[00:00:01]
[CALL TO ORDER]
TODAY IS APRIL 17TH, IS 3:00 PM THIS IS THE COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION MONTHLY REGULAR MEETING.[PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL]
WELCOMING YOU, UH, THAT ARE PRESENT.WE HAVE SEVERAL, UH, PEOPLE THAT, UH, SIGNED UP TO TALK, UH, PUBLICLY, UH, SPEAKING.
I'M NOT SURE IF, IF THEY'RE HERE, 'CAUSE MOST OF THEM, THEY SIGN UP ONLINE, SO WE'LL BE VERIFYING, UM, IF, UM, BRIANNA LEAN IS HERE.
OH, YEAH, THAT'S A GOOD POINT.
UH, FIRST WE'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE TO VERIFY QUORUM.
SO WHEN YOU HEAR YOUR NAME, PLEASE SAY, UH, I OR PRESENT.
CAN SEE IF YOU GET THEIR VOICE GOING, HE'S PRESENT.
TERRY, NOW TO TURN ON YOUR, YOUR CAMERA AND YOU HAVE A CHANCE.
SO, TERRY, UH, FLOOD IS PRESENT.
CELESTA WILLIAMS. WILLIAMS. LAURA CORTES FRANCO.
UM, AND I GUESS I, I, CHRISTOPHER, CAN YOU USE ONE OF THOSE PEN? YEAH.
DO YOU WANT SIT HERE? OKEY DOKEY.
SO, UM, WE'D LIKE TO START BY DOING OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS.
UM, I'D LIKE TO VERIFY IF THE, SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT SIGNED UP ARE HERE.
UH, WHAT ABOUT ROSE SANTINI? MORGANTON? YEAH.
SO WE'LL START REMINDER, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I'D LIKE TO START WITH HEARING FROM BRIANNA.
HI, MY NAME'S BRIANNA ARRADONDO.
AND, UM, I, I'M A TRANS, I'M A TRANS PERSON.
THERE'S SO MUCH TO SAY IN A LITTLE AMOUNT OF TIME.
AND, UM, UM, LIKE, WHERE'S ACCOUNTABILITY AT WHEN POLICE OFFICERS COMMIT CRIMES AND, UM, IT'S ALL CONNECTED WHERE POLICE OFFICERS AND DPS HAVE BEEN DOING TO STUDENTS.
HAS THEY HAVE BEEN DOING TO COMMUNITY MEMBERS? HAVE, HAVE THEY BEEN DOING WHAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING TO PRESS FILMERS, LIKE ME AND MY FRIEND RIGHT HERE? AND, UM, AND NOT ONLY THAT, BUT POLICE OFFICERS BEEN MURDERING BROWN AND BLACK PEOPLE.
THEY NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
YOUR COMMISSIONERS, RIGHT? ARE YOU HOLDING THE POLICE OFFICERS ACCOUNTABLE? THAT'S THE PE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WANTS TO SEE.
THEY WANT TO KNOW, ARE YOU HOLDING THESE POLICE OFFICERS ACCOUNTABLE? YES OR NO? THAT'S WHAT THE, THE COMMUNITY, US COMMUNITY MEMBERS, THE STUDENTS WANTS TO KNOW.
WE ARE, WE ARE MAKING A DEMAND.
THIS IS A DEMAND, NOT A, NOT A RECOMMENDATION, NOT A SUSPENSION.
NOT, YOU KNOW, FOR ONE OR TWO DAYS, LIKE LOCKIN OR FIVE DAYS.
WHERE'S, WHERE'S ACCOUNTABILITY FOR LOCKIN AS WELL? LIKE ACCOUNTABILITY.
ACCOUNTABILITY MEANS IN PRISON, IN JAIL.
THESE POLICE OFFICERS NEED TO BE IN JAIL FOR MURDERING BROWN AND BLACK PEOPLE SLAMMING DOWN.
A, A, A BROWN TRANS WOMAN ON SIXTH STREET LEDGER NEEDS TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR PUNCHING THESE MINORS ON SIXTH STREET LEDGER.
UM, LOCKIN, OFFICER GARCIA, YOU KNOW, SEAN GIO FOR SLAMMING INTO US, RAMMING INTO US WITH, UH, UM, INTO A POLICE.
SUV SEAN GIO FOR, WITH A PD SLAM INTO RAMM INTO ME AND MY FRIEND HERE.
WE, WE WERE, WE WERE DEFENDING A CAMP
[00:05:01]
BECAUSE CITY OF AUSTIN ALSO, IT'S ALL CONNECTED.WHAT THE POLICE HAVE BEEN DOING.
THEY'VE BEEN VIOLATING PEOPLE'S RIGHTS, UNHOUSED PEOPLE'S RIGHTS, FILLMORE'S RIGHTS, PRESS RIGHTS, STUDENTS AS WELL.
AND THEY'RE ALSO COLLABORATING WITH ICE, YOU KNOW, SAY FOR WHAT IT IS, Y'ALL, PEOPLE, THE POLICE OFFICERS ARE DENYING THAT, OH, WE'RE NOT WORKING WITH ICE.
THEY'RE ABSOLUTELY WORKING WITH ICE.
AND ALSO THERE'S ALSO A-L-G-B-T QUALITY OF LIFE COM COMMITTEE COM, YOU KNOW, AND THE POLICE OFFICERS LIED TO THEM SAYING THAT, OH, UH, THE, UM, THAT, UH, THAT THE INVESTIGATION WAS, WAS STILL ONGOING, BUT IT, THEY CLOSED IT WHEN OFFICER LOCKIN LIKE RESIGNED.
RESIGNATION IS NOT ACCOUNTABILITY.
WE ACCOUNTABILITY IS PUTTING 'EM IN PRISON, IN JAIL FOR, YOU KNOW, THESE POLICE OFFICERS, THEY'RE NOT YOUR FRIENDS.
THEY'RE, WE DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY.
THEY ACT LIKE THEY'RE YOUR FRIENDS.
THEY'RE NOT YOUR FRIENDS AT ALL.
WHETHER THEY'RE GAY OFFICERS, BROWN BLACK OFFICERS, THEY'RE A POLICE OFFICER FIRST.
THAT BADGE THAT WHAT GIVES THEM THAT BADGE? THEY MAKE 'EM LIKE, OH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE EXECUTIONER.
THEY'RE THE, THEY'LL, THEY'LL EXECUTE YOUR LIFE.
WHAT GIVES 'EM THE BADGE? THEY DON'T, THEY'RE NOT ABOVE THE LAW.
THEY NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS A VIOLATION OF COLOR OF LAW.
AND LIKE, IT'S JUST, YEAH, WE NEED, WE DEMAND.
WE PEOPLE, WE THE PEOPLE, WE THE COMMUNITY, WE DEMAND THESE OFFICERS BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, UH, HELD TO A HIGHER STANDARD.
THEY'RE NOT BEING HELD TO A HIGHER STANDARD AT ALL.
BECAUSE HELD TO BE ENTIRE STANDARD MEANS THAT THEY NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, UH, TO BE IN JAIL FOR WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN DOING.
AND STOP WORKING WITH ICE LEAVE.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS, THIS IS WHAT, UM, THIS IS THE PUBLIC RIGHT HERE.
WHAT, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT WE'RE SAYING.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE IS NOT SPEAKING, BUT, YOU KNOW.
I ONLY GIVE YOU THREE MINUTES THERE.
NEXT, UH, ROSA, CAN YOU TURN YOUR MIC ON, PLEASE? HI.
WE'LL MOVE TO THE NEXT, UH, VOICE OF AUSTIN.
I'M JULIAN REYES WITH THE CHALLENGER STREET NEWSPAPER.
I GUESS I'M THE VOICE OF AUSTIN.
'CAUSE I TELL MORE REAL NEWS THAN YOU PROBABLY ACTUALLY CARE TO HEAR ABOUT THE POLICE IN AUSTIN, SINCE I'VE BEEN DOING POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY FOR 13 YEARS NOW.
UM, SO HOW MANY PEOPLE, I NEED A SHOW OF HAND I NEED TO SELECT TO NOT JUST HAVE FACES STARING AT ME THAT ARE HIRED BY, OR NOT HIRED, BUT LIKE, VOLUNTEER, WHATEVER IT IS BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
I NEED, YOU KNOW, I NEED TO SEE A SHOW OF HANDS.
A WHO HERE SUPPORTS THE AUSTIN POLICE OR POLICE IN GENERAL? I SHOULD MAKE YOU AWARE OF.
YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK, BUT WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO, WE ARE NOT NORMALLY COME IN, IN BACK.
SO PLEASE JUST MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION.
OKAY? I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF Y'ALL WERE PRO-POLICE, JUST THINK ABOUT IT IN YOUR HEAD, IF YOU WOULD RAISE YOUR HAND OR NOT TO SAY THAT YOU'RE PRO-POLICE OR PRO OUM POLICE.
NOW, BY ALL, DO YOU KNOW, ARE YOU GUYS, I, I CAN'T ASK YOU, BUT I'M GONNA MAKE YOU AWARE OF THE STANFORD PRISON EXPERIMENTS THAT STANDS FOR STANFORD PRISON EFFECT.
I CAN TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE COP THAT I TALKED TO FOR AN HOUR YESTERDAY, ABOUT AN HOUR ON THE STREET IN THE SUN, ABOUT, UM, ALL BAD COPS HATE GOOD.
I MEAN, ALL GOOD COPS HATE BAD COPS, AND HE'S A GOOD COP BAR.
RUDY IS HIS NAME, IF YOU WANNA KNOW.
UM, SO, UH, YOU CAN'T SUPPORT POLICE IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT.
IF YOU SUPPORT POLICE ABUSE AND BLINDLY ACCEPT IT AND TAKE TWO YEARS TO GET YOUR YOUR RULES TOGETHER, WHERE THERE'S NO ACCOUNTABILITY AT ALL THROUGH THIS, THIS, THIS COMMISSION COMMITTEE, WHATEVER, UM, YOU, YOU'RE NOT SUPPORTING THE POLICE.
YOU'RE SUPPORTING THE FACT THAT THE LAST COMMISSIONER MEETING THAT Y'ALL HAD, WHEN, WHEN CHIEF CHIEF DAVIS AND, AND, UH, GAIL MCCANN TOLD YOU THAT LEDGER HAD BEEN FIRED AT LEAST FOUR OR FIVE TIMES.
THEY SAID, LEDGER HAS BEEN TERMINATED, UH, INDEFINITE SUSPENSION, BASICALLY FIRED.
WE'VE GOT PLENTY OF VIDEO THAT WE CAN SHOW YOU IF YOU GUYS WANT TO SEE IT.
UH, PICTURES OF HIM OUT THERE IN THE COMMUNITY, IN UNIFORMS STILL WORKING.
[00:10:01]
POLICE ACCOUNTABLE, IF YOU HOLD THE POLICE ABOVE THE PEOPLE, THE PEOPLE IN A DEMOCRACY ARE AT THE HIGHEST POINT.IF YOU HAVE SOME KIND OF SENTIMENT THAT'S BIASED TOWARDS THE POLICE THAT'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR ANTI THE PEOPLE OF AUSTIN, THEN YOU'RE DOING A DISSERVICE.
INSTEAD, YOU SHOULD BE LISTENING TO PEOPLE LIKE US.
THE PERSON YOU JUST SPOKE TO AND MYSELF HAVE YEARS AND YEARS OF POLICE EXPERIENCE.
WE HAVE LISTS OF POLICE THAT WE HAVE PUBLICLY LISTED THAT ARE BAD.
WE'VE MADE WANTED POSTERS FOR PEOPLE WHO, UH, POLICE OFFICERS WHO ARE USUALLY DISTRICT REPS TO GO OUT THERE AND SWEEPS AND SLASH TENTS WITH A KNIFE.
THAT'S NOT CONSTITUTIONAL BEHAVIOR.
GRAB PEOPLE OUT OF THEIR TENTS IN THEIR SLEEP, INCLUDING A BLACK MAN RIGHT HERE UNDER 35.
HE GOT INJURED AND THEY TOOK ALL HIS STUFF AND LEFT HIM.
SO IT WASN'T RESISTING ARREST, IT WASN'T A PROPERTY USE OF FORCE.
IT'S NOT A PROPER ENTRY, IT'S NOT A LEGAL THING, AND IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME.
SO THE DISSERVICE THAT WE DO TO POLICE UNDER THE PRISON EXPERIMENT, IT'S PSYCHOLOGICAL.
YOU'RE CREATING BELIEFS AND PSYCHOPATHS OUTTA PEOPLE YOU SUPPOSEDLY RESPECT.
NEXT, WE'D LIKE TO HEAR, UH, FROM PETER HUNT.
UM, I WAS HOPING TO SPEAK SPECIFICALLY ON ACTION ITEM EIGHT.
SO I THINK IT MIGHT MAKE MORE SENSE IF I COME UP BEFORE THE ITEM AND SPEAK ON THAT.
HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT, UH, THAT, UH, BEFORE I MOVE ON, I WANTED TO GIVE, UH, MS. ROSE, UH, NIA A CHANCE IF SHE'S, IF SHE ARRIVED.
SO NEXT WE'LL TRY TO PROCEED TO THE APPROVAL
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
OF MINUTES.NUMBER ONE, ITEM ONE HERE IS, UM, APPROVAL FOR THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 27TH, 2026.
UH, UM, I CAN SECOND THAT IF, YEAH, IF YOU WANNA GO FOR A MOTION TO DO THAT.
THIS, UH, WE FAILED TO, UH, PROVE PAST THIS THE FEBRUARY BECAUSE THERE ARE ONLY SIX PEOPLE PRESENT.
AND AT OUR NEXT MEETING, UH, THE FORUM ECONOMIC QUORUM TO PASS IT, I'M NOT SURE IF WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO IT AGAIN THIS TIME, BUT I LIKE TO, UH, ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE 20, THE FEBRUARY, UH, AGENDA MINUTES.
MAYBE I CAN EASILY COUNT SIX, SEVEN.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO, UH, ITEM NUMBER TWO, WHICH IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 20TH, 2026.
I'LL SECOND THAT SECOND THERE.
IS THERE A SECOND? YEAH, I'LL SECOND THAT.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY, AYE.
LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE, UH, YOU, YOU NEED TO COUNT AGAIN, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AGAIN.
SO THAT LOOKS LIKE WE APPROVED.
I'D LIKE TO MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE IN THE
[3. Staff briefing regarding progress of work with the Police Technology Unit on an internal drive for the CPRC to access case files.]
AGENDA, UH, STAFF BRIEFING REGARDING PROGRESS AND WORK ON THE POLICE TECHNOLOGY UNITS.UH, IS THERE ANY UPDATES ON THAT? THERE IS NO UPDATES.
ANY, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE ANYONE IN THE COMMITTEE? I'LL MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR,
[4. Staff briefing regarding updates related to Austin Police Oversight, including an overview and key highlights; administrative and operational updates; commission support and follow-up; community engagement; policy highlights; and upcoming items and priorities from Director Gail McCant]
WHICH IS, UH, A STAFF, UH, BRIEFING, UH, REGARDING UPDATES ON THE AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT.UH, I AM GAIL MCCANN, DIRECTOR AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT.
WE'LL LOOK OVER THE OVERVIEW, UH, OVERVIEW AND KEY HIGHLIGHTS.
UH, FY 27 28 ANNUAL GOALS AND KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR THE CITY MANAGER.
UH, DEPUTY DIRECTOR MASTERS, CRYSTAL KIMBRO, WHO IS OUR POLICY, UH, MANAGER.
ENGLE IS THE CONSULTANT BROUGHT BY, UH, A PD, UM, BROUGHT IN BY A PD TO ADDRESS USE OF FORCE DATA COLLECTION AND REPORTING.
INGLE PROVIDED FOR US A PREVIEW OF A PRESENTATION
[00:15:01]
THAT SHE PROVIDED TO MAYOR CA COUNCIL ON APRIL 7TH.SO WE ALSO, UM, DISCUSSED THE PROCESSING TIMING TO ENSURE THAT A P D'S USE OF FORCE DATA IS ONCE AGAIN AVAILABLE TO A PO.
IT HAD BEEN PAUSED AS THEY BROUGHT THE CONSULTANT IN TO START TO LOOK AT THAT DATA.
AND SO, UH, WE WILL RESUME HAVING THE ABILITY TO LOOK AT THAT DATA AND ANALYZE AND POST, UH, OUR FINDINGS THERE ON OUR WEBSITE AND MORE TRAINING WILL BE SCHEDULED FOR A PO STAFF TO ENSURE WE HAVE FUNCTIONALITY AND THE ABILITY TO DO WHAT'S UH, NEEDED FOR OUR ANALYSIS.
A PO CONTINUES TO MEET WITH OUR, UH, INTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS TO PRE TO PREVIEW OUR KNOW YOUR RIGHTS, UM, PROGRAM THAT WE PLAN TO LAUNCH LATER THIS SUMMER, AS WELL AS OUR OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTING DASHBOARD.
UM, WE HAVE ONE FINAL PREVIEW WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE NEXT WEEK, AND THEN AT SOME POINT WE'LL BRING THAT PRESENTATION TO THE COMMISSION FOR REVIEW AS WELL, OR PREVIEW, UM, UPCOMING ACTIVITIES, UH, MAY 4TH, UH, KEVIN AND I, DEPUTY DIRECTOR KEVIN AND I WILL PRESENT TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION ON OUR MEDIATION PROGRAM AND PROVIDE A SUMMARY OF APOS RESPONSES TO THEIR SEPTEMBER RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE WILL ALSO PROVIDE BOTH OF THOSE BRIEFINGS TO YOU AS WELL PRIOR TO THAT ON MAY 15TH, UH, IS YOUR NEXT, UH, CPRC MEETING, ADMINISTRATIVE AND OPERATIONAL UPDATES.
UH, JUST WANNA REMIND EVERYBODY THAT THE FY 25 26 TEXAS CYBER SECURITY AWARENESS TRAINING FOR NO BEFORE, WHICH HAS, UH, A DEADLINE OF MAY 31ST FOR COMMISSIONERS.
JUST A REMINDER THAT WE NEED TO GET THAT DONE.
AND THEN TO REACH OUT TO RYAN IF YOU NEED ANY ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE WITH THAT.
APPLICATIONS ARE BEING, UM, REVIEWED FOR TO FILL OUR, OUR COMPLAINTS DIVISION SUPERVISOR, UH, POSITION, UH, THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR IS THE LEAD IN THAT RECRUITMENT PROCESS AND IS WORKING TO IDENTIFY A PERMANENT SUPERVISOR TO START BY MID-JUNE.
UH, THE POLICY AND RESEARCH DIVISION HAS ALSO COMPLETED IN THE INTERVIEW PROCESS.
THEY ARE TRYING TO FILL A POLICY ANALYST POSITION AND ANTICIPATE MAKING A SELECTION AND OFFER OF EMPLOYMENT, UH, HERE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS.
UH, A PO REQUESTED, UH, IIAD DOWNLOADS SEVEN CASES TO BE SHARED.
UH, THE DIGITAL CASE FILES FOR THE CPRC, UH, ONE DOWNLOAD WAS COMPLETED IN 11 WORKING DAYS, AND THEN SIX DOWNLOADS WERE COMPLETED IN 13 WORKING DAYS.
THE CASES HAVE BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO CPR, C'S DESIGNATED, UM, REVIEW GROUPS.
A PO IS MOVING FORWARD WITH PLANS TO RECRUIT FOR ALTERNATES FOR THE CPRC MEMBERS, UM, TO ENSURE THAT YOU ARE FULLY OPERATIONAL IN THE EVENT THAT, UH, COMMISSIONERS, UH, HAVE TO VACATE FOR, FOR, FOR WHATEVER REASON.
UH, WE CURRENTLY HAVE ONLY ONE ALTERNATE AVAILABLE, SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE ARE STARTING THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS.
WE DO HAVE A TIMELINE FOR RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION.
THAT TIMELINE IS THE APPLICATION PROCESS WILL OPEN UP TODAY.
SO THE APPLICATION PROCESS WILL OPEN UP TODAY.
UH, A PO WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR LAUNCHING ALL THE CAMPAIGN ADS, THE SOCIAL MEDIA, A PRESS RELEASE.
WE'LL BE DOING ALL OF THAT ON NEXT WEEK.
THE ASK IS, WE ARE RECOMMENDING BEFORE OR AFTER YOUR MAY 17TH MEETING THAT YOU HAVE A RECEPTION, UM, EITHER HERE, UM, BEFORE OR AFTER.
AND THIS WOULD JUST BE TO HOST A RECEPTION FOR THOSE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN BECOMING A, UH, COMMISSIONER.
SO, ANY INTERESTED COMMUNITY MEMBERS WOULD BE WELCOME TO ATTEND THE, UH, RECEPTION IN PERSON HERE AT CITY HALL, UM, TO MEET ANY POTENTIAL, UH, FUTURE TO MEET YOU GUYS FIRST, AND THEN FILL THOSE POSITIONS AS THEY, IF AND WHEN THEY BECOME, UH, AVAILABLE.
UM, WE CAN PREPARE LIGHT REFRESHMENTS FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND ALSO ALLOW FOR VALIDATION FOR PARKING.
UM, SO JUST WANTED, THAT'S THE ASK.
AND IF YOU ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT, WE CAN START TO, UH, COORDINATE THAT AS WELL.
MAY 17TH, BEFORE OR AFTER YOUR MEETING, YOU'LL JUST NEED TO TELL US WHAT TIMEFRAME YOU'D LIKE TO DO IT.
YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE WOULD COME BEFORE OR AFTER OUR MAY 17TH? IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE ON THE SAME DAY.
WE WOULD PROBABLY SET SOMETHING UP RIGHT IN THE ARON.
WE'RE GONNA DO ALL THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR THAT SO THAT COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THESE POSITIONS AS ALTERNATES COULD COME OUT AND HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY JUST TO MEET WITH YOU AS THEIR POTENTIAL
[00:20:01]
OR FUTURE COLLEAGUES, AND HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT, UH, YOUR ROLES, UM, PRIOR TO MAKING THE COMMITMENT THEMSELVES.AND I'M SORRY, I, I, I LIKE YOU KEEP TALKING AND I FORGOT TO ASK QUESTIONS.
I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS ON THE MEDIATION PROGRAM.
IS THAT OKAY? WE'RE GONNA DO A BRIEFING ON THE MEDIATION OKAY.
SO WE WILL CLOSE THE APPLICATIONS FOR ALTERNATES AT 11:59 PM ON MAY 22ND.
SO THEY, THE APPLICATIONS WOULD CLOSE THE FOLLOWING FRIDAY AFTER YOUR RECEPTION, IF YOU AGREE TO THAT.
AFTER THAT PROCESS, THE AUDITORS HAVE TO, UH, QUALIFY APPLICANTS.
WE ANTICIPATE THAT WILL HAPPEN AROUND JUNE.
AND THEN JUNE OR JULY, WE WOULD DO THE SELECTION FOR THE ALTERNATES.
AND THEN AUGUST OR SO, WE WOULD, UM, SELECT THE NEW COMMISSIONERS AND THEN DO THE TRAINING FOR THE ALTERNATES COMMISSION SUPPORT AND FOLLOW UP.
AGAIN, THE DRAFT CPRC ONE YEAR REPORT.
WE UNDERSTAND IT'S STILL IN PROGRESS WITH COMMISSIONER HARRIS AS THE LEAD.
THERE WAS A REQUEST FOR TWO CASE BRIEFINGS BASED ON PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS FROM, UH, TWO COMPLAINANTS IN MAR AT YOUR MARCH MEETING.
WE ARE NOT CONDUCTING EITHER BRIEFING AT THIS MEETING TODAY.
THE REASON IS THAT ONE CASE IS AN ACTIVE INVESTIGATION, SO WE WON'T BE DOING A BRIEFING ON THAT.
AND THE SEVEN, THE SECOND CASE, ALTHOUGH IT'S ALREADY BEEN ADJUDICATED, UM, THERE IS SOME, THERE'S A PENDING CRIMINAL CASE RELATED TO THAT CASE.
SO WE'RE NOT GONNA BE DOING THOSE BRIEFINGS HERE.
SO LAST MONTH, THE CITY OF AUSTIN LAUNCHED A NEW WEBSITE DESIGN.
AS A RESULT, SOME OF THE, UM, THE LINKS ON THE CPR UH C WEBSITE ARE BROKEN, AND SO WE ARE WORKING, UM, WITH THE DEPARTMENT RELATED TO THAT.
UM, THE A PO COMMUNICATION TEAM IS WORKING WITH THE CITY'S WEB TEAM TO IDENTIFY AND FIX ANY BROKEN LEAKS.
BUT IF YOU ARE NOTICING ANY BROKEN LEAKS, PLEASE LET US KNOW SO WE CAN MAKE SURE WE ARE PUTTING IN A TICKET AND GETTING THAT ADDRESSED.
TO SUPPORT CPRC COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EFFORTS ON FRIDAY, APRIL, APRIL 3RD, THE A PO COMMUNICATION MANAGERS MET WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER FRANCO TO DISCUSS IDEAS FOR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.
SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CAME OUT OF THAT IS, UM, JUST A LONG-TERM ENGAGEMENT PLAN.
WE TALKED ABOUT, UM, PROVIDING MAYBE BUSINESS CARDS AND NAME TAGS FOR COMMISSIONERS AS THEY ARE DOING SOME OF THAT COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND ALSO RECOMMENDING A TRAINING.
THERE'S, UH, A TRAINING CALLED THE IAP TWO TRAINING.
UH, WE ARE STRONGLY REP RECOMMENDING THIS TRAINING IS A WIDELY RECOGNIZED, UH, AS AN INTERNATIONAL STANDARD FOR PUBLIC SECTOR, COMMUNICATE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND PLANNING.
THE CITY OF AUSTIN OFFERS THIS TRAINING IN-HOUSE, UH, IF YOU ARE INTERESTED AT A REDUCED COST, AND WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO HELP YOU COORDINATE THAT TRAINING TO COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT TRAINING.
UM, IN TERMS OF, UH, ENGAGEMENT QUESTION, HOW DO WE SIGN UP FOR THAT TRAINING? UH, YOU CAN JUST LET US KNOW.
AND THEN SARAH, UM, OUR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PERSON WOULD HELP YOU NAVIGATE THAT.
AND THEN THE REGULAR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EVENTS HAVE BEEN ADDED TO YOUR CALENDARS TO THE CPRC RESOURCE CALENDAR FOR COMMISSIONERS TO VIEW AND ATTEND.
ADDITIONAL OUTREACH OPPORTUNITIES WILL BE ADDED TO THE CALENDARS AS THEY ARE IDENTIFIED.
JUST SOME ADDITIONAL ENGAGEMENT.
UM, MARCH 28TH, THE NORTH HEALTH AND WELLNESS FAIR WE ATTENDED ON APRIL 3RD.
WE MET WITH, UH, THE CPRC VICE CHAIR TO DISCUSS COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENTS.
PLANNING FOUR 13, MEETING WITH A PD AND CMO FOUR 14.
MEETING WITH THE AUSTIN POLICE ASSOCIATION.
THAT WAS A POPUP RESOURCE CLINIC, UH, THAT, UM, WE ATTENDED FOUR 16 AND 17, THE CENTRAL AFRICAN AMERICAN FAMILY SUPPORT, UH, CONFERENCE.
WE'VE ATTENDED, UH, FOUR 16, ALSO THE A PD ACADEMY, UH, 4 22.
UH, WE'RE MEETING WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.
I THINK I MENTIONED THAT EARLY.
AND THEN 4 22, THE TRAIN, UH, TRINITY CENTER RELATED TO POLICY AND RESEARCH, UH, HIGHLIGHTS, A PO SERVES ON THE AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT'S
[00:25:01]
POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE AS A NON-VOTING MEMBER.STAFF ATTENDED A COMMITTEE MEETING TO DISCUSS SEVERAL POLICIES UNDER REVISION.
THE COMMITTEE IS STILL IN REVIEW PHASE FOR THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
THE POLICY AND RESEARCH DIVISION WILL ALSO LAUNCH THE AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTING DASHBOARD IN THE COMING WEEKS.
UM, WE ARE LOOKING TO SCHEDULE A DEMO AT THE, AT AN UPCOMING CPRC MEETING, UH, SO THAT YOU AND THE PUBLIC CAN LEARN MORE ABOUT THE DASHBOARD IN TERMS OF THE COMPLAINTS DIVISION, THE COMPLAINTS DIVISIONS PARTICIPATED IN THE MEETING, UH, WITH THE TRINITY CENTER, ALONG WITH THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT TEAM IN MARCH.
AND PLANS TO HOST ITS FIRST COMPLAINT DIVISION CENTERED COMMUNITY EVENT IN APRIL AT THE TRINITY CENTER.
THIS EVENT WILL FOCUS MORE JUST ON THE COMPLAINT PROCESS, SO WANT COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO BE ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS AND LEARN MORE ABOUT FILING COMPLAINTS AND WHAT THE COMPLAINTS PROCESS LOOKS LIKE.
AND THEN WE HAVE YOUR UP, UH, UPDATED ITEMS AND PRIORITIES.
I THINK RON HAS MENTIONED THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL THINGS YOU NEED TO ADD, BUT, UM, COMMISSIONER REVE SPONSORED THE CPRC YEAR ONE SUMMARY OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES, UH, REVIEW AND EDITS OF THE CPRC, INTERNAL OPERATION OPERATING PROCEDURES.
DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO ACCESS AND CASE FILES UNDER CITY CODE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION FOR AN ONLINE MESSAGE BOARD FOR THE COMMISSION.
BYLAWS DISCUSSION AND AMENDMENTS.
PRESENT A DRAFT RULES AND PROCEDURES FOR REVIEW BY THE FULL COMMISSION.
DISCUSSION OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION'S.
RECENT RECOMMENDATION TO COUNSEL, UH, REGARDING THE OFFICE OF POLICE OVERSIGHTS COMPLIANCE WITH THE AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT ACT.
CONSIDERATIONS OF HANDLING CONFIDENTIAL VERSUS PUBLIC INFORMATION.
POLICY REVIEW OF AP D'S POLICY FOR OFFICER INVOLVED CASES.
UH, COMMISSIONER EUGENE SPONSORED EDUCATION ON AP PD DISCIPLINE MATRIX AND POLICY RULES AND PROCEDURES ON CASE REVIEW.
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION, RULES AND GUIDELINES.
AND A PD POLICY ON OIS CASES, COMMISSIONER FLOOD SPONSORS RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A PD TO DEVELOP A DASHBOARD ON ICE INTERACTIONS.
CODIFY A PROCESS TO INTERACT WITH A PD AND COMMUNITY INTEREST, A PD INTERACTIONS WITH ICE ON A PUBLIC DASHBOARD PROPOSAL AS AN ACTION ITEM, A BRIEFING ON THE TWO CASES THAT WE DISCUSSED EARLIER.
UH, AND THEN CHARGING CPRC REVIEW WITH PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE TO, RATHER THAN BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
AND COMMISSIONER PENA SPONSORED A DRAFT, A RESOLUTION TO COUNSEL FOR AN OPEN FEEDBACK WHITEBOARD PROPOSAL AS AN ACTION ITEM.
AND I THINK THERE WERE ADDITIONAL, UM, ACTION ITEMS THAT YOU WANTED TO ADD, AND WE'LL, WE'LL ADD THOSE AT THE END OF THIS MEETING.
I HAVE A, I GUESS, UM, I HAVE A, I GUESS A PARLIAMENTARIAN QUESTION, UM, REGARDING THE RECEPTION.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, UH, I MEAN, I THANK IT'S A FANTASTIC IDEA AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM.
I WOULD GO, BUT MAYBE THE ONLY QUESTION IS WHETHER BEFORE OR AFTER, OR BOTH, OR, WE KNOW WE ARE, SOME OF US ARE HERE EARLIER AND SOME OF US ARE HERE AFTER, AND THEY CAN DO THAT.
BUT I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANY, ANYBODY HAS ANY PARTICULAR OBJECTION TO THAT.
COMMISSIONER SEEMS LIKE I I, MY PERSONAL, UM, I THINK, UH, PEOPLE THAT ARE TRYING TO DECIDE TO BE ON A COMMITTEE WILL BE WELL SERVED IF THEY CAN BE TOLD SOME OF THE EFFORT INVOLVED IN, IN DOING THIS, AND WHETHER IT'S HOW, MAYBE INCOMPATIBLE WITH SOME, SOMETIMES THE JOB AND THE AMOUNT OF TIME I TAKE THE REVIEW, EVEN ONE CASE, AND WE HAVE HUNDREDS OF CASES TO DO SO THEY CAN BETTER UNDERSTAND THE COMMITMENT OF TIME THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO, THEY'RE GONNA DO.
I THINK WE'VE HAD, UH, A LARGE TURNOVER, PARTLY BECAUSE I THINK SOME PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SURPRISED TO KNOW HOW MUCH WORK IT INVOLVED.
SO I, I SAID, I JUST WANNA GIVE ANY COMMISSIONER ANY OPPORTUNITY TO, TO VOICE IF THEY THOUGHT, IF THEY SEE ANY OBJECTION TO THAT.
'CAUSE THAT SEEMS LIKE A PERFECT THING.
IT'S JUST THAT I DON'T WANNA WAIT TILL APRIL TO HAVE TO VOTE ON IT IF WE HAD TO, AND JUST THOUGHT MAYBE IF WE, IF WE, WE ALL THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA, I DON'T SEE ANY REASON FOR NOT LETTING IT.
JUST SAY, LET'S, LET'S HAVE THAT.
AND WE WOULD WORRY ABOUT WHO IS BEFORE AND WHO IS AFTER, AND, UH, MAKE SURE SOMEBODY AVAILABLE THINK'S A GOOD IDEA.
I CAN BE THERE BEFORE OR AFTER I, LIKE AFTER, BUT, UM, YEAH.
AND SOMEONE WAS LIKE, I WOULD BE, MAKE SURE I'LL BE HERE BEFORE AND WE CAN, WE CAN DO THAT.
I LIKE AFTER AS WELL, BECAUSE WE'LL GET PEOPLE, UM, WHO COULD COME AFTER WORKING HOURS.
UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE DIRECTOR? YES.
DID YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? WHY DID I ASK? SO IS
[00:30:01]
SHE GONNA GO OVER THE, UM, MEDIATION PROGRAM? THAT'S, THAT'S, UM, THAT'S ON THE AGENDA, BUT I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE REPORT.YOUR REPORT, UM, YOU REFERENCED DR.
UH, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR HER TO, UH, FOR, FOR US TO REQUEST THAT SHE PRESENT TO THE COMMISSION? WE CAN, WE CAN ASK.
AND THEN YOU MENTIONED THE ACADEMY OR MEETING AT THE ACADEMY.
SO OUR COMPLAINTS STAFF, UM, GOES TO THE ACADEMY JUST TO TALK ABOUT FOR THE CADETS, SO THEY ARE AWARE OF WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO.
SO THEY GET SOME INSIGHT IN TERMS OF THE OFFICE OF POLICE OVERSIGHT, WHAT OUR COMPLAINTS PROCESS LOOKS LIKE.
WE TALK TO THEM ABOUT COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND, AND POLICY AS WELL.
SO WE HAVE A TIMEFRAME IN WHICH, UM, WE ARE THERE.
WE ARE PROVIDING A PRESENTATION THEN TO THEM PRIOR TO THEIR GRADUATION FROM THE ACADEMY.
SO THERE'S A, THERE'S AN ACADEMY CLASS RIGHT NOW? YES.
AND WHAT, WHEN IS THEIR ESTIMATED GRADUATION DATE? DO YOU KNOW? I DON'T KNOW.
I CAN FIND OUT FOR YOU AND LET YOU KNOW.
THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS YOU WANT ONLINE.
ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE I MOVE ON TO THE NEXT? I, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING REAL FAST.
THE, UM, YEAR IN REVIEW, I WILL SAY I'VE BEEN VERY BEHIND, AND THAT IS NO FAULT BY MYSELF, AND I DO APOLOGIZE.
UM, I THINK IF ANYTHING, I JUST NEED TO GET AN OUTLINE OF JUST THE CASES WE REVIEWED AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS WE'VE MADE, SO I CAN INCLUDE THAT, MAKE SURE THAT'S COVERED.
MAYBE SEND GUYS A DRAFT, TAKE A LOOK AT IT, AND THEN I CAN WORK FROM THERE.
I, I DO WANNA MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT OUR ONLINE PARTICIPANTS.
IF YOU'RE PARTICIPATING ONLINE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE YOUR MIC AND YOUR CAMERA ON, OR YOU WON'T BE CONSIDERED PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER EUGENE IS REACTING TO, UH, CELESTE WILLIAMS, UH, JUST JOINING, BUT SHE'S ONLY ON THEIR, UM, BUT NOT, NOT NOT PRESENT INVOICE.
SO WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO COUNT HER AS PRESENT, MAYBE MAKE AWARE OF IT.
YEAH, COMMISSIONER, I'M WORKING WITH HER ONLINE.
WE'RE JUST DOING A LITTLE BIT OF TROUBLESHOOTING, BUT AS SOON AS SHE TURNS ON OUR CAMERA, I'LL COUNT HER FOR THE TIME.
I'M TRYING TO TURN IT ON RIGHT NOW, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, IT'S NOT WORKING.
NOTICE THAT I HAVE A QUESTION, UM, FOR MS. MCCANN.
UM, WHERE DOES THE INFORMATION THAT YOU GIVE US THAT, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE ARE INTENTIONALLY BEING MISLED OR MISINFORMED, BUT WHERE DOES THAT INFORMATION COME FROM, LIKE ON THE STATUSES OF THE OFFICERS? DOES THAT COME DIRECTLY FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND, AND GIVEN TO YOU, OR IS THERE A SECONDARY VERIFICATION PROCESS? I'M, I'M NOT SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING YOUR QUESTION.
THE STATUS OF THE OFFICERS, YES.
IT WAS, UM, AN ACCUSATION, UM, POINTED TOWARDS YOU, UH, DURING ONE OF THE PUBLIC SPEECHES TODAY, AND THEY SAID THAT YOU AND THE POLICE CHIEF LIED TO THE COMMISSION REGARDING AN OFFICER THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE TERMINATED, BUT THEY'RE STILL ON ACTIVE DUTY, AND I KNOW YOU TO BE A PERSON OF INTEGRITY.
SO I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND WHERE THAT INFORMATION CAME FROM THAT YOU RELAYED TO US.
UM, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE INTENT INTENTIONALLY BEEN MISLED, BUT I JUST WANT TO HAVE CLARIFICATION FROM THE RECORD.
UH, SIR, I, I BELIEVE THE SPEAKER IS SPEAKING, UH, REGARDING THE CASE DISCUSSION WE HAD IN THE, NOT THE LAST COMMISSION MEETING, BUT THE ONE BEFORE THAT.
AND, UH, THE DISCUSSION WAS REGARDING, UH, GARCIA, OFFICER GARCIA, WHO HAD BEEN, UH, INDEFINITELY SUSPENDED, NOT LEDGER.
AND SO WHEN THEY'RE INDEFINITELY SUSPENDED, THERE'S NO CHANCE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO RETURN TO THE PORCH.
THAT'S BASICALLY A TERMINATION.
THE THE OFFICER IS TERMINATED, SIR.
I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE CLARIFICATION BECAUSE IF NOT THAT, UH, TYPE OF SENTIMENT THAT SPREAD, AND I WANT TO KEEP OUR TRUSTWORTHINESS LEVEL AS HIGH AS POSSIBLE.
IF THAT'S ALL FOR THE ITEM FOUR, I'D LIKE TO MOVE ON TO ITEM ITEM NUMBER
[5. Staff briefing on the Austin Police Oversight (APO) Mediation Program. ]
FIVE, STAFF READING AND AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT MEDIATION PROGRAM.[00:35:07]
WHO'S THE, UH, THE LEAD ON THAT? HEY, GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSION.KEVIN MASTERS DEPUTY DIRECTOR AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT.
I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW OF THE AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT MEDIATION PROGRAM.
BASICALLY, THE PRESENTATION WILL CONSIST OF, OF A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE OVERSIGHT PROGRAM, THE AUTHORITY ABOUT MEDIATION, THE PROCESS, AND WHAT WE BELIEVE THE BENEFITS TO BE TO BOTH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AS WELL AS MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY.
I WILL SAY THE PROGRAM CAME ABOUT BASED ON A DISCUSSION THAT WAS INITIATED BY THE FORMER COMMANDER OF THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DIVISION COMMANDER, JEREMY COMPTON.
HE REACHED OUT TO ME ONE DAY AS HE WAS LOOKING THROUGH, I BELIEVE, THEIR POLICIES, AND HE, UH, HE BASICALLY, THE CONVERSATION WAS, HEY, KEVIN, WE'VE GOT THIS POLICY THAT SAYS WE SHOULD REALLY HAVE A MEDIATION PROGRAM.
WE'VE BEEN TRYING FOR 20 YEARS TO STAND UP A MEDIATION PROGRAM.
AND HE ASKED ME IF I WOULD WORK WITH HIM IN AN EFFORT TO DO THAT.
SO THIS IS AN OUTCOME OF THAT PROACTIVE CONTACT FROM COMMANDER COMPTON TO STAND UP A MEDIATION PROGRAM THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY IMPLEMENT WITHIN AUSTIN POLICE OFF AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PD AND THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER, WHO IS OUR CONSULTANT, WHO WILL BE WORKING WITH US IN THE PROGRAM.
AS YOU KNOW, THE MISSION OF, UH, AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT IS FOR US TO PROVIDE IMPARTIAL OVERSIGHT OF THE AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT'S CONDUCT PRACTICES AND POLICIES TO ENHANCE ACCOUNTABILITY, IMPROVE TRANSPARENCY, AND SUSTAIN PARTNERSHIPS THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY.
UH, OUR PILLARS IN WHICH WE STAND UNDER IS ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY, AND PARTNERSHIPS.
THERE'S SOME SPECIF SPECIFIC THINGS THAT WE DO AND SOME THINGS THAT WE DON'T, THAT WE THINK IT'S ALWAYS IMPORTANT TO ARTICULATE.
UH, WE ARE A SEPARATE INDEPENDENT CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT BODY.
WE DO NOT WORK FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
WE DO NOT REPORT TO THE CHIEF OF POLICE.
WE REPORT TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, AND WE ARE SEPARATE FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
WE REVIEW ALL COMMUNITY COMPLAINTS, UH, AS WELL AS WE HAVE FULL ACCESS TO A-B-D-S-A-P-D SYSTEMS, THEIR BODY-WORN CAMERAS, THEIR REPORTS, THEIR DATABASE.
WE MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CHIEF OF POLICE AND CITY MANAGERS RELATED TO DISCIPLINE, ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES, AS WELL AS TRAINING.
THESE ARE INDEPENDENT RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE CREATED IN-HOUSE.
WE DON'T HAVE TO REACH OUT AND ASK THE CHIEF OR ANYBODY FOR PERMISSION TO SAY SOMETHING.
WE BASE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS ON OUR INDEPENDENT EFFORTS BASED ON OUR DISCOVERIES AND OUR REVIEWS.
WE ALSO IN CHARGE WITH EDUCATING COMMUNITY MEMBERS ABOUT THE COMPLAINT PROCESS, OUTLINE REPORTS, AS WELL AS RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND WE DO PUBLIC EDUCATION WITH RESPECT TO INTERACTION WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT.
WHAT WE DO NOT DO, ONCE AGAIN, WE DON'T REPORT TO A PD OR THE CHIEF OF POLICE.
WE DON'T OVERSEE THE LAW ENFORCEMENT A OTHER, OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES.
SO IF PEOPLE HAVE A COMPLAINT AGAINST TRAVIS COUNTY, SHERIFF, ROUND ROCK POLICE, OR SOMEONE ELSE, WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO TO BE INVOLVED IN THOSE TYPES OF COMPLAINTS.
WE DO NOT ENGAGE IN ANY CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS.
OUR AUTHORITY IS WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATIVE REALM.
SO WE LOOK AT ISSUES OF POLICY VIOLATIONS ON THE COMPLAINT SIDE.
WE ALSO DO NOT, UH, ADMINISTER DISCIPLINE BY STATE STATUTE ONLY.
THE CHIEF OF POLICE CAN ISSUE DISCIPLINE OR FINAL DISCIPLINE FOR A POLICE OFFICER.
WE'RE NOT THE FINAL DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY.
THE MEDIATION PROGRAM, UH, BASICALLY THE MEETING CONFER AGREEMENT IS, IS ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT AUTHORIZE US THE ABILITY TO DO THAT.
THE MEDIATION AUTHORIZES ESTABLISHED IN THE 2024 MEETING CONFER CONFER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT.
IT'S ARTICLE 17, SECTION 16, WHICH SAYS, THE CITY SHALL IMPLEMENT A VOLUNTARY MEDIATION PROCESS CONCERNING BOTH CITIZEN AND INTERNAL COMPLAINTS.
THAT'S, THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS WE MOVED FORWARD WITH TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE IMPLEMENT A PROGRAM.
THE ANOTHER AUTHORITY WAS THROUGH THE APDS POLICIES, WHICH IS AP D POLICY 9 0 2 6 6 0.5, INVESTIGATION HANDLING THROUGH MEDIATION.
THE POLICY STATES MEDIATION SHALL BE AN OPTION TO DISCUSS, DISCUSSED BY AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT INTAKE STAFF AFTER THE INTERNAL EX, THE EXTERNAL COMPLAINT AFFIDAVIT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE COMPLAINANT.
SO THE OTHER AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MEDIATION PROGRAM IS ESTABLISHED WITHIN THE POLICIES OF A-P-D-A-P-O ALSO HAS A POLICY THAT OUTLINES MEDIATION AND OUR MEDIATION PROCESS AND PROCESS
[00:40:01]
HANDLING.WE VIEW MEDIATION AS KIND OF A COMMUNITY STRUCTURED VOLUNTARY PROCESS THAT HELP RESOLVE CONFLICTS BETWEEN COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND POLICE OFFICERS THROUGH DIALOGUE RATHER THAN DISCIPLINE OF FORCE.
WHAT IS MEDIATION? WE VIEW MEDIATION AS A VOLUNTARY CONFIDENTIAL PROCESS IN WHICH NEUTRAL MEDIATORS FACILITATE DIALOGUE BETWEEN A COMMUNITY MEMBER AND A POLICE OFFICER TO RESOLVE CONCERNS, IMPROVE UNDERSTANDING, AND BUILD TRUST OUTSIDE OF THE DISCIPLINARY PROCESS.
CAN I ASK, WHY DOES THIS PROCESS HAVE TO BE CONFIDENTIAL? WELL, WE THINK IN ORDER FOR IT, FOR IT TO BE, IN ORDER FOR IT FOR CITIZENS, THAT'S THE CONFIDENTIALITY PART.
WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT CITIZENS FEEL COMFORTABLE AS THEY MAKE COMPLAINTS, AND AS THEY GO THROUGH A, A PROCESS TO MAYBE REACH A SOLUTION TO WHATEVER THEIR COMPLAINT IS AS THEY INTERFACE FACE-TO-FACE WITH OFFICERS.
THAT'S BEST PRACTICE AS IT RELATES TO MEDIATION AND MEDIATION, UH, IMPLEMENTATIONS, THEY'RE USUALLY CONFIDENTIAL PROCESSES.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, SOME OF THE ALLEGATIONS THAT ARE MADE, SOME OF THE INFORMATION THAT'S OFFERED WITHIN THE ME WITHIN THE COMPLAINT IS WHAT'S CALLED PII OR PRIVATE INFORMATION.
IT'S INFORMATION THAT SHOULDN'T BE DISCLOSED PUBLICLY.
SO WE WORK AS BEST WE CAN BY NOT ONLY CITY POLICY, BUT ALSO LAW TO MAKE SURE CERTAIN INFORMATION IS CONFIDENTIAL.
YOU, THE, THE OFFICERS SHOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO ANY CONFIDENTIALITY.
WHEN WE ARE, WHEN WE FOCUS ON CONFIDENTIALITY, THE OFFICERS SHOULD HAVE SOME LEVELS OF CONFIDENTIALITY AS IT RELATES TO SOME PERSONAL INFORMATION THAT MAY BE AN INVESTIGATIVE FILE THAT INVOLVES THEM.
WE GET ALL KIND OF COMPLAINTS.
SOME OF IT INVOLVES INFORMATION THAT'S PERSONAL TO THEM.
MUCH OF THE CONFIDENTIALITY INFORMATION THAT'S RETAINED AND CONFIDENTIAL IS THE COMPLAINANTS.
WE WANNA MAKE SURE COMPLAINANT'S INFORMATION IS CONFIDENTIAL AS WELL.
SO IF WE HAD A POLICY THAT SAYS, HEY, WE'RE GONNA PUT EVERYTHING OUT THERE AND NO INFORMATION IS GONNA BE CONFIDENTIAL, MY GUESS IS WE WON'T HAVE MANY COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO SAY, I WANNA BE PART OF THE MEDIATION PROCESS.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION SINCE YOU BROUGHT IT UP? FOLLOW UP QUESTION.
UM, AND MAYBE, UM, I'M GONNA, THIS IS QUESTION FOR UNDERSTANDING.
THE WAY I READ THIS, I IMAGINE THE WAY IT WORKED OUT WAS, I AM A CITIZEN AND I FEEL THE POLICE HAVE DONE SOMETHING TO ME.
MY OPTIONS RIGHT NOW IS TO FILE TO A PO AND SEND SOME, A FILE, A COMPLAINT TO A PO, WHICH IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO, TO DO.
SO INVESTIGATION STARTS IN LIEU OF THAT.
THERE'S AN ALTERNATIVE, WHICH YOU SAY, WELL, WOULD YOU, UH, ACCEPT A MEDIATION BETWEEN YOU AND THE OFFICER? WHERE I'M ASKING, I'M NOT SAYING I'M, I'M IMAGINING THAT I DECIDE, OKAY, WELL, I WILL SIT IN FRONT OF THE OFFICER WITH A, A MEDIATOR AND CONFRONT THEM THERE AND TELL 'EM WHAT I THOUGHT HAPPENED.
AND AFTER HAS A CHANCE TO EXPLAIN IT AND THE CHANCE, AND WITH, WITH THE HOPE THAT WE MAY WALK AWAY FROM THAT THINKING, OKAY, WE, WE HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING AND AVOID, UH, INVESTIGATION.
AM I INTERPRETING THIS? YEAH, IF, IF, YOU KNOW, I WOULD ADVOCATE IF YOU LET ME GET THROUGH IT.
SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS MAYBE ANSWERED AS WE GET THROUGH THE REST OF THE ATION.
THE REASON I WAS THINKING THEN, THAT CASE, OF COURSE, I WANT CONFLICT CONFIDENTIALITY FOR BOTH OFFICER, BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO TALK TOGETHER AND TRY TO SOLVE THIS OUT BEFORE WE GO TO THE INVESTIGATION.
SO THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING THAT, CORRECT.
IF YOU GUYS LET ME GET THROUGH IT.
IT'S, IT'S A PRETTY SHORT PRESENTATION, AND THEN I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS BEST I CAN.
IT MAY ANSWER SOME OF YOUR OTHER QUESTIONS.
UH, MEDIATION AUTHORIZATION THROUGH A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING, WE HAVE BASICALLY ENTERED INTO, BACK IN NOVEMBER OF 2025, WE ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER, DRC, UH, AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT, AS WELL AS AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT FOR DRC TO BE THE CONSULTANT THAT CONDUCTS OUR MEDIATION.
AND THE PURPOSE OF THE MOU IS TO ESTABLISH A COLLABORATIVE FRAMEWORK AMONG D-R-C-A-P-D AND A PO TO PROVIDE MEDIATION SERVICE FOR INTERACTION BETWEEN MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND A PD OFFICERS IN WHICH PUBLIC HAS SUBMITTED A COMPLAINT REGARDING ALLEGED POLICE MISCONDUCT.
THE GOAL OF THE MEDIATION IS TO PROVIDE A SAFE, CONFIDENTIAL, AND VOLUNTARY SPACE WHERE THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE COMPLAINANT AND THE OFFICER CAN BE COMMUNICATED OPENLY TO WORK TOWARD MUTUAL ACCEPTABLE SOLUTIONS FACILITATED BY A PROFESSIONAL, A PROFESSIONAL THIRD PARTY MEDIATOR.
IN TERMS OF OUR PURPOSES, UH, IT'S REALLY TO ESTABLISH A COLLABORATIVE FRAMEWORK BETWEEN AGENCIES, UH, ENTERING INTO THE, UH, INTERACTION AND, AND THE AGREEMENTS.
IT'S TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE A SAFE, CONFIDENTIAL AND VOLUNTARY SPACE WHERE PEOPLE
[00:45:01]
CAN TALK ABOUT ISSUES OF DISCORD.THEY CAN TALK OPENLY ABOUT THEIR INTERACTIONS IN THEIR ACTIONS, TO CULTIVATE A MORE TRUSTING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND POLICE OFFICERS TO ENCOURAGE DIALOGUE BETWEEN COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND POLICE OFFICERS.
SO THEY MAY EDUCATE EACH OTHER ON VARIOUS NORMS, CUSTOMS, AND BEHAVIORS OF THE TWO DIFFERENT GROUPS.
IT'S ALSO, ONCE AGAIN, AN EFFORT TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH A PA CONTRACT, A PD, GENERAL ORDERS, AS WELL AS A PD OPERATING.
SO WITH RESPECT TO THE PROCESS, MEDIATION WILL BE OFFERED FOR FORMAL COMPLAINTS.
UH, AND THAT'S BECAUSE IF SOMEONE ASKS FOR A COMMUNITY CONCERN, THAT'S THEM SAYING, I DON'T WANT ANY FURTHER CONTACT.
I JUST WANT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO BE AWARE OF MY COMPLAINT.
THERE'S A BUILT IN INTERACTION WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE IN A SUPERVISOR REFERRAL, THE SUPERVISOR OF THE OFFICER IS REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE CITIZEN, AND THEY HAVE A DIALOGUE.
SO THE PURPOSE OF THE MEDIATION, IF THERE ARE OTHER FORMAL COMPLAINTS WHERE THEY REQUEST A FORMAL INVESTIGATION AND WE IDENTIFY THAT IT'S ELIGIBLE FOR MEDIATION, THAT'S ANOTHER AVENUE INSTEAD OF A FORMAL INVESTIGATION.
THE GOAL IS FOR A PA AND A PD TO IDENTIFY SUITABLE MEDIATION BASIS OR MEDIATION CASES, UH, BASED ON PUBLIC COMPLAINTS AGAINST A PD OFFICERS, UH, APPROVAL HAS TO BE RECEIVED FROM THE CHAIN OF COMMAND AND WILLINGNESS OF THE OFFICER TO PARTICIPATE.
BEFORE WE OFFER MEDIATION TO THE COMPLAINANT, WE WILL REFER THE INVOLVED OFFICER, AS WELL AS THE COMPLAINANT AND THE CHAIN OF COMMAND TO THE DRC SO THAT THEY CAN START THE VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION IN THE MEDIATION PROCESS.
THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER WILL HAVE STAFF WHO WILL CONTACT THE OFFICER AS WELL AS THE COMPLAINANT, AND COMPLETE THEIR VARIOUS INTAKE DOCUMENTS, WHICH ARE CONFIDENTIAL AGREEMENTS.
THEY'LL TALK TO 'EM ABOUT THE PROCESS, UH, AS WELL AS OTHER COMMITMENTS THAT BOTH PARTIES HAVE TO MAKE PRIOR TO THE MEDIATION.
MEDIATIONS WILL BE CONDUCTED VIRTUALLY, UH, AND THAT'S, THAT'S PART OF THE PROCESS.
A PD HAS A POLICY BY WHICH WHEN AN OFFICER'S ON DUTY, HE OR SHE OBVIOUSLY HAS TO CARRY A FIREARM, WHETHER THEY'RE IN A FORMAL UNIFORM OR IF THEY'RE IN PLAIN CLOTHES.
ANYTIME THEY'RE ON DUTY DOING POLICE ACTIONS, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE A FIREARM.
DRC HAS A POLICY THAT THEY DON'T ALLOW FIREARMS INTO THEIR, THEIR BUILDING.
UH, THEY STOOD UP A MEDIATION VIRTUAL PROCESS DURING COVID AND, UH, ACTUALLY THEY SAID THAT THEY WERE VERY COMFORTABLE AND THEY DO A LOT OF THEIR MEDIATIONS VIRTUALLY.
SO THIS PARTICULAR MEDIATION PROCESS WAS DESIGNED TO BE CONDUCTED.
VIRTUALLY OFFICERS WILL ALWAYS HAVE ACCESS TO THE TECHNOLOGY AND WHAT'S NEEDED.
IF A COMPLAINANT DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO, LET'S SAY, A COMPUTER FOR VIRTUAL PURPOSES, DRC WILL PROVIDE THAT AND OUR A PA WILL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE, THEY CAN COME TO OUR OFFICES TO, TO BE ENGAGED IN THE MEDIATION PROCESS.
AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE MEDIATION, UH, THE DRC WILL PROVIDE A A PO WITH A WRITTEN RESPONSE THAT STATES WHETHER OR NOT BOTH PARTIES APPEARED AND WHETHER OR NOT THE, THE, THE MEDIATION WAS, UH, CONDUCTED, WHETHER THEY BELIEVED IT WAS A SUCCESSFUL MEDIATION OR NOT.
FAILURE FOR THE OFFICER TO ATTEND A MEDIATION WILL AUTOMATICALLY DEFAULT TO A FORMAL INVESTIGATION.
IF THE COMPLAINANT FAILS TO, UH, PARTICIPATE IN THE MEDIATION PROCESS, THE CASE WILL BE CLOSED, UH, AND NO OTHER ACTIONS WILL OCCUR.
SOME OF THE CORE GOALS WE WOULD LIKE TO ACHIEVE, OR WE BELIEVE WE CAN ACHIEVE IS IMPROVED COMMUNICATION AND UNDERSTANDING.
I THINK WE CAN RESOLVE COMPLAINTS MORE COLLABORATIVELY AND STRENGTHEN COMMUNITY AND POLICE RELATIONS.
WE THINK THE MEDIATION WILL HELP PARTIES UNDERSTAND THE OTHER'S PERSPECTIVE AND EXPERIENCE BECAUSE OF THE FACE-TO-FACE DIALOGUE AND HOPING TO REDUCE MISUNDERSTANDINGS THAT OCCUR AND OFTEN ESCALATE CONFLICTS.
UH, IT ALLOWS COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND OFFICERS TO ADDRESS CONCERNS DIRECTLY AND FOCUS ON MUTUALLY ACCEPTABLE AGREEMENTS AND NOT NECESSARILY PUNISHMENT.
UH, AND WE ALSO THINK IT WILL BUILD TRUST BY SHOWING THAT OFFICERS ARE WILLING TO LISTEN AND ENGAGE, AND IT'LL HELP HUMANIZE BOTH SIDES TO REDUCE LONG-TERM TENSIONS.
ADDITIONAL CORE GOALS IS TO PROVIDE A SAFE AND CONFIDENTIAL NEUTRAL ENVIRONMENT, AND TO REDUCE REPEAT CONFLICTS AND RESOURCE STRAIN, AS WELL AS PROMOTE HEALING AND ACCOUNTABILITY.
UH, CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIALITY ENCOURAGES HONESTY AND REDUCES FEAR OF RETALIATIONS.
THE SESSIONS WERE PRIVATE AND FACILITATED BY A TRAINED MEDIATOR AS PREVIOUSLY STATED.
WE ALSO THINK IT WILL HELP THE DEPARTMENT FOCUS COMPLAINT INVESTIGATORS AS WELL AS,
[00:50:01]
UH, SOME OF OUR STAFF ON MORE SERIOUS NATURES, UH, AND MORE SERIOUS MATTERS.IF, IF BOTH AGREED TO GET ENGAGED IN, UH, MEDIATION, IT WILL ALSO REDUCE THE TURNAROUND TIME IN WHICH INVESTIGATIONS OCCUR.
WE KNOW FORMAL COMPLAINTS CAN SOMETIME TAKE SIX, SEVEN MONTHS AND MAYBE EVEN UP TO A YEAR, WHEREAS MEDIATIONS ARE DESIGNED TO BE SCHEDULED WITHIN 30 TO 45 DAYS AND HOPE THAT THE MEDIATION PROCESS WOULD BE CONCLUDED WITHIN A MONTH TO TWO MONTHS.
IT GIVES COMMUNITY MEMBERS A VOICE IN THE PROCESS, AND IT ENCOURAGES OFFICERS TO BE, TO REFLECT ON INTERACTIONS WITHOUT ADVERSARIAL TONE.
WE BELIEVE SOME OF THE BENEFITS, UH, TO POLICE OFFICERS WILL BE CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK.
IT'LL REDUCE CONFLICT AND STRESS, CLARIFY INTENTIONS, TIMELY RESOLUTION TO LOW LEVEL COMPLAINTS.
MOST OF THE, ALL OF THE MEDIATIONS WILL BE BASED ON LOW LEVEL COMPLAINTS, ISSUES OF DISCOURTESY, MAYBE AN ERROR ON A, ON A REPORT THAT, THAT AN OFFICER MADE, UH, OR MISCOMMUNICATION THAT THAT RESULTED IN THE REPORT.
WE ALSO THINK IT WILL IMPROVE COMMUNICATION SKILLS FOR OFFICERS BECAUSE THEY'LL BE MORE ENGAGED, UH, ON FACE-TO-FACE BASIS.
YOU GO TO CALLS EVERY DAY, BUT SOMETIMES WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO CALLS, YOU'RE FOCUSED ON THE DISCOURSE THAT GENERALLY HAPPENS IN A CALL FOR SERVICE ARE A SELF-INITIATED EDIT ACTIVITY.
BEING ENGAGED IN A MEDIA MEDIATION PROCESS, IT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENT WHERE YOU'RE ACTUALLY HAVING A DIALOGUE, HOPEFULLY WITH SOMEONE.
IT JUST KIND OF SLOWS DOWN THE PROCESS.
WE BELIEVE THE BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WILL BE, THEY'LL HAVE A VOICE AND VALIDATIONS.
THEY CAN DIRECTLY EXPRESS HOW AN INCIDENT IMPACTED THEM, WHICH IS NOT OFTEN POSSIBLE DURING A TRADITIONAL COMPLAINT PROCESS.
WE THINK THERE'LL BE MORE TIMELY RESOLUTION AS STATED EARLIER, TRANSPARENCY AND UNDERSTANDING COMMUNITY MEMBERS GAIN INSIGHT INTO POLICIES AND PROCEDURES AND SITUATIONAL CONSTRAINTS THAT THEY MAY NOT OTHERWISE BE, BE AWARE OF.
IT GIVES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE OFFICER TO TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, I DID THIS BECAUSE POLICY SAYS THIS, UH, UH, ET CETERA.
ALSO, UH, HEALING ENCLOSURE, EVEN WHEN HARM CAN'T BE UNDONE.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND APOLOGY WHEN APPROPRIATE, OFTEN MATTERS MOST DURING THE FORMAL DISCIPLINE PROCESS.
ALSO PROVIDES EVERYONE A SAFE SPACE BECAUSE MEDIATION IS VOLUNTARY AND FACILITATED BY A NEUTRAL THIRD PARTY, IT CAN HELP COMMUNITY MEMBERS FEEL HEARD RATHER THAN INTIMIDATED.
THAT COMPLETES MY OVERVIEW, AND I AM HAPPY TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS AS BEST I CAN.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, IS THERE A COST TO THE CITIZENS TO ENGAGE IN THIS MEDIATION? NO.
UH, OUR OFFICE, UH, ARE FUNDED SO THAT THERE'S NO COST TO A PD AND THERE'S NO COST TO COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO PARTICIPATE.
THE AVERAGE MEDIATION WILL BE UP TO TWO TO FOUR HOURS, IS WHAT WE'RE PROJECTING.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
UM, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT IT THOUGH.
UM, HOW ARE THE MEDIATORS CHOSEN? THE MEDIATORS ARE MEDIATIONS, MEDIATORS WHO ARE CURRENTLY ON STAFF WITH DRC, THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER.
THEY'RE ALL TRAINED AND CERTIFIED MEDIATORS.
MEDIATORS HAVE TO, UH, COMPLY WITH STATE STATUTE IN TERMS OF TRAINING, CERTIFICATION AND OTHER QUALIFICATIONS.
WE HAVE ENTERED A IN AGREEMENT WITH THE DRC, AND WE RELY ON THEM TO MAKE SURE THAT TRAINED MEDIATORS ARE PROVIDED DURING THIS PROCESS.
AND IS THERE ANY MECHANISMS SET UP THAT IF, YOU KNOW, THEY DO THE MEDIATION AND THEY DON'T FEEL LIKE IT WAS FAIR, IS THERE ANY SORT OF APPEAL OR WHAT'S THE NEXT PROCESS FOR THAT? WHEN YOU SAY THEY, WHO ARE YOU REFERRING TO? THE COMPLAINANT, THE WAY IT'S SET UP IS THAT THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER WILL PROVIDE US KIND OF AN AFTER ACTION REPORT THAT TALKS ABOUT, NOT NECESSARILY ALL THE DETAILS, BUT WHETHER THEY BELIEVE IT IS A SUCCESSFUL MEDIATION OR NOT.
WE DO, WE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED WHAT HAPPENS IF EVERYBODY'S UNHAPPY.
AND I ANTICIPATE THERE ARE GONNA BE TIMES WHEN A MEDIATION'S DONE AND SOMEBODY'S NOT GONNA BE UNHAPPY.
WE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL ACTIONS THAT CAN OCCUR.
WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO HAPPEN IS WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE MEDIATIONS AND ONE SIDE, UH, LET'S SAY A COMPLAINT AND NOT BE SATISFIED WITH THE MEDIATION.
WE WANT THEM TO UNDERSTAND THAT IS THE, THE PROCESS.
ONCE IT'S, ONCE THE MEDIATION IS COMPLETED, WE WON'T HAVE A, ANOTHER FORMAL INVESTIGATION BECAUSE THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL OUTCOMES OR NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT'S GONNA COME OUT OF IT.
THE LAW WILL BE LOW LEVEL COMPLAINTS.
AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THE, UM, PROGRAM OVERVIEW.
HAS THIS BEEN TRIED IN OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, OR ARE YOU AWARE OF OR HAVE ANY DATA FROM THOSE OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES? I DO KNOW OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES HAVE MEDIATION PROGRAMS. I'M NOT AWARE
[00:55:01]
OF ANY DATA.IF AN OFFICER HAS BEEN FOUND IN THE MEDIATION TO HAVE VIOLATED POLICY, UH, WHAT HAPPENS AT THE END OF THAT MEDIATION? IS THAT OFFICER REFERRED FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION, OR IS THAT THE END OF IT? THAT'S A, TO BE DETERMINED, IT DEPENDS ON THE LEVEL OF THE ALLEGATION.
UH, I MEAN, THESE START OUT AS LOW LEVEL VIOLATIONS, AND IF THE OFFICER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT HE OR SHE VIOLATED A CRIME AND IT'S IN DURING THE MEDIATION PROCESS, AS AN EXAMPLE, IF, OKAY, I MADE A MISTAKE ON THIS REPORT THAT OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, PUT YOU AT A DISADVANTAGE, UH, I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I MADE A MISTAKE AND IT'S A MIS IT, IT IS AGAINST POLICY TO MAKE A MISTAKE.
AND THE OFFICER APOLOGIZES AND SAYS THAT HE OR SHE RECOGNIZES THE MISTAKE WAS MADE, THEN IT, IT'S, IT'S A CLOSED DEAL.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE OFFICERS ACKNOWLEDGE POLICY VIOLATIONS ON LOW LEVEL COMPLAINTS ONLY TO RECEIVE DISCIPLINE FOLLOWING THEIR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.
SO THE GOAL IS TO COME TO A SUCCESSFUL CONCLUSION, HOPEFULLY, SO THAT THE COMPLAINANT CAN HEAR THEIR COMPLAINT, THEY CAN HAVE A FACE-TO-FACE CONVERSATION WITH THE OFFICER, AND THEY CAN COME TO SOME UNDERSTANDING IN SOME AGREEMENT.
THE GOAL IS NOT TO ADD ADDITIONAL FORMAL PUNITIVE DISCIPLINE TO OFFICERS AFTER THE MEDIATION PROCESS.
CAN YOU GIVE ME SOME EXAMPLES OF SOME, WHAT YOU CONSIDER LOW LEVEL, UM, LOW LEVEL VIOLATIONS, THIS, UH, YOU KNOW, I HEAR FROM PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN ASSAULTED BY OFFICERS, SO ON.
WOULD THIS, WOULD THIS FORM BE APPROPRIATE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? YEAH.
USE OF FORCE IS NEVER IN, IN OUR OFFICE.
USE OF FORCE IS NEVER A LOW LEVEL VIOLATION.
LOW LEVEL VIOLATIONS WILL FALL UNDER DISCOURTESY.
I CALL, I I SAID A CUSS WORD THAT MAY HAVE OFFENDED YOU.
I, I PUT MISINFORMATION ON THE REPORT.
MAYBE I HEARD YOU WRONG AND I DIDN'T FILL THE REPORT OUT CORRECTLY.
99% OF THE ALLEGATIONS WILL BE FORMS OF DISCOURTESY FORMS OF SOME FORM OF REPORT WRITING OR MINOR PROCEDURAL AREA, MINOR PROCEDURAL THINGS.
UH, LET'S SAY YOU'RE ON SIXTH STREET, YOU'RE LEGALLY PARKED, I, I, I TOLD YOUR CAR BECAUSE I, I DIDN'T SEE THE SIGN THAT ALLOWED YOU TO PARK THERE.
BUT IN SOME RESPECTS, THAT'S, THAT MAY BE A LOW LEVEL COMPLAINT.
IF IT'S TRULY A MISTAKE THAT WAS MADE BY THE OFFICER USE OF FORCE, UH, BIAS BASED POLICING, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS WILL NEVER BE A LOW LEVEL COMPLAINT ELIGIBLE FOR MEDIATION.
ONE, ONE COMMENT FOR ME IS, I THINK IT GOES ALONG A SECOND TO COMMISSIONER, UM, I, IS THAT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF THE TYPE OF VIOLATIONS THAT YOU PLAN TO USE FOR THESE WERE LISTED CLEARLY BECAUSE I HAVE QUESTIONS ON SOMETHING LIKE BIAS AND DISRESPECTFUL, YOU KNOW, RACIAL, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THOSE IN MY VIEW, MAY, MAY RISE TO A THINK MORE THAN JUST, I'M SORRY, I APOLOGIZE AND I DON'T WANT THIS MEDIATION.
AND SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE HAVING SOME DIFFICULTY UNDERSTANDING WHAT'S THE LEVEL OF, YOU KNOW, WHERE DOES, WHAT DO YOU DRAW THE LINE AND WHAT SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS OF GEO ARE ELIGIBLE? YEAH, YEAH.
WHAT, WHAT ARE ELIGIBLE FOR MEDIATION? IS THAT MAYBE WHAT YEAH, WE WILL CONDUCT OUR PRELIMINARY REVIEW.
THERE'LL ALL BE FORMAL COMPLAINTS.
SO THERE'LL BE COMPLAINTS THAT A COMPLAINT SPECIALIST HAS LOOKED AT, A COMPLAINT INVESTIGATOR HAS LOOKED AT.
WE'VE WRITTEN A MEMO TO GO DOWN TO INTERNAL AFFAIRS.
IF IT'S A USE OF FORCE, IF IT'S BY SPACE POLICING, UH, IF IT'S INACCURATE REPORTS THAT WE PERCEIVE THAT'S BASED ON, THOSE AREN'T LOW LEVEL, I WILL TELL YOU, I CANNOT ITEMIZE WHAT A, MY LOW LEVEL OFFENSE IS GONNA BE.
BECAUSE THERE'LL BE SOMETHING I LEAVE OFF THE LIST AND ALL OF A SUDDEN I'VE DOCUMENTED THESE ARE THE LOW LEVEL VIOLATIONS.
WE WON'T BE ABLE TO ITEMIZE THEM FOR YOU.
BUT AT LEAST A LIST OF EXAMPLES ARE TYPICAL, BECAUSE CLEARLY ONE OF THE THINGS I NOTICE IS THAT AS WE GO THROUGH THE REVIEWS, THERE ARE SOME CODES THAT SHOW UP MORE OFTEN THAN OTHERS.
AND SO YOU FIGURE WHAT THE, THE HOPE THAT IF YOU WANNA MAKE THIS PRACTICAL, YOU LOOK FOR THOSE CODES THAT SHOW UP OFTEN THAT DO FALL INTO THIS LEVEL OF LOWER AND MAKE SURE YOU, I YOU CLEARLY ITEMIZE.
THERE'S TWO OF THOSE THAT WE KNOW THAT THEN WE KNOW YOU BENEFIT FINANCIALLY BY, I AVOID INVESTIGATION ON THESE, AND YOU'RE TARGETING THE RIGHT LEVEL OF, OF, OF THING.
UM, ANOTHER LAST QUESTION I HAVE, I GUESS MAYBE
NORMALLY WHEN I'VE SEEN MEDIATION USED AND PEOPLE AGREE TO MEDIATION, IT'S BASICALLY YOU AGREE TO MEDIATION AND YOU AGREE TO, TO LIVE BY THE
[01:00:01]
RESOLUTION OR THE CONCLUSION OF THE MEDIATOR.AND YOU, IT'S ALMOST LIKE A PROMISE THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA ESCALATE AFTER THIS WHATEVER YOU DECIDE, WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT AND DONE THIS SEEMS, UH, IN A, A SIMILAR THING.
SO I THINK THERE'S A CERTAIN BURDEN TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMPLAINANT, THE, UH, KNOWS, YOU KNOW, THAT, UH, YEAH.
SO AM I INTERPRETING THIS CORRECTLY? YES.
DRC IS A, THEY'VE BEEN AROUND FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.
LIKE I SAY, THEY ARE ALL LICENSED AND TRAINED MEDIATORS THAT ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE REQUIREMENTS FOR MEDIATORS.
SO, BUT THEY GOING, THE COMPLAINANT GOING KNOWING, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER RULE, I'M GONNA HAVE TO LIVE WITH THAT.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE COMPROMISE.
AND I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE, OBVIOUSLY IF THEY, IF THEY GET TO MEDIATION AND THE COMPLAINANT IS NOT SATISFIED, THEY CAN'T NECESSARILY DIVULGE WHAT HAPPENED IN IT, BUT THEY CAN GO TO OTHER OPTIONS IF THEY FEEL MEDIATION HAS FAILED, I GUESS.
NOT WITHIN OUR OFFICE, NOT WITHIN MEDIATION IS PART OF THE PROCESS.
IT'S A CHOICE YOU MAKE TO MEDIATE.
AND THEN, UM, SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF IT'S A LOW LEVEL CASE, THEN IT'S NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING THAT THE OFFICER WOULD BE PUNISHED FOR, MAYBE JUST LIKE A, AN APOLOGY AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
IS THAT CORRECT? AND IF SO, IS THERE GOING TO BE ANY MECHANISM TO KEEP TRACK OF WHETHER INDIVIDUAL OFFICERS ARE HAVING TO USE MEDIATION OVER AGAIN? AND AT WHICH POINT WOULD THAT TURN INTO, UM, SOMETHING NEEDING TO HAPPEN TO THE OFFICER? YES.
WE, WE, WE, WE HAVE DESIGNS TO TRACK ALL MEDIATIONS, AND THAT FALLS UNDER A DIFFERENT UMBRELLA BECAUSE, UH, WE WILL SEE THE MEDIATION.
AND WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS WE HAVE A MATRIX THAT TALKS ABOUT, OKAY, IF THIS IS YOUR FIRST EPISODE OF THIS, THIS IS THE RECOMMENDATION.
IF YOU HAVE THIS MANY EPISODES OF THIS, IT, IT, IT ESCALATES.
SO, I MEAN, WE WOULD KEEP TRACK OF THEM IN OUR OFFICE AND NATURALLY IF I SEE, OKAY, KEVIN MASTERS HAS HAD TWO PRIOR MEDIATIONS FOR A SIMILAR, OR EVEN JUST TWO PRIOR MEDIATION THAT MY RED FLAG GOES UP.
SO THOSE ARE THE, AT THAT POINT, IT WOULD PROBABLY NOT BE ELIGIBLE, OR WE WOULDN'T RECOMMEND AN OFFICER PARTICIPATE IN MULTIPLE MEDIATIONS, EVEN IF THE VIOLATIONS WEREN'T OF SIMILAR NATURE AT THAT POINT.
SO THE RESULT COULD BE THAT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE MEDIATORS THAT THE OFFICER GOES AND TAKES TRAINING AND, YOU KNOW, HR TRAINING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IS THAT CORRECT? I MEAN, THAT, THAT COULD BE THE, THAT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE SOMETIMES THAT'S ACTUALLY THE OUTCOME OF, EVEN, EVEN WHEN A FULL INVESTIGATION, SOMETIMES THE OUTCOME IS YOU NEED TRAINING.
I'M WHAT, WHAT WONDERING IF, IF, IF THE MEDIATOR WOULD HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU NEED TO TAKE SOME SPECIAL TRAINING.
I, I'M, I'M NOT GONNA SAY WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO, BUT I CAN SEE A SCENARIO WHERE THAT'S PART OF THE MEDIATION WHERE THE COMPLAINT AND THE OFFICER AGREE, YEAH, I, I I NEED TO, I'LL DO THIS.
SO I CAN SEE THAT AS A REASONABLE OUTCOME ON SOME CASES.
AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION IS, UM, ARE, ARE THESE MEETINGS GOING TO BE RECORDED? ARE THEY ON BODY CAMS? WHAT HAPPENS IF EVENTUALLY, UM, SOMEONE WANTS TO TAKE THIS TO CIVIL COURT, WOULD THEY JUST SUBPOENA THAT MEDIATOR? OR IS THERE BODY CAM FOOTAGE OF THIS MEDIATION? THERE WILL NOT BE BODY-WORN CAMERA, UH, THERE, UH, BWC OF THE MEDIATION, UH, I, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT IT, BUT I DON'T RECALL THE SPECIFIC PROCESS THAT DRC WILL USE AS IT RELATES TO RECORDING.
UH, I, I CAN'T ANSWER THAT, BUT I'LL GIVE YOU AN ANSWER TO IT.
BUT I, I WILL TELL YOU THERE WILL BE NO BWC BECAUSE IT'S A PROCESS THAT'S GONNA BE SEPARATE FROM POLICE AS WELL AS SEPARATE FROM A PO.
IT'S WHATEVER DRCS POLICIES ARE AS IT REC AS IT RELATES TO RECORDING MEDIATIONS.
IF THEY HAVE A POLICY, WE DON'T RECORD MEDIATIONS, THEN THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE RECORDED.
YOU, SO IS THE PRESENTATION, CAN YOU PUT I HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, AND I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE YOU A PERSPECTIVE OF A COMMUNITY MEMBER.
UM, IT ALMOST FEELS LIKE A CHANCE FOR REHABILITATION FOR THE OFFICER WITHOUT ANY CONSEQUENCES, UM, BEING RECORDED.
UM, AND ALSO A CHANCE FOR THE COMMUNITY TO ENGAGE WITH THE OFFICER.
BUT IF IT IS NOT BEING RECORDED, IF IT IS JUST THE MEDIATOR AND THE CITIZEN AND THE OUTCOMES AND THE METRICS AREN'T PUBLIC, I THINK THAT CREATES TRANSPARENCY CONCERNS.
AND THEN THE OTHER PART OF THAT IS WHEN IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR A CITIZEN TO HAVE REPRESENTATION IN THE MEDIATION? AND WILL THE OFFICER BE AFFORDED REPRESENTATION IN THE MEDIATION? THOSE ARE MY
[01:05:01]
QUESTIONS FIRST.AND THEN UPON THOSE ANSWERS, I THINK I HAVE A COUPLE FOLLOW UP.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING REPRESENTATION WILL NOT BE INVITED TO THE MEDIATION.
UH, AND IN TERMS OF TRACKING, WE WILL TRACK THE OUTCOMES OF THE MEDIATIONS, WHETHER THEY WERE SUCCESSFUL MEDIATIONS OR NOT, AS WELL AS ANY AGREEMENTS THAT ARE MADE WITHIN THE MEDIATION TO, TO THE, TO COMMISSIONER GREAVES EXAMPLE, IF BOTH PARTIES AGREE THAT YEAH, THE OFFICER NEEDS SOME TRAINING, THAT WILL STILL BE TRACKED BECAUSE THAT WILL BE BECOME PART OF HIS OR HER ACTUAL INTERNAL AFFAIRS RECORD BECAUSE IT'S AN OUTCOME OF A FORMAL INVESTIGATION.
I WOULD FIND THAT HARD TO BELIEVE THAT AN OFFICER WOULD SAY, YEAH, I DO NEED SOME RETRAINING.
OH, I SEE IT HAPPENING A HUNDRED TIMES.
I, I MEAN IF, YEAH, BUT I'M JUST SAYING IT IS, IT IS REALLY A HARD FOR, AGAIN, I'M JUST COMING FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE CITIZEN TO BELIEVE THAT OH YEAH.
I MESSED UP ON SIXTH STREET THAT NIGHT.
LIKE THAT'S JUST, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THAT WOULD BE PLAUSIBLE.
AND, BUT I GET IT BECAUSE YOU'VE BEEN ON THE INSIDE, BUT THAT'S JUST THE PERCEPTION OF AN OUTSIDER.
UM, THAT IF THEY WERE ALREADY GONNA HOLD THEMSELVES ACCOUNTABLE, THEN THEY'D BE REPORTING THEMSELVES.
AND SO WHAT CAN WE DO TO ENSURE THE COMMUNITY THAT THIS PROCESS IS FAIR AND NOT LIKE A OPPORTUNITY TO WHITEWASH THE RECORD? UM, AND ESPECIALLY IT IS HARD BECAUSE IF WE CAN'T CODIFY WHAT OFFENSES FALL INTO WHAT CATEGORY OR WHAT IS HIGH AND LOW LEVEL, YOU JUST KNOW IT.
WHEN YOU SEE IT, IT'S REALLY HARD TO BE ABLE TO REALLY JUSTIFY HOW THAT DETERMINATION GOT MADE.
AND SO I'M LOOKING AT STRUCTURE AND HOW LONG HAS THIS, WELL, MY QUESTION, HAS THIS PROGRAM ALREADY STARTED OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE PLANNING TO START? AND THEN I THINK YOU MENTIONED, UM, YOU WERE WORKING WITH OFFICER COMPTON, IS THAT CORRECT? UH, WE SIGNED THE AGREEMENT WITH THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER IN NOVEMBER OF 2025.
SO IT'S A PROGRAM THAT WE CAN OFFER AS OF NOVEMBER, 2025.
AND WE CURRENTLY WORK WITH THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DIVISION.
THAT COMMANDER IS NO LONGER THERE.
THAT COMMANDER WAS, WAS THE, UH, KIND OF THE RESOURCE THAT, THAT STARTED THE CONVERSATION.
BECAUSE I THOUGHT, I THOUGHT WE MET HIM WHEN WE DID OUR LITTLE TOUR OF THE ACADEMY.
SO IT'S ALMOST, UM, SIX MONTHS OLD.
UM, IS THERE ANY METRICS RIGHT NOW THAT YOU COULD, ARE THERE ANY METRICS RIGHT NOW THAT YOU COULD SHARE WITH US ABOUT HOW THE PROCESS HAS BEEN GOING? NO.
WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY MEDIATION REFERRALS.
AND DO YOU THINK THAT'S JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT OR PEOPLE AFRAID OF IT, OR? I WOULD SAY, I WOULD SAY IT'S BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T IDENTIFIED A CASE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO BE MEDIATED.
BUT AGAIN, WHAT IS THAT? WHAT IS THAT THRESHOLD? THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
I HOW DO WE GET BEYOND, WE KNOW IT WHEN WE SEE IT.
HOW DOES THE PUBLIC KNOW IF THEIR CASE IS ELIGIBLE TO BE MEDIATED? WELL, THEY WILL KNOW BECAUSE WE WILL, WE WILL MAKE NOTIFICATION TO THEM THAT THIS CASE IS ELIGIBLE FOR MEDIATION, THE OFFICER'S CHAIN OF COMMAND, AND THE OFFICER HAS AGREED TO THE MEDIATION.
SO IT'S, IT'S AN OFFER THAT'S BASED ON AN OBSERVATION.
LIKE I SAY, I, I CAN'T SAY THAT EVERY DISCOURTEOUS CASE IS GONNA BE ELIGIBLE FOR MEDIATION.
I MEAN, I, I I, I'M SAYING THIS IS, WITHOUT HAVING A RUBRIC, IF YOU WILL, IT'S REALLY HARD TO NOT SAY THAT THIS IS SUBJECTIVE.
IT IS NOT OBJECTIVE BECAUSE IT DEPENDS ON WHO'S MAKING THAT DECISION TO REFER TO MEDIATION OR NOT.
AND THUS FAR, YOU HAVEN'T SEEN ANY CASES.
BUT IF THERE'S NO CONSISTENT THRESHOLD, THERE'S NO CONSISTENT, YOU KNOW, GATES, AND I KNOW IF YOU'VE SEEN ONE CASE, YOU'VE SEEN ONE CASE.
BUT IF THERE'S A, ALMOST LIKE A TEMPLATE OR A WAY THAT PEOPLE COULD KNOW THAT, OKAY, I DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH, UM, THE LONG ARDUOUS PROCESS OF REPORTING OF MY CASE AND THEN DOING ALL THE OTHER PROCESSES, I CAN GET MEDIATION.
BUT IF THERE'S NO CODIFIED METRIC TO SAY WHAT MEETS THAT, AND IT CAN'T BE CLEARLY ARTICULATED, THEN IT IS SUBJECTIVE
[01:10:02]
AND IT IS GOING TO GIVE THE COMMUNITY THE PERSPECTIVE THAT PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO COVER FOR OFFICERS.IF I WERE A CITIZEN, UM, AND I KNOW THE INTENT IS NOT THAT, BUT PERCEPTION IS REALITY.
THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, COMMISSIONER.
IT, IT IS A SUBJECTIVE PROCESS.
IT'S SUBJECTED TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ALLEGATION.
SO I I, IF WE TRY TO MAKE THIS OR TRY TO MAKE IT APPEAR THAT IT'S NOT A SUBJECTIVE PROCESS, THAT'S DISINGENUOUS.
THIS IS A VERY SUBJECTIVE PROCESS BECAUSE IT'S BASED ON SPECIFIC INCIDENT, A SPECIFIC ACTION IN EVERY INCIDENT THAT'S COMPLETELY DIFFERENT BASED ON THE CIRCUMSTANCE.
BUT THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH, THAT WE SHOULD TAKE SOME SUBJECTIVITY OUT OF IT, BECAUSE PEOPLE ALREADY FEEL LIKE YOUR POSITION ON THIS BOARD, JUST BECAUSE OF YOUR HISTORY AS BEING A POLICE OFFICER, MAKES YOU PREJUDICIAL TO PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT TO THE OFFICER.
I KNOW THAT YOU ARE AN UPSTANDING CITIZEN AND YOU WANT TO DO RIGHT BY EVERYONE.
BUT AGAIN, THAT APPEARANCE AND THAT PERCEPTION CAN PLAY INTO THE HOW PEOPLE CHOOSE TO INTERACT.
AND IF WE COULD BUILD IN SOME GUARDRAILS TO MAKE PEOPLE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE PROCESS, WITH MORE CODIFIED MECHANISMS, AND I'M SURE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE THOUGHT THROUGH AND WORKED THROUGH.
AND I'M NOT SAYING IT'S GONNA HAPPEN TODAY, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE YOU A CITIZEN'S PERSPECTIVE OF IT AND WHAT WE COULD DO TO MAKE IT BETTER SO THAT WE CAN MAKE IT AN EFFECTIVE PROGRAM.
'CAUSE I ULTIMATELY, I THINK IT IS A REALLY GOOD IDEA.
I THINK IT COULD HAVE TREMENDOUS BENEFIT, BUT I'M ALSO LOOKING AT THE BARRIERS TO WHY IT MAY NOT BE ADOPTED BY THE COMMUNITY.
BUT THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS, HONESTLY.
AND, AND MAY I ADD, UM, COMMISSIONER FAR, THANK YOU FOR THAT COMMENT AND THAT, THAT FEEDBACK, AND THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE CAN LOOK INTO.
BUT LET ME JUST REMIND THE COMMISSIONERS THAT THIS IS A VOLUNTARY PROCESS.
AND SO IF WE IDENTIFY A CASE THAT WE BELIEVE IS ELIGIBLE FOR, UH, MEDIATION, AND WE GET THE OFFICER TO AGREE, AND WE GO BACK TO THE COMPLAINANT AND SAY, LOOK, WE KNOW THAT THE OFFICER WAS RUDE.
HE HAS AGREED TO GO, HE OR SHE HAS AGREED TO GO TO MEDIATION, AND THE COMPLAINANT SAID, NOPE, NOT INTERESTED.
I THINK THIS IS, THIS SHOULD MOVE FORWARD, UM, WITH AN INVESTIGATION.
THEN THEY HAVE THAT OPTION WHEN WE GO TO THE COMPLAINANT, THE, THIS IS A, THE COMPLAINANT MAKES A DETERMINATION WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
AND IF THEY SAY, I KNOW YOU IDENTIFIED THAT AS A LOW LEVEL COMPLAINT, I DO NOT, AND IT'S NOT A PROCESS THAT I WANNA GO THROUGH.
I I THINK EVERYBODY IN THE, IN THE PROCESS, UM, FROM THE OFFICER TO THE COMPLAINANT, UM, HAVE THE OPTION OF ACCEPTING MEDIATION.
BUT LIKE I SAID, I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE EQUITY AND PERCEPTION OF IT JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE, THE METRICS FOR IT AREN'T QUANTIFIED.
BUT THANK YOU BOTH FOR ANSWERING THE COMMITTEE'S QUESTIONS.
I HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY IF I MAY.
UM, I ACTUALLY, UM, I DO A LOT OF OPEN RECORDS ACTIVITIES AND IN NEW JERSEY, I DID A MEDIATION PROGRAM, UM, AND THERE WAS NO CONSEQUENCES FOR THE, UM, PERSON OR THE AGENCY I WAS COMPLAINING AGAINST.
SO IT'S ACTUALLY KIND OF A BREATH OF FRESH AIR THAT IF YOU DO, UH, IDENTIFY SOMETHING AS, UH, ELIGIBLE FOR MEDIATION AND THE PERSON WANTS TO GO FORWARD, THE COMPLAINANT WANTS TO GO FORWARD WITH MEDIATION, THAT THERE ARE SOME CONSEQUENCES FOR THE OFFICER IF THEY DON'T AT LEAST ACT IN GOOD FAITH.
UM, I, I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA AS LONG AS THE, THE PEOPLE THAT GO INTO IT UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE MEDIATION, IT, IT WOULD APPEAR IS A BIT BINDING ON, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT IT'S CONFIDENTIAL AND THAT WHATEVER THE MEDIATOR DECIDES IS KIND OF, THAT'S, THAT'S IT.
YOU KNOW, ONE, UH, COMMENT I GUESS I HAVE ON THE FINANCIAL SIDE IS, UH, THIS IS BEING SOLD OR BEING PRESENTED AS, UH, AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SAVINGS BECAUSE IT, IF IT AVOIDS THE COST OF AN INVESTIGATION, THEN, UH, YOU KNOW, IT, THERE'S DISA ADVANTAGE THERE FOR EVERYBODY.
BUT, UH, DO WE HAVE ANY NUMBERS TALK ABOUT METRICS ON THE COST OF AVERAGE COST OF
[01:15:01]
SOME OF THESE INVEST OR INVESTIGATIONS APOS AND OF, OF, FOR OF ALL, YOU WILL NOT KNOW, BUT, YOU KNOW, UH, THE COST OF THE AVERAGE COST OF AN INVESTIGATION? ANY, NO, I, WE DON'T HAVE THOSE NUMBERS.YEAH, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S, I MEAN, THAT'S JUST THE, AND THE OTHER COMMENT I WANT THEM TO MAKE TO CO, UM, COMMISSIONER OF FLOODS IS THAT I, YOU KNOW, WITH THE A, THIS IS ANECDOTAL DATA BECAUSE WE, ALL OF US HAVE ONLY REVIEWED A HANDFUL OF CASES, BUT I REMEMBER SEEING A CASE WHERE ALL, ALL THE COMPLAINANT WANTED WAS AN APOLOGY, AND I KEPT THINKING, WELL, YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS LOOKED LIKE AN WOULD'VE BEEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR NICK TO GET TOGETHER AND FIGURE OUT SOMETHING THERE.
AND I, I'M NOT SURE IF THE OFFICER WOULD'VE AGREED, BUT IT SEEMED THAT THERE'S SOME THINGS WHERE THE, THE, EVEN THE COMPLAINANT PUTS INTO PERSPECTIVE HOW OFFENDED HE IS AND WHAT HE WOULD WANT, UH, APOLOGY.
AND I THOUGHT MAYBE THAT THOSE ARE POSSIBLE CASES FOR MEDIATION.
BUT YEAH, BEFORE WE STOOD UP THE PROGRAM, WE ACTUALLY HAD A, A CASE OR TWO WHERE THE OFFICER HAD ASKED FOR A MEDIATION.
SO, AND WE HADN'T STOOD IT UP, SO WE COULDN'T GO THROUGH WITH IT.
SO CAN YOU PUT THE PRESENTATION BACK UP FOR JUST A SECOND? I WANNA MAKE SURE I GET THROUGH ALL MY SLIDES.
OH, YEAH, THAT'S THE FINAL SLIDE.
I JUST WANNA REMIND THE COMMISSION THAT THE NEXT OVERSIGHT IMPLEMENTATION WORK GROUP MEETING IS SATURDAY JUNE 6TH, 2026.
IT'S GONNA BE AT THE CONLEY GUERRERO SENIOR ACTIVITY CENTER, 8 0 8 N STREET HERE IN AUSTIN.
WE WELCOME Y'ALL TO COME OUT AND JOIN US AND INVITE FAMILY AND FRIENDS.
CAN I ASK ONE MORE QUESTION, UM, REGARDING THE MEDIATION.
IF THE OFFICER ACCEPTS THE MEDIATION AND THE MEDIATOR SUGGESTED, UH, X ACTIVITY FOR, UM, THE OFFICER TO COMPLETE AND GIVE THEM LIKE A TIMELINE TO DO IT, DOES THE OFFICER'S CHAIN OF COMMAND HAVE TO AGREE AND SIGN OFF ON THAT? OR IS IT THE MEDIATOR'S DECISION FINAL IN THAT IF, IF THERE'S A MEDIATION OUTCOME THAT THE OFFICER HAS AGREED TO, THEN HE OR SHE WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE TO COMPLY WITH WHATEVER THE AGREEMENT IS.
AND WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? IT LOOKS LIKE EBD, WHENEVER AN OFFICER RECEIVES FORMAL DISCIPLINE AND THEY GET WHAT'S CALLED EBD EDUCATIONAL BASED TRAINING, THEY GIVE 'EM A TIMELINE IN WHICH TO DO IT, AND IT'S TRACKED.
AND IF IT'S NOT COMPLETED WITHIN THAT TIMELINE, THEN UH, DISCIPLINE IS ADMINISTERED.
SO IF THAT HAPPENS, IF THE OFFICER AGREES TO SOMETHING DOESN'T COMPLETE IT, THEN THAT IS TRACKED BY YOU ALL AND YOU ALL WILL REPORT TO INTERNAL AFFAIRS? I WOULD SAY YES.
WE'LL, WE'LL, WE, WE WILL BE TRACKING OUTCOMES AND AGREEMENTS, YES.
AND, AND DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THE CONTRACT WITH DRC IS? IS IT LIKE, IS IT ON A RETAINER OR IS IT PER INDIVIDUAL CASE? WE HAVE A TWO YEAR AGREEMENT WITH THEM, WITH A MAXIMUM 6,000, BUT WE ARE CHARGED BASED ON INDIVIDUAL, UM, MEDIATIONS.
SO WE HAVE AN UP TO FOR THE FIRST TWO YEARS.
IS THERE A WRITTEN GUIDELINE FOR WHAT YOU CONSIDER ELIGIBLE FOR MEDIATION AND NOT ELIGIBLE FOR MEDIATION? THAT'S KIND OF THE DISCUSSION.
WE'VE, WE'VE, WE'VE BEEN HAVING, UH, WHAT WE HAVE SAID ARE LOW LEVEL COMPLAINTS, AND I WILL GO THROUGH A PROCESS TO TRY TO IDENTIFY AS BEST I CAN WITH AN ASTERISK, NOT FULLY ENCOMPASSING, BUT I'LL OUTLINE IN A SEPARATE DOCUMENT, UH, ONE PAGE.
THESE ARE THE TYPES OF THESE, UH, OF, OF COMPLAINTS THAT MAY BE ELIGIBLE FOR MEDIATION.
I'D BE VERY INTERESTED TO SEE THAT.
PLEASE, WE'LL GET IT TOGETHER, AND IT, I'LL, I'LL HAVE IT FOR YOUR NEXT MEETING.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
UM, WE ALLOW US OR CURIOUS ABOUT WHAT THIS WAS ABOUT THE, I'M MOVING ON
[6. Staff briefing on the Public Safety Commission’s September 2025 recommendation, including review of written responses to Recommendation No. 20250908-006.]
TO ITEM NUMBER SIX IN THE AGENDA, UH, STAFF BRIEFING IN PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION SEPTEMBER, 2025.RECOMMENDATIONS, INCLUDING REVIEW OF WRITTEN RESPONSES TO RECOMMENDATION 2 25 0 9 0 8 DASH 0 0 6.
AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.
GAIL MCCANN, DIRECTOR, UH, AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT.
UH, I'D LIKE TO TAKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON RECOMMENDATION 0 0 6 FROM THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION.
I'D LIKE TO OFFER AN OVERVIEW OF THE ACTIONS A PO HAS TAKEN IN RESPONSE TO THE
[01:20:01]
RECOMMENDATION, ALONG WITH CURRENT STATUS OF OUR REPORTING, COMPLIANCE, AND TRANSPARENCY EFFORTS.SO, ON SEPTEMBER 8TH, UM, THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION APPROVED A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL AND THE CITY REQUIRING FOUR KEY ACTIONS FROM A PO.
THE RECOMMENDATION ALSO CALLED FOR A PO TO PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES ADDRESSING COMPLIANCE STATUS, IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINES, AND OPERATION CONSIDERATION.
UM, EACH OF THOSE ITEMS THIS EVENING WANTED TO PROVIDE FOR C-P-R-C-A SUMMARY OF OUR RESPONSES.
UH, THE SCOPE OF THE, UH, RECOMMENDATION WAS RELATED TO ANNUAL REPORTING COMPLIANCE, PUBLIC DATA ACCESS, ACCESSIBILITY COMPLAINTS, UM, PROCESS AND OUTCOMES, UH, CPRC, AND THERE WAS SOME MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AS WELL.
AT THE END OF THAT RECOMMENDATION, WHICH I'LL, UH, ALSO, UM, UPDATE YOU ON, JUST FOR BACKGROUND, THIS RECOMMENDATION FOLLOWS AN EARLIER COMMISSION DISCUSSION WITH A PO IN JULY OF 2025 REGARDING APOS RESPO, UH, REPORTING AND TRANSPARENCY OBLIGATIONS.
GIVEN THE COMPLEXITY OF THE ISSUES RAISED AT THAT MEETING, I, AS THE DIRECTOR, DETERMINED THAT RESPONDING IN WRITING WOULD BEST SUPPORT THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION'S DELIBERATIVE PROCESS, AND ALSO ALLOW ENGAGEMENT FROM A MORE INFORMED POSITION DURING FUTURE DISCUSSIONS.
I ALSO WANTED TO ENSURE PRECISION IN OUR RESPONSES AND ALLOW A PO THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE, UH, COMPLETE INFORMATION, THOUGHTFUL INFORMATION, UH, AND, BUT HOWEVER, THE COMMISSION, UH, SUBSEQUENTLY ADVANCED ITS QUESTIONS THROUGH A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION, UH, TO THE CITY MANAGER AND COUNCIL, THE ORDINANCE.
UM, THIS IS REGARDING, UM, THE ANNUAL REPORT.
THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION, UM, MADE A REQUEST TO PRESENT THE MOST RECENT ANNUAL REPORT OF A, UH, OF, OF THE ANNUAL REPORT PUBLICLY, UH, POSTED AT A PUBLICLY POSTED, UH, COUNCIL MEETING.
AND SO, APS RESPONSE TO THAT IS ON THE 2024, UH, ANNUAL REPORT, UH, WAS, UH, PRESENTED TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL VIA MEMO ON OCTOBER 13TH ON 2025, UH, IN 2020.
THE 2020 F UH, FOUR REPORT WAS ALSO PUBLISHED TO OUR WEBSITE AND PUBLISHED, UM, PUBLICLY ON THE FOLLOWING DAY ON OCTOBER 14TH, 2024.
AND THEN WE PRESENTED THE REPORT TO MAYOR COUNSEL ON DECEMBER 9TH, 2025.
THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES THAT A PO AT LEAST ONCE PER YEAR, PROVIDE BOTH A WRITTEN AND ORAL REPORT AT AN OPEN, UM, CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT THE TIME, THE RECOMMENDATION WAS ADVANCED TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 8TH.
WE HAD NOT PUBLISHED THE 2024 ANNUAL REPORT AT THAT TIME, SO WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE ANNUAL REPORT TIME LINE KIND OF LATER IN THE PRESENTATION.
UM, THERE WAS ALSO A REQUEST FROM A RECOMMENDATION, RATHER, FROM THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION, UH, TO PUBLISH A COMPLIANCE PLAN RELATED TO OUR, UH, COMPLIANCE WITH THE AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT ACT.
A PO OPERATES IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT ACT, WHICH SERVES AS OUR GOVERNING FRAMEWORK FOR, UM, WHAT WE DO.
A PD UH, A PO DOES NOT MAINTAIN A SEPARATE STANDALONE COMPLIANCE PLAN.
UH, COMPLIANCE IS EMBEDDED IN OUR POLICIES AND OUR PROCEDURES AND OUR REPORTING PRACTICES TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE STAYING ALIGNED WITH THE OVERSIGHT ACT.
WE ARE OPEN TO IDENTIFYING OPPORTUNITIES TO FURTHER DOCUMENT ANY OR CLARIFY, UH, OUR COMPLIANCE APPROACH, UM, WHERE WE FIND VALUE IN THAT COMPLAINT DATA, UH, DATABASE.
UH, THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION, UM, RECOMMENDED THAT WE CREATE A SEARCHABLE PUBLIC COMPLIANCE DATABASE.
UH, COMPLAINT DOCUMENTS ARE ALREADY SEARCHABLE ON OUR WEBSITE.
UH, WE UNDERSTOOD THAT THERE WERE SOME CHALLENGES WITH THE INTERFACE OF OUR WEBSITE, BUT WE WERE ALSO AWARE THAT THE CITY WAS GOING TO, UM, LAUNCH A NEW WEBSITE.
SO AT THE TIME OF THIS RECOMMENDATION, AT THE TIME, THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION ADVANCED THIS RECOMMENDATION, A P'S WEBSITE WAS ALREADY SEARCHABLE AND PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE.
[01:25:01]
WERE AWARE OF COMMUNITY CONCERNS REGARDING LIMITATIONS IN SEARCH FUNCTIONALITY, AND THERE WERE OCCASIONAL, UM, MISTRANSLATION OF POSTED CONTENT.AS I NOTED, THE CITY WAS IN THE PROCESS OF REBUILDING ITS WEBSITE ON A NEW PLATFORM DESIGNED TO IMPROVE SOME OF THESE ISSUES THAT WE WERE HEARING OUT IN THE COMMUNITY.
SO ON MARCH 19TH, THE CITY, UM, LAUNCHED A NEW SITE, UM, WITH A, IT HAS A CLEANER PAY STRUCTURE, A MORE INTUITIVE NAVIGATION.
IT HAS ENHANCED SEARCH FUNCTIONALITY, AND THEN IT'S JUST AN OVERALL SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT FOR THE USER.
SO THE USER IS HAVING A MUCH BETTER, UH, USER EXPERIENCE.
AND SO, AT THE TIME THIS RECOMMENDATION WAS ADVANCED, WE WERE AWARE THAT COMPLAINANTS WERE HAVING SOME OF THESE ISSUES, UH, ON OUR WEBSITE, BUT NOT ON JUST OUR WEBSITE, BUT ON, ON DEPARTMENT WEBSITES ACROSS THE CITY.
SO SINCE THE NEW, UH, WEBSITE LUNCH, WE ARE, UH, ANTICIPATING THAT WE WILL NOT HAVE SOME OF THE SEARCH FUNCTIONALITY ISSUES THAT WE WERE HAVING IN THE PAST.
THE PUBLIC SAFETY REC, UM, THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION ALSO RECOMMENDED, UM, THAT, THAT THE COUNCIL ASSIGN A, A CITY CLERK STAFF AS YOUR LIAISON.
UM, THIS RECOMMENDATION WAS NOTED TO HELP ALLEVIATE, UH, THE STRAIN ON THE AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT STAFF RESOURCES AND TO PROVIDE, UH, CONSISTENCY AND, UH, EXPERTISE REGARDING OPEN MEETINGS.
SO, UM, A PO HAD NOT ARTICULATED ANY, UH, RESTRAINT ON OUR RESOURCES.
UH, WE HAVE NOT EXPERIENCED ANY RESTRAINT IN SUPPORTING THE COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION, AND WE CONTINUE TO DO SO CONSISTENCY CONSISTENTLY.
UM, THE OFFICE HAS THE NECESSARY LEGAL SUPPORT TO ADDRESS QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE TEXAS OPEN MEETING ACTS AND ANY OTHER CITY PROCESS.
UM, WHILE WE ARE NOT AWARE OF ANY, UM, CAPACITY ISSUES OR CHALLENGES, UH, IN THE EVENT THAT THAT WAS THE OCCUR, WE DON'T ANTICIPATE THAT, BUT WE WOULD COORDINATE WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND THE CLERK'S OFFICE TO MITIGATE ANY IMPACT SHOULD THOSE ISSUES ARISE.
BUT WE ARE, WE ARE NOT HAVING ANY ISSUES IN TERMS OF, UH, NEEDING THAT, UM, SUPPORT OR HAVING RESOURCE ISSUES RELATED TO THE, UH, CPRC.
I GUESS I'D LIKE TO STOP HERE AND MAKE A, A COMMENT, UM, JUST TO BE SURE, AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS WHO MAY HAVE BEEN AT THE TIME THEY'RE PRESENT, IT'S CLEAR THAT THE, OFTEN THE, THE SAFETY COMMISSION VIEWING THE DIFFICULTIES IN WHICH A-C-P-R-C WAS HAVING IS, IS HAVING IN RAMPING UP AND GETTING THINGS DONE, MAY HAVE ATTRIBUTED OR RIGHTFULLY SO ATTRIBUTED THAT TO LACK OF SUPPORT OR STAFF IS A ISSUE.
SOMETHING, UH, THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE THAT MAYBE PRESENT THEN, I DON'T, NOT SURE IF ANYBODY WANTS TO COMMENT ON, ON THIS, BUT, UH, THIS IS, UH, BASIC.
BASICALLY, THIS IS BASICALLY SAYING STAFF LIAISON AND THE STAFF AND WHATEVER STAFF, UH, UH, SUPPORT YOU'RE GIVEN CPRC IS NOT SUFFICIENT.
MAYBE THEY NEED THEIR OWN DIRECT SUPPORT FROM A CITY.
UM, MY MY IMPRESSION IS THAT, UM, THERE MAY BE ONE MORE THAN ONE PER PEOPLE, ONE, ONE PERSON IN THE COMMITTEE, OUR, YOU KNOW, THAT MAY, MAY BELIEVE THAT THERE'S A RE THERE.
THAT MIGHT BE ONE OF THE EXPLANATIONS OF THE DIFFICULTY.
AND SINCE WE DON'T, WE HAVE NOT PUT A YEAR IN REPORT, AND WE HAVE NOT PUT IN A, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, SUMMARIZED SOME OF OUR CRITICISM THAT THAT IS, UM, THAT'S A FAIR, I THINK THAT'S A FAIR ASSESSMENT OF POSSIBILITY.
ANY COMMENTS FROM ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER? YEAH, I'LL, I'LL COMMENT AND SAY THAT.
UM, I THINK A LOT OF THAT IS GONNA COME DOWN TO HOW YOU, UM, WHO YOU ASK AS FAR AS HOW TO INTERPRET CITY CODE 2 15 4.
UM, I GUESS I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT FOR NOW.
UM, THIS WAS A QUESTION RELATED TO THE ANNUAL REPORT SCHEDULE AND, AND WHO HAS ADDED AND REVIEW AUTHORITY OVER THE ANNUAL REPORT.
SO OUR ANNUAL REPORT IS BASED ON ALL COMPLAINTS FILED WITHIN THE CALENDAR YEAR, AND WE WANT TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE PROVIDING COMPLETE AND ACCURATE DATA WHEN WE ARE PUTTING OUT OUR REPORT AD'S.
INTERNAL AFFAIRS DIVISION HAS 180 DAYS TO COMPLETE AN INVESTIGATION.
[01:30:01]
SO WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT COMPLAINTS THAT ARE FILED REALLY LATE IN THE CALENDAR YEAR, NOTABLY IN DECEMBER, UM, MAY NOT FINALIZE UNTIL JUNE OF THE FOLLOWING YEAR.SO ONCE INTERNAL AFFAIRS COMPLETES ITS INVESTIGATION, OUR COMPLAINT TEAM STARTS TO COMPILE AND VALIDATE ALL THE DATA.
THAT INFORMATION IS THEN PROVIDED TO OUR, UM, WE HAVE A ANNUAL REPORT, A PROJECT LEAD.
UM, AS WE WORK THROUGH DRAFTING OUR ANNUAL REPORT, THEY BEGAN DRAFTING THE REPORT, WHICH IS SUBSEQUENTLY REVIEWED AND FINALIZED IN COORDINATION WITH THE AUSTIN COMMUNICATION AND ENGAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, AS WELL AS THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.
SO FROM ABOUT JULY THROUGH THE PUBLICATION, WE HAVE A STRUCTURED PROCESS THAT INCLUDES DATA COLLECTION, VALIDATION, DRAFT DEVELOPMENT, INTERNAL REVIEW EDITS, AND THEN FINALLY WE GET TO THE DESIGN PIECE OF THIS, THIS END-TO-END PROCESS TECH, UH, TYPICALLY TAKES US ABOUT A SPAN OF, UH, THREE MONTHS TO ENSURE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, AND QUALITY.
AND THEN AT A LATER DATE, WE DETERMINE TIMING AND COORDINATION TO BE PLACED ON, UH, COUNCIL AGENDA FOR ORAL PRESENTATION, WHICH WE WILL AN ANTICIPATE DOING IN DECEMBER.
THIS WAS A CONCERN BY THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION, JUST BASED ON THE TIMEFRAME IT WAS TAKING US TO GET OUT AN ANNUAL REPORT.
I KNOW THERE MAY BE AN EXPECTATION THAT IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AN ANNUAL REPORT WHEN THE YEAR ENDS IN 2025 MM-HMM
THEN THE ANNUAL REPORT IS, IS READY.
BUT IT, FOR US, THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
BECAUSE IF CASES ARE FILED IN DECEMBER OF 2025, IN ORDER FOR US TO PROVIDE COMPLETE DATA IN OUR REPORT, WE HAVE TO WAIT TILL ALL CASES ARE COMPLETE.
AND BECAUSE THEY HAVE THAT 180 DAYS TO COMPLETE THE CASE, IT MAY BE THE FOLLOWING YEAR IN JUNE OR SO BEFORE WE GET THAT COMPLETE DATE OR SO.
THAT IS THE DELAY, UH, INDIVIDUALS ARE SEEN IN TERMS OF WHEN WE ARE GETTING, UH, THOSE REPORTS OUT.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE ARE HAVING TO HAVE, UH, A REVIEW AND APPROVAL, UH, BY THE, UH, COMMUNICATION AND ENGAGEMENT DEPARTMENT AS WELL AS THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.
SO, QUESTION, SO WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT IN A, IN A, IN A DECENT YEAR, WE WOULD, ONE SHOULD EXPECT A 2025 REPORT BY, I GUESS, AUGUST OR, OR WHATEVER OF 2026? I'M TRYING TO, THE LA THE LAGGING MONTHS IS NINE MONTHS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IS WHAT I'M SAYING? YEAH, THERE'S A LAG IN MONTHS.
AND SO FOR, LET'S SAY FOR EXAMPLE, THIS YEAR, UM, THE 2025, WE STILL WAITING TO CLOSE OUT CASES MM-HMM
AND SO ONCE ALL OF THOSE CASES ARE CLOSED OUT, PROBABLY AROUND JUNE, WE ARE DRAFTING THAT REPORT MM-HMM
AND SO BY THE END OF 2026, WE'LL BE REPORTING OUT, WE WILL RELEASE THE 2025 REPORT, AND THEN WE WILL REPORT THAT AT A PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO I GUESS WE'RE THINK THAT, AND I GUESS THE EFFECTIVE LAG IS A YEAR, IS WHAT YOU WOULD THINK? YEAH.
WHAT WE'RE SAYING HERE, NOT NINE MONTHS.
SO WE'RE NOT RELEASING THE 2025 REPORT UNTIL 2026 DECEMBER.
SO I'M, I'M ASSUMING LIKE THE ACTUAL PROCESS OF ISSUING THE REPORT IS NOT THAT DIFFICULT.
'CAUSE EVERYTHING IS IN THE COMPUTER.
AM I CORRECT OR WRONG ON THAT? MM-HMM.
IT'S JUST THE TAKING THE TIME TO GET IT IN TO, TO GET EVERY, WE HAVE TO VALIDATE ALL THIS INFORMATION THAT, ALL THIS DATA THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
I WILL TELL YOU, THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SECTION OF THE REPORT IS A LOT EASIER AS WELL AS THE POLICY, UM, SECTIONS OF THE REPORT.
IT'S THE COMPLAINTS DATA THAT TAKES SO LONG, FIRST OF ALL, TO, TO COMPLETE ALL THE INVESTIGATIONS BY JUNE, AND THEN TO VALIDATE ALL THAT, THAT DATA.
AND THEN THERE'S THESE REVIEW PROCESSES THAT WE GO THROUGH AS WELL.
SO, UM, WHAT ABOUT DOING QUARTERLY REPORTS INSTEAD SO THAT WE'RE GETTING TO SEE INFORMATION THROUGHOUT THE YEAR? WELL, THE COMMUNITY IS GETTING TO SEE, UM, UH, INFORMATION THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, BECAUSE WE DO THOSE QUARTERLY, UM, WORKING GROUP MEETINGS.
AND SO AT THOSE QUARTERLY MEETINGS, THEN WE ARE PROVIDING DATA AT THOSE MEETINGS.
AND SO THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT POST REQUIREMENTS AND POSTING GAPS AND ALSO DATA INFRASTRUCTURE.
THESE WERE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS, UM, COMING OUT OF THAT RECOMMENDATION, ALL COMPLAINTS SUBMITTED TO A PO ARE PUBLISHED ON OUR WEBSITE.
ANONYMOUS COMPLAINTS ARE NOT SEPARATED OUT.
[01:35:01]
MAKE THAT POINT BE IS BECAUSE THE RECOMMENDATION ASK WHETHER OR NOT, UM, ANONYMOUS COM, ALL THE ANONYMOUS COMPLAINTS WERE PUBLISHED.WELL, WE DON'T PUBLISH, UM, DOCUMENTS BY COMPLAINT TYPE.
AND SO YES, ALL OF THEM ARE PUBLISHED TO INCLUDE THE ANONYMOUS COMPLAINTS AS WELL.
AND SO THAT'S WHY I POINT THAT WE DO NOT, UM, ANONYMOUS COMPLAINTS ARE NOT SEPARATED OUT FROM ANY OTHER COMPLAINT.
UH, A PA DOES NOT, UM, PUBLISH COMPLIMENTS.
THAT WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS AS WELL, WHETHER OR NOT ALL THE, UH, COMPLIMENTS WERE, UH, PUBLISHED.
AND ALSO THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT PUBLICATION OF ORAL AND WRITTEN, UH, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO AT THE TIME THAT THIS, UH, RECOMMENDATION WAS ADVANCE, UH, O-A-A-P-O HAD ALREADY, UH, HAD BEEN WORKING ON FINALIZING, UH, THE REMAINING TWO QUARTERS.
SO THERE WERE TWO QUARTERS, UH, THE LAST OF 2025 THAT HAD NOT BEEN PUBLISHED.
AND THE COMMISSION HAD SOME, UH, QUESTIONS RELATED TO REASONS WHY THOSE COMPLAINTS, UM, WERE NOT PUBLISHED.
SO WE WERE WORKING ON POSTING THE REMAINING TWO QUARTERS OF 2025 COMPLAINTS.
AT THE TIME, THIS RECOMMENDATION WAS, UM, ADVANCED A PO.
AGAIN, AS I NOTED, WE DO NOT SEPARATE COMPLAINTS OUT BY TYPE.
SO YES, ALL THE ANONYMOUS COMPLAINTS TO DATE HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED TO OUR WEBSITE.
THERE WAS A BACKLOG OF COMPLAINTS THAT HAD NOT BEEN PUBLISHED TO, UH, JUST BASICALLY DUE TO STAFFING VACANCIES AND NOT HAVING A MEETING CONFER AGREEMENT IN PLACE, WHICH KIND OF HINDERED, WHICH HINDERED OUR ABILITY TO PUBLISH CERTAIN DOCUMENTS.
'CAUSE THOSE DOCUMENTS WITHOUT A ME TO CON, UH, CONFER WERE CONSIDERED, UH, CONFIDENTIAL, UH, DOCUMENTS, UM, UNDER STATE LAW.
SO FOLLOWING THE RATIFICATION OF THE NEW, UH, AGREEMENT IN OCTOBER, 2024, WE ESTABLISHED THE NECESSARY PROCESS AND REDACTION UH, SAFEGUARDS TO RESUME PUBLICATION AND COMPLIANCE WITH LEGAL AND PRIVACY REQUIREMENTS.
AND SINCE THAT TIME, A PO HAS PUBLISHED ALL OF THE 2025 COMPLAINTS ON OUR WEBSITE, JANUARY, 2026.
COMPLAINTS HAVE NOW ALSO BEEN PUBLISHED, AND COMPLAINT DOCUMENTS CONTINUE TO BE POSTED OR PUBLISHED, UH, IN REGULAR BATCHES.
AS THE TEAM COMPLETES FINAL QUALITY REVIEW AND REDACTIONS AS OF, UM, APRIL OF 2026, COMPLAINT DOCUMENTS NOW HAVE TO GO UNDER REVIEW TO ENSURE THAT THEY MEET THE FEDERAL WEB ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS.
SO NOW WE ARE REQUIRED TO, THIS WAS A, UM, REQUIRED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
IT WAS A RULING FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, AND THEREFORE, WE ARE SEEKING, WE ARE HAVING A, THIS IS CAUSING MAYBE A, A 45 DAY DELAY IN US GETTING, UH, POSTINGS, UH, WITH THAT ADDITIONAL, UH, THAT ADDITIONAL ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENT COMPLIMENTS.
UM, WE ARE, WE DO NOT PUBLISH COMPLIMENTS ON OUR WEBSITE.
WE ACTUALLY FORWARD THOSE TO THE OFFICER'S CHAIN OF COMMAND.
AND, UH, A PO REPORTS THOSE NUMBERS OF COMPLIMENTS RECEIVED BY OFFICERS AT ITS QUARTERLY WORKING GROUP MEETINGS.
AND SO THEN WE ALSO PUBLISHED THAT INFORMATION ON OUR WEBSITE AS WELL, UH, REGARDING ORAL AND WRITTEN REPRIMANDS, THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THOSE ARE PUBLISHED ON OUR WEBSITE.
WE ARE NOT CURRENTLY PUBLISHING THEM ON OUR WEBSITE.
UH, OUR CURRENT DOCUMENT COLLECTION, IF YOU GO TO OUR WEBSITE, YOU WILL SEE SOME, UH, WRITTEN AND ORAL REPRIMANDS THERE.
UH, THEY WILL DATE BACK TO 2019, I THINK, 2021.
UM, AS I CAME ON AS THE DIRECTOR, I MADE THE DECISION TO FOCUS APOS PUBLIC POSTING PRACTICES ON SOME OF THOSE MOST SERIOUS, UH, DISCIPLINARY OUTCOMES.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE ACCOUNTABILITY INTEREST IS GREATEST FOR THE COMMUNITY.
SOME OF THOSE LOWER LEVEL, WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT LOWER LEVEL, UH, DISCIPLINES SUCH AS, OR WRITTEN REPRIMANDS TYPICALLY INVOLVE LESS SERIOUS POLICY VIOLATIONS.
AND WHERE THE CONT THE INTENT IS REALLY TO IMPROVE PERFORMANCE RATHER THAN, UH, IMPOSE SIGNIFICANT PUNITIVE ACTIONS.
I, I WANNA, I, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT THOSE LOWER LEVEL, UH, VIOLATIONS LOOK LIKE.
UH, KEVIN NOTED DISCOURTEOUS RUDENESS, UH, REPORT WRITING, BUT SOME OF THOSE THINGS WHICH WOULD NOT QUALIFY FOR MEDIATION, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE YOU AWARE OF SOME OF THOSE THINGS THAT ARE LOWER LEVEL, UH, CONFRONTATION WITH OTHER FELLOW UM, OFFICERS.
UM, THOSE ARE SOME OF THE LOWER LEVEL OR WRITTEN REPRIMANDS.
YOU WILL SEE PRO USING PROFANITY.
YOU SEE A LOT OF, UH, PATROL VEHICLE OPERATIONS,
[01:40:02]
SPEEDING AND, UM, MINOR ACCIDENTS WITH VEHICLES.A LOT OF THOSE ARE THOSE ORAL AND WRITTEN REPRIMANDS.
SOMETIMES IT'S FAILURE TO, UH, ACTIVATE YOUR BODY-WORN CAM IN A TIMELY MANNER.
THOSE ARE SOME OF THE LOWER LEVELS, UH, THINGS THAT, THAT WE ARE SEEING.
AND SO, JUST AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT SOME OF THOSE LOWER LEVEL, UH, POLICY VIOLATIONS LOOK LIKE.
SO I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU SOME EXAMPLES OF THAT.
SO THOSE LOWER LEVEL DISCIPLINES SUCH AS THAT, THAT RECEIVED SOME OF THAT OR, AND WRITTEN REPRIMAND, WE ARE, WE ARE NOT POSTING ON, UM, OUR WEBSITE.
UM, I BELIEVE THIS REAPPROACH MAINTAINS TRANSPARENCY REGARDING OVERALL DISCIPLINARY TRENDS.
UH, WHILE KEEPING THE PUBLIC FACING REPOSITORY, WHICH IS OUR WEBSITE, FOCUSED ON THE SERIOUS MISCONDUCT MATTERS.
THESE ARE THE MATTERS THAT I THINK THE ARE, ARE OF GREATER PUBLIC INTEREST.
AND IT'S THE THINGS THAT THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO GO TO OUR WEBSITE AND LOOK FOR.
AND SO THOSE, AND SO THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THAT DECISION.
UH, THE AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT ACT.
IT, IT REQUIRES PUBLIC TRANSPARENCY AND OUTCOMES, UH, AND DISCIPLINE REPORTING, BUT IT AFFORDS US SOME DISCRETION ON HOW WE ORGANIZE THAT INFORMATION AND PRESENT IT.
SO OUR CURRENT PRACTICE SATISFIES THAT MANDATE THROUGH DETAILED PUBLICATION OF OUR SERIOUS CASES.
AND THEN WE AGGREGATE THE REPORTING OF SOME OF THOSE LOWER LEVEL, UH, CORRECTIVE ACTIONS IN OUR ANNUAL REPORT AS IT RELATES TO REPORTS, UH, RELATES TO REPORTING GAPS IN DATA INFRASTRUCTURE.
WE CONTINUE TO TRY TO IDENTIFY, UM, WE ARE WORKING WITH A PD TO IDENTIFY A CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM THAT WE, THAT COULD SUPPORT, UH, THE REPORTING OBLIGATIONS UNDER RESOLUTION 99 AND SOME OF THOSE CONSISTENT DATA, UH, GAPS.
SOME OF THE QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN, UH, RELATED TO, UM, UH, RACIAL DATA, DEMOGRAPHICS, THAT KIND OF STUFF.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE EXPLAINED PUBLICLY BEFORE IS THAT ON OUR COMPLAINTS FORM, UH, SOME OF THE DATA IS NOT REQUIRED.
SOME OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION IT IS ON THE REPORT.
YOU, YOU, WHEN YOU'RE FILING A COMPLAINT, IT'S ON THE COMPLAINT FORM, BUT IT'S NOT A REQUIRED FIELD.
AND SO, UM, WITH THAT, YOU'RE NOT GETTING COMPLETE DATA.
'CAUSE SOME COMPLAINANTS FILL IT OUT AND SOME COMPLAINANTS DO NOT.
WE DON'T REQUIRE, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT IT TO HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT ON COMPLAINANT'S ABILITY TO FILE COMPLAINTS.
IF WE'RE ASKING FOR DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION, WHAT'S YOUR RACE? NATIONAL ORIGIN? UH, UNLESS YOU'RE FILING A COMP, A RACE-BASED COMPLAINT, OF COURSE, THEY'RE NOTING THEIR, THEIR RACE, BUT IF NOT, COMMUNITY MEMBERS SOMETIMES DON'T WANNA PROVIDE THAT, UH, UH, DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION, AND WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT.
DON'T WANNA HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT ON THEIR ABILITY TO FILE A COMPLAINT.
UM, THERE WAS ALSO A QUESTION RELATED TO, UM, EXCUSE ME, CAN I ASK A QUESTION RELATED TO THAT? I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE REASON THAT YOU CANNOT SHOW DATA BECAUSE IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT, UM, COMPULSIVE IF PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO DO IT.
IT'S, UH, IT'S, UH, I GUESS OPTIONAL.
BUT WHAT YOU COULD REPORT IS A PERCENT OF PEOPLE WHO FILL THAT OUT.
AND THAT WILL GIVE SOME, THE, THE, THE PUBLIC SOME IDEA OF WHAT, WHETHER THAT THAT FIELD, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THE NEXT THING TO KNOWING, THE NEXT THING TO KNOWING THE RACIAL OUTCOME WOULD BE THE KNOW THE PERCENT OF PEOPLE WHO, BECAUSE IT'S VOLUNTARILY FILL IT OUT.
SO THAT'S AN OPTION WHERE YOU COULD PARTLY COMPLY WITH THAT.
UM, THERE WAS SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT, UM, THE DATA GAPS IN TERMS OF THAT WE HAD A PLAN IN PLACE TO RECLASSIFY A POSITION, UH, WITHIN OUR DEPARTMENT IN HOPES OF, UM, YOU KNOW, ADDRESSING SOME OF THE, THE DATA GAP ISSUES.
OF COURSE, THAT POSITION WAS ELIMINATED, UM, AFTER THE FAILURE OF PROP Q.
SO WE COULD NOT, UM, GO BACK AND RECRUIT FOR, UM, SOMEONE FOR, FOR THAT.
ONE OF THE DISCUSSIONS, UH, OUR LEADERSHIP, UH, TEAM IS HAVING IS WE CURRENTLY HAVE A DATA SCIENTIST IN OUR OFFICE.
WHILE THAT PERSON IS NOT WORKING ON SPECIFICALLY COMPLAINT DATA, UH, WHICH WAS THE CONCERN FROM THE COMMISSION, WE ARE DISCUSSING, UM, IF THERE ARE WAYS THAT WE CAN, UH, ALLOW FOR THAT POSITION TO HELP US IN THAT AREA IN TERMS OF BRIDGING SOME OF THE GAPS, UH, OF THE REPORTING DATA.
OF COURSE, AS HE TAKES ON THAT RESPONSIBILITY, UH, WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THE CAPACITY, UH,
[01:45:01]
TO DO THAT IN ADDITION TO THE WORK THAT THAT PERSON IS ALREADY DOING.BUT IT IS A DISCUSSION WE ARE HAVING IN TERMS OF MAYBE HAVING THAT DATA SCIENTIST THAT WE ALREADY HAVE ON STAFF ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE, UH, DATA ISSUES.
AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, UH, WE ARE WORKING WITH THE AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT ON A CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM THAT WE THINK MAY SUPPORT SOME OF THOSE DATA GAPS AS, AS, AS WELL.
THERE WAS A QUESTION RELATED FROM THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION RELATED TO TRAINING AND CASE MANAGEMENT.
UH, THE COMPLAINTS STAFF RECEIVE ONGOING TRAINING.
THERE WAS A QUESTION RELATED TO THE, UM, COMPLAINANT'S OPTIONS WHEN THEY ARE FILING FOR COMPLAINTS, UH, SPECIFICALLY AROUND SUPERVISOR REFERRALS.
OF COURSE, WE GET A GREAT DEAL OF, UH, COMPLAINANT SELECTING SUPERVISOR REFERRALS AS THEY ARE FILING THOSE COMPLAINTS.
SO THERE WERE QUESTIONS RELATED TO THAT.
SO WE'VE NOTED ON THE DOCUMENT, ON THE BACKUP DOCUMENT THAT YOU HAVE, UH, SEVERAL TRAINING SESSIONS THAT THE STAFF HAVE ALREADY COMPLETED.
UH, AS I MENTIONED IN, UM, THIS MEETING PREVIOUSLY, THAT A PO HOLDS A MEMBERSHIP WITH THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.
UH, WITH THAT ORGANIZATION, THEY OFFER VIRTUAL TRAINING.
PLUS THERE IS THAT NATIONAL, UH, CONFERENCE ANNUALLY THAT WE'VE INVITED YOU ALL TO GO TO.
AND SO OUR STAFF GET TRAINING IN THAT WAY AS WELL.
REGARDING OPTIONS FOR COMPLAINT FILING, WE, UM, PROVIDE COMPLAINANTS WITH CLEAR INFORMATION ABOUT THEIR OPTIONS FOR FILING.
THIS IS A COMPLAINT DRIVEN PROCESS, AND SO THEREFORE, COMPLAINANTS ARE EMPOWERED TO DETERMINE HOW THEY WANNA MOVE FORWARD WITH THE, THEIR COMPLAINTS.
SO, UM, WE DO HAVE A VAST NUMBER OF COMPLAINANTS THAT SELECT SUPERVISOR REFERRAL, UH, AS OPPOSED TO A FORMAL COMPLAINT OR COMMUNITY CONCERNS.
SO THERE WAS SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE, THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINANTS MAKING THAT SELECTION IN TERMS OF, UH, SUPERVISOR, UH, REFERRALS.
UM, THE COMPLAINT TEAM HAS THE EXPERTISE TO KNOW, UH, THAT IF A COMPLAINANT IS IDENTIFYING, UH, BEHAVIOR, UH, THAT IS SERIOUS OR EGREGIOUS, BUT THEY STILL THINK THAT MAY NEED TO BE A SUPERVISOR REFERRAL, UM, MY TEAM HAS THE EXPERTISE.
THEY KNOW THAT, NOPE, THAT'S NOT A SUPERVISOR REFERRAL.
THAT'S SERIOUS, THAT'S EGREGIOUS.
AND WE HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE TO REQUEST A FORM INVESTIGATION IF WE ARE SEEING THAT.
WE REVIEW ALL SUPERVISOR REFERRAL OUTCOMES, AND WE ALSO MONITOR ANY TRENDS AND COMPLAINTS, INCLUDING ANY REPEATED INCIDENTS IN ANY SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHIC AREA.
THERE WERE ALSO QUESTIONS RELATED TO CASE REVIEW VACANCIES, CASE BRIEFINGS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION.
AS YOU ARE AWARE, YOU HAVE ALREADY ESTABLISHED WORKING GROUPS AND ARE RECEIVING CASES, UH, CASE FILES FOR REVIEW.
UH, THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT YOU HAD THE ABILITY TO REVIEW.
SO CPRC CAN REVIEW ANY ALLEGED SERIOUS MISCONDUCT CASE AS WELL AS A REQUEST FOR REVIEW BY A COMPLAINANT.
THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT CASE CASE BRIEFINGS.
WHERE WILL THEY OCCUR? THEY WILL HAPPEN IN A CLOSED SESSION, AS YOU ARE AWARE.
UM, WE HAVE, UH, FILLED ALL THE VACANCIES.
THERE WAS A QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAD ANY VACANCIES ON THE CPRC.
THAT WAS ALSO A QUESTION ABOUT HOW THOSE VACANCIES WILL BE FILLED A ALTERNATES.
AND AS YOU'VE HEARD DURING THE EXECUTIVE LIAISON REPORT, WE ARE PREPARED TO REOPEN THAT APPLICATION PROCESS TO ENSURE THAT ALTERNATES ARE AVAILABLE, UM, SO THAT YOU CAN, UH, FILL THOSE VACANCIES QUICKLY.
AGAIN, THERE IS NO VACANCIES ON THE COMMISSION AT THIS TIME.
AND THEN CPRC, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.
THERE WAS A QUESTION RELATED TO WHERE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL RE RESIDE AND THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL RESIDE ON, ON THE CPRC WEBSITE.
AND THEN THERE WERE SOME MISCELLANEOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHTS PARTICIPATION IN PRESS CONFERENCES AT THOSE CRITICAL INCIDENTS.
THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS RELATED TO FUNDING, UH, WEBSITE ACCESSIBILITY, WHICH I ADDRESSED ALREADY.
AND, UH, HIRING, IT'S NOW A PO, UH, IS PRESENT AT CRITICAL INCIDENT BRIEFING.
IT'S INTENTIONAL AND IT ALIGNS WITH NATIONAL BEST PRACTICES.
MANY CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT AGENCIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
[01:50:01]
EARLY VISIBILITY DURING CRITICAL INCIDENTS.SO OUR PRESENCE THERE, UH, SIGNALS TO THE COMMUNITY THAT INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT IS ACTIVELY BEING MONITORED AND THE INCIDENT IS IN MONITORING AT, IN REAL TIME OF THOSE INCIDENTS.
AND THAT WE'RE NOT JUST VIEW REVIEWING IT, UH, AFTER THE FACT.
SO WHEN YOU ARE SEEING THOSE PRESS CONFERENCE AT 4:00 AM 3:00 AM I'M THERE OR KEVIN, UH, WE'RE BOTH THERE.
WE ARE SEEING THE PROCESS IN REAL TIME.
WE'RE LOOKING AT BODY-WORN CAM THAT NIGHT.
AND, AND SO THAT'S THE PURPOSE FOR US BEING ON SITE WHEN THOSE CRITICAL INCIDENTS OCCUR.
I THINK THE COMMISSION'S, UH, RECOMMENDATION, SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTINGS, KEVIN OR MYSELF ARE, ARE ON SCENE FOR EVERY OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTING.
AND I, I JUST WANNA SAY PUBLICLY, LIKE WHENEVER I SEE SOME OF THE NEWS COVERAGE OF THE, YOU KNOW, OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTINGS, I SEE YOU GUYS THERE.
SO I'VE BEEN PLEASANTLY SURPRISED IN THAT REGARD.
UH, FUNDING, UH, WE DID NOT, WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY ADDITIONAL FUNDING DURING THE LAST, UM, BUDGET ADOPTION.
UH, WITH RESPECT TO UNMET NEEDS, I THINK ONE OF THE QUESTIONS WAS WHAT DID OPO NEED OR THINK THEY NEEDED? AND SO WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME AREAS IN TERMS OF THAT BEING ABLE TO REPORT OUT MORE DATA SO THAT THAT IS A UN UH, UNMET NEED.
AGAIN, WE ARE ACTIVELY EVALUATING SOLUTIONS TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE REMAINING DATA GAPS.
UH, I'VE HIGHLIGHTED SOME OF THE, UM, STRATEGIES WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING THROUGH WORKING ON A NEW, WITH A PD ON A CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM THAT WE THINK CAN PROVIDE MORE REPORTING LOOKING AT IN, UH, STAFF THAT WE ALREADY HAVE AVAILABLE THAT MAY CAN HELP WITH THAT AS WELL.
SO OUTSIDE OF THAT UNMET NEED, AND THOSE ARE THE STRATEGIES WE'RE WORKING THROUGH, UH, TO ADDRESS THAT, UM, THERE WAS A QUESTION REGARDING HIRING.
UM, LIKE EVERY OTHER DEPARTMENT ACROSS THE CITY, WE FOLLOW THE MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE RULE FOR HIRING, UH, STAFF.
UM, I THINK THERE WAS SOME EXPRESSION RELATED TO, UM, THE TEAM HAVING SOME INDIVIDUALS WITH A PUBLIC SAFETY BACKGROUND.
I THINK COMMISSIONER, UH, FLOOD MENTIONED THAT EARLIER.
AGAIN, WE FOLLOW, UM, YOU KNOW, THE MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE RULE AND HIRING IS BASED ON SKILL, KNOWLEDGE, AND ABILITIES.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
I WOULD LIKE TO START, UM, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS THAT WERE SPECIFIC TO THE CPRC.
UH, YOU KNOW, IN SOME DEGREE I THINK I, I WANNA, I GUESS I WOULD SAY A FACT, UH, PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION BECAUSE THEY SEEM TO BE BEHAVING AS A PO AND CPRC OVERSIGHT.
UM, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I'M NOT SURE WE ADDRESSED TODAY WAS THEY SPECIFICALLY WERE ASKING, IS THE CPRC GIVEN THE ABILITY TO REVIEW CASES THAT OPO OR A PD AI HAVE ALREADY CHOSEN NOT TO REFER FOR DISCIPLINE.
AND, UM, AND I GUESS TO ME, I, I WANT TO REESTABLISH AGAIN THERE, THERE'S, THERE IS AN INNATE PROBLEM THAT'S, THAT'S GONNA OCCUR EVEN AS WE START TO GET TO DO MORE CASES AND REVIEW MORE CASES.
AND THAT IS THAT WE AT AP, AP CPRC HAS TO WAIT FOR A PO AND AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT TO COMPLETE THEIR REVIEWS BEFORE WE CAN EVEN START LOOKING AT OURS.
AND EVEN THOUGH IN THEORY THAT THE POLICE CHIEF, YOU KNOW, WILL, SHOULD WAIT FOR US TO LOOK AT THAT BEFORE SHE ESTABLISHED A RULING.
THE PRACTICES THAT THE IN PRACTICE, WHAT'S HAPPENING IS IF YOU HAVE AN OFFICER WHO'S BEEN WAITING FOR MONTHS TO GET A RULING, I CAN SEE THE PRESSURE ON A POLICE CHIEF TO WANT TO GET THAT OFFICER, YOU KNOW, LET THEM GET THE RULING, GOOD OR BAD.
AND SO THERE'S AN INNATE PRESSURE THERE TO DO THAT SOON.
AND THEN ONE MORE OBSTACLE THAT'S HAPPENED IS THAT WE ARE NOW, THEY HAVE TO WAIT FOR US ALSO.
AND I ANTICIPATE THAT'S GONNA BE A, THAT'S GONNA BE A PROBLEM.
I'LL EXACTLY SHOW HOW TO RESOLVE IT.
AND ONE OF THE REASONS WE WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO CHIEF POLICE TO SEE WHAT CAN BE DONE.
BUT THIS IS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH IN THEORY IT SAYS, YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, THEY GET YOU, YOU WROTE YEAH, BEFORE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CPRC MAY REVIEW ANY INVESTIGATION OF DEATH IN CUSTODY, SERIOUSLY BODY INJURY OR OTHER SERIOUS MISCONDUCT AFTER THE COMPLETION OF ANY INVESTIGATION AND BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF DISCIPLINE AND OR THE RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST FOR REVIEW BY A COMPLAINANT.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT IN PRACTICE, THAT'S, IT'S PROVEN DIFFICULT.
[01:55:01]
DIFFICULT FOR US.AND I'M SURE THAT YOU MAY HAVE A SIMILAR PROBLEM.
AND I WANT WONDERING IF, HOW ARE YOU RESOLVING THAT? HOW HAVE YOU MANAGED, HAVE YOU HAVING ANY PLANS TO RESOLVE THAT YOURSELF? 'CAUSE YOU HAVE, HAVE THE SAME PRESSURE, FINISH YOUR INVESTIGATION AND HOPE THAT SHE CAN, YOU KNOW, WAIT FOR YOU TO GIVE YOUR, I WILL SAY WE ARE SIMILARLY SITUATED.
IT'S, IT'S THE, IT'S, WE HAVE THE SAME ISSUES.
THE BIG DIFFERENCE FROM US THOUGH IS WE'RE THERE 40 HOURS A WEEK SO WE CAN MOVE MORE QUICKLY.
AND WE DON'T NEED, YOU KNOW, A MAJORITY VOTE IN ORDER TO MAKE A DECISION.
WE WRITE A MEMO AND THE DIRECTOR MAKES THE DECISION.
SO WE ARE SIMILARLY SITUATED AS IT RELATES TO BEING BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL IN SOME WAY, JUST BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE WORK 40 HOUR, WE'RE FULL-TIME PEOPLE.
THE OR THE DISADVANTAGE YOU DON'T HAVE BECAUSE YOU GOTTA GET A, A QUORUM.
YOU'VE GOTTA HAVE, YEAH, IT'S A PROBLEM.
I THINK THE LAW SAYS THAT YOU CAN WORK IN THEORY, BUT NOW WE HAVE TO MAKE IT WORK.
AND THAT WE HAVE, SORRY, UM, I WAS SAYING IS THAT THE, WHILE THE LOSS SAYS WHAT CAN BE DONE AND HOW SHOULD BE DONE, THE 11 OF US ARE IN THIS COMMITTEE, HAVE JOBS AND OTHER OBLIGATIONS, AND SOME OF THESE REVIEWS CAN TAKE A LONG TIME.
I'VE BEEN ASKING THE COMMISSIONERS TO PLEASE RECORD, YOU KNOW, KEEP SOME DATA, HOW LONG IT'S TAKING YOU TO DO THE REVIEWS, BECAUSE I, I THINK THAT'S GONNA HELP US SOMETIME, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE THE NEW POTENTIAL COMMISSIONS, WANNA GIVE THEM THAT DATA, LET THEM KNOW HOW MUCH IT TAKES.
SO WHEN YOU ASK, WHEN YOU SEE, I ASK YOU QUESTIONS LIKE, HOW MUCH MONEY IS IT COSTING TO DO AN INVESTIGATION? 'CAUSE I'M AWARE OF HOW MUCH DATA THERE IS THERE MM-HMM
AND I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH TIME REASONABLE FOR SOMEBODY DEDICATED TO TAKE, TO DO THIS INVESTIGATION, TO DO THE, AND THE INVESTIGATION IS DONE, BUT, AND REVIEWING IT, YOU KNOW? YEAH.
SO I, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S A LOT TO IT.
YOU KNOW, YOU DEFINITELY DON'T WANT TO LEAVE ONE, YOU KNOW, YOU WANT TO BE THOROUGH AND NOT LEAVE A STONE UNTURNED, RIGHT? YOU WANNA LOOK THROUGH ALL THE BODY CAM, YOU WANNA LOOK THROUGH ALL THE OFFENSE REPORTS.
SO FOR ME, IT, IT, IT CAN TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO GO THROUGH A CASE, YOU KNOW, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
I'M JUST THROWING A RANDOM SUGGESTION OUT THERE.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW WE'RE HAVING A DIFFICULTY, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY CASES BEHIND US AND WE'RE FOLLOWING THEM AND WHAT THEY DO.
WHAT IF WE STARTED TAKING CASES THAT HAPPEN NOW INSTEAD OF THE ONES THAT HAVE ALREADY PASSED? LIKE WE HAVE ALL OF THESE CASES THAT NEED TO BE REVIEWED.
WHY NOT TAKE THEM ON WHEN THEY HAPPEN? LIKE, 'CAUSE WE'RE A NEW COMMISSION STARTED OFF FRESH AND, AND, AND WHY SHOULD WE HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL YOUR DECISION IS MADE OR, UM, THE AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT'S DECISIONS MADE WHEN OUR POSITION IS TO OVERVIEW THE POLICY IN THE FIRST PLACE.
SO WE'RE NOT RECOMMEND RECOMMENDING ANYTHING HAPPEN TO THE OFFICER.
WE'RE JUST DECIDING WHAT POLICIES WERE USED, WHAT WAS FOLLOWED, DID THEY DO IT CORRECTLY OR NOT? SO WHY NOT START THIS COMMISSION OFF BRUSH START DOING, AS YOU SAID, WHEN THERE'S A USE OF FORCE INCIDENT AND YOU GUYS HAVE TO GO TO THE SCENE OR THE OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTING, WE COULD TAKE THAT SAME THING HERE.
WHEN SOMETHING HAPPENS, WE ARE ALERTED, OKAY, THERE'S A CASE THAT JUST POPPED UP.
THEN WE ALL, THERE'S 11 OF US, THIS CASE JUST POPPED UP BETWEEN 11 OF US.
WE'D BE ABLE TO GET THAT, THAT THREE.
SO WHY NOT JUST START OVER NEW AND TAKE ON INCOMING CASES? JUST ONE SECOND TO TEST MY UNDERSTANDING.
UM, YOU'RE NOT QUESTIONING THAT WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR A PO TO FINISH THEIR INVESTIGATION FOR US, FOR THEM TO EVEN MAKE IT PUBLICLY AVAILABLE, I MEAN, AVAILABLE TO US.
THAT'S CLEAR, RIGHT? IF THERE'S, THERE'S, THAT'S NOT EVEN A A OUR CHOICE, IT'S A MANDATE.
WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR A, FOR A PD TO FINISH THE INVESTIGATION, A PO TO FINISH THEIRS BEFORE WE EVEN GET TO START TO SEE THE, THE, THE INVESTIGATION.
OUR ISSUE THEN IS THAT HOW FAST CAN WE, ONCE THAT IS OUT THE INVESTIGATION, THE INVESTIGATION IS COMPLETE, HOW FAST CAN WE DO THE REVIEWING AND HAVE IT DONE IN TIME THAT IT CAN REACH THE POLICE CHIEF BEFORE SHE HAS TO MAKE HER RULING.
AND A PO HAS THE SAME PROB ISSUE.
THEY HAVE THEIR, YOU KNOW, APD IS DOING AN INVESTIGATION, THEY CAN START THEIRS, BUT THEY HAVE TO FI WAIT FOR THAT TO COMPLETE BECAUSE OF SOME THINGS THAT THEY NEED TO SEE FROM THE OFFICERS AND A PD.
SO WHEN THEY COMPLETE THEIRS, THEN THEY ALSO HAVE TO SAY, OKAY, COMPLETE WRITE THE THING, CAN I GET IT OUT IN TIME FOR THE POLICE CHIEF TO HAVE A, AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONS TAKE IT INTO CONSIDERATION BEFORE SHE MAKES HER RULING.
SO YEAH, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS WHY CAN'T ALL THREE OF THOSE PROCESSES BE GOING AT THE SAME TIME? LIKE WHY CAN'T WE ALL BE REVIEWING AT THE SAME TIME? AND IF IT'S, IF IT'S A, AN ISSUE IN THE CODE, THEN LET'S ADDRESS THE ISSUES.
[02:00:01]
BE ABLE TO DO IT AT THE SAME TIME? AND THAT WAY THE COMMUNITY'S GETTING THE INFORMATION BACK FASTER.WHAT I'M, I'M FAILING TO EXPLAIN TO YOU IS THAT THERE'S INVESTIGATION WHICH ONLY EXPERTS LIKE A PD AND A PO CAN DO.
AND THERE'S A REVIEW WHERE THE REASON WHY THE COMMISSION SAYS OR MAY ONE OF THE THINGS IS REVIEW IS THAT THAT'S ALL WE DO.
AND SO REVIEWS CAN ONLY START AFTER INVESTIGATIONS ARE COMPLETE.
THAT'S JUST THAT, THAT'S JUST THE, THE, THE LOGISTICS OF OF, OF WHAT'S HAPPENED AND DIFFICULTY.
AND I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE NOT MAYBE AWARE OF THE ROLE OF THE CPRC AND THAT THAT'S IN BY ESSENCE, BY STATUTORY, DEFINITIVE BY LAW.
SO YOU CAN'T REVIEW UNTIL THE INVESTIGATIONS ARE COMPLETE.
SO THAT'S BUT WHY THINGS CAN BE DONE SOME THINGS.
THE WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO, THAT'S THE JOB.
WHAT THE, THE, UH, THE TRIAD AGENT IS TRYING TO DO IS TRYING TO PRIORITIZE THOSE, ALL THE THINGS IN THERE.
AND I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S UH, SOMETHING TO CONSIDER IS THAT THEY MAY START PRIORITIZING THE, I THINK THEY ALREADY TOOK THAT INTO ACCOUNT PRIORITIZING THINGS THAT ARE BY DATE THAT ARE COMING UP PRETTY SOON AND PRIORITIZING THINGS THAT BY SERIOUSNESS OF THE INCIDENT OR ET CETERA.
UH, BUT THAT DOES NOT STOP THE PROBLEMATIC, THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM OF WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE REVIEWS TO BE COMPLETE.
ONE EXAMPLE RECENTLY IS THAT WE PUT OUT SOME EXAMPLES OF CASES WE WANTED TO REVIEW AND SPREAD IT OUT AS THE COMMISSION TO TWO POOR WORK GROUP TO DO.
TURNS OUT THOSE INVESTIGATIONS WERE STILL IN THE PROCESS.
SO THEY, WELL THEY'RE STILL THERE IN THE PROCESS OF BEING REVIEWING, WE CAN'T EVEN START TO LOOK AT THEM.
I WOULD SAY THAT'S PARTIALLY CORRECT.
UM, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT ONCE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DOES THEIR INVESTIGATION AND THEY SEND IT TO A PO, WE GET IT AT THE SAME TIME.
AND IS THAT NOT CORRECT? WE MAKE THE REQUEST THAT THEY DOWNLOAD IT INTO THE DRIVE WHEN WE GET IT, SO, RIGHT.
I MEAN IT'S, IT'S NOT, WE DON'T HAVE, IT'S NOT CORRECT FROM THE STANDPOINT THAT, LIKE I SAY, THE LAST BATCH TOOK 'EM 11 DAYS AND 13 DAYS TO DOWNLOAD.
BUT WE DO REQUEST THEM THE SAME DAY THEY COME TO US, RIGHT? BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE SAME RIGHTS BECAUSE OF SOME DIFFERENT REGULATIONS.
BUT YEAH, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE ALMOST NEAR SIMULTANEOUS ONCE IT COMES FROM AN INTERNAL AFFAIRS.
SO THAT'S NOT REALLY THE REASON FOR THE OVERALL DELAY.
I THINK SHE BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT THAT WE CAN STOP LOOKING RETROSPECTIVELY OR WE CAN DO BOTH AND WE CAN START BEING MORE PROACTIVE AND TRY TO CATCH UP WITH THE WAVE BECAUSE WE'RE NEVER GONNA GET THROUGH THE BACKLOG THAT WE'RE ALREADY ON.
SO ONCE EVERYONE FEELS CON COM COMFORTABLE OR CONFIDENT THAT THERE'S ENOUGH EXPERTISE AND TRAINING, 'CAUSE WE HAVE REVIEWED CASES, I WOULD LIKE TO ACTUALLY GO WITH THE ACTIVE CASES AS OPPOSED TO STUDYING THINGS THAT WE CAN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
SO I THINK OJT IS ALWAYS GOOD.
SO I DO LIKE THAT RECOMMENDATION.
IF YOU'RE WAITING FOR COMMENTS FROM ME ALREADY, I GUESS I TRY TO EXPLAIN, I THINK I CAN EXPLAIN HOW, UM, YOU KNOW, WE ARE SUPPOSED TO EXPECT WAIT FOR A PO TO FINISH THEIR, THEIR UH, ANALYSIS.
BUT ONCE AGAIN, YOU KNOW, UH, YOU, YOU ARE, YOU ARE ACTUALLY COMMISSIONER FLOOD, YOU ARE ON THE, THE WORKING GROUP THAT IS PRIOR JUNE TWO.
YEAH, BUT WE'RE NOT WAITING ON, AGAIN, WE'RE NOT WAITING ON A PO TO FINISH THEIR ANALYSIS.
WE'RE WAITING ON THE CASE BECAUSE IT GETS DELAYED AS MR. MASTER SAID, 'CAUSE IT GETS SCRUBBED.
BUT WE HAVE A, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SIMULTANEOUS ACCESS TO THE CASE THE SAME TIME THAT A PO DOES.
BUT ARE WE, THEY GET IT SOONER BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE, THEY DON'T HAVE THE BARRIERS THAT WE DO.
SO, BUT NOT BECAUSE OF ANYTHING STATUTORY OR REGULATORY.
SO I GUESS WE DON'T AGREE ON THE FACT THAT WE, THE CPRC NEEDS TO WAIT FOR A PO TO COMPLETE THEIR RULING ON THE INVESTIGATION BEFORE WE CAN DO THAT.
I, I NEVER HEARD, THIS IS THE FIRST I'M HEARING OF THAT.
AND WE HAVE THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS IN THE ROOM, SO I WOULD DEFER TO THEM.
SO JUST FOR A SENSE OF CLARITY, UM, THE CPRC DOES HAVE TO WAIT TILL AN INVESTIGATION IS COMPLETE.
UM, SO, AND IN, IN TERMS OF THAT COMPARISON, AS KEVIN HAS NOTED, WE ARE DOING THIS WORK ALONG WITH, UH, WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WITH INTERNAL AFFAIRS.
YOU GUYS ARE NOT READING THOSE INTERVIEWS TILL YOU, TILL THE FILE IS UPLOADED.
[02:05:01]
KNOW, WE ARE IN INTERVIEWS WITH WITNESSES.WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO LOOK AT THAT DATA PRIOR TO THE CLOSING OF AN INVESTIGATION.
YOU ALL DON'T GET IT UNTIL A INVESTIGATION IS COMPLETE.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE CHAIR IS NOTING THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY, WE DO THIS EVERY DAY, ALL DAY, 40 HOURS A WEEK.
AND SO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO LOOK AT THAT INFORMATION IN REAL TIME.
AND YOU ARE ONLY GETTING IT AFTER THE COMPLETION OF AN INVESTIGATION.
BUT WHAT I WAS SAYING IS THAT YOU ALL CAN'T ACTUALLY MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATION OR COMPLETE YOUR PROCESS UNTIL THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS IS OVER.
BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU GUYS ARE THERE IN REAL TIME WHILE IT IS GOING.
AND SO WHAT I'M SAYING FOR US IS BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY BEHIND, UM, WITH THE ENTIRE INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS AND THEN WHEN IT DOES GET RELEASED SO THAT YOU GUYS CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEN YOU HAVE TO CLEAN THE DATA SO THAT IT CAN BE RELEASED TO US, WHICH IS MORE TIME, IT WOULD BE MORE EFFECTIVE IF WE COULD START WORKING ON CASES THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING ABOUT AS OPPOSED TO BEING RETROSPECTIVE.
BUT I DO THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
'CAUSE AGAIN, I'M, I'VE ONLY BEEN ON THIS COMMISSION HERE A COUPLE MONTHS, SO NOW I'M REALLY STARTING TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS OF EVERYTHING.
SO NOW THAT I FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT YOU GUYS HAVE TO COMPLETE YOUR INVESTIGATION BEFORE WE STEP INTO THIS POSITION, I'M COMPLETELY QUESTIONING THE WHOLE THREE GROUP SYSTEM.
BECAUSE IF OUR POSITION IS SOLELY TO DETERMINE IF POLICY WAS FOLLOWED OR NOT, I THINK THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL PERSON SHOULD BE ABLE TO LOOK OVER THE CASE.
AND WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR, ONLY LOOKING FOR IS, WAS THIS POLICY NOT FOLLOWED? AND IF THAT, IF WE DISCOVER, OH WOW, THERE IS A POLICY VIOLATION IN THIS SPECIFIC CASE, THEN WE BRING IT TO THE FULL COMMISSION AND WE SAY, HEY, WE HAVE A CASE THAT WE NEED TO LOOK INTO TO GO OVER THE POLICY.
SO AT THIS POINT, THIS THREE GROUP SYSTEM I JUST FEEL IS COMPLETELY INEFFECTIVE BECAUSE ALL WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS FAILED POLICY AND YOU GUYS HAVE ALREADY GONE OVER THE CASE TWICE.
SO IT MAKES A LOT MORE SENSE FOR US INDIVIDUALLY TO GO OVER THESE CASES AND TRY TO FIND THE ONE THAT HAS A POLICY VIOLATION, THEN BRING IT TO THE COMMITTEE, CLEAR UP THE BACKLOG.
AND JUST ONCE AGAIN, TO CLARIFY A, A LITTLE BIT, UM, WELL, WHEN WE REVIEW THE CASE, WHEN WE REVIEW THE INVESTIGATION, WE DO GET THE, THE, THE JUDGE WHETHER FOR INSTANCE, THE PUNISHMENT THAT THEY THINK IS APPROPRIATE IS NOT WE, WE GET TO SAY, NO, NO, I THINK THIS PERSON SHOULD BE AND ACT, UH, ESCALATE THAT WE ALSO HAVE A CHANCE TO ASK WHEN WE SEE THERE WAS, THERE ARE THINGS MISSING HERE.
A WHAT XY, Z PERSON DID, WASN'T WAS AN INTERVIEW.
MAYBE IF THEY, THE INTERVIEW THAT COULD HAVE CHANGED THINGS THAT WE GET A CHANCE TO ASK, ASK FOR A BRIEFING AND ADD, WHICH, WHICH COULD INITIATE FURTHER INVESTIGATION FROM BOTH A PO AND A PD.
SO, SO WE, THE WAY TO, TO THINK ABOUT THE ROLE FOR ME IS THAT THERE'S A, THIS, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITIZENS.
SOMEBODY THAT HAS NO AP, NO TIED TO THE POLICE SYSTEM, JUDGE WHETHER THE VERDICT IS A FAIR ONE, AND BASED ON UNDERSTANDING THAT A COMPLETE INVESTIGATION WAS DONE AND THAT ALL THE POSSIBLE THINGS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATED, UH, OR THEN.
SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT JUST POLICY.
WE ARE ACTUALLY, WE COULD MAKE A, WE COULD MAKE AN IMPACT IF DONE THIS, IF DONE CORRECTLY IN HELPING SOMEBODY GET JUSTICE.
UM, AND SO I, I REALLY LIKE WHAT YOU JUST SAID, AND I AGREE WITH THAT.
AND SO THAT CAN BE ADDED ONTO THAT AS WELL.
BUT I, I DO NOT BELIEVE, AND AGAIN, I'VE NEVER BEEN A POLICE OFFICER, BUT WE'RE GOING OVER ALL THESE CASES AND WE HAVE YET TO FIND ONE WHERE THERE'S SOMETHING THAT IS SUSPICIOUS.
SO WHY NOT USE THAT SAME IDEOLOGY THAT YOU'RE HAVING? OKAY, SOMETHING IS WEIRD.
THEN WE BRING IT TO THE COMMISSION AND WE SAY, HEY, WE NEED TO LOOK INTO THIS FURTHER.
WE DON'T NEED THREE PEOPLE TO REVIEW A CASE THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING TO BE WRONG.
WHEN NINE TIMES OUTTA 10, THERE'S PROBABLY NOT GONNA BE SOMETHING WRONG IN IT.
SO WHY NOT EACH INDIVIDUAL REVIEW THE CASE? AND IF THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG, THEN IT GETS BROUGHT FORWARD.
BUT I DON'T THINK THERE'LL BE THAT MANY THAT THERE'S THINGS WRONG.
WHY DON'T YOU LET, UM, COMMISSIONER PENA MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CHANGE THE PROCESS IF SHE'D LIKE TO, AND THEN WE COULD CONSIDER THAT AT ANOTHER MEETING? EX EXCELLENT.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, THE, THE WAY IT'S RUN RIGHT NOW IS THAT COMMISSIONER FLOOD AND FRANCO AND OTHERS PUT A PROCESS TOGETHER, AND THE IDEA WAS, LET'S GIVE THIS PROCESS
[02:10:01]
A CHANCE AND LET'S, BECAUSE WHAT, RIGHT NOW, THE, THE MOST, I'M BIASED, BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTION THAT WE COULD MAKE IS REVIEWING CASES.AND WE'RE JUST BARELY STARTING TO GET TO LEARN TO REVIEW THEM AND UNDERSTAND HOW DIFFICULT THEY, AND TIMING.
AND SO I, THE THOUGHT WAS, ANY CASE WE REVIEW, JUST HAVE WE LEARNED TO REVIEW AND MAKE SURE WE GET THAT, THAT EXPERTISE UNDER THE BELT KNOW WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT A CODE 42 3 MEANS, AND WHAT'S THE RIGHT PUNISHMENT AND SO FORTH, WHICH SOME OF US ARE STILL TRYING TO UNDERSTAND TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN I SEE A PO MAKES A, MAKE A DECISION, AND I SECOND GUESS THEM, YOU KNOW, THAT THERE'S VALIDITY TO IT AND IT'S NOT, THERE'S NOT THINGS THAT I MISSED OUT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THEIR EXPERTISE AND SO FORTH.
SO THE PROCESS, THE, THE, THE PROCESS OF WHAT THAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW IS A HUNDRED PERCENT IN THE HANDS OF 11 OF US.
YOU KNOW, BUT I, YOU KNOW, FOR SOME OF US, WE BELIEVE IT'S STILL, AND I KNOW OTHERS AGREE THAT I DON'T GIVE IT, WE HAVE NOT DONE ENOUGH.
I DON'T BELIEVE WE'VE DONE ENOUGH REVIEWS TO, TO, TO, TO FEEL, YOU KNOW, BUT THAT'S JUST MY VIEW.
WRITE A SUGGESTION FOR CHANGING THE PROCESS, AND THEN WE CAN, WE CAN VOTE ON THAT AND SO FORTH.
UM, I, I'LL, I'LL HELP YOU WRITE THAT SUGGESTION BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR A YEAR AND A HALF.
IT IS INEFFECTIVE, IT IS NOT WORKING, AND WE NEED CHANGE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, BUT I WILL HELP YOU DEVELOP AND FIGURE THAT OUT.
UM, I DON'T WANT TO BE THE SINGLE POINT OF FAILURE, SO IF MY TRIAGING IS SLOWING THINGS DOWN, I WILL STOP DOING THAT TOO.
BUT, UM, I'M TRYING TO MAKE IT AS, AS EXPEDITIOUS AS POSSIBLE.
'CAUSE LIKE I SAID, WE'RE ALREADY GETTING THESE CASES WAY BEHIND THE CURVE.
AND IF IT'S A HIGH PROFILE CASE, WE KNOW THEY'RE GONNA CLOSE IT OUT.
SOMETIMES THEY CLOSE IT OUT BEFORE A PO CAN EVEN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.
AND THEY WERE SITTING RIGHT THERE ALONG THE WAY WITH THEM THE WHOLE TIME.
I, I, SO WE NEED TO, WE NEED A BETTER SYSTEM.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE HEARD TODAY WHEN PEOPLE WERE GIVING THEIR PUBLIC COMMENTS, UM, BECAUSE I BEGGED THE DIFFERENT COMMISSIONER FLOYD, IN THAT WE HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWING FOR 18 YEAR AND A HALF A YEAR SAY, THAT, DIDN'T SAY THAT.
I SAID, WE HAVE BEEN A COMMISSION FOR A YEAR AND A HALF, BUT HOW LONG HAVE WE BEEN REVIEWING AND SO FORTH.
THAT'S WHERE IT, WELL, IT'S BEEN A LOT OF DELAYS TO THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT JUSTIFICATION FOR CONTINUING TO DELAY THE PROCESS.
AND THIS, YOU CAN'T LET THE PURSUIT OF THE PERFECT BE THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD.
HOW DO YOU THINK? AND SO, YEAH, SORRY.
AND SO THERE'S A LOT OF US ON THIS COMMISSION.
IT'S NOT ALWAYS A CONSISTENT CONSTANT THING.
SO IF PEOPLE COULD DO IT INDIVIDUALLY AND SAY, HEY, I LOOKED AT THIS CASE, AND THEN THEY DO BRING IT UP, UH, THAT MAY BE A BETTER PROCESS.
LIKE I SAID, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS.
I KNOW THAT GIVING EVERYTHING A CHANCE UNTIL MORE COMMISSIONERS LEAVE AND WE KEEP HAVING ATTRITION IS NOT IT.
BUT I DID OFFER TO, SINCE SHE DID IDENTIFY THE PROBLEM, I DID OFFER TO HELP HER COME UP WITH A SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM, BECAUSE I AM NOT IN AGREEANCE THAT THIS IS THE IDEAL SYSTEM.
CAN I ANSWER IN A PUBLIC FORM? I WANNA MAKE SURE FOR THE RECORD, RIGHT.
I DON'T BELIEVE THERE, THERE ARE ANY ONE OF US THAT HAS REVIEWED FOR, THOROUGHLY REVIEWED FOR FOUR OR FIVE CASES IN HERE, AND, AND THERE'S SOME, THAT'S THE POINT WHO HAVE NOT REVIEWED A CASE THAT IS NOT PROBLEM OF THE PROCESS IS THAT THERE, THERE'S, UM, THERE, THERE, IT IS NOT GONNA ACCELERATE THINGS BY PICKING ONE UP UN UNTIL PEOPLE LEARN.
LIKE ONCE AGAIN, WE, WE, THE, THE WAY SOME THINGS YOU HAVE TO GET DONE BY TRYING THEM.
AND MY OPINION, AND I, BECAUSE I AM ON A WORKING GROUP, I CAN TELL YOU THAT I'M NOT SURE IF YOU ARE ONE, IF YOU HAVE REVIEWED A CASE.
BUT BECAUSE I AM IN A WORKING GROUP, I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE NEED TO HAVE MORE CHANCES TO REVIEW THINGS.
AND I THINK THAT'S, BY THE WAY, REMEMBER THIS, YOU CAN ALWAYS WRITE THE PROPOSAL, AND THEN IF THERE'S SIX PEOPLE WHO AGREE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOOD.
SO, BUT WARNING TO YOU, IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE A CASE, IS THAT SOME OF US WHO HAVE BELIEVED THAT WE STILL NEED TO DO A FEW MORE CASES TO FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT WE ARE CAPABLE OF GIVING MR. MASTERS AND HIS TEAM AND SAYING, YOU KNOW WHAT? I THINK YOU MISSED THIS.
WHO WORKED ON DEVELOPING THIS PROCESS THAT WE HAVE NOW? I WORKED ON IT, YOU KNOW WHY? BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, DUE TO THE TURNOVER, AND I ASKED, I ASKED THE CHAIRMAN THE QUESTION.
I SAID, MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE A QUESTION.
I DID NOT HEAR YOU SAY THAT COMMISSIONER FLOOD AND COMMISSIONER FRANCO WERE THE OF THE HEART OF DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, AND THEY PRESENTED TO THE REST OF, THEY PRESENTED IT TO THE REST OF US.
MAY, MAY, MAY I BE HEARD? UM, I JUST WANNA SAY, I THINK WE'RE HAVING, WE, THIS HAS BEEN A DIFFICULT PROCESS, I THINK FOR ALL OF US.
UH, I THINK WE'RE HAVING A REALLY GOOD DISCUSSION, TO BE HONEST, BECAUSE
[02:15:01]
AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU KNOW, WE MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS AND HOWEVER WE GET THERE, UM, I THINK THE MAIN POINT IS, YOU KNOW, WE GET TO SEE THINGS THAT THE GENERAL PUBLIC PUBLIC MAY NOT BE ABLE TO SEE.AND WE'RE, WE, WE TAKE THAT AND WE MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS WITH IT.
AND, YOU KNOW, I I THINK THAT, UH, I DON'T WANNA LOSE SIGHT OF THAT, YOU KNOW, BEING ABLE TO, UH, TAKE THIS, UM, VERY IMPORTANT ROLE WE'RE ALL IN.
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT, BUT I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT, I'M GLAD WE'RE DOING IT.
WELL, I'M GLAD WE'RE DOING IT TOO, BUT, AND THIS IS THE VOLUNTEER POSITION, BUT IF WE'RE NOT GONNA DO IT DELIBERATELY, THEN WE SHOULDN'T DO IT AT ALL.
AND I'M THE FIRST ONE TO SAY, TRY ANYTHING.
BUT I CAN ALSO SAY THAT, THAT DIDN'T WORK.
THAT'S WHAT CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT IS ALL ABOUT.
IT'S NOT JUST SAYING, OH, I CAME UP WITH THIS IDEA, WE'RE GONNA DO IT EVEN IF IT DOESN'T WORK.
NO, IT DOESN'T TAKE ALL DAY TO RECOGNIZE SUNSHINE.
MAYBE WE DO NEED SOME MORE REPS, BUT TWO THINGS CAN BE TRUE.
AT THE SAME TIME, WE CAN ALSO BE MORE PROACTIVE AND REVIEW REAL CASES TOO.
AND IF PEOPLE DON'T FEEL THAT THEY'RE PREPARED TO DO THAT, THEN THEY DON'T HAVE TO PARTICIPATE.
HELL, WE CAN BARELY GET A QUORUM SOMETIMES.
SO IT REALLY JUST NEEDS TO BE MORE JUDICIOUS AND LESS TRYING TO PERFECT THE PROCESS, BECAUSE WE'RE NEVER GONNA GET IT, GET IT RIGHT.
UM, BUT WE CAN ALWAYS GET BETTER, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M FOCUSED ON.
BUT RIGHT NOW, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE NOT BEING EFFICIENT OR EFFECTIVE, AND I FEEL LIKE IT'S REALLY A WASTE OF ALL OF OUR TIME.
I DISAGREE, UH, AT LEAST IN TERMS OF, UH, I'M, I'M IN GROUP B WITH, UH, WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER WITH CHRIS AND DEREK
UM, YOU, UH, I, I FEEL THAT, UH, I CAN ONLY SPEAK OF THE EXPERIENCE OF WHAT WE'RE HAVING IN GROUP B.
UM, BUT I, I FEEL THAT, UM, WE HAVE BEEN MAKING POSITIVE, WE HAVE BEEN MAKING POSITIVE PROGRESS.
UM, I THINK AT LEAST THE, AT LEAST THE THREE OF US OF COMMISSIONERS SEEM TO WORK WELL TOGETHER.
UM, AND, UM, UH, I THINK, UH, YOU KNOW, I HAD SOME, UH, STUFF IN MY LIFE THIS MONTH THAT, UH, AFFECTED MY ABILITY TO COMMIT AS MUCH AS I WOULD LIKE TO.
BUT, UM, PER, PERSONALLY, AS A COMMISSIONER, I WOULD NOT LIKE TO SPLIT THE GROUPS UP YET.
UM, AT LEAST GROUP B
UM, BECAUSE I'VE, I, I KNOW THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT I CAN PROACTIVELY DO THAT I DID NOT DO THIS MONTH THAT, UM, UH, I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE ALMOST THERE.
YOU KNOW, I, UH, AS FAR AS GROUP B, UM, I, I DON'T KNOW.
I'M SORRY THAT THE OTHER EXPERIENCES THEY'RE HAVING IN OTHER GROUPS, BUT I, I WOULD SAY GROUP B IS SO FAR GOING IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION, AND I THINK WE CAN GET, I THINK WE CAN MEET OUR GOALS.
UM, WE'RE NOT THE FIRST OVERSIGHT COMMISSION IN THE COUNTRY.
ARE THERE SOME OTHER COMMISSIONS ACROSS THE COUNTRY THAT MAYBE WE COULD TALK TO THEM AND SEE WHAT THEIR PROCESS IS? YES.
MS. MCC, MS. MCCALL, YOU HAD MENTIONED, HI MS. MCCALL.
YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT THE A PO IS PART OF A NATIONAL ORGANIZATION THAT OVER, YOU KNOW, POLICE OVERSIGHT.
COULD YOU PUT US IN TOUCH WITH SOME OTHER COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, CIVILIAN COMMISSIONS THAT MAYBE WE COULD TALK TO THEM, PICK THEIR BRAIN A LITTLE? WE, WE ABSOLUTELY COULD REACH OUT FOR YOU AND CONNECT YOU WITH SOME OTHER COMMISSIONS.
I MEAN, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IN TEXAS.
I'VE ASKED THAT QUESTION IN THE PAST AS WELL.
SO, I, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT THE CURRENT PROCESS, I BELIEVE THAT A LOT OF, UH, FORETHOUGHT WAS PUT INTO IT.
UH, IT WAS THOUGHT OUT, UH, IT WAS PRESENTED WELL.
UM, WE ALL DISCUSSED IT AND DELIBERATED ON IT AND ADOPTED IT AS A COMMISSION.
AND I THINK IT'S, IT WOULD BE PREMATURE TO CHANGE IT, BUT I'M OPEN TO CONSIDERING CHANGES.
BUT, UM, RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST GOING AROUND IN CIRCLES MM-HMM
SO I BELIEVE IT WAS A THOUGHT OUT PROCESS.
WE ADOPTED IT, WE'RE WORKING THROUGH IT.
UM, AND, UM, I, I, I'M, I'M GOOD WITH STICKING WITH IT.
SO MY QUESTION TO EVERYONE IS, WHEN, WHEN DO WE SAY THERE'S BEEN ENOUGH TIME? IF WE DON'T HAVE, IF WE DON'T KNOW WHERE WE'RE GOING, WE CAN GET THERE ANY TYPE OF WAY.
[02:20:01]
WHEN IS A GOOD CUTOFF POINT? WHAT IS THE TRIGGER? WHAT IS THE INDICATOR? WHAT IS THE MEASURE OF PERFORMANCE, MEASURABLE EFFECTIVENESS? HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT THAT IS? AND THAT'S MY WHOLE POINT.AND I APPRECIATE KATHY SHARING ABOUT GROUP B.
AND SO IF YOU GUYS ARE WORKING WELL, THEN I BROUGHT UP THE SUGGESTION THAT WE SHOULD HAVE A TEAM THAT EXPEDITES CASES, THE ONES THAT COME BEFORE US IN REAL TIME.
UM, I JUST DON'T LIKE THE CURRENT FORMULA WHERE WE'RE JUST LOOKING BACKWARDS, LOOKING BACKWARDS, LOOKING BACKWARDS, EVEN THOUGH WE CAN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE, EVEN IF WE PRESENT IT TO THIS BODY BECAUSE THE CASE HAS ALREADY BEEN CLOSED AND ACTIONED UPON IT IS GOOD TRAINING.
BUT I DON'T THINK THE PEOPLE WANT TRAINING.
THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY ASKED US FOR.
WE NEED THE TRAINING TO ACTUALLY DELIVER RESULTS, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE HAVE REAL CASES IN THE QUEUE THAT WE COULD GET EVEN BETTER TRAINING ON AND UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS EVEN BETTER.
I, AND SO I DON'T THINK WHY, I DON'T LIKE BINARY CHOICES, AND THAT'S WHAT I KEEP HEARING OKAY.
IS OKAY, LET'S JUST KEEP DOING THEM RETROSPECTIVE.
BUT WE CAN BE PROSPECTIVE TOO.
LIKE I SAID, UM, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT A BINARY CHOICE.
I, I, I, I'M TRYING TO MOVE ON.
SO WHAT I'LL SUGGEST IS A FOLLOWING.
IT'S CLEAR THAT IT'S THE WAY WE WORK.
YOU COULD MAKE A PROPOSAL SECOND AND MOVE ON.
ONE OF THE, THE THINGS ABOUT A PARLIAMENTARIAN SYSTEM IS THAT SOMETIMES YOU WANT TO GET A, A, FEEL A POLL BEFORE YOU PUT SOMETHING AND WORK ON SOMETHING OF HAVING, KNOWING IF IT HAD A CHANCE OF PASSING.
I SUGGEST YOU, YOU KNOW, JUST, JUST ANECDOTALLY LOOK AROUND AND WONDER IF YOU SEE PEOPLE IN GROUP B AND C AND THEY'RE THINKING PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY DOING THE WORK ARE THINKING, MAYBE WE WANNA KEEP TRYING.
THAT'S A SOMEWHAT OF AN INDICATION THAT MAYBE IF YOU DO PUT A PROPOSAL OUT THERE, WHICH YOU SHOULD, AND YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO IT, IT MAY HAVE A, MAY NOT HAVE A GOOD CHANCE OF PASSING BECAUSE THE, THE PEOPLE THAT WORK, THEY'RE DOING WORK RIGHT NOW, JUST TRYING TO, TO DO SOME MORE.
SO, I, I'M NOT, I DON'T WANT TO TO DISCUSS ANYMORE.
I THINK IT'S, UH, WE'VE, WE'VE KILLED THIS.
WE ALL UNDERSTAND OUR POSITION, AND THEN WE'RE GONNA KEEP GOING IN CIRCLE.
SO I PROPOSE TO CONTINUE, DO NO MANY QUESTIONS, CONTINUE, UH, LET ALLOW, UH, THE DIRECTOR TO COMPLETE HER PRESENTATION AND THEN MOVE ON CHAIR.
MAY I, UM, UM, THIS, THIS PRESENTATION IS BRIEFING, ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO THE COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION THAT THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION, UH, MADE THE RECOMMENDATION HAS PROMPTED A LOT OF CONVERSATION.
I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UH, NUMBER 21, WHERE THEY TALKED ABOUT, UM, YOUR ABILITY TO REVIEW CASES IF YOU ARE OPEN TO IT.
I, I KNOW WHEN WE INITIALLY STARTED THAT, UM, THIS DISCUSSION, UH, THE, UM, A-P-O-N-I-A-D HAD PROPOSED A, UH, SOLUTION TO, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL RECALL THAT, UH, UH, MAYBE I'LL LET KEVIN SPEAK TO THAT.
BUT IF YOU'RE OPEN TO, AS YOU ARE LOOKING AT, UH, COMMUNION, UH, COMMISSIONER PENA AND FLOODS, DRAFTING SOMETHING DIFFERENT, ALSO, UM, MAYBE, UM, LOOKING AT RELOOKING AT THAT, UM, UH, PROPOSAL THAT WAS MADE, UH, MAYBE, MAYBE SEVERAL MONTHS, MONTHS AGO, IF YOU'RE, UH, OPEN TO, TO PUT REVISITING, UH, THAT, UM, PROPOSAL THAT WAS MADE, UH, SEVERAL MONTHS AGO BY THE AUSTIN POLICE OVERSIGHT OFFICE AND, UH, INTERNAL AFFAIRS.
UH, AND SO, UH, WE ARE OPEN TO SHARING THAT IF YOU'RE OPEN TO, UH, REVIEWING THAT PROCESS AGAIN.
AND I'LL LET KEVIN TALK ABOUT THAT.
WHEN WE FIRST STARTED MEETING, AND YOU START, WE FIRST STARTED TALKING ABOUT THE REVIEW AND THE BRIEFING PROCESS, I THINK IT WAS MYSELF AND LIEUTENANT WILSON, WHO'S A LIEUTENANT IN THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DIVISION.
WE HAD KIND OF PROPOSED A PROCESS FOR YOU GUYS FOR YOUR DELIBERATIONS TO MS. JOHNSON'S POINT.
UH, YOU GUYS AREN'T THE FIRST CPRC.
THERE WAS A-C-P-R-C PRIOR THAT ACTUALLY HEARD CASES THAT ACTUALLY GOT BRIEFINGS.
WHETHER THEY MADE RECOMMENDATIONS OR NOT, I DON'T KNOW.
BUT WE PROPOSED A PROCESS THAT LOOKED LIKE IAD WOULD COMPLETE THEIR CASE.
THEY WOULD DO WHAT THEY'RE DOING NOW.
THEY WOULD DOWNLOAD THE CA DOWNLOAD THE CASE INTO A FOLDER THAT WAS AVAILABLE FOR YOU.
UH, THEY WOULD DO A BRIEFING SHORTLY AFTER THEY DOWNLOADED THEIR CASE TO THE FULL COMMISSION SO THAT YOU CAN DELIBERATE.
I THINK, UH, I, I, I THINK THE BIGGEST DISCONNECT IS, IT'S NOT A DISCONNECT, BUT IT'S, THE WORD THAT'S IN MY HEAD RIGHT NOW WAS THAT THE PROPOSAL WAS FOR WHENEVER A CRITICAL INCIDENT INVESTIGATION WAS COMPLETED, THEY WOULD IMMEDIATELY DOWNLOAD IT SO THAT IT'S FULLY REVIEWABLE FOR THE COMMISSION.
WE WOULD IMMEDIATELY DO A BRIEFING FOR THE FULL COMMISSION TO DELIBERATE ON AND THEN MOVE FROM THERE.
WHAT, WHAT I WILL SAY IS I THINK IT GOT BOGGED UP WHEN YOU
[02:25:01]
GUYS WANTED TO LOOK AT EVERYTHING, AND, AND THAT'S A LOT.UM, I, I WOULD ADVOCATE THAT IF MAYBE YOU LOOKED AT THE PROCESS THAT THE PREVIOUS CPRC USED, LOOKING AT CRITICAL INCIDENTS IN THOSE CASES, DEATH IN CUSTODIES OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTINGS, UH, SERIOUS CASES OF MAYBE EXCESSIVE USE OF FORCE OR SERIOUS IMPROPER CONDUCT CASES.
LET'S GET THE INVESTIGATIONS DONE.
WE CAN GET 'EM DOWNLOADED AND DO A FULL REVIEW, A BRIEFING, BOTH INTERNAL AFFAIRS AND IAD, BOTH INTERNAL AFFAIRS AND A PO TO THE COMMISSION.
IT KIND OF FALLS IN LINE WITH, I THINK, WHAT MR. FLOOD AND MAYBE MS. PENA WAS ARTICULATING.
SO, BUT I'LL BE HAPPY TO, WE'LL MAKE SURE, WE'LL SEND THE FULL COMMISSION BECAUSE WE HAD IT IN A FLOW CHART AND IT WAS SPELLED OUT.
WE'LL GET THAT TO YOU AS YOU CONSIDER HOW YOU WANNA MOVE FORWARD.
AND CAN WE HAVE THAT ON THE, I I'LL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE HAVE IT ON THE FUTURE NEXT MEETING AGENDA FOR SURE.
HOWEVER, IT'S TOTALLY UP TO YOU HOW YOU WANT TO PROCEED.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, RECOMMEND, I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE TAKE UP AND CONSIDER ITEM EIGHT OUT OF ORDER SO THAT WE CAN LET MR. HUNT MAKE HIS PUBLIC COMMENTS.
AND I WISH I HAD MADE THIS EARLIER, BUT, UM, IF IT'S YES, I MEAN, I THAT'S GOOD.
IS THAT YOUR DISCRETION? SO, LIKE I SAID, WE WILL.
WHAT WE'LL DO IS SKIP SEVEN FOR NOW.
[8. Discussion of the recommendation to the Austin City Council, City Manager, and the Austin Police regarding transparency, accessibility, and the public presentation of data related to interactions with federal immigration authorities]
LET'S GO TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.SO, UH, MR. HUNT CAN MAKE HIS PRESENTATION AND WE CAN JUST DISCUSS DISCUSSION ON THE RECOMMENDATION.
AUSTIN, CITY COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER, AND AUSTIN, UH, POLICE REGARDING TRANSPARENCY, ACCESSIBILITY, AND PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS OF DATE RELATING TO INTERACTIONS WITH FEDERAL IMMIGRATION AUTHORITIES.
UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR CONSIDERATION.
I'M A VOLUNTEER WITH THE AUSTIN JUSTICE COALITION.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER EUGENE, FOR THE CONSIDERATION.
I'M GONNA BE HERE THROUGH THE END OF THIS ANYWAY, BUT, UH, AT LEAST I CAN GO TO THE BATHROOM.
UM, I WANTED TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNSEL REGARDING, UM, THE REGULAR PUBLICATION DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION REGARDING APDS INVOLVEMENT WITH, UH, FEDERAL IMMIGRATION OFFICIALS.
UM, IN PARTICULAR, I WANNA EMPHASIZE THREE THINGS, UH, THAT I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THIS COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL THAT THIS REPORTING BE MONTHLY, UM, THAT IT BE IN A DASHBOARD FORMAT, SIMILAR TO THE OTHER INFORMATION ON THE A PD OPEN DATA, UH, RELEASE, UM, AND THAT IT COVER ALL INTERACTIONS WITH FEDERAL IMMIGRATION OFFICIALS.
THIS SOUNDS, I THINK, A LOT MORE COMPREHENSIVE THAN IT ACTUALLY IS RELATIVE TO THE DATA THAT IS CURRENTLY COLLECTED AND DISTRIBUTED.
UM, FOR REFERENCE, CURRENTLY, THERE IS A REGULARLY MONTHLY UPDATED DATA RELEASE THAT COVERS ALL REQUESTS FOR IMMIGRATION STATUS, UM, AND ALSO PER A DIRECTIVE FROM COUNCIL IN 2024, THERE ARE QUARTERLY REPORTS THAT COVER, UH, WHAT LOOKS TO BE ALL INTERACTIONS THAT A PD HAS WITH ICE.
UM, THE MOST RECENT OF THESE WAS RELEASED, UH, JANUARY 31ST, COVERING THE PERIOD FROM OCTOBER TO DECEMBER.
UM, I'D SAY LOOKS TO COVER EVERYTHING.
UH, TECHNICALLY, THE, THE TWO SECTIONS THAT I'M REFERRING TO, UM, SECTIONS TWO AND THREE COVER CASES IN WHICH A PD RESOURCES WERE DEDICATED TO ASSISTING IMMIGRATION OFFICIALS AND CASES IN WHICH A PD PROVIDED INFORMATION PER THE REQUEST OF IMMIGRATION OFFICIALS.
THAT SOUNDS TO ME FAIRLY COMPREHENSIVE, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE VALUABLE FOR THIS COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND THE COUNCIL CLARIFY THAT DIRECTIVE TO COVER ALL, TO JUST SAY IT SHOULD BE ALL INTERACTIONS, WHETHER THOSE ARE REQUESTED BY IMMIGRATION OFFICIALS OR WERE, FOR EXAMPLE, INITIATED, UM, UH, AT THE DECISION OF AN INDIVIDUAL OFFICER.
UM, AND IMPORTANTLY THAT THIS INFORMATION BE DISTRIBUTED IN A WAY THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH, FOR EXAMPLE, SOME OF THE OTHER REPORTS THAT A PD RELEASES IN THEIR OPEN DATA SETS, UH, AND THAT HAVE MONTHLY UPDATES.
UM, AS, AS I SAID, THE, UH, IMMIGRATION STATUS REQUEST, UH, REPORTS, UH, ARE SENT OUT MONTHLY.
THOSE ARE EASILY ACCESSIBLE, UH, AND ARE MUCH EASIER TO LOOK THROUGH AND FIND AND DEAL WITH.
UM, THE ISSUE WITH THAT SORT OF UPDATING PATTERN IS CURRENTLY THE IMMIGRATION, UH, COORDINATION INFORMATION THAT IS RELEASED IN THESE REPORTS.
AND THESE QUARTERLY REPORTS CAN HAVE AS MUCH AS A FOUR MONTH LAG TIME BETWEEN AN EVENT AND WHEN IT IS THEN REPORTED.
UH, THIS IS PARTICULARLY RELEVANT RIGHT NOW WHEN WE'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS, AND I'VE APPEARED BEFORE THIS COMMISSION BEFORE ADDRESSING, FOR EXAMPLE, SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IN JANUARY.
AND THERE HAVE RECENTLY BEEN UPDATES TO THE GENERAL ORDERS.
I'M THINKING PARTICULARLY OF GENERAL ORDER THREE 19, THAT MODIFIES THE STANDARDS FOR HOW OFFICERS OR CLARIFIES THE STANDARDS FOR HOW OFFICERS ARE ENGAGING WITH FEDERAL IMMIGRATION OFFICIALS WITH THE CURRENT REPORTING PATTERN.
UM, THAT MEANS THAT WE WOULD NOT REALLY BE SEEING THOSE EFFECTS, LET'S SAY.
SO JANUARY, FEBRUARY, MARCH, THAT REPORT WOULD
[02:30:01]
COME OUT AT THE END OF APRIL, BUT THESE WERE INSTITUTED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE REPORTING PATTERN.WE WOULDN'T REALLY BE ABLE TO SEE POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF THOSE CHANGES IN THE GENERAL ORDERS OR ANY LONG-TERM PATTERNS UNTIL APRIL, MAY, JUNE, END OF JULY.
SO THAT'S GETTING INTO DEEP SUMMER BEFORE WE SEE SORT OF THE IMPLICATIONS OF CHANGES THAT MAY HAVE BEEN MADE EARLY IN THE SPRING.
SO I THINK IT'S PRETTY VALUABLE FOR THIS COMMISSION ALSO TO RECOMMEND THAT THESE REPORTS HAPPEN IN A CONSISTENT FREQUENT WAY, AS PLENTY OF THEM ALREADY ARE, WHICH IS THE FOURTH OF EVERY MONTH, LIKE THE, UH, IMMIGRATION STATUS INQUIRY REPORTS ARE HAPPENING.
SO, JUST TO REITERATE, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS MATERIAL AFTERWARDS.
UM, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THIS COMMISSION TO MAKE AN AFFIRMATIVE RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL TO RELEASE REPORTS ON, UH, ALL INTERACTIONS THAT A PD HAS WITH FEDERAL IMMIGRATION OFFICIALS, UM, WHETHER INITIATED BY, UH, FEDERAL IMMIGRATION OFFICIALS OR A PD, UH, AND REPORT ON THOSE, UH, MONTHLY IN A WAY THAT IS EASILY ACCESSIBLE AS THEY DO WITH PLENTY OF OTHER THINGS.
UM, AGAIN, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS, THERE'S PLENTY TO SAY HERE THAT MIGHT EXTEND BEYOND THREE MINUTES.
YEAH, I JUST WANNA SAY THAT I THINK IT, IT'S REALLY USEFUL TO HAVE, UH, THE PUBLIC IN A RESPONSIBLE WAY HAVE THE INFORMATION.
OBVIOUSLY, RESPONSIBLE WAY CAN BE, YOU KNOW, THAT CAN BE INTERPRETED IN MANY WAYS, BUT, UH, I, THERE'S A LOT OF, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A LOT OF POLITICS INVOLVED WITH ICE AND, UH, A PD AND I THINK GOOD INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT IS ACTUALLY GOING ON IS, IS VALUABLE.
UM, SO WE KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THEY PICKING UP PEOPLE FOR, YOU KNOW, UM, I THINK THAT'S GOOD INFORMATION TO HAVE.
I JUST HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION.
ARE WE ACTUALLY DISCUSSING ITEM EIGHT, OR ARE WE JUST DISCUSSING WHAT HE TALKED ABOUT? OR IS THERE GONNA BE AN INTRODUCTION? HOW ARE WE MOVING FORWARD? YEAH, WE, WE, SINCE, UM, WE'RE GONNA BE DISCUSSING ITEM EIGHT AT THIS POINT.
AND SO TO START IT, SINCE, SINCE HE HAD A, UH, A PUBLIC COMMENT, WE ALLOWED HIM TO MAKE HIS PUBLIC COMMENT.
SO NOW WE, WE SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON ITEM EIGHT.
AND, UH, SORRY, I WAS SAYING, UH, WE ARE DISCUSSING, UH, ITEM EIGHT.
AND SINCE MR. HUNT, UH, WANTED TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON IT, WE ALLOWED HIM TO TALK FIRST.
BUT RIGHT NOW, THE, THE REST OF US WILL BE DISCUSSING IT AND WAS GONNA ASK, UH, THE CHAMPION PERSON WHO PUT TOGETHER THE, THE LEAD THE DISCUSSIONS.
UH, MYSELF AND COMMISSIONER FRANCO PUT TOGETHER THIS PROPOSAL.
UM, YOU ALL SHOULD HAVE IT BEFORE YOU, AND WE BASICALLY ADOPTED A LOT OF THIS FROM THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION.
UM, WE HAVE MORE AUTHORITY, UM, THAN THEY DO, BUT WE, UH, MERGED A LOT OF THEIR INFORMATION, AND THEY GAVE US A LOT OF FEEDBACK, UM, WHEN WE HAD HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THEM.
AND ONE ISSUE THAT I WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT I HAD NOT EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT WAS, WE MAY NOT BE GETTING THE FULL PICTURE BECAUSE THE STATE DPS HAS AN ARRANGEMENT WITH ICE.
SO AN AUSTIN PD OFFICER ON SCENE WORKING WITH D-P-S-A-P-D MAY NOT REPORT, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE STATE POLICE WHO IS ALSO AT THAT INCIDENT DOES NOT REPORT.
AND SO WE NEED TO CATCH THAT TOO, THE, BECAUSE JUST, AND THEY POINTED OUT THAT THAT COULD BE A TREND AND A PATTERN IS THAT YES, A PD IS NOT REPORTING ANYONE TO ICE, BUT THERE COULD BE STATE POLICE INVOLVEMENT, AND THOSE INDIVIDUALS ARE STILL GETTING REPORTED TO ICE.
SO WE NEED TO BE MORE, I GUESS, WIDEN OUR APERTURE AND BE ABLE TO CONTEXTUALIZE THAT.
BECAUSE IF AN A PD OFFICER CALLS A STATE POLICE OFFICER ON THE SCENE SO THAT THEY CAN CONTACT ICE, THEY'RE JUST CIRCUMVENTING THE SYSTEM AND THE NUMBERS STILL WON'T REFLECT WHAT TRULY HAPPENED.
UM, BUT SIMILAR TO WHAT MR. HUNT WAS ASKING FOR, UM, THE WHOLE OUTCOME OF WHAT WE DISCUSSED WAS AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT DASHBOARD, UM, WITH COORDINATED STRUCTURE AND A UNIFIED REPORTING NETWORK.
AND WE ARE ASKING FOR TRANSFER, TRANSFER TRANSPARENCY, AND THEN, UH, UPDATES ON WHAT IS GOING ON WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION.
I AM STANDING BY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS, AND I WILL OFFER MS. FRANKL THE FLOOR IF SHE HAS ANYTHING TO IT.
[02:35:01]
I THINK IF NOBODY HAS ANY, EXCUSE ME, ANY IMMEDIATE QUESTIONS, I DO WANNA MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT, UM, PART OF THIS, WE DID NOT INCLUDE A, WITHIN LIKE A SPECIFIC TIMELINE, RIGHT? SO INSTEAD OF, AND, AND HOPEFULLY WE HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO KIND OF GO THROUGH IT, BUT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE MISSING IS THAT WITHIN A SPECIFIC TIME OF DAYS TO HAVE THOSE INTERACTIONS SHARED WITH US.SO I THINK THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A GAP, UM, THAT THE COMMENT BROUGHT UP.
SORRY IF I'M KIND OF LOSING MY VOICE, THAT'S WHY I'M KIND OF QUIET TODAY.
BUT YES, UM, I WILL TRY TO DEFER MOST QUESTIONS TO COMMISSIONER FLOOD, BUT IF I'M ABLE TO ANSWER ANYTHING, I'D BE HAPPY TO.
UH, MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS, UH, LAST MEETING THAT WE HAD, I HAD SAID, I AM NERVOUS ABOUT THIS TYPE OF SYSTEM BECAUSE IT CAN POSSIBLY BE WEAPONIZED AGAINST THE POLICE AND IT COULD DETER POLICE FROM DOING THEIR JOB.
THAT WAS BEFORE I FULLY UNDERSTOOD WHAT SB FOUR WAS.
NOW, IF YOU LOOK INTO SB FOUR, WHICH HAS BEEN UPHELD BY THE FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT, IT SPECIFICALLY STATES A LOCAL ENTITY MAY NOT PROHIBIT OR DISCOURAGE THE ENFORCEMENT OF IMMIGRATION LAWS.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, IF ONE OFFICER FEELS CHILLED IN ANY WAY, BY PERFORMING THEIR DUTIES OVER THEM BEING TARGETED, IF THIS IS BROKEN DOWN PER SECTOR, WHICH I HIGHLY RECOMMEND AGAINST, IF ONE OFFICER IS DETERRED FROM DOING WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING, THEN THE CITY OF AUSTIN WILL BE IN VIOLATION OF SB FOUR.
WE ALREADY KNOW THAT KEN PAXTON IS LOOKING INTO THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND IS THREATENING TO TAKE AWAY STATE FUNDS OVER THIS.
SO I AM VERY, VERY STERN ON THE FACT THAT WE SHOULD NOT HAVE IT BROKEN DOWN THE WAY YOU GUYS HAVE IT IN YOUR PROPOSAL BY SECTOR, BECAUSE YOU ARE GONNA DETER THE POLICE.
AND THAT COULD AND MIGHT, AND VERY LIKELY WILL LEAD TO AUSTIN GETTING ITS, UH, FUNDING REMOVED FROM THE STATE.
ADDITIONALLY, I, I WANTED TO SAY, AS SOMEBODY WHO'S WORKED IN STATE AND FEDERAL POLICY BEFORE, LOOKING AT THE PROPOSAL IS ALSO ANOTHER CONCERN THAT I HAVE, BECAUSE WE ARE JUST, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE A COMMISSION AND WHEN WE ARE GOING TO BE MAKING PROPOSALS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, IN ORDER FOR THESE, UH, POLICIES AND THINGS TO GET PASSED OVER THE NEXT LEVEL, TYPICALLY YOU WANT TO BE AS, AS GENERIC AND, UM, AS SHORT AS POSSIBLE ON WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE.
BECAUSE IT IS NOT OUR DUTY TO CREATE THE SYSTEMS ON THIS COMMISSION THAT'S GONNA BE THE DUTY OF THE CITY MANAGER.
AND SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, UM, FOR SURE, AND TO PROTECT THE CITY, IS THAT YOU GUYS GO BACK.
AND BY THE WAY, YOU DID AN AMAZING JOB.
SO I, I DO WANNA THANK YOU FOR THE TIME THAT YOU PUT INTO THIS, BUT I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU GUYS TO GO AND SEE THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT THAT THE COMMUNITY OR THE, UM, PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION DID.
AND IT'S GONNA BE ABOUT TWO PAGES LONG OF WHEREAS, AND A THEREFORE GO BACK AND PUT IT IN THAT FORMAT, AND THEN TAKE AWAY THE REQUIREMENT OF REPORTING BY PRECINCT.
THAT WAY WE CAN ENSURE THAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS NOT LIABLE FOR VIOLATING SB FOUR.
AND, AND, AND REGARDLESS OF HOW ANYBODY FEELS, UM, EMOTIONALLY ON THIS TOPIC, BECAUSE IT IS A SENSITIVE TOPIC, OUR FEELINGS ARE IRRELEVANT.
THE ONLY THING THAT IS RELEVANT IS THAT SB FOUR IS STATE LAW, AND WE MUST COMPLY WITH IT.
UM, AND THERE ARE A LOT OF STATE LAWS ON, ONE OF WHICH IS TO PROTECT OUR CITIZENS.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THIS GOES TOWARDS.
UM, IF AN OFFICER HAS THE RIGHT BY STATE LAW TO REPORT THIS DOES NOT DISSUADE THEM.
THEY ARE NOT PROSECUTED, THEY ARE, NOTHING HAPPENED TO THEM.
IT IS JUST ON IF SOMEONE HAS AN INCIDENT.
AND IF WE CAN'T TAKE DATA AND TURN IT INTO USABLE IN INFORMATION AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THE TRENDS AND PATTERNS ARE, THEN WE'RE LETTING THE POLICE DICTATE THEIR OWN POLICIES.
THEIR JOB IS TO PROTECT AND SERVE THE SERVANT CAN'T FEEL SUPERIOR TO THE PEOPLE THAT THEY'RE SERVING.
SO I, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
SO WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF ACCOUNTABILITY, AND THEY HAVE TO HAVE SOME OVERSIGHT.
AND ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR IS WHAT THE FACTS ARE.
SO IF THIS PRECINCT HAS A HIGHER RATE OF INCIDENT, WE NEED TO KNOW THAT THAT'S HOW TARGETING WORKS.
THAT'S HOW YOU FIT SYSTEMS. IF WE TREAT EVERYTHING EQUAL AS OPPOSED TO EQUITABLE, THEN WE'LL NEVER GET ANYWHERE BECAUSE WE'LL LOOK AT EVERYTHING AS IT'S THE SAME.
THINGS HAPPEN AT DIFFERENT TIMES PER DAY, DIFFERENT SHIFTS BY DIFFERENT OFFICERS.
AND IF WE CAN'T PICK UP ON THAT AND HOLD THOSE PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE, THEN WE ARE FAILING THE PEOPLE.
AND SO IF YOU THINK THAT US MAKING SUGGESTIONS, THAT LITERALLY IS WHAT THEY ARE, AND EVERYTHING'S GONNA GO UNDERGO
[02:40:01]
A LEGAL REVIEW, UM, IF YOU THINK THAT'S HINDERING ANYTHING, I'M HERE TO SAY THAT IT'S NOT, IS WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE.IDEALLY, WE TOOK WHAT YOU SAID, THE PUBLIC SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE EVEN HAD A MEETING WITH THEM, AND WE ADDED ON TO THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE MORE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS THAN THEY DO.
AND SO THIS WAS COLLABORATIVE.
THIS WAS NOT DONE IN A VACUUM.
THIS WAS NOT DONE WITHOUT GATHERING THE FACTS.
AND SO WE WANT TO ENSURE THE PEOPLE, BECAUSE THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS AND THE POLICE OFFICERS UNION HAVE THEIR BACK.
THIS IS OUR ROLE TO BE THE VOICE OF THE CITIZEN.
AND THIS IS WHAT THIS IS WRITTEN AS.
AND SO MY JOB IS NOT TO PROTECT OR LOOK OUT FOR THE POLICE.
UM, MY JOB IS TO LOOK OUT FOR THE PEOPLE.
MY JOB IS TO LOOK OUT FOR MY SON.
MY JOB IS TO LOOK OUT FOR MY NEIGHBOR.
AND THAT'S WHAT I AM TRYING TO DO.
AND I'M TRYING TO DO IT IN A TRANSPARENT WAY, UM, AND NOT HAVE ANYTHING HARD TO UNDERSTAND, HARD TO LOCATE THE DOCUMENTS OR ANY TYPES OF DELAYS.
UM, I JUST WANT TO BRING A REALISTIC PERSPECTIVE FROM A LIVED PERSON'S EXPERIENCE AND SHOW WHAT THE DATA IS.
IF IT'S HAPPENING, WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
IF IT'S NOT HAPPENING, GREAT, BUT WE CAN'T KNOW IF WE DON'T TRACK.
AND I, I TOTALLY APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING COMPLETELY, BUT I, I, YOU KNOW, I DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW WHERE EACH OF THE COMMISSIONERS LIVES THAT ARE ON THIS COMMISSION, UM, SINCE WE'RE NOT BROKEN DOWN BY DISTRICT.
BUT I CAN SAY THE VERY TYPE OF COMMUNITY THAT YOU GUYS ARE TRYING TO PROTECT WITH, THIS HAPPENS TO BE THE VERY COMMUNITY THAT I LIVE IN.
I LIVE IN A POOR NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE BROWN AND BLACK COMMUNITIES.
THAT'S WHERE I LIVE RIGHT NOW.
AND SO, UNLESS YOU GUYS HAVE GONE OUT AND SPOKEN TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS IN YOUR AREA, THAT MAY MATCH THAT TARGETED AREA THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF.
I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I, I STRONGLY, STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT IT BE A CITYWIDE VIEW BECAUSE I HAVE SPOKEN TO MY CONSTITUENTS AND I DO LIVE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHICH YOU TARGETING, WE DON'T WANT, WE DO NOT WANT THINGS LIKE THIS.
I LIVE THERE, I THINK, WELL, I, I, I GO THERE FREQUENTLY, AND I, THE PEOPLE THAT I TALK TO, MAYBE THEY DON'T TALK TO THE PEOPLE YOU TALK TO, BUT THEY DO WANT TO KNOW IF THEY'RE BEING TARGETED.
THEY DO WANT TO KNOW IF THEY'RE BEING OVERPOLICED.
THEY DO WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE STATISTICS LOOK LIKE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TRACKS.
BECAUSE HOW CAN YOU HAVE A FAIR COMPARATOR IF YOU NEVER COMPARE? ARE PEOPLE THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING TO, DO THEY HAVE AN ILLEGAL STATUS? ARE YOU ICE
ICE IS NOT GOING TO GO AFTER SOMEONE.
AMERICAN CITIZENS HAVE BEEN ARRESTED BY ICE.
AMERICAN CITIZENS HAVE BEEN DETAINED, THEY HAVE BEEN FALSELY DEPORTED.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOUR INFORMATION SOURCES ARE, BUT IT IS PUBLIC INFORMATION THAT AN ICE HAS ADMITTED IN COURT THAT THEY MADE THESE MISTAKES.
SO JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT ILLEGAL DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE, UH, FREE FROM BEING ACCOSTED BY ICE.
TWO AMERICAN CITIZENS WERE KILLED BY ICE.
SO I'M NOT HERE AS THE ICE PROTECTIONIST AGENCY.
I AM HERE TO REPRESENT THE PEOPLE OF THIS CITY AND BE A VOICE AND SAY THAT WE NEED TRANSPARENCY.
I'M NOT SAYING ICE IS GOOD OR BAD.
EVERY AGENCY HAS GOOD AND BAD ACTORS.
IT'S ABOUT HOW THEY OPERATE AND WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THEM.
AND LAURA, LAURA HAS HER HAND UP.
I JUST WANTED TO RESPOND ON THE SB FOUR.
THAT SB FOUR IS STILL UNDER ACTIVE FEDERAL COURT REVIEW.
IT HAS NOT REACHED THE FINAL OR STABLE ENFORCEMENT STATUS.
SO BECAUSE ENFORCEMENT HAS BEEN REPEATEDLY ENJOINED AND REMAINS SUBJECT TO ONGOING LITIGATION, IT'S GONNA BE PREMATURE AND IT'S POTENTIALLY LEGAL RISKY FOR ANY LOCAL POLICY, ANY COMMISSION DECISIONS TO ASSUME IT IS FULLY OPERATIVE OR CONSISTENTLY ENFORCEABLE.
SO I THINK INSTEAD OF SCARING INTO, OH, THERE'S THIS LAW, THERE'S THIS THING GOING ON, I STAND BY THE COMMUNITY.
AND IF THAT HAPPENS TO BE SOMEONE WITH AN IMMIGRANT BACKGROUND, THAT IS MY COMMUNITY.
AND I THINK THIS IS EXACTLY WHY WE'RE GONNA HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS.
I DO THINK THAT IT IS WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION TO BRING SOMETHING LIKE THIS UP.
UM, IF THERE'S ANYBODY HAS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR FEEDBACK.
YEAH, I JUST, IT'S MY PER UM, IT'S MY PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT EITHER ILLEGAL OR LEGAL.
[02:45:01]
THEY'RE UNDOCUMENTED OR DOCUMENTED.WELL, MY THOUGHT IS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT CHANGING, AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND THIS RECOMMENDATION, I COULD BE WRONG, IS NOT NECESSARILY CHANGING A GENERAL ORDER.
UH, IT'S JUST COLLECTING INFORMATION AND MAKING AN ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC.
UM, YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
SO I MEAN, I'M SURE THAT DAY WILL COME, BUT FOR TODAY, UM, YOU KNOW, IT IS JUST INFORMATION.
AND, UH, AS LONG AS, UH, WE RUN IT BY, I, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU GUYS ARE GONNA DO IT, BUT AS LONG AS WE RUN IT BY LEGAL AND WE'RE NOT COLLECTING INFORMATION, WE SHOULD NOT BE COLLECTING, DISSEMINATING TO THE PUBLIC.
I'M PRETTY SURE, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS IT FOLLOWS THE LAW ON WHATEVER THAT MAY BE, MAY BE, WE MAY NEED TO TALK TO LEGAL ABOUT IT IS, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS WHAT INFORMATION WE CAN COLLECT AND DISSEMINATE TO THE PUBLIC, AND ESPECIALLY SEGREGATED INFORMATION OR, BY THAT I MEAN LIKE COLLECTED INFORMATION AND IT'S NOT IDENTIFYING A SPECIFIC OFFICER.
AND, UH, AS LONG AS WE'RE, WE'RE CAREFUL HERE, I, I THINK JUST INFORMATION IS A GOOD THING.
AND, UH, AS MR. HUNT SAID THAT THIS DATA IS ALREADY COLLECTED, I'M JUST ASKING IT TO BE PUT INTO A DASHBOARD BECAUSE THE AVERAGE AMERICAN HAS ABOUT AN EIGHTH GRADE READING LEVEL.
BUT IF THEY CAN JUST SEE, OH, WELL, THIS NUMBER OF PEOPLE WERE ARRESTED ON THESE DATES IN THIS SECTOR, THAT'S NOT HARD TO DO.
AND PEOPLE HAVE SHORT ATTENTION SPANS.
SO, UM, I JUST WANT TO GIVE IT TO PEOPLE IN A WAY THAT THEY RECEIVE INFORMATION.
UM, SOME PEOPLE LOVE READING LONG NOVELS.
OTHER PEOPLE JUST GIMME THE FACTS.
AND THAT'S ALL THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO DO.
AND AS A, AS A LOW INCOME MOTHER LIVING IN POVERTY, I'M JUST SIMPLY ASKING THAT YOU GUYS DON'T HIGHLIGHT MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND HAVE IT ON BLAST.
WHY CAN WE NOT JUST DO A CITYWIDE DATA INSTEAD OF TARGETING SPECIFIC AREAS? I DON'T WANT MY NEIGHBORHOOD TARGETED.
CAN I SAY, CAN I INTERVENE HERE? I GUESS IT'S, IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT YOU GUYS HAVE MADE YOUR POSITIONS, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S, THAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'LL GET THE, THE PRIORITY, THE REST OF US TO, TO, TO MAKE A DECISION.
ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I WANT TO MAKE SURE, UH, COMMISSIONER HARRIS KNOWS ONE OF THE REASONS THIS NOT, DID NOT MAKE THE, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, ITEMS VOTED TO VOTE ON WAS BECAUSE IT, WE, IT, WE, WE NEVER HAD A CHANCE TO GET IT TO, TO CHECK BY LEGAL.
SO THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WILL HAPPEN IN NEXT MONTH.
RIGHT? I ENCOURAGE EVERY ONE OF YOU TO GO TO HAVE A NOW A DETAILED SPENT SOME MORE TIME IN NEXT MONTH BEFORE, BECAUSE IT WOULD'VE BEEN, WE WE'LL KNOW BY THEN IF THERE ARE ANY, ANY THINGS THAT LEGAL DISAPPROVE ON.
AND IT'S GONNA BE UP, HOPEFULLY, FOR, FOR VOTING ON NEXT TIME.
I MEAN, UH, COMMISSIONER PENEZ MADE HER POINT VERY CLEAR, BUT SHE WANTS THE OTHER 10 OF US WILL HAVE TO DECIDE IF WE FEEL THAT IT IS MORE, IS MORE CRUCIAL FOR THE DATA TO BE OUT THERE.
AND THAT IF, YOU KNOW, SO I, I, I WAS WANT, I DON'T, I DON'T WANT TO CONTINUE DELIBERATING IT BECAUSE I THINK YOUR BOTH YOUR POSITIONS ARE CLEAR.
YOU KNOW, ONE OF EM SAYS, CITY-WISE, THEY DON'T WANNA SAY NO.
I, I WANT TO KNOW THE DETAILS BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT.
AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, I THINK, UH, THE PROPOSAL WAS ALSO STARTED IN, UH, PROMPTED BY, UM, SOME MEMBERS OF, OF THE COMMUNITY.
SO ANY OTHER COMMENTS? RIGHT? ANYTHING ELSE? EVERYBODY KNOWS THE ROLE.
I THINK CLEARLY THERE MAY BE SOME AMENDMENTS, UH, OF, UH, IF YOU GUYS ARE INTERESTED, MAKE SURE, AND LET'S TRY TO HAVE THESE THINGS COME TO THE COMMISSIONERS BEFORE THE WEEK BEFORE.
'CAUSE IT WILL, IT WILL HELP THE PROCESS, UH, IF WE CAN HAVE THIS IN TIME FOR THE LEGAL TO HAVE THE CHANCE TO REVIEW IT.
ONCE AGAIN, THE THRESHOLD HERE IS NOT GONNA BE WHATEVER YOU CHANGE, IT'S GONNA HAVE TO GO THROUGH LEGAL AGAIN.
SO PLEASE MAKE SURE IT'S IN, IN OUR HANDS, AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, MORE THAN A WEEK BEFORE TO MAKE SURE IT AT LEAST NEEDS THAT TREASURER BEFORE YOU CAN VOTE ON IT.
I JUST WANNA ASK ONE MORE QUESTION.
I, UM, I BELIEVE LEGAL WAS HERE AND, UM, LAST, LAST WEEK AND THEY DIDN'T REALLY HAVE MUCH INPUT.
BUT BECAUSE THESE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO PASS, THESE ARE NOT ACTUAL THINGS THAT WE'RE GONNA ACT ON OR MAKE, OR WE DON'T MAKE LAWS OR ANYTHING.
THIS IS RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL.
I'M NOT SURE THAT IT'S, UM, IT CAN GET A LEGAL REVIEW, BUT I'M NOT SURE IT'S NECESSARY BECAUSE THESE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THEIR OWN LEGAL REVIEW ANYWAY.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE JUST TRYING TO BE, UM, TO ENSURE THAT WE GIVE THEM THE MOST ACCURATE DOCUMENT OR ARE WE BEING
[02:50:01]
REDUNDANT? BUT EITHER WAY, UM, THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL.IT'S NOTHING FOR OUR COMMITTEE TO ACTUALLY ENACT.
WE CAN'T ENFORCE LAW OR COMPLY.
YOU CAN, YOU CAN BLAME IN THE CHAIR THAT DECIDES THAT THE, THE CAUTION IS TO HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATION WE, WE PUT OUT, GO TO, UH, GO TO OUR COUNCIL FIRST, AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'M BEING RUNNING.
AND I JUST, AGAIN, I WANNA SAY I DON'T WANT OUR CITY TO LOSE FUNDING.
I DON'T WANT DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE CITY TO BE DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTED.
I'M A MEMBER OF ONE OF THESE COMMUNITIES AND I GUESS I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF ANY OF THE OTHER MEMBERS ON THIS BOARD THAT HAVEN'T REALLY SPOKEN YET COULD JUST TELL ME HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT MY IDEA OF A CITYWIDE VIEW.
BECAUSE YES, WE WANNA KNOW THE REACTIONS OR THE ACTIONS THAT ARE GOING ON.
WE WANT TO KNOW THE THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN OUR CITY IN REGARDS TO THIS ISSUE.
I DON'T WANT US TO LOSE THE FUNDING, BUT HOW DOES IT AFFECT YOU? HOW WOULD IT AFFECT YOUR AREA WHERE YOU LIVE? WHAT IS WRONG WITH DOING A CITYWIDE VIEW VERSUS A DISTRICT BROKEN DOWN VIEW? AND I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO HEAR OTHER COMMISSIONERS EXPLAIN HOW THAT WOULD AFFECT THEM NEGATIVELY BY DOING A, A PRECINCT BASED REPORTING INSTEAD OF DOING CITYWIDE.
WHAT IS THE NEGATIVE IMPACT OF THAT? AND WELL, COMMISSIONERS THINK ABOUT THAT.
NOWHERE IN THIS RECOMMENDATION, IS THERE ANY INSTRUCTION TO IDENTIFY NEIGHBORHOODS OF CONCERN, UH, OR ANY S OR ANY OF WHAT YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT.
UH, SO YOU WANNA MAKE, MAKE THAT CLEAR.
NOWHERE IN THIS DRAFT ARE WE ASKING FOR THAT SPECIFIC DATA, EVEN THOUGH I THINK IT'S ALREADY BEING COLLECTED AND WE'RE NOT EVEN ASKING 2% IT.
SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE COMMISSIONERS UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S THE ISSUE COMMISSIONER OPINION THAT YOU'RE HAVING.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S ACTUALLY EMBEDDED IN THE DRAFT.
AND I THINK, LIKE OUR CHAIR WAS MENTIONING, IF WE JUST HAD A LITTLE MORE TIME TO READ THROUGH IT, IT WAS KIND OF SUBMITTED, A LITTLE DELAYED ON MY END AND WEREN'T NOT UNABLE TO GET LEGAL TO REVIEW IT BEFORE WE WERE ABLE TO VOTE ON IT.
BUT I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN NEED.
YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY WELCOME TO BRING IN THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, BRING IN THOSE AMENDMENTS, AND WE CAN HAVE ANOTHER CONVERSATION WITH THOSE PROPOSALS.
YOU DON'T, WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO HAVE EVERYBODY AGREE ON ONE THING OR THE OTHER.
YOU CAN ADD IN THOSE AMENDMENTS.
AND I THINK RIGHT NOW, HOPEFULLY OTHER COMMERCIALS HAD SOME TIME TO THINK ABOUT THEIR ANSWERS.
IF ANYBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO CHIME IN, PLEASE CHAIR.
I THINK MR. HYATT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK.
IT'S UP TO YOU IF HE, IF HE CAN, WHO, UH, MR. HYATT FROM THE ASK TO CLARIFY.
WHEN I SPOKE EARLIER, I SAID THAT A LOT OF THIS INFORMATION IS ALREADY COLLECTED AND ACTUALLY REPORTED.
UM, AND I WANT TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF SOME INFORMATION THAT IS ALREADY PUBLICLY AVAILABLE REGARDING THESE KIND OF INCIDENTS, WHICH INCLUDES ZIP CODES AND CASE NUMBERS FOR EACH OF THE INCIDENTS WHERE IT HAPPENS, WHICH I THINK IS MORE SPECIFIC THAN A CITY LEVEL REPORT.
UH, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE MOST RECENT REPORT, UM, THIS WAS PUT OUT, LIKE I SAID, THE END OF JANUARY.
THERE'S PROVIDED A CASE NUMBER, THE REASON FOR THE STOP OF THE ARREST, THE REASON FOR CONTACTING ICE, WHICH IS IN THIS CASE, AN OFFICER WAS WORKING AT A CITY OF AUSTIN PARK CLEANUP PROJECT, UM, CONFIRMED THAT SOMEONE THERE HAD AN ICE DETAINER ON THEM, CONTACTED ICE, AND THE PERSON WAS TAKEN INTO CUSTODY.
UH, AND THEN IT LISTS THE GENERAL LOCATION OF THE INCIDENT BY ZIP CODE.
UM, SO A LOT OF THIS INFORMATION IS ALREADY BEING PUBLICLY DISTRIBUTED BY THE CITY, UM, ON A REGULAR BASIS IN A WAY THAT IS MORE REFINED THAN CITY LEVEL REPORTING, AND HAS BEEN DOING THIS FOR AT LEAST THREE OR FOUR YEARS SINCE THIS DIRECTIVE WAS FIRST PUT OUT.
UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO FLAG THAT AS, BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN A POINT OF SOME CONTENTION, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THE INFORMATION THAT IS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE AND HIGHLIGHT THAT.
PART OF WHAT I THINK THIS RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE GOOD FOR IS MAKING SURE THAT THIS INFORMATION IS PUT OUT IN A COMPREHENSIVE AND CONSISTENTLY UPDATED WAY IN LINE WITH OTHER KINDS OF DATA THAT THE CITY ALSO COLLECTS AND ALSO REPORTS AS OPPOSED TO IN A WAY THAT'S LESS CONSISTENT.
UM, SO I FEEL LIKE THAT WAS, THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT THING THAT ALL OF YOU HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING.
I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT INFORMATION THAT IS CURRENTLY PUBLICLY PRESENTED BY THE CITY AND HAS BEEN FOR SEVERAL YEARS.
AND MAY I ASK YOU A QUESTION? WHAT IS, IS YOUR OPINION THAT, UM, IT'S NECESSARY TO BE BROKEN DOWN THAT WAY IF WE DO THIS DASHBOARD, IF IT'S ALREADY AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC? AND I ALSO WANNA REMIND EVERYONE THAT THESE PROGRAMS AND, AND TO DESIGN THIS SYSTEM IS AGAIN, COSTING THE TAXPAYERS MORE MONEY.
WE'RE SPENDING MORE AND MORE MONEY FOR DATA THAT'S ALREADY AVAILABLE.
ON TOP OF THAT, OUR CITY IS ALREADY IN A DEFICIT OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
SO WHY IS IT THAT WE'RE IN A NEED TO GO AND ADD IN NEW PROGRAMS? SO, UH, THE DASHBOARD THAT I WOULD, OR THE KIND OF PRESENTATION THAT I THINK WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS IS ALREADY USED FOR A WIDE VARIETY OF OTHER FORMS OF POLICE REPORTING, INCLUDING OTHER KINDS OF INFORMATION THAT IS IN THIS SAME REPORT.
THE REPORT THAT I'M REFERENCING HERE HAS AS ITS FIRST SECTION, UH, CASES
[02:55:01]
IN WHICH A PD REQUESTED THE IMMIGRATION STATUS WITH AN INDIVIDUAL.AND THAT IS PUT UP IN A MONTHLY UPDATED REPORT THAT YOU CAN ACCESS THROUGH THE OPEN DATA SET.
SO, UH, THIS DOES NOT INVOLVE LIKE PRODUCING ANY NEW FANCY INTERFACE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
UM, IT DOESN'T EVEN INVOLVE MAKING SOMETHING FOR A SPECIFIC KIND OF REPORT.
HALF OF THE INFORMATION THAT'S REPORT IS ALREADY PUT IN A CONCURRENT KIND OF MONTHLY UPDATED FORMAT THAT I THINK WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE OTHER HALF OF THIS INFORMATION THAT ENCOMPASSES THE ACTIVITIES OF, UH, A PD RELATED TO FEDERAL IMMIGRATION, UH, AGENCIES.
SO AS FAR AS COST, BURDEN, BURDEN, UM, I OBVIOUSLY CAN'T, I, I CAN ONLY SPECULATE TO THAT, BUT THAT SEEMS ABOUT AS MINIMAL AS YOU CAN ASK OF JUST SAYING, HEY, THIS INFORMATION IS ALREADY BEING COLLECTED, IS ALREADY BEING REPORTED.
IT SHOULD JUST BE UPDATE OR REPORTED IN THE WAY AND WITH THE FREQUENCY THAT OTHER INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE IS BEING REPORTED AND THAT WE ALREADY HAVE SYSTEMS TO DO.
DOES THAT SORT OF ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COMMISSIONER? YES, SIR.
AND FOR CLARITY, WHEN I SAY DASHBOARD, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT LIKE AN ACTUAL DASHBOARD, LIKE A DIGITAL, LIKE, OR YOUR CARD DASHBOARD.
I'M LITERALLY SAYING CATEGORIZING, DISPLAYING NUMBERS IN A WAY THAT PEOPLE CAN JUST READ THE NUMBERS AND SEE WHAT THE DATA IS THROUGH QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DATA IN ONE, ONE VIEW.
SO JUST TAKING WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE, DROPPING IT INTO A EXCEL FORMAT DONE.
SO YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT AN INTERACTIVE MAP THAT PEOPLE CAN GO IN AND, AND TARGET.
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT JUST MAPPING OR ANY OF THAT.
I MEAN, THEY CAN TAKE THAT INFORMATION, DROP IT INTO CLA AND THEY'LL DO IT FOR THEM, UM, AT ONE SIN OR SOMETHING.
BUT NO, I JUST WANT PEOPLE TO HAVE RELEVANT DATA THAT THEY CAN REFERENCE VERY QUICKLY AND BE ABLE TO TELL THE STORY, BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN WE TURN DATA INTO INFORMATION AND THEN WE CAN ACT ON THAT INFORMATION.
AND I, I'M THE CUSTODIAN OF TIME, SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THERE ARE TWO THINGS WE, A COUPLE OF THINGS WE HAVE TO DO BEFORE WE END.
[7. Discussion of a recommendation regarding the creation of a publicly accessible CPRC communication platform to enhance transparency and ensure compliance with the Texas Open Meetings Act. ]
AS NUMBER ONE IS ITEM SEVEN.I'M GOING TO, UH, PUSH THAT TO NEXT, NEXT MEETING.
DISCUSSION ON ITEM SEVEN WILL BE PUSHED, WHICH IS DISCUSSIONS OF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE CREATION OF PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE CPRC, UH, COMMUNICATION PLATFORMS, ENHANCED TRANSPARENCY AND ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS OPEN ACT MEETING.
AND IT WILL HAVE THE BENEFIT OF, BY THEN IT WOULD'VE ALSO HAD A LEGAL REVIEW.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ]
UM, SO WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A ONE COMMENT FOR FUTURE AGENDAS.UM, IT WAS MADE, MADE ME AWARE THAT WE HAVE TO, UM, EVERY YEAR THERE'S A REELECTION OF OFFICERS, SO THERE WILL BE A REELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.
AND, UM, THAT IS, UH, WE'RE GONNA BE GONNA BE SUGGESTED TO BE DONE NEXT OR MAY, MAY IN OUR MAY MEETING.
SO START, BE PREPARED TO THINK ABOUT WHO YOU WANT TO BE YOUR CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.
AND, UM, THEN, UM, ANY OTHER ACTION ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE ON THERE? I DO, YEAH.
UM, I WANTED TO BRING UP, BECAUSE I'VE BEEN SPEAKING TO SOME CONSTITUENTS IN THE AREA THAT, UM, OUR, OUR, UM, 3 1 1 OR THE I REPORT AUSTIN.COM IF YOU'RE CALLING 9 1 1 AND FOR WHATEVER REASON, THE NINE ONE ONE CALL TAKER DOESN'T WANT TO SEND OUT A POLICE, THEY DIRECT YOU TO GO TO I REPORT.COM.
AND THAT, UH, WEBSITE IS ACTUALLY VERY DIFFICULT TO NAVIGATE.
SO I'M HAVING CONSTITUENTS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT ARE TRYING TO REPORT THINGS THAT ARE HAVING A VERY DIFFICULT TIME NAVIGATING THAT WEBSITE.
SO I WOULD LIKE FOR THERE TO BE SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA OR HOWEVER WE NEED TO GO ABOUT THE PROCESS OF MAKING THAT WEBSITE EASIER, BECAUSE AGAIN, THERE ARE SEVERAL CONSTITUENTS IN MY DISTRICT THAT ARE HAVING ISSUES REPORTING THINGS TO 9 1 1.
I'D LIKE ON NEXT MEETING'S AGENDA TO HAVE THE REPORT ABOUT THE, UM, UH, A PO UH, INTERNAL AFFAIRS, UM, REPORTING MECHANISM THAT, UH, MR. MATI TALKED ABOUT.
YOU MEAN FROM THE PRE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FROM THE PREVIOUS CPRC GROUP? IF THAT'S, IF THAT'S WHERE THEY GOT IT FROM.
OTHER ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDA? YEAH, I STILL NEED TO, UH, UM, VICE CHAIR REACHED OUT TO ME AND, UH, LIKE A, UM, JERK I DID NOT RESPOND ON IN TIME, UH, ABOUT MY, UH, DISCUSSION ITEM ABOUT, UH, CHANGING
[03:00:01]
THE BURDENS OF PROOF FOR WHEN, UH, AN OFFICER ENCOUNTERS DEADLY FORCE RESISTANCE FROM, UH, PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE TO BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.UM, THIS TIME I'LL, I'LL RESPOND TO HER EMAIL BEFORE, UH, NEXT
I BELIEVE THE POLICE CHIEF WAS SUPPOSED TO COME THIS WEEK, I MEAN THIS BRIEFING, BUT IT GOT PUSHED.
DO WE KNOW WHEN SHE'S BEEN RESCHEDULED? THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.
SHE HAS BEEN RESCHEDULED FOR THE MAY 15TH, UH, COMMISSION MEETING.
AND, UH, WHO'S THE LEAD POINT OF CONTACT HANDLING THOSE QUESTIONS? UH, CHAIRMAN, I AM.
I'LL SEND, I'LL SEND ANY QUESTIONS I HAVE TO YOU.
PLEASE SEND ALL YOUR QUESTIONS TO COMMISSIONER
WELL, IF THAT IS IT, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK, UH, CLOSE THE MEETING AND I NEED SOMEBODY TO MOTION TO ADJOURN.
UM, MISS, UM, APRIL, WHATEVER, 17TH.
17TH, OUR MEETING IS COMPLETE.