER
NDS UP AND WE ARE OUT OF TIME I'LL DIRECT THE CLERK TO RECEIVE AND FILE THAT REPORT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE NEXT REPORT IS FROM COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT COMMITTEE. THAT REPORT WILL BE GIVEN BY THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> MADAM CHAIR AND
COMMISSIONERS, CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? WE HAD A MEETING WITH ALL OF OUR MEMBERS PRESENT I BELIEVE AND COVERED A LOT OF GROUND. THE FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS WAS FOR US TO ELECT COMMISSIONER STEWART AS OUR VICE CHAIR OF THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT COMMITTEE.
SO THAT WAS IMPORTANT. SECONDLY, WE TOOK UP A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE ANNUAL PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE COMMISSION. AND WE HAD A PRETTY WIDE RANGING DISCUSSION REFLECTING ON LAST YEAR'S HEARING ON OPTIONS SUCH
AS HOLDING MULTIPLE HEARINGS IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS, NORTH SIDE, SOUTH SIDE, VARIOUS POINTS AROUND THE CITY. I THINK WE CAME TO A CONSENSUS AS A COMMITTEE THAT THE LOCATION NOT IN THIS BUILDING, BUT THE NEWER, NICER PUBLIC SERVICE
BUILDING IS A VERY GOOD CENTRAL ACCESSIBLE LOCATION THAT HAS THE EQUIPMENT TO TELEVISE THE CITY COMMUNITY RESOURCES. SO THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE HAVE ONE HEARING WE MHT LATER IN
THE YEAR FIND OTHER OUTREACH OPPORTUNITIES, BUT THAT WE FOCUS ON ONE. THAT WE COME WITH A NICE PREPARATION OF A CONCISE STATEMENT OF THE ROLE OF CCPO.
AND SOME REFLECTIO ON OUR WORK AND HOW WE FIT WITHIN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND CONSENT DECREE AS WELL AS OUR ROLE IN COMMENTING ON POLICY. THERE WAS SOME DISSSION AROUND WHAT RESOURCES CAN BE PRESENT AT
THAT HEARING BOTH WITHIN THE CITY OR OTHER COMMUNITY RESOURCES AS OFTEN. I THINK WE ALL HAVE EXPERIENCES IN THESE SETTINGS OF COMMENTS THAT REFLECT A WIDE VARIETY OF EXPERIENCES, SOM TRAUMATIC AND
HOW CAN THERE BE RESOURCES IN PLACE WITHIN REASON OF WHAT'S AVAILABLE. ALSO HOW CAN THE RESOURCES OF THE CITY ENTERPRISE HELP SUPPORT THE COMMUNICATION AND OUTREACH TO PUBLICIZE THIS PUBLIC HEARING SO THAT WE HAVE STRONG
PARTICIPATION. AND W ALSO THOUGHT THAT AGAIN, CCPO'S ROLE IN THE COMMUNITY SAFETY INFRASTRUCTURE AND OUR ROLE IN COMMUNITY OVERSIGHT SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN
REALLY HELP BE CLEAR ABOUT. THE REPORT SUGGESTS THAT I SCHEDULED THE ARING, BUT I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT IT WAS A COMMITTEE DISCUSSION. AND IT IS A RECOMMENDATION TO TD THAT HEARING ON TUESDAY,
MAY 13TH AT 6:30 P.M. IT WAS BASED IN PART ON LOOKING AT OUR GENERAL SCHEDULE AND ALSO KNOWING WHAT IS AVAILABLE FOR THAT ROOM 100 IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE CENTER OR BUILDG OR WHATEVER THE NEW ONE IS CALLED.
SO THAT'S OUR REPORT ABOUT RECOMMENDING A PUBLIC HEARING ON MAY 13TH AT 6:30 P.M., A TIME WHEN WE THOUGHT PEOPLEHO HAVE BEEN WORKING DURING THE DAY CAN STILL GET THERE AT A REASONABLE TIME IN THE EVENING. WE THEN TOOK UP SOME DISCUSSION
ABOUT THE POLICY REVIEW PROCESS, AND WE DECIDED THAT FIRST OF ALL WE WOULD GO TO OUR MARCH MEETING TO HOLD AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO COMMENT ON PPRR'S WORK
IN JANUARY AND NOW YOUR MOST RECENT FEBRUARY REPORT SO THAT THOSE POLICIES AND THE COMMITTEE'S REVIEW OF THOSE POLICIES CAN BE PUT OUT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AS SUCH FOR OUR NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING WHICH I
BELIEVE IS MARCH 18TH. WE ALSO THEN GOT INTO THIS SAME DISCUSSION ABO THE TIMELINESS OF THE COMMITTEE'S REVIEW OF POLICIES AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT WITH THAT REVIEW.
AND I WOULD SAY THA IT WAS REASSURING TO HEAR THAT THERE'S A FLEXIBILITY ABOUT WHENEVER THE COMMISSION OFFERS COMMENTS THAT THOSE CAN BE TAKEN IN AND WE DIDN'T, WE HAD A PREVIEW OF THIS
FLYER THAT WE'LL DISCUSS MORE IN MORE DETAIL. IT WAS GRE TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO PROVIDE COMMENTS AND KNOW THAT THEY WOULDE RECEIVED AND CONSIDERED AT ANYTIME. BUT WE ESPECIALLY WANT TO BE RELEVANT TO THE PROCESS OF ALL
OF THE OTHER ACTORS OF THE PROCESS AND CONSENT DECREE. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP COORDINATING.AND I THINK THERE E CONVERSATIONS ABOUT PRIORITIZING POLICIES FOR REVIEW TO MAKE SURE THAT THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING IS TIMELY AND RELEVANT TO THE
WORK OF OTHERS. THEN, WE AGREED THAT WE WOULD HOLD THAT MARCH 18TH MEETING FOR THE POLICIES THA PPRR REVIEWED IN JANUARY AND FEBRUARY. THEN WE NOTED THAT THE CITY
STAFF HAD PREPARED A DRAFT COMMUNICATIONS PLAN FOR CCPO. AND WE WANTED TO SEE IF WE COULD GET OUR HANDS ON THAT DRAFT PLAN AND CONSIDER IT AS A COMMITTEE AT O MARCH MEETING AND BRING THAT BACK THEN TO THE COMMISSION
SO THAT WE CAN A BE ENGAGED IN COMMUNITY OUTREACH IN A PLANFUL WAY. SO WE'LL PLAN ON BRINGING THAT FORWARD AFTER OUR MARCH MEETING. AND WITH THAT, LET ME TURN TO MY OTHEROMMITTEE MEMBERS TO SEE
WHAT OTHER PIECES I MIGHT BE MISSING. I SEE -- >> COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> YES, THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE RECAP. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. FIRST, I LOVE THE IDEA OF HAVING THE MARCH 18TH MEETING, INVITING
THE PUBLIC TO SPECIFICALLY COMMENT ON TH POLICY. HOW DO WE GET THAT OUT? HOW IS THAT BEING GIVEN TO THE PUBLIC OTHER THAN US SAYING THIS HERE AND NOW? WHAT ARE WE DOING TO SAY TO THE
PUBLIC, AT THE PARTICULAR PPRR MEETING OR THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MEETI WE'RE GOING TO BE FOCUSING ON THIS IF THEY HAVE CONCERNS OR IDEAS. HOW ARE WE GETTING THAT OUT? >> WE SPOKE ABOUT HAVING IT ON LIMS. WE SPOKE ABOUT BNGING IT TO THE NEXT ALEFA COMMUNITY MEETING. WE SPOKE ABOUT ALL OF US SHARING
IT ON OUR SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS. AND THERE WAS GOING TO BE A DRAFT FLYER POSSIBLY MADE THAT WE COULD SHARE. >> THE QUESTION I HAVE IS WHO'S MAKING UP THE DRAFT FLYER, THE TALKING POINTS SO THEY'RE CONSISTENT BETWEEN THE SOCIAL MEDIA THAT WE SHARE AND WHAT WE PUT ON LIMS.
SO IT'S THE NUTS AND BOLTS I'M TALKING ABOUT. WE DON'T WANT TO BE PUTTING OUT SEPARATE VERSIONS OF THIS. WE WANT ONE UNIFORM THING. IS THERE STAFF THAT DOES THAT, DO WE DO IT ON OUR OWN? HOW DO WE GET THAT DONE?
>> COMMISSIOR STEWART, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHINGO ADD? WHAT I'LL SAY AND IT MAY BE HELPFUL IF THE CITY CAN HELP WITH THE FLYER WITH THAT COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENTOMMITTEE MEETING ON MARCH 18TH. PERHAPS COMMISSIONER SMITH CAN HELP AND THE COMMITTEE CAN DRAFT
SOMETHING TO GET OUT BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMUNITY TO KNOW. PEAPS THEY CAN PUT IT OUT ON THEIR TIKTOK IF THEY HAVE VARIOUS WAYS TO GET IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC WHICH IS HELPFUL. I THINK THE COMMITTEE CAN WORK TO GET THAT INFORMATION OUT. IN THE NORMAL CHANNELS THE CITY
HAS TO PUT OUT PUBLIC MEETINGS. COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD. >> DID BRING UP -- CITY AND I DON'T SEE THE PHRASE IN THE NOTES. I FIND THAT FRUSTRATING. WE TALKED ABOUT THAT.
I BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COMMITTEE THAT THERE WAS A CONTRACT PASSED FOR $500,000. AFTERWARDS WE HAD THE MDHR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT HAS IN IT A SPECIFIC PARAGRAPH THAT
REQUIRES THERE TO A COMMUNITY SURVEY AND THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE BEEN BEING ASKED BY THE PUBLIC IS WHETHER OR NOT THAT $500,000 CONTRACT IS BEING USED THAT WE'VE GOT THAT COVERED. AND SO, I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO
COME UP AND GET AN ANSWER TO THAT, B I THINK WE NEED TO PROPERLY REFLECT THIS IN THE NOTES OF OUR MEETING. WE HAD SOME VERY TROUBLING PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY ABOUT IT. AND I WILL NOTE TODAY THAT I ALSO LEARNED GOI TO THE
ADMINISTRATION AND ENTERPRISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE, I HEARD THE PRESENTATI FROM THEM AND I HAD SOME SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT THE WAY THAT THERE IS NO COMMUNITY OR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND ALTHOH IT DIDN'T COME OUT AT THE AEO MEETING, I LEARNED TODAY THA
THEY HAVE NOW GOT A CONTRACT TO DO THE SURVEY AT GEORGE FLOYD SQUARE. AND I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT GOT DONE, IT WASN'T PUBLIC NOTICED AND I WAS TOLD IT DIDN'T NEED TO BE. SO THERE ARE SOME REAL CONCERNS GOING ON INCLUDING THE FACT WHAT WE HEARD TODAY TT THERE IS AN
ISRAELI SURVEILLANCE COMPANY THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN APARTHEID AND GENOCIDE FOR DECADES AND WE NEED TO TAKE WHAT THE PUBLIC BRING TO US SERIOUSLY. SO I WOULD APPRECIATE IF WE COULD AMEND THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT NOTES TO SHOW THAT
THERE WAS DISCUSSION ON THAT. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> MADAM CHAIR, I DO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN THAT THE QUESTION OF THIS COMMUNITY SURVEY CAME UP AT THE END OF THE MEETING AUT CCPO COMMUNICATIONS GENERALLY AND
THEN HOW THAT FIT WITH THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. AND I BELIEVE WE HAD A COMMITMENT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO AT LEAST ANSWER THAT QUESTION MY THOUGHT WOULD BE THAT WHEN WE HAVE OUR NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING WE'LL BE REVIEWING THE MINUTES OR THE SUMMARY AND WE CAN MAKE
ADJUSTMENTS AS APPROPRIATE TO REFLECT THAT. BUT MAYBE THERE'S ALSO MORE NEWS TO OFFER HERE. >> THANK YOU, I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE BECAUSE SOME OF US WERE NOT AT THE MEETING SO WE'RE NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENED AT YOUR COMMISSION MEETING. COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN CAN BRING UP WHAT MAY BE MISSING AT
THE MINUTES AND YOU CAN MAKE A DETERMINATION AND BRING THAT BACK. >> THANK YOU BOTH. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. MAYBE A LITTLE BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT FOR FOLKS. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, IMPLEMENTATION UNIT. A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN'S QUESTION. IT CAME UP IN RELATION TO THE COMMUNITY SURVEY THAT IS REQUIRED UNDER THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. SO WE TOOK A PEEK AND LOOKED
BACK AND IT'S IN SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT PARAGRAPH 415 SPECIFICALLY. AND I CAN KIND OF GIVE YOU A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THAT SO Y'ALL DON'T HAVE TO GO AHEAD AND LOOK ATIT. IT'S SPECIFICALLY AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR REQUIREMENT. SO THAT IS NOT A REQUIREMENT OF THE CITY ITSELF TO DO THAT
SURVEY. SO ALEFA AS THE CITY'S INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR IS REQUIREDO DO A COMMUNITY-WIDE SURVEY, AN ANNUAL SURVEY EACH YEAR BOTH TO THE COMMUNITY BROADLY AND INTERNAY WITHIN
MPD. SO HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. >> THANK YOU. >> IT DOESN'T FULLY ANSWER THAT. BUT I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. MY READING OF THAT PARAGRAPH IS IT STILL DOESN'T ANSWER THE
QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE $500,000 CONTRACT THAT WAS GIVEN PRIOR TO THE MDHR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BEING AFFECTUATED IS GOING TO BE USED TO CHECK OFF THE BOX FOR THAT. AND WHAT I LEARNED TODAY AT THE AEO MEETING WAS VERY SPECIFIC.
THE LAWYER SAID ALL OTHE DATA GOES TO MPD, ALL OF IT GOES TO ALEFA, AND SO THAT TELLS ME THAT THEY ARE INVOLVED IN THAT AND IF THEY'RE INVOLVED IN THAT, THEN THAT CONTRACT, THAT SPECIFIC CONTRACT MUST BE BEING USED TO CHECK OFF THE BOX. AND I WILL SAY ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT ALARMED ME IS COUNCILMEMBER RIGHTLY POINTED OUT WHAT KIND OF MEASURES ARE BEING USED TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC FROM THE DATA THAT THEY GIVE, THE INFORMATION THAT THEY GIVE WILL BE PROTECTED AND THEY PROVIDED AN ANSWER FOR WHAT THEY'REDOING. BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT ALEFA IS DOING, I DON'T KNOW WHAT MPD IS
DOING. AND IN FACT THEY MADE IT A POINT OF SAYING MPD OWNS THE RIGHTS TO THIS. SO THAT MEANS THEY HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE SURE IT'S PROTECTED AND WE HEARD NOTHING ABOUT THAT. AND OF COURSE WE DON'T KNOW AT ALL WHAT ALEFA IS DOING WHEN THEY GET THE INFORMATION, HOW THEY'RE PROTECTING IT.
SO I'M JUST SAYING THERE'S A LOT OF CONCERNS AROUND THIS BOTH IN TERMS OF PUBLIC POLICY AND JUST PRACTICALITY. >> CHAIR REEVES, COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN, TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION SPECIFICALLY, I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO DISTINCT SETS OF THINGS.
THE CONTRACT THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF IS WITH MPD AND THE CITY. THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT REQUIREMENT WITHIN 415 IS SPECIFICALLY WITH ALEFA. SO ALEFA IS ABLE TO SET UP THAT COMMUNITY SVEY HOWEVER THEY SEE FIT. I THINK COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD
GAVE A SHOUT OUT FOR THE ALEFA MEETING ON MARCH 12TH. I THINK THAT IS AUESTION THAT WOULD BE PERTINENT TO ASK THERE AS WELL, BUT THIS IS NOT A CITY REQUIREMENT. THANK YOU. >> OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> JUST TO FOLLOW UP THOUGH, IT IS A CITY CONTRACT THAT WAS MADE
BEFOREALEFA WAS EVEN BORN. AND MY CONCERN IS THAT THERE IS A MIXING OF APPLES AND ORANGES. THAT WE ARE USING A CITY CONTRACT FOR ZEN CITY TO MAKE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT LOOK GOOD KIND OF SURVEYS AND THAT THAT IS
BEING USED TO CHECK OFF THE BOX. SO WHEN YOU PASS IT OFF AND SAY IT'S ALEFA, IT'S A CITY CONTRACT THAT PREDATED THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. SO WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET AN ANSWER FROM ESPECIALLY THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ABOUT WHETHER THAT CONTRACT IS BEING USED TO PAY FOR AND IMPLEMENT A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT PROVISION. >> I THINK I CAN ANSWER DIRECTLY, NO. SO THIS CONTRACT IS SPECIFIC TO THE CITY AND MPD. ALEFA, AS THE INDEPENDENT
EVALUATOR AS STATED IN 415, HAS ANOTHER PROCESS THEY HAVE TO DO INDEPENDENT OF THE CITY. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER OLSEN. >> THANK YOU. I'M JUST GOING TO LET THE TIME EXPIRE, WE HE EIGHT SECONDS LEFT. AND I DON'T WANT TO EXTEND IT. >> THANK YOU. >> WE HAVE ONE ITEM OF BINESS THAT WE DO NEED TO DO HOWEVER
FROM THIS COMMITTEE. >> WE DO NEED TO PASS THE MOTION FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON MAY 13TH. SO COMMISSNER SMITH, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO FORMALLY MAKE THE MOTION. >> YES, SO MOVED. >> IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION? >> I'LL SECOND. >> THANK YOU. THERE'S BN A MOTION AND A
SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> CAN IT BE REATED WHAT DATE AND TIME THE MEETING IS? I HEARD THE LOCATION, BUT NOT THE TIME. >> 6:30 P.M. >> AND THEN WOULD WE STILL HAVE THE TRADITIONAL CCPO MEETING IN MAY AS WELL? OR WOULD THAT BE REPLACING OUR MEETING? >> SEPARATE.
TWO MEETINGS IN MAY. >> TWO MEETINGS IN MAY, GOT IT. >> MAYBE JUST FOR DISCUSSION'S SAKE, CAN WE ADD THAT TO OUR CALENDAR. WE NEED TO UPDATE THE CALDAR ANYWAY, SO THAT WOULD BE GREAT IF IT CAN ALL BE ON THERE.
>> THANK YOU. CLERK CARL. >> COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER CLEMENT.>> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH-KOOIMAN. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER BASTICK. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER STEWART. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER CANAY. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS-JOHNSON. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH.
>> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR OLSEN. >> AYE. >> CHAIR REEVES. >> YES. >> THERE ARE 11 AYES. >> WE NOW HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING MAY 13TH AT 6:30 P.M. AT THE PUBLIC SERVICE BUILDING. THIS IS WONDERFUL AND I HOPE THE COMMUNITY COMES. WE WANT TO HEAR FR YOU.
WE'LL ASK THE CLERK TO RECEIVE AND FILE THAT REPORT AS WELL. SO WE ARE DONE WITH THE REPORTS ON THE AGENDA. THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS UNFINISHED BUSINESS AND WE HAVE ONE ITEM. WE HAVE AN UNFINISHED AGENDA ITEM FROM LAST WEEK OR LT MONTH, EXCUSE ME, RELATED TO CCPO INPUT ON THE POLICE CHIEF
EVALUATION. I WILL NOW INVITE COMMISSIONER BARNETT WITH THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC SAFETY TO GIVE US AN UPDATE ON THIS MATTER. THANK YOU. >> GOOD EVENING. THANKS FOR HAVING ME,'M TODD BARNETT, THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMUNITY SAFETY FOR THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS.
I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT CCPO INPUT TO THE MINNEAPOLIS POLICE CHIEF'S EVALUATION. AS YOU KNOW, THIS BODY, TS COMMISSION IS AN INDEPENDENT BODY THAT ALLOWS THE PUBLIC TO
PARTICIPATE IN POLICE OVERSIGHT. AND THEREFORE THIS BODY HAS BEEN GIVEN THE AUTHORITY TO HAVE INPUT INTO THE MINNEAPOLIS POLICE CHIEF'S PERFORMANCE REVIEW. AND THIS AUTHORITY IS DERIVED FROM YOUR BYLAWS, ARTICLE 9 A5.
I TAKE YOUR ROLE IN THIS PROCESS VERY SERIOUSLY, BECAUSE YOUR ROLE IS ESSENTIAL TO FOSTERING A POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT IS RESPONSIVE TO THE COMMUNITY, ACCOUNTABLE FOR ITS ACTIONS, AND COMMITTED TO ONGOING IMPROVEMENT AND REFORM.
THIS BUILDS TRUST, AND IT ALSO GIVES ME A DIVERSE PERSPECTIVE. IN ADDITION TO THAT, YOUR INPUT CAN HEL GUIDE ME IN PRIORITIZING THE INITIATIVES THAT BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY AS
WELL FOR ALL THE DEPARTMENTS. WE'VE MET INTERNALL AND DISCUSSED AND ARE FORMULATING A PROCESS IN WHICH I BELIEVE WILL BECOME THE NORM FOR THE POLICE CHIEF'S PERFORMANCE REVIEW,
ANNUAL REVIEW, I SHOULD SAY AS FAR AS YOUR ROLE IN HAVING INPUT INTO THAT. WE'REORKING TO FIND THE BEST MECHANISMS IN WHICH TO ATTAIN FROM EACH OF YOU YOUR PERSPECTIVE AND INPUT ON THE CHIEF'S REVIEW.
SOME OF THE AREAS THAT, AND IT'S NOT AN EXHAUSTIVE LIST, BUT WE'RE LOOKING TO HAVE YOU HAVE INPUT ON HIS OVERALL PERFORMANCE, POLICE REFORM, ACCOUNTABILITY, PRACTICES AND POLICY IMPLEMENTATION, ALSO LONG-TERM PLANNING AND THE
VISION LONG TERM FOR THE MINNEAPOLIS POLICE DEPARTMENT. IT IS MY INTENTION TO HAVE A FINAL PLAN F THIS PROCESS REVIEWED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, CIVIL RIGHTS DEPARTMENT, D OF COURSE OUR HUMAN RESOURCE
DEPARTMENT BY THE END OF THIS MONTH. SO THAT IS THE UPDATE, HOPEFULLY THAT WAS BRIEF ENOUGH FOR YOU, CHAIR. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS?
COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. I'M SORRY? DID I MISS SOMEONE? >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BARNETT. I APPRECIATE THAT.
I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THIS COMMISSION HAS A ROLE IN DEFINING THIS PLAN THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PUT OUT? FROM WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE GOING TO DEVELOP A PLAN AND GIVE IT TO US. I THINK WE SHOULD BE SOMEHOW INVOLVED IN THAT PLAN.
CAN YOU DISCUSS THAT? >> CHAIR REEVES, COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN, THE WAY I READ YOUR BYLAWS IS THAT YOU HAVE INPUT INTO THE CHIEF'S OVERALL
EVALUATION, ANNUAL EVALUATION. IT DOESN'T DESCRIBE THE ACTUAL WAY IN DOING THAT. TH'S WHY INTERNALLY WE'VE REALLY DISCUSSED WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO GET THE INPUT BECAUSE
THIS IS A PERSONNEL ISSUE. AND I SAY PERSONNEL BECAUSE IT'S NOT, HIS EVALUATION IS NOT PUBLIC. SO HOW DO I GET THAT INFORMATION FROM EACH ONE OF YOU, HAVING TH DIVERSE PERSPECTIVE THAT
COMPLIES WITH OUR HR RULES A ALSO MEETS THE STANDARDS THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY WOULD HAVE AS WELL. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE COMING UP WITH THE PLAN. >> SO CAN I JUST FOLLOW UP ON THAT? >> YES. >> SO YOUR GOAL IS TO MEET WITH EACH OF US INDIVIDUALLY?
>> NO, I SAID TO GET INPUT, YOUR INDIVIDUAL INPUT, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. >> I KNOW YOU WEREN'T HERE FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENT. BUT SOMEBODY DID BRING UP THE EVALUATION OF THE CHIEF IN
REGARDS TO THE HIRING DECISIONS THAT THE CHIEF HAS MADE REGARDING OFFICER TIMBERLAKE WHO WAS HIRED AFTER HE HAD USED A HOLD TT WAS SIMILAR TO WHAT MURDERED GEORGE FLOYD. THERE WAS COMMENTARY ABOUT
HIRING A PARTICULAR POLICE OFFICER, I BELIEVE IT WAS MR. WITHERSPOON WHO WASNVOLVED IN THE SOUNDS LIKE TORTUROUS DEATH OF LUCAS BELLAMY THAT RESULTED IN A $3.4 MILLION LAWSUIT AND I BELIEVE THERE WAS ONE ANHER. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THIS
PERSON SAID AND I JUST WANT TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK ON THIS IS THAT THE CCPO SHOULD HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING SEPARATE FM WHAT WE'RE DOING MAY 13TH IF I
HEARDT RIGHT MAYBE THEY WERE SAYING IT SHOULD BE PART OF MAY 13TH OR THE ALTERNATIVE. WHAT DO YOU THK ABOUT HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING THAT WOULD ALLOW PEOPLE TO COME IN AND SPEAK TO ONCE YOU HAVE A PLAN LAID OUT ABOUT WHAT THE PLAN IS AND WHAT WE SHOULD BE COMMENTING ON?
HOW DO YOU THINK ABOUT HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CHIEF'S EVALUATION? >> CHAIR, I'M NOT SURE -- YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU WOULD HAV A PUBLIC HEARING, AND WHAT WOULD
BE THE PURPOSE BE? >> TO BE NOTHING BUT GETTING THY FEEL THE CHIEF HAS MET OR NOT MET STANDARDS FOR BEING RECOMMENDED FOR RECORACTING. >> CHAIR REEVES, COMMISSIONER
GURIAN-SHERMAN THE WAY THAT I READ YOUR RE HERE IS THAT THIS BODY REPRESENTS T PUBLIC. AND SO FROM MY VIEW, YOUR INPUT IS THE PUBLIC'S VIEW.
CITIZENS, RESIDENTS, VISITORS, WHOEVER, THERE ARE OTHER CHANNELS FOR THEM TO FILE COMPINTS OR GIVE THEIR VIEWS. AND THAT HAPPENS QUITE
FREQUENTLY. SO IF YOU'RE ASKING ME, I'M NOT THE ONE TO TELL THIS BODY WHETHER THEY HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING OR NOT. BUT I VIEW EACH MEMBER AS REPRESENTING THE PUBLIC. THAT'S THE WAY I READ YOUR ROLE. >> THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER BASTICK.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I KNOW YOU'RE STILL FIGURING OUT THE PROCESS. AND I'M JUST IMAGINING SOMETHING ONLINE.
AND YOU ARE THINKING THROUGH WHAT THOSE SORT OF CATEGORIES OF FEEDBACK ARE AND THAT MAKES SENSE. MY ONLY CATEGORY OF FEEDBACK WOULD BE THAT WE PERHAPS BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY BEFORE YOU FINALIZE THAT PROCESS, MAYBE A LITT UPDATE AT OUR NEXT MEETING WHERE BECAUSE YOU SAY
YOU'RE HOPING TO ACTUALLY FINALIZE THE PROCESS BY THE END OF THIS MONTH. I THINK IT WOULD BE ENORMOUSLY HELPFUL FOR THIS BODY TO RECEIVE A LIST OF THE CATEGORIES, I IMAGINE AN ONLINE FORM SENT
INDIVIDUALLY, A LIST OF THE CATEGORIES SO WE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE GET TO COMMENT ON. AND I WOULD REALLY, REALLY, REALLY RECOMMEND AS A PROCESS PERSON THAT AT THE VERY END THAT YOU GIVE US A CHANCE TO VE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. MAYBE LIMIT IT, BUT THAT WOULD
BE ENORMOUSLY HELPFUL JUST IN CASE YOU DON'T HIT ALL OF THE POINTS BECAUSE WE'RE ALL GOING DIFFERENT THINGS. THANK YOU. >> CHAIR, COMMISSIONER BASTICK,
MY PAST EXPERIENCE WITH PERFORMANCE REVIEWS HAVE ALWAYS INCLUDED SORT OF ANY COMMENTS THAT YOU HAVE. SO I THINK THAT WILL DEFINITELY BE IN THERE AS WELL. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> YES. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH-KOOIMAN. >> YEAH, JUST HAD TWO
QUESTIONS. ONE, DO WE KNOW AND IS IT PUBLICLY AVAILABLE INFORMATION WHEN THE REVIEW PROCESS FOR THE CHIEF IS HAPPENING? AND THEN TWO, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT IF THIS BODY WERE TO DISCUSS AND VOTE ON IT, WE COULD HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING WHERE PEOPLE GIVE THEIR OPINION
OF THE CHIEF'S PERFORMANCE? >> SAY AGAIN YOUR SECOND QUESTION. >> I JUST WANTE TO CLARIFY THAT IF THIS BODY DECIDED TO DISCUSS AND VOTE ON IT, WE COULD DECID TO DEDICATE A HEARING TO HEARING THE PUBLIC'S FEEDBACK ON CHIEF O'HARA'S PERFORMANCE?
>> YOUR FIRST QUESTION ABOUT THE TIMELINE, I PRETTY MUCH HAVE DELAYED THE EVALUATION TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS INPUT IS GIVEN A THAT THE PROCESS THAT -- I'M
SORRY, CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, IS TRYING TO MAKEURE THAT THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE IS ONE THAT WOULD BE THE NORM GOING FORWARD FOR THE FUTURE. SO I'M JUST TRYING TO BE MINDFUL OF THAT IF THAT'S HELPFUL.
AN THAT'S BEEN SORT OF THE DELAY HERE. >> SO JUST TO CLARIFY THERE HASN'T BEEN A DATE DETERMINED WHEN THAT IS HAPPENING? >> NO, NOT EXACTLY. >> AND THEN TO THE SECOND QUESTION, JUST WANTED THE CLARI. >> ON THE PUBLIC HEARING? >> YES. >> WHETHER OR NOT -- >> JUST CLARIFYING FROM WHA YOU
HAD SAID EARLIER THAT IF THIS BODY, THERE'S NOTHING STOPPING THIS BODY FROM DISCUSSING AND VOTING ON THAT -- >> NO, I WAS SAYING THAT I DON'T FEEL LIKE THAT I PLAY A FACTOR ON WHETHER OR NOT THIS BODY HAS A PUBLIC HEARING OR NOT.
I THINK THAT YOU HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEY TO GIVE YOU LEGAL ADVICE ON WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S POSSIBLE. MY ONLY COMMENT WAS JUST THAT I DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THAT WAS MY PLACE. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. AND I'LL JUST ADD WHEN YOU KNOW
ABOUT THE TIMELINE OR WHEN WE CAN GET THAT INFORMATION, THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE SO THAT WE CAN START TO GENERATE THAT INFORMATION. IT WOULD BE NICE TO HEAR FROM ALL INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONERS WHAT THEY THINK AND IT'S A GOOD TIME FOR EVERYONEINDIVIDUALLY. I PREFER THAT THAN HAVING TO COME AS A BODY AND A COMMISSION
SO EVERYONE CAN SAY WHAT THEY WANT TO SAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> COULD I JUST ASK ONE I GUESS IT'S A THNICAL QUESTION. WHEN IS THE CHIEF'S CONTRACT UP? WHAT IS THE LAST DAY?
>> I AM SO SORRY - CHAIR. >> CAN WE JUST GET IT IN AN EMAIL OR SOMETHING? I'M JUST CURIOUS. >> I WILL HAVE TO FIND OUT, I THINK HE SIGNED A FOUR YEAR CONTRACT. >> I DO BELIEVE YES THAT IS PUBLIC INFORMATION THAT WE CAN
FIGURE OUT. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. >> THANK YOU. >> WE'LL RECEIVE AND FILE THAT REPORT AS WELL. NEXT UP WE HAVE NEW BUSINESS AND WE HAVE TWO ITEMS. WE HAVE A PRESENTATION ON THE TIMELINE FOR A POLICY FEEDBACK SUBMISSION. WE HAVE 15 MINUTES FOR THIS ITEM.
ATTACHED YOU'LL FIND A ONE PAGER OUTLINING ALL OF THE RELEVANT TIMELINES FOR POLICY FEEDBACK AS PRESENTED AT THE PPRR MEETING IN FEBRUARY. I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE USEFUL TO EMPHASIZE A TIMELINE AT THIS MEETING.
I'LL INVITE STAFF TO BRUINTRODU THEMSELVES AND START THAT ESENTATION. >> SAMANTHA ALSO CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. >> AND A QUICK THANKS. I KNOW WE SPOKE ABOUT IT A BIT AT THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETI.
BUT THANK YOU TO OPCR WHO MADE IT. OPCR WAS THE ENTITY TO THE DEPARTMENT THAT MADE IT SO THANKS TO THEM FOR THAT. WE THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNE TIME TO SPEAK DIRECTLY KIND OF TO CLEAR CONFUSION UP SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE TIMELINE
PROCESS, THE FEEDBACK PROCESS, AND SO WITH ALL OF THOSE THAT ARE OUT THERE, OPCR WENT AHEAD AND DRAFTED THIS DOCUMENT TO PUT EVERYTHING, COMPILE EVETHING INTO ONE PLACE. AND SO KIND OF JUST GIVING YOU ALL A REFRESHER AND TO NOTE AS WELL SO NOTHING ON THIS, I
BELIEVE IT'S PROBABLY IN THE LAST PAGE OF YOUR DOCUMENTS. BUT NONE OF THIS IS NEW. SO THIS IS ALL NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE THESE DEADLINES H. SO AGAIN THIS IS JUST KIND OF A REFRESHER. I WILL PULL IT UP HERE ON MY
END. I'M GOING TO SKIP AHEAD A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I THINK BULLET POINT NUMBER TWO IS A BIT EASIER. AND SO THIS SPECIFICALLY IS THE 45 DAY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT REQUIRED DEADLINE.
AND SO MPD HAS A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT REQUIRED. SO THAT'S WITHIN PARAGRAPHS 27 AND 28. DEADLINE OR TIMELINE FOR COMMUNITY TO SOLICIT COMMUNITY FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY BROAY.
THOSE ARE FOR SPECIFIC SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT CALLED OUT POLICIES. SO THOSE ARE I THINK FOR YOUR EASE OF USE, KIND OF OUR MISSION, VISION, VALUES,ND GOALS ARE USE OF FORCE,
NONDISCRIMINATORY POLICING, AND STOP AND ARREST. THOS ARE POLICIES IN THOSE LARGE BUCKETS THAT THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT CALLS OUT FOR THAT 45 DAY POLICY TIMELINE. TO MOVE ON TO BULLE POINT NUMBER ONE, SO THEN AS I THINK COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD ALSO NOTED AS WELL, THANK YOU FOR
THAT, IT WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR US. R THOSE POLICIES THAT ARE NOT CALLED OUT IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, S THOSE THAT ARE NOT IN THOSE FOUR LARGE BUCKETS, MPD IN THE INTEREST OF ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY, AND UNDERSTANDING THE ADVANTAGE OF COMMUNITY FEEDBACK HAS ONED THAT UP BROADLY TO ALL OF THE
POLICIES THAT THEY'RE REVIEWING. AND SO IF YOU LOOK ON THE POLICE WEBSITE NOW FOR THE POLICY WEBSITE, YOU'LL SEE SPECIFIC AREAS THAT DON'T TOUCH THESE FOUR. SO THEY'RE KIND OF KEEPING THAT OPEN TO POLICIES BROADLY. SO THAT SPEAKS SPECIFICALLY TO
THE DEADLINE. SO THEY PACIFIC 30 DAYS SO FAR HAS BEEN THE GENERAL USE. BUT THERE IS N SPECIFIC DEADLINE REQUIREMENT THAT MPD HAS TO FOLLOW IN REGARDS TO THOSE POLICIES. THEY ARE DOING SO AND HAVE CHOSEN TO DO SO BECAUSE OF THE
ADVANTAGE OF SEEKING PUBLIC INPUT. SO WHEN YOU SEE THE POLICIES, OKAY WHY ISN'T THIS 45 DAYS, THEY'RE PROBABLY POLICIES THAT DO NOT FIT WITHIN THOSE. I'LL PASS IT OVER TO MY
COLLEAE, SAM. >> SO JAMESON TOUCHED ON THOSE FIRST TWO WHICH ARE FEEDBACK TO MPD. THE THIRD AND FINAL FEEDBACK TO MPD CATEGORY IS TS LAST ONE, NUMBER FOUR, WHICH IS THE ANYTIME NO DEADLINE. SO THAT'S THE ONE TT'S BEEN REFERENCED A COUPLE OF TIMES
TODAY. SO THIS HAS BEEN IN EMAILS TO THE COMMUNITY, EMAILS TO ALL OF YOU. AND IT'S ESSENTIALLY MPD SAYING LOOK, WE WOULD REALLY LOVE YOU TO HIT ALL OF THESE DEADLINES BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN WE CAN GET IT DONE RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW. WE'RE NOT GOING TO JUST TAKE THIS FEEDBACK AND THROW IT TO THE WIND IF WE DON'T GET IT
WITHIN THAT TIMELINE. THEY'RE COMMITTED TO WHE YOU DON'T SEND THEM FEEDBACK, IF THEY DON'T GET IT IN TIME FOR THIS IMMEDIATE REVIEW, AS YOU MAY KNOW IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THERE'S AN AREA THAT TALKS ABOUT THERE'S AN ANNUAL REVIEW THAT'S CONDUCTED ON THESE POLICIES THAT ARE CONTINUOUSLY REVIEWED OVER AND OVER TO MAKE SURE THAT FEEDBACK IS BROUGHT IN.
SO MPD HAS COMMITTED AND THEIR LANGUAGE WAS THAT THEY ARE COMMITTED TO REVISITING FEEDBACK AT A LATER DATE TO ENSURE ALL V. BOTTOM LINE, THAT FEEDBACK IS GOING TO BE READ, IT'S GOING TO BE INPUT AND A PART OF THAT VERY NEXT REVIEW THAT'S DONE OF THE POLICY. SO THAT IS THE ANYTIME.
SO THEN THE FINAL ONE, CATEGORY NUMBER FOUR OR EXCUSE ME CATEGORY NUMBER THREE ABOUT THE 120 DAYS, SO THAT'S THE SEPARATE ONE, RIGHT. SO JAMESON RSED THE FIRST TWO, AND THEN MINE WAS THE THIRD. THAT'S ABOUT POLICY FEEDBACK TO MPD. THE FOURTH AND FINAL ONE IS POLICY FEEDBACK OR EXCUSE ME,
POLICY ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THIS BOD TO THE PUBLIC. SO DIFFERENT AUDIENCE HAPPENING THE. AND SO THAT IS ABOUT AS YOU MAY KNOW, YOUR ORDINANCE. SO THAT'S TALKING ABOUT THE 120 DAYS FROM THE TIME OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE, THEN YOU ALL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, LOOK AT
THOSE POLICIES, TALK ABOUT IT, ANALYZE IT, RECOMMEND IT AS YOU SEE FIT AND TURN THAT OUT TO THE PUBLIC. SO THAT IS NOT A TOMPD. WE'RE GOING THE OTHER CORRECTION THERE, THAT'S A TO THE PUBLIC CATEGORY FROM YOU ALL. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHAT THIS GRAPHIC HAS BEEN MADE.
SO AGA OUR THANKS TO OPCR FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER FOR US. BUT THAT'S KIND OF OUR HOPE THAT WE CAN PROVIDE A LITTLE CLARITY ON THAT FOR YOU. >> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. IN LIGHT OF THAT, I'D LIKE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE
PO CALENDAR BECAUSE THIS IS VERY HELPFUL INFORMATION REGARDING THE TIMELINES. WOULD COMMISSIONERS BE OKAY WITH THAT? COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> YES, I DID HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT THE TIMELINE. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE WHAT COMMISSIONER OLSEN AND
COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD SAID EARLIER ABOUT WHEN I BROUGHT UP THAT IT'S THE STATE JUDGE THAT ACTUALLY PASSES OFF ON THIS. HER NAME IS NOWHERE SEEN ON THIS IN HER AUTHITY. SO I THINK IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO SAY THAT
EN IF FEEDBACK COMES IN AFTER SOME OF THESE TIMELINES IT WILL BE CONSIDERED AND HOW THAT IS GOING TO BE CONSIDERED AND I THINK IT WAS REALLYMPORTANT WHAT COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD SAID THAT THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT REQUIRES REPEATED REVIEW. I THINK WE NEED TO SEE THAT
PARAGRAPH NUMBER. SO I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. I THINK THAT'S HARD TO GRASP ABOUT THIS I THAT THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT HAS A DEFINED LIST OF POLICIES, NOT EVERY POLICY THAT'S IN THE
POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL IS COVERED BY THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. BUT CONVERSELY, ALMOST EVERY POLICY THAT IS COVED BY THE POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL WOULD BE COVERED BY THE 120
DAYS. SO WE HAVE A PURVIEW THAT ANYTHING THAT'S IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT. SO THE 45 DAYS, WHAT IT COVERS IS ALSO WHAT THE 120 DAYS COVERS, RIGHT? SO I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE
SOMETHING THAT CLEAR. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE WORD COURTESY COMES IN, AND I'M CONFUSED IN NUMBER ONE, WHAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF A COURTESY POLICY THAT APPARENTLY DOESN'T HAV TO COME UNDER EITHER ONE OF THESE THAT HAS BEEN PUT OUT FOR REVIEW.
OR ANOTHER WAY OF PUTTING THAT IS IS THERE AN EXAMPLEF A POLICY THAT HAS BEEN PUT OUT THAT'S BEEN DONE AS A COURTESY THAT DOESN'T FALL UNDER THE5 DAYS, DOES NOT FALL UNDER THE 120 DAYS? I FIND THIS TO BE KIND OF CONFUSING.
AND I THINK WE NEED TO KIND OF CLARIFY, THIS WD COURTESY REALLY JUMPS OUT AT ME. I DON'T SEE IT ANYERE IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. MAYBE I'VE MISSED IT AND I APOLOGIZE IF I HAVE. WHEN YOU ADD SOMETHING LIKE THAT INTO THE MIX, AND I CAN'T FIND A
DEFINITION FOR IT, AND THEN WE DON'T HAVE HOW ALL OF THIS FITS IN WITH THE ROUTINE REGULAR REVIEW AND THE FEEDBACK AND THE TIMELINE AND THE JUDGE, I THINK WE'RE PAINTING AN INCOMPLETE PICTURE. TO ME THIS IS O PAGE OF WHAT SHOULD BE ALMOST LIKE A THREE PAGE TYPE OF DOCUMENT. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY, THINK
THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDED. I DO GET AND I'LL USE IT AGAIN, THIS IS LIKE HERDING CATS, IT'S NOT AN EASY CONCEPT TO PUT THIS ALL TOGETHER.BUT I THINK WE NEE FEW MORE CATS IO THIS. >> WOULD IT BE EASIER TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, WHEN Y HAVE
POLICY REVIEW, AT WHAT POINT AND HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE FOR THE JUDGE TO GET TO IT? ARE WE TALKING IN MONTHS, WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? BECAUSE YOU HEAR THE TIMELINE THE JUDGE, YOU CAN COME THE NEXT
TIME, DO U HAVE AN IDEA OF HOW LONG THAT TAKES? >> JUST SO I CAN CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS HERE, SO CATCH ME IF I'M MISSING ANYTHING.FIRS SIGNING OFF ON EVERY SINGLE POLICY THAT'S COMING IN. THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY HOW THE PROCESS IS LAID OUT.
SO ONN ANNUAL REVIEW, MPD OR EVEN RIGHT NOW, MPD IS REVIEWING POLICIESND THEY'RE GETTING FEEDBACK ON THAT. AND THEY'RE TALKING TO MDHR AND THEY'RE TALKING TO ALEF AND THEY COME UP WITH THIS FINAL POLICY. AND THEN THE POLICY GOES INTO EFFECT. SO THERE'S NOT A STEP WHERE WE'RE THEN ALSO TAKING THE MDHR
FEEDBACK, THE ALEFA FEEDBACK, THE CITY PEOPLE EDBACK, CCPO FEEDBACK, ET CETERA, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO THE JUDGE AND WE'RE SING CAN WE MAKE THIS A POLICY AND THE JUDGE IS SAYING YES AND THEN WE'RE MAKING IT A POLICY. THE JUDGE IS PRIMARILY, SO THIS IS A SIGNED AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE PARTIES. THE JUDGE IS FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM BABYSITTING. SHE IS MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE CATCHING EVERYTHING THE WAY THAT WE NEED TO BE DOING IT, THAT WHEN WE'RE FINDING SOMETHING COMPLIANT, THE JUDGE IS REVIEWING IF IT IS OR IS NOT
COMPLIANT, BUT THEUDGE IS NOT INVOLVED IN EACH MINUTE PIECE GOING FORWARD. SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE POLICIES GOING FROM DAY-TO-DAY OR YEAR TO YEAR, THE JUDGE IS NOT READING EVERY WORD OF EVERY POLICY AND SIGNING OFF AND SAYING THAT EVERY SINGLE POLICY I THE JUDGE FIND COMPLIANT. THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY HOW THE
PROCESS IS WORKING. AND THEN SORRY, GO AHEAD. >> DOES ALEFA KIND OF HAVE THAT ROLE? >> YEAH, AND I'M HAPPY TO GRAB THESE PARAGRAPHS AND GIVE THEM TO YOU AS WELL. I KNOW IT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION. BUT YES, ALEFA IS IN THE
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND IN THE HOPEFULLY FORTHCOMING CONSENT DECREE AS WELL, THEIR ROLE IS AS IT STATES IN THERE, THE APPROVAL ROLE. >> SO ESSENTIALLY FOR THE PUBL, IF ALEFA DETERMINES THAT MPD IS NOT FOLLOWING A POLICY BASED ON SOME RECOMMENDATION, THEY CAN GO TO THE JUDGE AND SAY THEY'RE NOT DOING SOMETHING.
THAT WOULD BE THE JUDGE'S ROLE IN THIS? >> SURE, THAT'S A GREAT EXAMPLE. I WANTED TO FOLLOW UPN YOUR SECOND QUESTION AS WELL. WHICH WAS JUST TO GO BACK FOR A SECOND AND BE CLEAR, SO THIS COURTESY THING, THAT'S COMING FROM ME JUST TO BE FAIR.
SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THE 45 CALENDAR DAYSS THAT HARD LINE. THAT'S WHERE WE'RE COMING THROUGH FROM THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT SAYING YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE AT LEAST 45 DAYS ON X, Y, Z CATEGORIES. THESE HAVE TO BE REVIEWED BY THE PUBLIC IN AT LEAST 45 DAYS WORTH
OF TIME THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW THEM. IF THAT POLIC IS NOT OUTLINED IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AS THESE MUST HAVE 45 DAYS, TECHNICALLY SPEAKING UNDER THE SETTLEMENT AGREENT, MPD DOES NOT HAVE TO PUBLICIZE THEM. THEY ARE NEVERTHELESS CHOOSING
TO PUBLICIZE ALL OF THEM AS A COURTESY. SO THAT'S WHERE I CAME UP WITH AT WORD, I'M HAPPY TO USE A DIFFERENT WORD INSTEAD. BUT THEY'RE TRYING TO GET THEM OUT IN THE INTEREST OF TRANSPARENCY SO THAT PEOPLE CAN STILL FEEDBACK EVEN THOUGHHEY ARE NOT REQUIRED TO GET FEEDBACK ON THOSE. SO RIGHT NOW, THAT'S PRIMARI
BEEN LIKE A 30 DAY BLOCK. BUT THEY WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE MORE AND HOPEFULLY IN THE FUTURE THAT'S THE CASE. RIGH NOW THEY'RE TRYING TO GET THEM OUT TO MAKE SURE LET'S GET FEEDBACK EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT MANDATED TO LET'S DO IT ANYWAYS.
THE 45 DAYS IS THE HARDLINE. AND THEN PLEASE ANYTIME SEND FEEDBA ON ANY POLICY, IT'S GOING TO BE REVIEWED AND PART OF THAT PROCESS WHEN THAT POLICY IS BROUGHT UP AGAIN. >> I SAW A HAND. COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD. >> THANK YOU.
EVERY TIME I SEE THIS OR HEAR IT I UNDERSTAND IT EVEN DEEPER. CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE ROOM WHERE IT HAPPENS. SO I REMEMBER YOU AND LIEUTENT ROBINSON TALKING ABOUT ALEFA AND
MPD AND IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, IN THE ROOM HASHING IT OUT. WHAT HAPPENS THEN, WHAT'S THE PROCESS BY WHICH IT BECOMES AN ACTION? >> SO I THINK LILY ACTUALLY HIGHLIGHTED A LITTLE EARLIER, BUT IT ALL STARTS WITH WKING MEETINGS. THESE ARE MPD POLICIES, SO MPD GETS TO LEAD THE TRAIN BECAUSE
THIS IS WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO. THEY SEEK LEGAL COUNSEL FROM THE CITY ATTOEY'S OFFICE. ALEFA HAS A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT ROLES IT CAN PLAY. SO THE ROLE TT WAS REFERENCED EARLIER TODAY, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, THAT'S REALLY USING ALEFA FOR EXAMPLE AS SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS TO SAY WHAT IS BEST PRACTICES IN THIS CITY OR
THIS DEPARTMENT OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE. SO THEY WILL GIVE INPUT THERE. AND THEN THE SAME THI WITH MDHR ALSO SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS GIVING GOOD ASSISTANCE. SO THEN THERE'S A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT KINDS OF INFORMAL AND FORMAL, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THEM, WORKING MEETINGS WHERE MPD IS TRYING TO GET THOSE
POLICIES GOING, GET THEM INTO A FINAL PLACE. AND WHEN THEY THINK THEY'VE GOT A FINAL DRAFT, THEY'RE PUBLISHING AND SAYING MORE, GIVE US FEEDBACK, LET US FIGURE THIS OUT. FROM THERE, THAT'S WHERE THEY'RE MOVING FORWARD AGAIN, TAKING THAT FEEDBACK, INCORPORATING IT ONCE AGAIN.
I TOLD COMMISSIONER BASTICK RECENTLY THAT SHE FOUND A MISSING S, A WORD WAS MEANT TO BE PLURAL AND THAT'S ALREADY IN THE. SO THEY'RE INCORPORATING IT RIGHT AWAY, TRYING TO GET THAT FEEDBACK BUILT IN. AND IT SLOWLY BUT SURELY WORKS ITS WAY INTO THE FINAL
SUBMISSION PROCESS WHICH IS ALSO OUTLINED IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. WHICH IS THE CITY ESSENTIALLY SENDING TO ALEFA SAYING WE HAVE A FINAL DRAFT BASED ON ALL OF THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, MPD, ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT PEOPLE HAVE LOOKED AT IT, THIS IS THE DRAFT
WE'VE GOT, HERE YOU GO. FINAL FORMAL COMPLIANT SUBMISSION, AND THEN ALEFA WILL DETERMINE THEIR LEVEL OF COMPLIANCE FROM THAT. AND THEY MIGHT COME BACK AND SAY GOODO GO, OR THEY MIGHT SAY YOU'VE GOT A COUPLE MORE. >> THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL AND THAT'S ANNUAL?
WITH ALEFA, THAT CHECK IS ANNUAL? >> THAT'S ALL THE TIME RIGHT NOW. >> ALL T TIME. SORRY, THAT MAKES ME WONDER THOUGH THEN IT MAKES MOST SENSE FOR US TO BE REVIEWING THE POLICIES THAT ARE RED LINED OR BLACK LINED THAT ARE POSTED ON
THE WEBSITE AS DRAFT; IS THAT RIGHT? >> SURE,YES. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. I WOULD PRIORITIZE OBVIOUSLY THE 45 DAY HARDLINE ONES FIRST BECAUSE THOSE HAVE DEADLINES MANDATED UNDER THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. >> IF WE CAN GET A MOTION TO
EXTEND JUST TO GET THIS AND THE CALENDAR CONVERSATION IN. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND FOR FIVE MINUTES. >> SECOND. >> ALL RIGHT, DISCUSSION? CLERK CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. >> COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD. >> YES. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH-KOOIMA >> YES. >> COMMISSIONER BASTICK. >> YES.
>> COMMISSIONER STEWART IS ABSENT. COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> YE >> COMMISSIONER CANADAY. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS-JOHNSON. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR OLSEN. >> YES. >> CHAIR REEVES. >> YES. >> THERE ARE NE AYES. >> COMMISSIONER --
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKENE OBSERVATION AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M GETTING IT WRONG. BUT THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT, OUR POLICY REVIEW ROLE IN THE ORDINANCE PREDATES THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. THAT WAS DEVISED BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT HAPPENED
AND IN SOME SENSES, THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTSUPERCEDES WHATEVER IS IN THE ORDINANCE. AND GIVEN THAT, YOU CAN TELL ME HOW ACCURATE THAT IS, BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY OUR EXPERIENCE ON THIS POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE HAS
BEEN REALLY ENCOURAGING AND ENLIGHTENING BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST EVERYBODY IN THE IMPLEMENTATION TEAM HAS BEEN SHOWING AND HEARING OUR INPUT. I TOTALLY GET THE SENSE THAT THE
IMPLEMENTATION TEAM WHETHER IT ENCOMPASSES ALEFA OR EVERYBODY ELSE REALLY WANTS TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC AND FROM US AND I GET THE SENSE THAT YOU'RE VALUING OUR INPUT, AND I FIND THAT REALLY ENCOURAGING, AND I AM
HAPPY WITH THE PROCESS AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON IT. >> SORRY ABOUT THAT. JUST TO ANSWER YOUR BRIEF QUESTION, YES. SO THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT CAME AFTE THE ORDINANCE, BUT IF YOU
HAVE MORE QUESTIONS, WE CAN TALK ABOUT CONFLICTS. I AM NOT IDENTIFYING ANY RIGHT NOW. BUT WHAT I'LL POINT YOU TOO SPECIFICALLY IS JULY 8TH OF 2024, JOEL SENT EXCUSE ME, ATTORNEYFUSSI SENT ALL OF YOU AN EMAIL GOING IN HEAVY DETAIL
ABOUT HOW THIS WORKS AND HOW INGS ARE OUTLINED AND WHAT TAKES PRECEDENT, BUT YES, YOU'RE EXTLY CORRECT AND YES, WE DO VALUE AND READ ALL OF YOUR FEEDBACK. MPD IS VERY IN TUNE WITH THAT. >> THANK YOU.
>> SO I JUST WANT TO ASK A VERY CLEAR QUESTION. IS IT THE POSITION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE THAT THE 120 DAY REVIEW IN THE CCP ORDINANCE IS NO LONGERN EFFECT BECAUSE IT'S PREEMPTED BY THE 45 DAYS IN
THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT? >> NOT AT ALL. 120 DAYS IS FULLY IN EFFECT AND AGAIN THE 120 DAYS IS NOT ABOUT FEEDBACK TO MPD. THE 120 DAYSS ABOUT THE CCPO GIVING ITS REVIEW AN ANALYSIS
TO THE PUBLIC.>> SO THERE'S NO ISSUE? 120 DAYS IS IN EFFECT? >> YEAH, NOT AT ALL. 120 DAYS IS IN EFFECT AND AGAIN THAT'S ABOUT YOU GS SPEAKING TO THE PUBLIC AS OPPOSED TO YOU GUYS PROVIDING FEEDBACK TO MPD.
NOT TOUCHED BY THAT. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BASTICK. >> ATTORNEY FUSSI, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE A COPY OF THAT MEMO THAT YOU JUST REFERENCED. I THINK THAT WOULD BE SUPER USEFUL. THAT WAS BEFORE MY TIME AND WE ALSO HAVE SOME OTHER NEWER
COMMISSIONERS, I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A GREAT RESEND IF YOU ARE ABLE TO DO AT, PLEASE. >> I WILL DO SO, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD. >> YES. I'M WONDERING HOPEFULLY THIS WILL PUT TO REST OUR CONFUSION ABOUT THE TIMELINES. THE 120 DAYS, I THINK WHAT IS STILL CONFUSING ABOUT THAT IS
FROM WHEN? THERE'S NO START DATE. SO THE START DATE IS EVERY TIME THE POLICY GETS POSTED IN DRAFT FORM. BUT WE DON'T KNOW TSE DATES AHEAD OF TIME. WE AREN'T ABLE TO CALENDAR THAT OUT. SO I THINK WE JUST DO IT AS REGULARLY AS WE CAN AND WE
PROVIDE THE PUBLIC OUR FEEDBACK AND WELCOME THAT AT ANYTIME. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT 120 DAY NUMBER NEEDS TO MEAN A WHOLE LOT TO US GOING FORWARD. I WOULD BE CURIOUS IF ANYONE DISAGREES. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH.
>> I'M TRYING TO LISTEN AS CAREFULLY AS I CAN, AND I'VE READ ALL OF THIS STUFF A MILLION TIMES. AND I PRACTICED LAW FOR 36 YEARS. I'M STILL CONFUSED. BECAUSE TO ME THE POINT OF THE ORDINANCE IS NOT SIMPLY FOR THE COMMISSION TO ISSUE A REPORT TO
THE PUBLIC. THE POINT OF THAT IS FOR THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT THE COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED POLICIES, AND IS CONTRIBUTING IN ENGAGING THE PUBLIC IN THE
REVIEW SO THAT MPD CAN CONSIDER THEM TO BE ADOPTED. IF ALL WE'RE DOING IS SENDING OUT A REPORT TO THE PUBLIC AND THAT'S IT THEN WE'RE NOT VERY RELEVANT. SO I'M HOPING THAT IN PRACTICE WE HAVE EVOLVED TO THE POINT
WHERE WE'RE FITTING WITH THE 45 DAYS AND WE'RE SHOWING THE PUBLIC HOW WE'RE REVIEWING POLICIES, WRE ENGAGING THE PUBLIC IN THAT PROCESS. AND OVER TIME, 120 DAYS DSN'T
MATTER TOO MUCH BECAUSE WE'RE ON A REALLY REGULAR BASIS REVIEWING POLICIES, DOING THE WORK AS COMMISSION MEMBERS TO DO THAT. PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ENGAGE WITH US AT THE
COMMITTEE LEVEL, REFINING OUR COMMENTS AND WE SEE THEM GET IMPLEMENTED OR ADOPTED AND CONSIDERED AND THAT'S WHAT REALLY COUNTS. THANK YOU. >> I'LL JUST SAY MY APOLOGIES FOR BEING CONFUSING.
THE 120 DAYS I'M JUST MENTIONING ONLY BECAUSE IT'S A NUMBER. BUT ABSOLUTELY, POLICY FEEDBACK IS ALSO A PART OF YOUR ROLE THAT'S ENVISIONED UNDER YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES IN SECTION I. SO THAT IS ABSOLUTELY A PART OF
YOUR ROLE. THE ONLY REASON I HIGHLIGHTED 120 ON HERE WHICH PERHAPS I CAN DO THAT DIFFERENTLY NEXT TIME WAS JUST TO CLARIFY WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THAT SPECIFICUMBER WAS. AND THAT IS A TO THE PUBLIC NUMBER AS OPPOSED TO A TO THE
MPD NUMBER WHICH WE WOULD ADVISE WOULD BE THE 45 DAYS OR LESS THAN 45 DAYS NUMBERS. >> AND QUICKLY COMMISSIONERS FOR THAT I THINK IT MIGHT BE RELEVANT FOR ANOTHER RESEND OF A MEMO, AND I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT HOW DO THESE POLICIES STAY
RELEVANT WITHIN THE 45 DAY PERIOD. AND I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY COMING UP AGAIN AROUND THE CALENDAR PROCESS. SO I KNOW CLERK CARL ALSO SENT OUT A MEMO SPECIFICALLY IN RELATING TO THESE POLICIES AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS YOU A PUT
FORWARD ARE RELEVANT. I'LL LEAVE THAT TO YOUR NEXT DISCUSSION AS WELL I BELIEVE THAT'S ON THE AGENDA. >> COULD I JUST QUICKLY ADD, I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD APOLOGIZE FOR USING THE WORD COURTESY, IT'S USEFUL. WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW IS IT'S NOT MANDATED BY THE 45 DAYS AND IT
WOULD BE HELPFUL TO MAYBE PUT IN A COUPLE OF CATEGORIES OF POLICIES THAT COVER THAT. I THINK GIVING EXAMPLES WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL. AND JT A QUICK DEFINITION OF WHAT THAT MEANS. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM AT ALL WITH IT. >> THANK YOU. SO WE HAVE EXPIRED TIME AGAIN.
I WANT TO GET TO THE CALENDAR DISCUSSION. SO IF WE COULD HAVE A MOTION TO DO FIVE MINUTES FOR THE CALENDAR. MOTION FOR FIVE MINUTES SOMEONE? >> SECOND. >> THANK YOU, MOTION AND SECOND. CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
I KNOW HE WANTS IT OFFICIALLY ON THE RECORD. [CHORUS OF AYES] >> THANK YO SO HAVING THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT THE CALENDAR, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT A COUPLE OF THINGS ONE THING I WOULD LIKE THE COMMISSIONERS TO CONSIDER IS
BECAUSE WHAVE A LOT OF CONVERSATION AROUND THE PUBLIC HEARING IN THE NEXT MONTH THAT OUR APRIL MEETING THAT WE CANCEL THE APRIL 7TH CCPO MEETING, THAT WE FOCUS ON THE PANELS ON THAT DAY, SO THAT APRIL 7TH I BELIEVE IS A MONDAY.
I BELIEVE IT'S A MONDAY, THAT WE WOULD DO PANELS ON THAT DATE. AND THEN THE COMMITTEES WOULD STILL MEET. THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND PPRR WOULD STILL MEET AND DO THEIR BUSINESS IN PREPARATION FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON MAY 13TH. BUT THAT WE CANCEL THE APRIL 7TH MEETING AND JUST DO PANELS.
AS YOU SAW ON THE REPORT, THERE ARE SEVERAL PANELS THAT ARE UP COMING DUE AND WE CAN GET THOSE DONE BECAUSE ALL COMMISSIONERS WILL BEVAILABLE ON THAT DATE FOR TWO AND A HALF, THREE HOURS OR WHATEVER IT IS, AND WE WANT EVERYONE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET THOSE PANELS DONE.
THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS. >> I TNK WE SHOULD BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT DUE ON OUR PLATE AND I THINK IT WOULD BE BETTER IF WE CANCEL THE APRIL 7TH MEETING SO WE CAN WORK ON OUR PANELS AND
THAT WAY WHEN IT COMES TO THE 13th, PEOPLE COME AT US, WE VE INFORMATION TO GIVE THEM. >> SO COMMISSIONER JOSON, WILL YOU FORMALLY MAKE THE MOTION? >> I MAKE THE MOTION OR WHATEVER WE HAVE TO SAY. >> THE MOTN TO CANCEL THE
APRIL 7TH MEETING. >> YEAH, I MOTION TO CANCEL THE APRIL 7TH MEETING. >> THANK YOU. AND I HEARD A SECOND. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DCUSSION FOR THAT? COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> I APPRECIATE THE FOCUS ON THE PANELS AND GETTING TO THE CASES. I OPPOSE THIS.
I THINK WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO WALK AND CHEW GUM. WE MEET ONCE A MONTH. WE ARE PUTTING ON THIS AGENDA TEN MINUTES TO DISCUSS THE VARIOUS PARTS OF THE AGENDA. WE BARELY HAVE TIME TO SQUEEZE THAT IN. WE ARE THE ONLY ENTITY IN THE
CITY THAT ALLOWS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE POLICE OVERSIGHT. AND I THINK IF WE TAKE THA AWAY FROM PEOPLE AND WE TAKE AWAY THE FACT THAT WE'RE KEEPING UP WITH THIN, HOW ARE WE GOING TO CONVINCE PEOPLE TO JOIN THIS CO
WORK DONE AND ALSO DO IT IN A WAY THAT ALLOWS FOR US TO REVIEW THINGS THOROUGHLY AND DO THE REVIEW PANELS? I JUST FIND THE NOTION -- WE CANCELED THE DECEMBER MEETING TO HAVE A TRAINING, NOWE'RE CANCELING THE APRIL MEETING SO
THAT WE CAN DO REVIEW PANELS. I THINK IT SENDS THE ABSOLUTE WRONG MESSAGE TO THE PUBL. AND IF WE CAN'T DO BOTH OF THESE THINGS THEN WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT AN ENTIRE RESTRUCTURING OF WHAT WE'RE DOING. >> CMISSIONER SMITH-KOOIMAN.
>> I WOULD JUST MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT ONE, THERE IS AN ENTIRE RESTRUCTURING THAT'S HAPPENING. THERE'S A NEW CONSENT DECREE THAT'S BEING IMPLEMENTED RIGHT NOW. AND THIS COMMITTEE IS UNDERGOING A LOT OF CHANGE AT THE MOMENT. WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF AN APPLICATION SESSION WHERE A LOT OF THINGS ARE HAPPENING.
BUTHEN TWO, DISCLAIMER MY DAY JOB, I WORK AROUND PEOPLE WHO ARE ON COMMITTEES ALL THE TIME. THEY CANCEL THINGS IN ORDER TO MAKE TIME FOR OTHER THINGS. I DON'THINK IT'S OUT OF THE NORM FOR ONE MEETING TO GET CANCELED TO DO OTHER NECESSARY WORK THAT IS BACKLOGGED AS WE
HAVE MANY, MANY, MANY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT. SO I SUPPORT THE MOTION IF IT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO GET THESE REVIEW CASES THAT ARE ON THE BACKLOG OUT AND THE INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC THAT WE CAN THEN SHARE MORE EFFECTIVELY. SOMETIMES I'M IN THESE MEETINGS AND I'M LIKE WHAT ARE WE
ACTUALLY SHARING OUT IF WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY HAVING THE WORK DONE. SO TT'S WHAT I WOULD S♪AY. THERE'S A LOT HAPPENING RIGHT NOW AND I THINK WE NEED TO GIVE GRACEO THE FACT THAT THIS COMMITTEE HAS UNDERGONE MANY, MANY CHANGES INHE LITTLE OVER A YEAR THAT IT'S EXISTED.
>> ANY OTH DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE MOTION FOR APRIL 7TH MEETI TO BE CANCELED AND PANELS TO BE DONE THAT DAY. THANK YOU? >> DID WE GET A SECOND? >> WE DID GET A SECOND. THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER SMH-KOOIMAN.
>> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER BASTICK. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER STEWART IS ABSENT. COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> NO. >> COMMISSIONER CANADAY. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS-JOHNSON. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR OLSEN. >> YES. >> CHAIR REEVES. >> YES.
>> THERE ARE EIGHT AYES AND ONE NAYS. >> COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD, WT DID YOU WANT IN TERMS OF THE CALENDAR? I WANTED TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE POLICY AND THE DAT YOU BROUGHT UP. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I DID JUST WANT TO ANNOUNCE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE MOVING THE PPRR MEETINGS A WEEK LATER THAN
THEY ARE IN THE CURRENT CALENDAR. JUST WANTED PEOPLE TO BE AWARE, WE'LL GET A NEW CALENDAR AND ALL OF THAT, BUT I DIDN'T WANT THAT TO SOUND LIKE IT HAD BEEN DONE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, BECAUSE IT ISN'T. ANY OF THE PPRR COMMITTEE MEMBERS HERE, I'M HOPING THAT WE CAN GET COPIES OF THE POLICIES
TO REVIEW FOR THAT NEXT MEETING TONIGHT. SO DON'T LEAVE. >> WOULD YOU MIND STATING THE DATE -- >> TWO OF US ARE KIND OF CONFUSED. >> MADAM CHR, I'M JUST GOING TO REMIND FOLKS THE CALENDAR WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE, WE DON'T GET TO JUST ANNOUNCE THAT WE'RE
CHANGING THE DATE. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE IF YOU COULD SAY THE DATE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MOVING IT TO. >> I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW HOW DO WE SET THE DATES FOR THE COMMITTEES? >> THERE HAS TO BE A NEW CALENDAR ADOPTED BY THE WHOLE
BODY. CHAIRS OF COMMITTEES DON'T GET TO JUST CHANGE THE DES OF THE MEETINGS THAT WERE ADOPTED BE I THIS BODY. SO IF YOU WANT TO PROPOSE THAT YOU CHANGE EITHER THAT INDIVIDUAL MEETING OR YOU WANT TO MAKE A PROPOSAL FOR A DIFFERENT CALENDAR, THAT HAS TO COME BACK TO THIS BODY TO BE
NSIDERED AND APPROVED. >> EXCELLENT, MAY I MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE THE PPRR MEETINGS BECAUSE THE TIMELINE RIGHT NOW FOR US IS TOO TIGHT TO GET THE STUFF BACK TO THE NEXT COMMITTEE AND TO WRITE THE NOTES REALLY QUICKLY. SO WE DISCUSSED THAT AT OUR LAST MEETING.
I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT I HAD THAT'S MY MOTION. >> CAN YOU CLARIFY THE MOTION TO SAY IT'S NOT THE FIRST MONDAY AFTER THE CCPO MEETING, BUT THE SECOND MEETING, CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT? >> THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. THE THIRD MONDAY OF THE MONTH.
>> THIRD MONDAY, THANK YOU. I'LL JUST SAY, IT'S NOT ALWAYS THE FIRST MONDAY OF THE MONTH FOR THE MEETINGS IN THE CALENDAR. SO CAN WE CLARIFY THAT YOU WANT IT THE SECOND WEEK AFTER THE CCPO MEETING -- >> TWO WEEKS AFTER THE MEETING. >> THERE'S A COUPLE OF MEETINGS THIS YEAR THAT IT'S THE SECOND
WEEK. SO TWO WEEKS AFTER THE CCPO MEETING SHE WOULD LIKE TO DO IT -- >> POINT OF INFORMATION VERY QUICKLY. AND IT'S DIRECTED TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO PROPOSE FOR A NEXT AGENDA OR IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN VOTE ON TONIGHT TO MOVE IT? >> IT'S ON THE AGENDA.
>> YOU CAN CERTAINLYO THIS TONIGHT, BUT YOU'VE PROPOSED MOVING THE POLICY RESEARCH COMMITE MEETING TO BE THE SAME TIME THAT THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT COMMITTEE IS NOW MOVING. YOU SAID MOVE PPRR BACK ONE WEEK, THAT'S WHEN THEY'RE SET.
NOT ALWAYS. THERE'S A WHOLE CALENDAR, THIS IS WHY THIS IS DIFFICULT TO DO ON THE F IS WHAT I'M SUGGESTING. IS THAT THERE'S A WHOLE SCHEDULE FOR A WHOLE YEA THAT WEDOPTED AND IT'S NOT AS EASY AS JUST WE
WANT TO MOVE TH, WE HAVE TO FIND A SPACE, PROVIDE THE NOTICE, SO APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I THINKF WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IS MOVE THIS ONE TIME, THAT'S FINE. BUT THIS BODY NEEDS TO CONSIDER AN ENTIRE CALENDAR IF WHAT YOU'REROPOSING TO DO IS CHANGE THE WHOLE CALENDAR.
WE ALSO KNOW THAT WE'RE TAKING OUT JANUARY AND FEBRUARY'S COMMENTS THAT YOU'RE ALREADY DONE WITH AT THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MEETING AT THEIR NEXT MEETING SO THEY ARE NOW STAGGERED TO ALWAYS BE BEHIND YOU. SO I DON'T THINK THERE IS THAT PRESSURE OF TURNING AROUND REPORTS IN A WEEK TO THAT GROUP
ANYMORE BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY NOW TWO MONTHS BEHIND WHERE YOU'RE GOING. SO YOUR NEXT MEETING, THEY WON'T TAKE UP UNTIL A MONTH FROM NOW. SO I THINK THERE IS BASED ON THAT WORK WE'VE DONE A STAGGERED EFFECT BETWEEN THEM. IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE
MEETINGS, WE SHOULD THINK HOLISTICALLY ABOUT WHAT THAT NEW CALENDAR LOOKS LIKE. >> WOULD YOU CONSIDER THEN AFTER HEARING THAT, JUST DOING ONE MEETING AND THEN HAVING THE CALENDAR COME UP ON THE NEXT ME? >> THAT'S FINE. WE NEED AT LEAST TWO WEEKS TO REVIEW THE POLICIES AND WE WILL GET THEM AT THE MEETING SO WE
WOULD LIKE TWO WEEKS TO REVIEW THEM, THAT'S WHAT WE DISCUSSED. THAT'S WHAT WE HAD DISCUSS A MONTH AGO SO HOPEFULLY WE WILL BE ABLE TO BRING THAT FORMALLY TO THE NEXT MEETING. BUT MARCH 17TH THEN IS THE MOTION THAT WE'LL HAVE OUR NEXT PPRR MEETING THEN. >> SO THE MOTION JUST FOR ONE
MEETING CHANGED FOR MARCH 17TH INSTEAD OF MARCH 10TH. THANK YOU. SO THE MOTION IS TO CHANGE THE MARCH 10TH PPRR WORK GROUP, SUB SUBCOMMITTEE GROUP TO MARCH 17TH.
SECOND. >> BEEN MOTIONED AND SECONDED. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER BASTICK.
>> QUICKLY GOING BACK JUST LOGISTICALLY, HAVING UNDERSTOOD THAT OPCRRE THE ONES THAT ACTUALLY PUT TOGETHER THE REVIEW PANELS, WE VOTED TO NOT HAVE OUR APRIL MEETING AND INSTEAD DO PANELS WHICH I'M VERY SUPPORTIVE OF.
ARE OPCR COMPLETELY IN THE LOOP ON THIS AND ARE THEY READY TO REALLY, REALLY SLAM THAT OUT AND GET US ALL ORGANIZED SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT DAY? >> IILL SAY THAT NOW THAT WE HAVE A PANEL DATE FOR THREE HOURS POTENTIALLY AVAILABLE AND ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS AVAILABLE, THEY WILL MAKE IT
WORK. >> EXCELLENT. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. ALL RIGHT, SO THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR HAS BEEN MOTIONED AND SECONDED. NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. CLERK CARL PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER SCHANFIELD. >> YES. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH-KOOIN. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER BASTICK.
>> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER GURIAN-SHERMAN. >> NO. >> COMMISSIONER CANADAY. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS-JOHNSON. >> AYE. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR OLSEN. >> AYE. >> CHAIR REEVES. >> YES. >> THE ARE EIGHT AYES AND ONE NAY. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. I ASK THE CLERK TO RECEIVE AND
FILE THE PREVIOUS REPORT. AND NEXT WE HAVE AN UPDATE ON THE CITY'S CONSENT DECREE WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. I'LL ALLOCATE TEN MINUTES FOR THIS PRESENTATION AND HERE TO PROVIDE THE UPDATE IS OUR CITY ATTORNEY -- WELL I'M LOOKING
LIKE I DON'T SEE HER, BUT PLEASE WELCOME. >> HI, ASSISTANT STATE'S ATTORNEY AGAIN. GOODO SEE YOU. IT IS NOT GOING TO TAKE ME TEN MINUTES, THERE'S NOT MUCH TO UPDATE. ON FEBRUARY 18TH, THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ASKED FOR A 30 DAY STAY. ON FEBRUARY 19TH, THE COURT
GRANTED THAT STAY, A THAT STAY WILL EXPIRE ON MARCH 20TH. SO THAT IS WHAT I HAVE FOR YOU. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? >> NOT A QUESTION, I WAS TRYING TO FIND OUT HOW YOU CAN KEEP TRACK AS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WITH THIS.
AND I WAS TOLD IT WAS THROUGH THE PACER SYSTEM. AND I WONDER IF YOU COULD JUST EXPLAIN THAT AND HOW WE AS INDIVIDUALS CAN GET SIGNED UP. I THINK YOU CAN GET ALERTS ABOUT THE CASES OR AT LEAST YOU CAN PUT IT IN AND FIND OUT IF SOMETHING IS SCHEDULED.
MY UNDERSTDING THERE ARE AMICUS BRIEFS AND THERE ARE TWO MOTIONS BEFORE THE COURT. SO HOW DO PEOPLE KEEP INFORMED ABOUT THIS? >> THAT IS A GREAT QUESTION. SO THE PACER SYSTEM IS A WEBSITE THAT ATTORNEYS WHO PRACTICE IN THE FEDERAL COURT USE TO PUT THEIR DOCUMENTS ON THAT THE JUDGE CAN LOOK AT AND THEN THEY
CAN PUT THEIR DOCUMENTS ON. SO IT'S LITERALLY A VERY ARCHAIC LOOKING SQUARE BOX SYSTEM THAT DOCUMENTS ARE FILED ON. I HAVE TO USE A LOG IN, BUT I DO THINK THERE IS A COMMUNITY VERSION. I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT WAY THAT THAT WORKS.
BUT I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF WEBSITES THAT JUST COPY PASTE ON TO THEIRS THAT MAKE IT A PUBLIC SERVICE. I WILL FIND OUT THE ANSWER, I DON'T KNOW FOR SURE HOW THAT WORKS. >> I DO BELIEVE THERE IS PUBLIC ACCESS, I DO HAVE PUBLIC ACCESS -- >> COULD YOU SEND THAT OUT TO AL OF THE COMMISSIONERS?
>> YEAH, I WILL FIND THAT BECAUSE I'M NOT POSITIVE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.>> THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER BASTICK. >> THANK YOU, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. BUT ALSO CAN WE JUST ASK, I'D LIKE TO ASK, I DON'T NEED TO MAKE A MOTION, I'D JUST LIKE TO ASK THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE OR CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, I THINK THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE JUST KEEP US UP TO SPEED, THIS WHOLE BODY. JUST SEND OUT, I READ ABOUT THIS ON FACEBOOK OR SOMEWHERE, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHERE, BUT FOR SOMETHING THAT IS SO CRITICAL TO
OUR WORK, WE SHOULD ABSOLUTELY GET A LITTLE EMAIL, DEAR COMMISSIONERS, IT'SEEN BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, LOVE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. SOMETHING REALLY, REALLY SIMPLE JUST TO KEEP US IN THE LOOP. WE'RE ALL SUPER BUSY RUNNING AROUND AND I KNOW THAT THAT WOULD JUST MAKE IT A LOT EASIER
FOR US, IT WOULD FEEL VERY COURTEOUS AND VERY INCLUSIVE. I FEEL THAT YOU'VE HAD TO MAKE A PRESENTATION, WE'RE HERE RUNNING PRETTY LATE, AND WE COULD HAVE JUST GOTTEN AN EMAIL ON THIS AND SAVE AN AGENDA ITEM. I FE THAT WOULD BE SUPER USEFUL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> I DO SAY I WANT TO HEAR THE PUIC TO HEAR THAT PART ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE JUDGE, THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT IN THE PR. BUT I DO GET THE POINT, COMMISSIONER BASTICK. ANY OTHER -- NO. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT.
I'LL DIRECT THE CLERK TO RECEIVE AND FILE THAT. WITH THAT, WE'VE COMPLETED ALL ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA FOR THIS MEETING. WITHOUT ANY OBJECTION, THE COMMISSION STANDS ADJOURNED. HAVE A GOOD MEETING EVERYONE. R NEXT MEETING WILL BE IN MAY. TWO MEETINGS IN MAY, AND THAT WILL BE ON THE PUBLIC WEBSITE. BUT OUR PUBLIC HEARING IS
MAY 13TH. I DON'T HAVE THE DATE ON TOP OF HEAD FOR THE NEXT MAY CCPO MEETING. BUT TWO MEETINGS IN MAY, THANK
YOU.