Common Council - Regular Meeting

Hey, for Tech or for Arianna, I see Alder Martinez-Rutherford in the attendee list, but not the panelist list, so I'm not, or panelist list, so I'm not sure what happened there, but just as a.

Thank you. I also see someone from MPD in there. Thank you. media team also i've got a request um apparently assistant chief matt ty didn't uh get his panelist invite um just check in if you could resend that thank you yeah i can resend that

Also, there's an email from Charlie Romine saying that all he has is a live stream and a YouTube link.

It was sent, President Madison, but I just resented just in case. Okay, thank you. Thank you all are in this little room with me here. The AirPods are so close.

And we'll give, what is it, 5 o'clock? Because it's 5 o'clock now, so we'll start promptly at 5.05 to give folks an opportunity to join, get their stuff set up. And Karen, you know that someone from NPD was in the attendee list. Did that person get moved over? five o'clock, and since this is not the regular Common Council meeting, I am not going to go through the whole spiel, except for the spiel that's necessary for this one. Hallelujah, because I don't have that printed out, and I'm not in my regular working place. I am president of the Madison Common Council. I'm Sabrina Madison. I represent District 17. And I'm just going to go first and start with a couple notes for everybody tonight. So I want to repeat that what I shared in emails to all Alders, that we'll start with the questions that Alders submitted. Isaac helped to, you know, kind of like really last minute with us trying to work this morning, this afternoon, to organize those in a way that we can just kind of power through them. So that's how we'll start. We are definitely ending promptly at 8 o'clock p.m. It was, you know, we all have various things that we're committed to. So I will keep to the time that I share with you all when I initially asked you to save the date for today, which is 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. I'll be moderating the discussion and I will do my best to keep up with folks as I see you raise your hands. But please give me some grace. This is probably my second time having to manage us on Zoom. We'll run through all their questions. And then I do want to ask staff if you can just please, please be as prompt and to the point as possible so we can make it through as many questions as we can today. um please we are not covering anything that is about open investigations nor the i believe there are two potential um budget amendments those things have not been taken up so we're not going to attempt to try to take them up here as well um we're not doing back and forth debate between alders and staff this is really for alders to ask questions of staff to help us do our jobs to make some decisions that we'll likely need to make in the coming months coming year Oh, format. So one of the reasons that I chose virtual and virtual only, I'm not sure who wasn't here, so I won't try to figure out who was at the previous Common Council discussion. But we previously had a Common Council discussion where we don't have to worry about having quorum. That discussion was on homelessness, where we had Director O'Keefe and CDD staff present on an update around the men's shelter issue. So this format allows us not to be stressed out about quorum, for us to still have this discussion. It's summertime. We all know how difficult it is to catch folks in the summertime, and it makes it a bit more easier, too, for us to get staff on this meeting. And two, for alders, because this is not a regular council meeting, if you need to leave early or come back, that's fine, because we don't have to worry about having 11 of you in the room in order to continue the discussion. Um, I think I haven't missed anything. Are there questions specifically about the format so we can just get started quickly? Okay, I see some head nods or head shaking. Okay, we're going to get started. So And, oh, too, if you email me after 1.30ish, I had to drive. I did send these questions to all the agency folks that were – oh, my God, I'm so sleepy. I'm so sorry – that were invited today. So they do have these questions to help them prepare. They didn't get them days in advance. They got them this afternoon. So I'm going to start there. Okay. First, let me make sure. In the press release, I did share all the agencies invited. So if you didn't see that, please just go back and read my blog post today. It has all the agencies that we sent an invitation to or I sent an invitation to. So I'm just going to start right away. I think staff or agency folks know who best to answer a question. So I'm not going to say, you know, Director O'Keefe, answer this, you know, for example, unless it's specifically a question for you. But please just feel free to do just a clarifying question. Can staff unmute themselves as? Yeah. OK, perfect. OK, so. The first section of the questions is around the encampment. So how did the city identify leaders and leaders as in quotations of the protests and what conversations were had with them and other community leaders to negotiate a peaceful disassembly of the site? Thank you, President Madison. I think.

I'll start and then if other staff want to jump in, they should feel free. I would say that the city did not attempt to identify leaders. There were people who described themselves as leaders who approached us. I didn't think it was for us to sort of put that designation on anyone. We talked to A number of different people, and I would say that there were city staff down at that intersection. Every day, sometimes multiple staff sometimes multiple times a day talk to a lot of different people and. I don't, it became apparent to us after some amount of time that there was no one person who could represent everybody down there. So again, reluctant to describe anybody as a leader in that sense. We were not negotiating with anyone. And although there were multiple people who I at least claimed to want to negotiate and to be able to represent everyone. It was apparent that they didn't. They couldn't make that representation. And so we really were not in negotiation with anyone. We did not tell anyone anything about timeframe or how long anything would be allowed or when we might need to clear the site. I know that we at least were hearing essentially every day rumors that the city was planning this, that, or the other thing. really none of which were true. I mean, just for example, we heard rumors that we were calling the National Guard. We never called the National Guard. We heard rumors, you know, basically every day that we were coming tomorrow or the next day or the day after to clear the site. So I think there was a lot of myths and potentially disinformation that was shared, but that wasn't based on information that we were sharing with anyone.

Thank you, Mayor. And just a reminder for auditors, just please begin to note your any follow up questions or clarifying questions. So when we get back around, you have them. So the next question is, when exactly was the decision made to disperse the encampment?

Again, I think that's probably best for me. And I think there's really two ways to answer the question. And the broader answer is as soon as it was apparent that people had created blockades and were blocking the street and that there was going to be a protest slash encampment, it was obvious that that wasn't going to be able to be sustained for anybody. significant period of time that we weren't going to be able to allow people to occupy a street. So in some ways, the decision was made to clear it as soon as it was blocked. The more specific way to answer that question is when we in observing the thing everything that was happening at the intersection when we it became clear that we it was more and more of a homeless encampment and less of a protest so we were sort of moving out of first amendment and protest and into just an encampment and that was when it became clear to me and i think to others that we needed to start moving in the direction of clearing the intersection and reopening the streets.

Thank you. The next one. Who was part of the decision-making process to disperse the encampment and how many people? And then in parentheses, they note both the city government and the community at large were notified of that decision before action was taken. I feel like that's kind of been answered, but that's the question.

Yep. And so, I mean, ultimately I'm the mayor. It was my decision. And I did consult with a number of folks in the city management team and in various agencies. And we initially kept the conversations relatively small. And, you know, throughout the process of planning, really wanted to tell as few people as possible, largely because of our experiences, both with previous encampments and with previous protests, and the knowledge that the more people who at least knew the timeframe, the more likely it was that more people would come to the site, that and there would be more resistance to clearing the intersection. And my goal all along was to do this in a way that did not lead with law enforcement, but led with other city staff, and to do it in a way that was as safe as possible for the people who were in the intersection and for city staff. And it was my estimation that that required as few people as possible knowing what the plan was and what the timing of the plan was. And we really wanted to minimize harm and to maximize safety for all concerned. So to be specific, who was part of the decision-making process, a number of top city leaders, and how many people were notified of the decision, as few as possible. So really only the people that were involved in the actual effort were notified and some of them were notified at the last possible minute.

Okay, here's the next one. So why didn't the nonprofit partners who had to deal with the aftermath and trauma of FIRST first the shooting and then the raid, get notification of the raid on the encampment.

I'm just going to disagree with the framing of the question. We did not raid the encampment. We reopened a public city street. And I think I've already answered the other part of the question as to why we didn't notify people.

Yep. Next question. How were the decisions reached on what tools officers would be equipped with and under what circumstance they could be used?

That's probably a better question for the police department.

No, thank you.

And if anybody needs me to repeat a question, just let me know because my coffee was done around one o'clock.

Thank you, Mayor. I'm going to actually ask Assistant Chief Tai to address this one. He oversees operations in our special events team.

So yeah, as far as the tools available to the police department and what staff was used. So we do have a longstanding specialized team that deals with crowd management. That's our special events team. They have a number of additional tools outside of what normal patrol officers have available to them. You know, one of the tools that we, uh, um, have is it's called a super hailer. I don't necessarily love the naming of it, but that's what it's called. It's a branded item and it allows for, um, louder amplification to give announcements. So that was, uh, uh, certainly a tool that was used. Um, and we were very intentional in our messaging, um, uh, to give people loud announcements that the streets and public works personnel were going to be clearing and removing the barricades and opening up the street. And then we had some additional messaging just asking for people's compliance and also that specifically in that messaging was that we were going to try to preserve the people's personal property as well as artwork the additional equipment available I mean they do have protective gear that they can put on you know we did not wear full protective gear we did put on helmets at one point as a result of projectiles being thrown at the streets personnel from the very beginning and additional projectiles so batteries rocks that kind of thing. And the idea of the helmets is just to protect people. There's also additional chemical munition options that we have for large scale use of using either OC spray or tear gas. We did not use any large scale chemical munitions, either OC spray or tear gas. We did utilize a smaller amounts of OC, like personal use that officers have. And I can go into that more later. And then the additional tools we have impact projectiles. But we did not utilize any of that equipment during, you know, during the encampment or frankly, in the days of protests that have gone on since then, we have not used any large scale chemical munitions or impact projectiles. We have used some of the protective equipment.

Thank you. Thank you. All right. Next question. What did the city specifically learn from McPike and Reindahl in 2021 about allowing an encampment to grow in a public space without balancing compassion with sustainable homelessness responses and a sustainable operating plan? And how did those lessons influence the city's decision making in 2026?

I think that's for me. So first I want to just provide a little bit of context for those that weren't around. The McPike and Rheindel Park episodes occurred in the midst of a pandemic and at a time when the U.S. Centers for Disease Control was advising local governments to support rather than disperse homeless encampments, part of a strategy to minimize disease spread. So very different set of circumstances. But what we learned there, and I think it's generally acknowledged by those around the country who work in this space, is that left unchecked encampments with more than five or six people are apt to grow rapidly. And without sufficient support, like bathrooms and running water, like behavioral health services, de-escalation support, et cetera, issues are likely to arise involving everything from interpersonal conflicts and drug use and violence, theft, public health threats, and predatory activities targeting those in the encampment. And these issues can adversely affect those in the encampment as well as the surrounding area. We also learned that with time, these situations tend to deteriorate, not improve. I think especially in the second week following the shooting incident, we saw a similar situation emerging at Williamson Baldwin Street. Recall our response to Rindle was a multi-million dollar investment in a structured sanctioned campground complete with public infrastructure and on-site support services made possible only with an infusion of federal funds. That, of course, was Derry Drive and those kinds of resources certainly not available at this location.

Thanks, Director O'Keefe. The next one. Did the city conclude that providing services to encampments differs from managing sanctioned shelters and requires a dedicated operating structure, safety, sanitation, and sustainable operating funding versus one-time emergency funding? That's the first half of the question. The second part is, how did that lesson affect the city's willingness in 2026 to provide services at an unsanctioned public space encampment?

Yeah, Alder, I think this touches on many of the same issues as the previous question. There is a great difference between supporting a sanctioned arrangement, whether it's a shelter or a campground setting, in which there is some control over who's authorized to be on site and some semblance of an operating plan. A successful response really requires an operations plan. And it requires a space with the facilities sufficient to support the people that would be using it. So we didn't recognize this as a sanctioned arrangement, nor an appropriate site for one. Therefore, our response, as with other unsheltered locations, was to deploy city-contracted street outreach teams.

Thank you. The next one. Was there a point at which the city's assessment changed from in quotations? This is a temporary space for grieving in quotations to. In quotations again, this is an occupation of public infrastructure that the city can no longer safely or reasonably sustain. If so, what specific facts cause that change? So again, was there a point at which the city's assessment change from this is a temporary space for grieving to this is an occupation of public infrastructure that the city can no longer safely or reasonably sustain? If so, what specific facts cause that change?

I can start, and Director O'Keefe may have something to add or others. To be clear, from the minute that there were barricades, it was an illegal occupation of public infrastructure. Initially, it really did feel, at least to me, like it was a protest and it was a space for grieving and the creation of community. And I felt like, despite the fact that it was not sanctioned or legal, that we needed to give time for that. I think for me, two things tipped it over into this is not a sustainable situation. Well, maybe really three. And so one, I mentioned already that over time, and this is something that Director O'Keefe may be able to speak in more detail to, was the transition from it feeling like a protest in a space for grieving to really feeling like a homeless encampment. We were seeing significant increases in numbers of people camping at the site that were experiencing homelessness. Even when we would be successful in connecting somebody with services, potentially a hotel room, potentially other services, and that person might leave the site, the next day we would see even more people at the site. So it really felt like it was growing in a way that was not sustainable, and I think that Director O'Keefe just spoke a little bit to that. The other... The other thing that really tipped it over for me was hearing from multiple sources just a number of ways in which things were getting really unsafe at that intersection and everything from physical safety concerns The nails in the barricades, multiple daisy-chained extension cords, sometimes running through puddles, human wastes, discarded sharps, and concerns about public health and safety with food preparation and open fires, concerns about trash and stormwater and the stormwater drains potentially being impacted and leading to localized flooding. And then when we at some point became aware that there was a vehicle nearby that was actively dealing drugs, and preying on the people who were staying at the intersection. And that was obviously very concerning. These are not substantiated, but there were rumors of sexual assaults. And I certainly would encourage anybody who has experienced any form of sexual assault to contact either a local nonprofit or the police department if you feel comfortable doing so. So there was a number of ways in which I felt like it was an increasingly unsafe situation for the people in the intersection. In addition, we started to hear increasingly from the neighbors, the people who live nearby, that they were being harassed and some of them were physically attacked. and they felt they couldn't get their cars in or out of their property they sometimes felt that they couldn't get in or out of their homes and they were being kept up all night and so we started to hear increasing concern from them we also started to hear that their um that some of them were in danger of losing jobs and that the people who are employed by businesses nearby were potentially losing their own jobs because those businesses were being impacted by loss of business and revenue. So there was a concern about the impact on the immediate neighbors and their safety and well-being, and then also the safety and well-being of the people actually in the intersection. So those were the three factors that really tipped it over. But Director O'Keefe, I don't know if you want to say anything more about the increasing numbers of folks experiencing homelessness that we saw.

Mayor, I think you covered it pretty well. You know, we were gathering information. We were on site on several occasions. We were hearing from our contracted outreach agencies. It was not just the increase in numbers. It was the rapidity of that increase. And, you know, we certainly were hearing stories, mostly anecdotal stories about some of the hardships that occurred. that folks were experiencing, especially early on, a handful of families with children. And so that's really caught our attention.

All right. Thanks, Mayor. Thanks, Director O'Keefe. Here is the next question. Can the city explain the decision-making framework? Oh, wait. Oh, no. No, I didn't do this. I'm sorry. Can the city explain the decision-making framework used to balance the needs of unsheltered residents protesters, quarries, family and mourners, neighborhood residents, businesses, pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and emergency responders. End of the question.

I mean, I think it's a lot of what I just talked about. And I don't know that I could describe a decision-making framework. I think that every day we were assessing the situation and getting as much information as we could and trying to, you know, make the best decisions that we could with imperfect information. And the only thing that I would add, I think, is, I mean, I guess maybe important to say that, you know, we were checking in with the fire department and, you know, and specifically asking about response times from station three. And if there was an impact there that we were concerned about, I was actually, I mean, I'm always concerned about response times, don't get me wrong, but I was concerned about response times into the intersection. If something were to happen, if like, if there was a fire in one of those buildings, could an engine get through to put out the fire? And, you know, if there was an EMS incident, could an ambulance get through and to help somebody? And so that was concerning to me. Um, uh, we also obviously were, um, you know, Metro was on detour. which did have an impact on folks, but it's not a life safety impact. The other thing I would just mention is that while we did, through an intermediary, have an initial reach out from the family's lawyer, we were told that the family didn't wish to speak to us through that intermediary. And so we were not in communication with the family. And my understanding was that was at their request until much more recently. Again, only through an intermediary. It bears saying, but it probably doesn't surprise anyone that I'm sure the family's lawyers are advising them not to speak to the city. And I'm sure that our lawyers advise us not to speak to them. But nonetheless, we did reach out again through intermediaries and, you know, around the question of a memorial, which I believe we'll get to later. But in terms of trying to balance their interests and needs, because we didn't have direct contact with them, that was difficult to do.

Thank you. Next question. What was the protocol for CARES and NPD to respond to the area while the encampment existed?

I think that's for police.

Sure. Thank you. I can jump on at least as far as it goes. With the CARES team during the encampment, there was no change in our dispatch response protocol. So it was as if requested at any other point.

Yeah, thanks, Chief. I would say similar, Balder. We waited for calls for service. We were certainly trying not to be overly visible in the area, not wanting to obviously create any additional issues, but we did respond in when called. One particular call which led to an arrest that a lot of you probably saw on the news. We did coordinate with individuals within the encampment for the extraction of that individual and were able to safely take that person into custody.

Yep. Thank you. Alder, Lane, Keller, is it just for them to restate something? Because we're going to take questions after we get through this list of questions. Or you just want to get your hand up for the cue.

No, that was an accident. Thank you. Sorry about that.

Okay. I thought you was doing like me where I'll get my hand up early just to be in the queue. Okay. All righty. So the next question. Does the city's emergency operations plan contemplate spontaneous or unscheduled demonstrations, civil disturbances, occupations of public infrastructure, or large-scale gatherings? If so, which emergency function or department assumes primary responsibility? Chief Carpenter, I think this is probably you. And I can repeat it. I'll repeat it. Does the city's emergency operations plan contemplate spontaneous or unscheduled demonstrations, civil disturbances, occupation of public infrastructure, or large-scale gatherings? If so, which emergency function or department assumes primary responsibility?

Yeah, thank you. I'm happy to. I'm happy to discuss this. We do have Bill Sullivan and Jimmy. I'm on and they may want to take a first crack at it.

Go ahead, Jimmy.

I was going to give Bill opportunity first. So generally, yes, we do have an emergency management plan. And in their civil disorder is one of the potential risks that it's addressed and assessed as far as likability or likelihood. Within that, the police are generally tasked with the crowd control responsibilities. All agencies have different rules and different events. These are all hazard events. And so streets is generally tasked with cleanup operations, which is why we consider putting them in first in this particular one. I don't know if, Bill, you have anything else?

No, nothing really to add on to that, but we try to keep everybody kind of in their specialties, particularly depending on what that emergency is that we're faced with.

Thank you. Next question, thanks to you both. What triggers activation of the emergency operations center or an incident command structure?

Well, I'll leave the So from an incident command structure, that's going to be kind of based on what agency is sent out first for an emergency. But as far from an emergency operations center, when that incident grows large enough that it may impact multiple agencies or one of the agencies that is tasked with response is overwhelmed and needs additional resources, that's when typically an emergency activation or emergency operations center is activated in a full scale. And then we're there to support that incident command structure. There are other times that we might be doing some monitoring and then at that point we're just kind of feeling engaged and make sure we have people that are prepared if the things grow that staff have the resources that they need and we're all informed and we've got the same information across all agencies and we make sure that we're not duplicating efforts in our response.

Thank you. Anybody have anything to add before I move on? I don't see any. Okay. Was the 2026 Williamson slash Baldwin occupation managed under any component of the city's emergency management framework?

Not entirely sure.

The short answer is yes, right? I mean, so the emergency operation plan You know, is the basic agencies are responding as they do daily. We have a hierarchy structure that follows a span of control, who you report to, make sure we're sharing that information across all agencies. So in all reality, the answer is yes, but that changes based on the event and who's in charge, who's the lead based on what the hazard might be.

Thank you. All right. So the next section of this, and we are on page 204 for agency folks. So the next section is titled encampment and or, you know, the area of discussion. So on the morning that the encampment was removed, which department staff were used initially to wake those present and get them to leave?

So I'll take that. Yeah. Jim, you want to take that one?

Happy to yes so that team was comprised of staff members from Community development from public health violence prevention unit from city parks and from employee assistance. The plan initially was that that team would contact people at the site and alert them that the site was about to be cleared. Team members would ascertain whether individuals required housing support and offer them access to hotel stays and access to bus transportation that was on site. But as the event unfolded, it turned out not to be necessary to awaken anyone. So that team just proceeded with the task of connecting with and assisting people throughout the morning.

All right. Thanks, Dr. O'Keefe. I'm guessing that was a ghost hand, Alder Matthews. Mistake. Gotcha. Okay. All right. So next question. Thanks, Director O'Keefe.

So let me just not repeat myself here.

How much time elapsed between staff members entering the site, the fires being set, and the police entering the site to clear the way for the fire crew?

I'm going to look to maybe two. Director Romines or one of the chiefs?

Sure. So, well, I can say that the first fires that started were actually put out by streets division employee with a loader. Fire came in on the third fire that we were aware of and put that out. And I believe the first part of the question was how much was it regarding MPD?

And how much time between when the first staff went in and then when the fires were set? And I mean, I guess the other thing is that things started being thrown at staff.

Sure. So the fires, and it's a little bit of a blur from that day, but the fires were not started right away. They were a little later in the morning. I'm going to say maybe an hour or so as far as the fires in the middle of the road that we put out. I think chief time might have a more specific time frame.

Yeah, Charlie, I can help out here. We have a we have a log that was maintained in the command post that we can run through. So we have it for 50 streets approached approaching to start the cleanup for 53 protesters observed loading pipes and boards. 4.55 set moved from staging to outside the encampment to into the area. And then rocks were being thrown at the streets, at the streets employees at 5 a.m. 5.01, we had a report of windows being broken. 5.08, the first fire was lit in front of the Willie Street Co-op. 5.12 a.m., second fire lit at Willie and Baldwin. And then 5.31, the third fire was lit at Baldwin and Wilson Street. And I would also mention that the commands from the, or not the commands, but the information that we were putting out through the Superhaler that that started at, let me see here, 4.57 a.m., but we had heard, and this I think was what Charlie and Jim were talking about, at 4.48 a.m. we started hearing people shouting through their own megaphones on the campsite to wake up. And so people were well awake and aware of our presence. But it did happen in a pretty compressed time frame as far as when streets people started getting in the area and reported of rocks and diesel batteries being thrown at their equipment. and then fires being started. So it did, and those are the times that were just recorded in real time by our crime analyst as we were observing things on the command post.

Thank you. And if you can keep, I may go back and ask that in my own questions because I missed it all. Sorry. All right. Next question. Were members of the CARES team present and or consulted prior to the removal of the encampment to help deal with people there with mental health issues?

Thank you for the question. I can take this one. There's a slightly nuanced answer here, but an important differentiation. There was one CARES team was brought in service that morning earlier than normal start times to have available in case the need for CARES services arose. They were not on site, but were in service available for calls anywhere that may be needed. Additionally, there was some thought ahead of time that we needed additional staff members citywide to help with the notification of some of the unhoused folks to try to inform them as to what was going on. The CARES folks were requested to participate because they have a vast amount of experience with de-escalation communication and skills that could be beneficial. So there were three of the paramedics that are a part of the CARES team that were utilized that morning. However, they were not in the CARES program. They were not partnered up with Journey Mental Health, were not on a CARES vehicle, but were prepared to assist. As the morning developed, those three CARES paramedics were actually never placed within the encampment and never had any actions down there throughout the morning. So again, three medics that were not utilized, one CARES unit that was in service in a conventional manner, but did not get any requests for service.

Thank you. All right. And I think this has been answered, but just if you can clarify, can we confirm and or deny the use of tear gas, pepper spray, batons, and any other equipment during the disbursement of the encampment?

I think Assistant Chief Tai addressed this a little bit in his first response, but again, there was individual officer deployments of pepper spray, but we did not utilize other tools, so to speak, or other chemical munitions.

Thank you. Next question. Were any city or state officers present brandishing rifles or riot gear?

Go ahead, Matt.

Yeah, I think so. We would call it protective equipment as opposed to riot gear because the intent is not for intimidation, but it's to protect the officers from projectiles. And so the decision of when or when not to put on protective equipment is based on projectiles being thrown. And we had very early on that, you know, and again, a tribute to our public works that Staff that was out there taking, you know, projectiles of rocks and diesel batteries. So that's where helmets were put on. I am not aware of rifles being displayed. I do think that sometimes we have less lethal projectile launchers that launch like a. a less lethal projectile. And those may get viewed as rifles. They are not rifles. It's a different thing. But I think, you know, people may see that and think that it's rifles, but that's, again, a less lethal munition. But none of those were launched during any of this. We did not use, I'm not aware of the use of, you know, impact munitions, batons, or CS gas or long or OC other than the personal use, the use of force that we are and we're still compiling this, but we, I think, have 12 to 13 uses of force that are all in the decentralization meaning taking a person from standing down to the ground. But just for people to understand, we will continue to do an after action. The written police reports on this incident and protest, there's 1,100 pages of police reports. So I just want people to understand the scope. We want to get it right. So if I sound like it's preliminary information, it's not. about hedging. It's just, it takes a while to do a complete after action in these kind of large scale events. So we will continue to look at things in review and these are very much preliminary numbers.

Thank you. Next question. Law enforcement officers from the state were present during the encampment and protests that followed. When state officers are present, who oversees coordinating with them? Do they have to follow NPD rules of conduct while working with our officers? What is the investigation and or discipline process for these officers if accused of misconduct?

Assistant Chief Tye was the incident commander for us. So Matt, if you could touch on that and I can cover discipline if you'd like.

Absolutely. So ultimately, You know, Charlie was the incident commander for this because we were intentionally trying to put police not on the forefront of this. But we had in the incident command structure, we had a law enforcement branch. So I would be the operations chief of all law enforcement personnel, including our partners at the University of Wisconsin Police Department and the State Patrol, as well as Dane County Sheriff's Department deputies that assisted us later on. in the day. We have longstanding relationships of working multiple crowd management situations with all three of those agencies. All three of those agencies participated in the Quarantrone Sentinel event review after the 2020 protests. And so, you know, ultimately decisions on any large scale munitions, whether CS gas or OC spray in large amounts, that would be a decision that I ultimately would make. There are commanders in the command post from both State Patrol, UW Police Department, and the Sheriff's Department that are in there. Ultimately, it's My decision is the operations chief for law enforcement as to those types of use of force. There is the possibility for officers can still make individual use of force decisions, and those will be reviewed in our regular process. And that's the same with the deputies or the officers from UW or the state troopers. So broad-based decisions are made at a command level in the command post area. And there's still an opportunity for individual decisions in the field. But again, I think we're philosophically very much aligned with our crowd management philosophy with all of those agencies, just because we've worked so closely with them for so many years.

We did have, just to add a little more, we had a few officers from Sun Prairie Police Department as well that fell under our direct supervision. So that's the only other thing I would add. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, next question. Is there a written operational policy for fires and dumpsters, trash cans, or other combustible materials in a densely populated urban area? Does the response change when the fire occurs adjacent to occupied buildings, vehicles, pedestrians, or an active roadway?

Thank you for the question, we do not have a written policy on those specific items, however, we do have dispatch procedures that assign units to those types of calls as they are coded out through the through the incident. i'm going to take the liberty to assume that this question has to do specifically with the decision on extinguishing fires within this scenario. In this case, we have chief officers in the incident command post. We also had chief officers on the ground and we have lieutenants who are officers with our individual apparatus. The decision process regarding the extinguishment of fires is based on an ongoing assessment that changes with the dynamics of the scene. Specifically here, initially when fires break out in the middle of a street and they are not threatening a building, adjacent structures, or other folks that are in close proximity, there is a little bit more time to make those decisions and assess. In this case, again, as more items began to be thrown on top of those piles, That's when the decisions, the size of the fire grew and the decisions were made to start working towards extinguishment. But I would say to the core of that question that, of course, anytime there is proximity to buildings, infrastructure, vehicles or pedestrians, that the acuity rises and the immediacy increases. is heightened in terms of the pace for which that fire may be extinguished. But it's always an ongoing assessment, and it's a combination and a coordination between the incident command post and the firefighters on the ground.

Thank you.

All right. Sorry, can I just ask you to add to that, Chief? What is the collaboration between fire and police in a situation like this? My understanding is that your folks won't go in to a live situation like this basically on their own.

Sure, I appreciate the question. There's always fine nuance, right? And anytime there's life safety at risk, the amount of risk for us that we take goes up and the decision timing for that goes down and we'll move faster and faster. But when you take any large scale incidents, whether it's Mifflin Street or other crowded areas, whether it's Halloween, We do typically coordinate because our firefighters are wearing protective gear for firefighting, but they're not wearing protective gear to keep themselves safe from projectiles and other objects. And so typically we have an incident command post set up and we do have close coordination with police and we identify the location. We get eyes on it and we start coordinating the pathway there and the police using their expertise and their crowd management folks. um work towards getting us access that's needed so that we can get our equipment in there depending on the size of the fire it depends on how much equipment and the feasibility and the timing of doing so i appreciate the question the opportunity for some clarity

Thank you. Thank you. All right. Just to give us an update on the time, if you can't see the time on your end, it's 5.55 and we will absolutely wrap up at 8 p.m. So the next area is referred to as the encampment aftermath. All right. So is there anything the mayor or chief of police would have done differently in the days immediately following the shooting to ensure a more orderly end to the memorial site and or encampment.

I certainly let the chief speak to this. I mean, I'll start by saying I think we made the best decisions we could with the information we had. One thing that I think people have asked about and I might have done differently, we did We did really try and apply lessons that we learned from 2020. And one of the major lessons that we learned was that when it is law enforcement that is the subject of the protest, it's better to not have law enforcement, you know, sort of facilitating the First Amendment rights of people that are protesting. And so one of the first things that i communicated was i would like us to find a way to keep these marches this protest safe and without police having a major presence so most of you know this but just in case you know when we have a first amendment situation when a protest march emerges that doesn't have a permit, doesn't necessarily need to have a permit, the police department will facilitate, if they're marching down a street, they'll facilitate clearing traffic from that street, blocking side streets so cars can't come in, and generally trying to keep protesters, marchers safe. And again, if the police are the subject of the protest, that's not always the best idea. So we were trying to use other staff. And as part of that, we asked streets and parks and other public works staff if we could use their vehicles. So one thing that we did was we parked streets vehicles around what we then thought was a protest in the intersection and initially was a protest in the intersection. I think we probably kept those trucks there longer than we should have or needed to. And initially, I think it was probably the right thing to do initially, again, to keep cars from running into a crowd. But at some point, it started to look like permission to keep the street closed. And so I think I would have, in retrospect, probably pulled those back earlier than we did. That's one thing that I might have done differently. But we were very focused on trying to have as low a profile for law enforcement as possible. Chief Patterson, I'm not sure if you have anything that you would have done differently.

No, thank you, Mayor. I mean to to an earlier point made by Assistant Chief Ty. I mean, we're going to review the entirety of of this response, not just the just that Tuesday. The clearing exercise occurred, but in all the days that followed as well, and I think there's undoubtedly going to be lessons for us to learn from and improve upon from for the future. I mean, I can tell you in the immediate, to answer right now, I... I would like to first analyze kind of the hours that followed, maybe hour 12, 13, 14 on that particular day, because to the mayor's point, you know, we had a lot of police officers out there for a very long time and they were the focus for those that were still out there. And our presence, you know, while needed was also important you know, it was agitating some folks as well. So I would like to continue to think about and explore what alternatives to our presence maybe could have been attempted or could have been explored ahead of time.

Thank you. All right. Next question in this area, the encampment created community. What should the city say to that? Is a city street intersection the appropriate place for the city to institutionalize that community? What can the public actually do?

Thank you to whoever asked this question, because it's something that's really been on my mind a lot. And I think the encampment did create community. And I think it's important to recognize that while ultimately it was not a safe situation for the people who were in the intersection or for anybody around it, that it did create a sense of community and that people found solace there and they found friendship there and they found commonality and a sense of solidarity. And I think that's important to recognize. And the question that keeps coming to my mind, and it's a question that I would ask all of you and really anyone, is what's wrong with Madison, that that's the only place that people can find community. How are we failing to give people the opportunity to create community every day such that this is the way that they find it? And I don't deny that people found community there. They did, absolutely. What I wonder is, What can we collectively be doing to give people the opportunity to create that sense of community, both without a crisis and not in the middle of a street? Because it's not the right place. There's no way that we could institutionalize a community in the middle of an intersection. But there are other places that we could and should And I think that it is, that's a question for all of us to wrestle with, is what more could we be doing, not just as a city government, but just as people who live in Madison, to give people the chance to create community. And to, you know, I think some folks in Madison feel like they have community and that exists for them. And I think that there's many that don't. I mean, I don't want to get, Anyway, I don't want to go down a rabbit hole, but I think it took me years to feel like I belonged to the Madison community when I first moved here. And so I think there is a question for all of us here about the creation of that sense of community and what, if anything, the city can do to provide opportunities that are safer and legal. and not potentially exposing folks to harm because I think that's really needed.

Thank you, Mayor. All right, next question. How many people have been arrested at protests between the disbursement of the camp and now? I'm just going to edit this because we're only focusing on up until the reopening of the street for the Willie Street area. So I'm not I have no clue all the other protests that might have happened since then. But in trying to keep us in the area of this topic for whomever can answer this question. How many people have been arrested at protests between the dispersion of the camp and now, but now meaning the end of it? What criteria does MPD use to distinguish between protected speech and or protest and illegal activity? Who is responsible for making that call in the moment?

I'm going to turn this to Assistant Chief Tai, who can try to give you some numbers to

Yeah, I'll do my best to give you numbers. We're at, I think, 32 arrests up to 745 on the 5th. But those are, again, we'll get more definitive numbers. I think it's hard to know the tracking time. So we were real good at tracking the number of arrests in that initial period. And then as this has gone on, And there's been continued protests. And I know that you're trying to keep it just to this encampment. So I think 32 is a pretty good number for this initial encampment. Lieutenant Jimmy Imel, do you have anything further on that? Or does that feel accurate to you?

Yeah, I was just going to add the initial response. That was 16, essentially. I should say 26 of those 10 were just cited and released. They didn't go down to jail. It was a ticket and please be on your way.

Thank you.

And then I can answer another part of that question that I don't want to dodge about, like when the distinction between First Amendment free speech and arrests and how that decision is made. And so, again, that's... the difference between free speech and a crime is not something that we just decide, right? We use state statutes and case law to help delineate that for us. And so, respective to this particular encampment, we did declare an unlawful assembly at a certain point. And by state statute, An unlawful assembly can be three or more people that are causing property destruction or other crimes. And so I think that this very early on, unfortunately, it became criminal conduct was occurring. through the streets and public works personnel that were in there very quickly, the throwing of projectiles. I know we at least had windows broken from one city streets vehicle. So when those projectiles are being thrown en masse, the diesel batteries, the rocks, et cetera, and when the fires are being started, then this switched from a encampment and a protest of sorts into an unlawful assembly. And so now we're then making the announcements and this is per state statute that this has now been declared an unlawful assembly and people need to leave. If you are refusing to leave at that point, that is a crime in the state of Wisconsin. And so then I think is the other I mean, the other things that are occurring is that there are crimes you can't just stand in the middle of the roadway. So, you know, you could arrest people for that. We weren't we weren't we didn't have the intention to arrest people for just that. obstructing the roadway but once crime started to occur uh fires were being lit uh projectiles were being thrown at officers and public works officials then it becomes an unlawful assembly and then we make the decision that people need to clear the area or they're subject to arrest so that's kind of the decision making process thank you anything else to add

Looks good. Okay. The last one in this area, I believe we won't, I won't seek an answer because this looks like related to the amendments, one of the, or yes, one of the two amendments out there, but I'll just read it.

I was just going to say that it's a question for the council.

Yes, that's what I'm like. I don't I'll just note that it's a it's about a proposal to compensate Willard Street businesses. And it's also asking whether or not that same thing can happen for nonprofits. But so I'll read it. So you guys have it. But we're not I'm not seeking an answer for this one. So there is a proposal to compensate Willie Street businesses. Will that apply to nonprofits who don't have the same kind of retail losses, but who had salary staff that worked additional hours, endured additional stress, did a lot of extra de-escalation, and dealing with the difficult results of this human tragedy with no additional compensation? Or for nonprofits who have volunteers who volunteered additional hours, opened up building spaces, donated materials that were lost in the raid and helped keep a peaceful protest all right for agency folks we are at the end of page two we're starting on page three and that area is labeled as homelessness president all right i just need to step away for a minute i think director o'keefe can answer these questions and i'll be right back

Okay, thank you. Alder Matthews? Yeah, I just wanted to ask, I'm sorry if I missed an email, but can you let us know for our own context how many pages of pre-submitted questions there are?

Okay, thanks. So for agencies, it's, oh my bad, I'm sorry. It's four pages, but the fourth page is just like two questions. So basically three pages and a little bit. Okay, let me get back to my where's third page. All right. How do we consider it an emergency to hotel people experiencing homelessness when there is an encampment at a protest, but not when the heat index is over 100 degrees or under zero degrees or any other severe weather?

A couple of these questions are pretty closely related. So let me begin with the first. And I don't mean for this to become about semantics. I'll try to be responsive to the question. But the protocols that we follow with respect to unsheltered homelessness don't typically turn on the concept of emergencies. There is an extreme weather night standard. Temperatures warmer than 90 degrees or colder than 20 degrees. that triggers opening the single men's and single women's shelter for use including and importantly by those who might be temporarily suspended. The city also has a small $45,000 contract with a local street outreach organization, Catalyst for Change, that authorizes it to offer short-term hotel stays during incidents of severe weather, usually tornado or tornado warnings, but most often used during extreme cold snaps. So they then have the discretion to offer hotels to persons who are unsheltered and, importantly, who are not able, not unwilling, but not able to access shelter. So it's sort of a last resort. For families, the county has a similar arrangement with the Salvation Army to support families. The city dollars are supporting single adults. In the week prior to the clearance, And having been made aware of several unsheltered families with young children, CDD staff authorized, I authorized the use of city funds from that Catalyst for Change contract to be used for hotel stays in this situation. They were used to support two or three families. This situation is reminiscent in my mind to One or two situations that arose during the civic protests in 2020 following Well, during that time of civic protest in 2020, during which there were demonstrations, a lot of activity in and around State Street and the Capitol Square, in which we also took action to remove, we thought, remove from harm's way people who were unsheltered and in that area of the city.

Thank you. I think you covered, did you cover how was it determined who got a hotel and who did not?

I didn't, but I will. All right, that's the next one, sorry. So I did mention the initial focus in the week prior to the clearance. You might recall during a period of very high heat and humidity was on a handful of families with children who frankly may or may not have been staying on Williamson Street, but had been reported to have been in that area during the course of the several days that we're talking about. As the week wore on and as the number of campers dramatically increased and as the prospects for some kind of action grew, we encouraged both contracted street outreach teams to offer brief stays again to get people out of out of harm's way. That effort continued through the Monday prior to Tuesday's clearance action. and it resulted in about 20 people being placed in hotels. Notably, outreach teams reported that many campers declined hotel offers, and they believed by the end of Monday night that anyone that was interested in taking advantage of that option had been offered the opportunity to do so. So street outreach team activity concluded on Monday evening. As I mentioned earlier on Tuesday, city staff took on that role directly. By the way, I just cannot say enough about how well that team performed, especially my colleagues, Sarah Lim and Allie Grant. By noon on Tuesday, everyone in and around the area that was interested was offered hotel stays. A few folks declined. A few others accepted hotel offers but did not use the rooms that were reserved in their name. In total, 67 people, 63 adults and four children, ended up being placed in hotels. So I think that anybody that was in that area, and frankly, a few people that came to the area during the course of the morning, that were unhoused and unsheltered that were interested in taking advantage of hotels were offered that chance.

Thank you. There are two more, but these are more so related to ongoing services. So I'll read them, but I'm not looking for an answer. So the last two points or two questions in that area was, what is the city's plan moving forward to deal with a large number of people, particularly families and men who can't get into shelters because they are full, sleeping outside with no legal place to go? The last one in the area says, for a person experiencing unsheltered homelessness today, what is the actual order of operations for obtaining temporary hotel assistance? All right. This next area was labeled memorial. All right. In this area, there are five questions. The first one is, what inventory was made of the memorial materials?

President Madison, I think...

with your agreement i think i can answer the first four questions together so if you want to read all four of them so i'll read them thank you so what inventory what inventory was made of the memorial materials what are those materials or where are those materials now who has custody of them what is the process for family and or community members to retrieve them Thank you.

So one of our priorities was to be respectful of the memorial materials. And so our initial plan was to send a team in that specifically was tasked with First choice, moving them to the sidewalk and leaving them there. Or if that wasn't possible for some reason, carefully packing them up and storing them in bins. And so we came prepared with bins and packing material. And that was the intention, was to preserve as much as possible and then to either have it at the site, just not in the street, or to be able to make it available to folks afterwards. What ended up happening, according to the folks that I spoke with that were down there that morning, was that actually Well, they did move some things to the sidewalk that more often people who were actually at the intersection would say to city staff, I don't want you to touch that. I will take it. Or if you will give me the bin, I will pack it up and take it. Or we'd like you to specifically be careful with this item, please. And so it was... A much more collaborative process with the people who were in the intersection that morning and I think that we had expected and the vast majority of them what you would describe as memorial materials and actually city staff didn't touch and they were taken by other people and whether either wrapped and put into a bin and taken away or just people took things. I think staff ended up moving candles, the glasses that candles had been in, but were burned down. And then at the end, there was a lot of dead or dying flowers that did get cleared, but the actual memorial materials had already been moved by that point. And so we didn't make an inventory. We didn't have a chance to make an inventory because people were just taking things. And we didn't end up actually packing and storing anything. And so where are the materials now? People took them. We don't know. I don't know who those people were or what they took, but But they were all taken by people who were down there and who I assume retain custody of them. And I honestly, if somebody believes that they're missing something that was down there that they wanted, I'm not sure how... They would go about getting it because again, in the moment, it was really members of the community that ended up taking most of the memorial items. And and specifically asking city staff not to touch them, which we respected and and. and let people take what they wanted to take. So really at the end, I think most of what we ended up moving was candles and flowers, and we moved them just to the side, either on or adjacent to the sidewalk, rather than being in the middle of the intersection.

Thank you, Mayor. The last question in that area is, what is the city's timeline for developing a permanent memorial with the Ruiz family?

So as I mentioned before, we don't have direct contact with the family. And we did reach out through an intermediary specifically around the question of a memorial and did receive word back that at least one member of the family is interested in that. And at the same time frame, I was asked by a county board supervisor if there was a role for Dane Arts to play. And so I put that person in touch with the intermediary who I hope. put them in touch with the family. And because of the potential pending legal issues, again, I think it's gonna be difficult for the family to communicate directly with the city. And so my hope is that they would be able to communicate directly with Dane Arts and that could facilitate some sort of permanent memorial in that fashion. But at this point in time, we're just a little bit in a holding pattern waiting to hear if the family wants to communicate with us about this or not, at which point we could have a conversation about what a memorial might look like and what a timeframe for that would be. And to me, it's very important that we do follow the lead of the family to the extent possible, while also obviously respecting the process that the city goes through if we do public art and, you know, So depending on what the nature of it might be, we might need to work with adjacent property owners to see if they'd be willing to host it. There's a lot of questions that really depend on what the family might want initially. And again, my hope is that they would be able to have that conversation with Dane Arts, since they probably won't be able to have that conversation directly with us.

Thank you. All right. Time is 621. There are two more areas, Office of the Independent Monitor and police training. I think there's a total of six questions left. And for this one, I just want to say if these are questions related to investigations, please feel free to decline to reply. All right, so the first question for the area's title, Office of the Independent Monitor, it says the OIM job description states that the monitor will set the office's operational philosophy and develop and maintain standard operating procedures to ensure all matters are handled in a thorough, objective, fair, and impartial manner. On the first night of the vigil, after Corey Ruiz was killed, you took the megaphone and exhorted those present to maintain the blockade at the intersection of Willie and Baldwin, stating, if they won't let me do my job, you don't let them do theirs. On July 30th, when you were interviewed by Spectrum News, you stated you were fully in support of the illegal blockade. and added and implied threat. I know 100% that it will escalate if the city and MPD do not give us what we need. If this type of advocacy and participation in the protest consists is I'm sorry, is this type of advocacy and participation in the protest consistent with your duty to handle all matters in a objective, fair and impartial manner. All right, anybody available or want to take this question?

Okay.

Thank you. All right, I'm going to go to the next question. In this area, it says, do you believe it is okay for city... Can you not hear me? Nope, I can hear you now. Can you hear me? Oh, okay.

Yes, I can hear you now. So... First of all, I'm not really sure how to answer a comment disguised as a question that is incorrect and inaccurate. So I can't do that. But what I will say is... There are multiple assertions in this comment that are untrue. And it is my job to show up for the community. There's a difference between OIPM's operational independence in my role as a public official trusted by the community and police that come to this office and trust this office when they don't trust their department. There is a duty for me to speak when the PCOB and other community members ask me to as a public official who is always going to show up for the most vulnerable in the community. Speaking at a demonstration and engaging with the community has been part of my job from the very beginning It is what I've done on a national level, and I'm never going to defend that. Since day one, I have asked for a case management system, which we finally have, for police accommodations. I have attended police awards with the chief. I have attended crowd control where MPD was controlling crowd control. And so it is my job to show up for the community in all aspects, not just when it makes people feel comfortable in regards to. what was misstated in regards to the Spectrum interview. What you don't hear is the questions that were asked to me. And I asked Spectrum to provide the videotape and the transcripts so that folks could see what I actually said. And they said it was against their policy to provide that. But what I can paraphrase is I was told that media went out to the community. And the one thing that the community kept saying and was consistent is that they trusted me and they trusted our office. And this was the only entity where they trusted to do an independent investigation and be fair and thorough and tell the truth and be transparent. They asked if MPD did not, and the city did not comply, did I believe that because of the community trust, things would escalate? And I said, 100%, I do believe that. So when people want to create a narrative, I believe that facts are important in those questions. Thank you.

Thank you. The next one in this area is do you believe it is okay for city employees to make inflammatory statements in volatile situations and not apologize?

I think that I believe wholeheartedly that we have to ask the question on who deems A statement inflammatory? Who was an employee speaking to? Who was the audience? Who was present? What was the context? I'm not... When we have... I'll stop. I see Alder Matthews question.

We're doing questions after monitor glass. Alder Matthews, do you mind just holding until the monitor is getting able to finish our questions or finish our answers to our questions? Thank you. All right. Were you wanting to add anything? Yes.

So as I was saying, I... I do believe that context matters. I do believe that knowing who deems a statement inflammatory, who an employee was speaking to, what was the context, and who was it actually directed to is important. I'm not going to assume what this question is related to. If we're referring to if I believe the mayor saying that I incited violence is inflammatory, I do. And I have not received an apology. So thank you.

Thank you. There are just two more in this area. And just give you all a time check at 628 p.m. Do you understand that many, I'm sorry, here's a question. Do you understand that many of this city no longer view you as a neutral arbiter of facts, that you have instead traded impartiality and objectivity for the passion of the activists, and in doing so have torched your credibility and greatly diminished your ability to provide effective police oversight? Can you repeat that question? Yep, yep, yep. So it starts with, do you understand that many in this city no longer view you as a neutral arbiter of facts, that you have instead traded impartiality and objectivity for the passion of the activists, and in doing so, have torched your credibility and greatly diminished your ability to provide effective police oversight?

So I think that no. I think that it is, again, another statement disguised as a question. I was very clear about who I am, what I stand for, and that I have done this work on a national level. And you can Google me. Everyone, when the board appointed me, they were very clear about who I was, what I stood for, and my ability to do the job. When I have exonerated officers, no one said anything. When I advocated for body-worn cameras on day one, when I got here, no one said anything. When I have taken officer complaints and kept their identities closed because they understand the retaliatory behavior of this city, it shows where I stand and me showing up on a comprehensive level. I would also say that the volume of inquiries and new complaints tell a very different story. And so if this was an office or I was a public official that people did not trust. It would not have been until 2.30 in the morning where you all sat and heard from the people, as well as all of the new complaints that have come in, not just since I got here, but since what took place around this protest happened. So I think to frame something as many, and we don't know who these things are coming from, when there are many people that have spoken up and shown that they do trust myself in this office. will tell a very different or has told a very different story. So thank you.

Thank you. The last question in this area is regarding city attorney Haas's legal opinion on the NGO 5.19 and 5.20 and related restrictions established by Wisconsin Statute 175.47 on the timing of release of information and evidence related to an officer-involved shooting. to the interim independent monitor. What is the path under the Wisconsin Constitution and statutes for a party disagreeing with Attorney Haas' opinion to pursue a definitive alternative interpretation?

Thank you. I would ask that everyone get a pen. The State of Wisconsin Circuit Court, Dane County, Court Case Number 2026, C as in cat, V as in Victor, 00-case code 30707 is my answer to that question. Thank you.

Thank you. Attorney House, were you adding anything? I thought I saw your thing.

Sure. Thank you, President Madison. Again, I guess following Director O'Keefe's I don't want to get caught up in semantics, but the challenging what we say is an opinion is different than challenging what the police department may or may not do as a result of that opinion. So generally, I mean, somebody with standing can file an action in circuit court. to try to require a city agency to perform some action. As the independent monitor indicated, that office filed a lawsuit this afternoon in circuit court. And so that is something where those issues may play out.

Thank you. There are monitor glass.

Yes. Just a correction. That lawsuit was filed Thursday. Thank you.

Thanks. The last area is labeled police training. And there are two questions in this area. So what training to the police? Oh my gosh. I'm so I need more coffee, but it's after the time to be having coffee. Okay. What training do the police receive about responding to homeless encampments or when dealing with an unhoused individual?

Thank you, Alder. I can start, and then I would ask Assistant Chief Tai to discuss kind of our involvement in response to encampments. But, you know, every new recruit officer gets extensive what we call PCS or professional communications training. A lot of the scenario-based trainings that we are doing subjecting our employees to go through, do touch on homeless issues and unhoused individuals. Certainly we encounter unhoused individuals every single day in the city of Madison. A lot of you may remember we did start a couple unhoused liaison positions this year that I think some of you are very familiar with. They've been doing a great job at bringing resources together and really trying to centralize officer access to all these resources. So you know, if they encounter an individual who needs, you know, whatever the issue may be, we have a site or a specific location now where each officer knows to go to kind of navigate what resources exist in the community. And then I'll let Assistant Chief Tai jump in on the encampment issue, please.

Yeah, I think specific to the encampment issue, there's a citywide encampment response plan that Jim O'Keefe and Sarah Lim kind of led that project. And the police in general were in a supporting role as far as responding to encampments. And I think that everyone that's on this call is aware that we try to do our best as a city with the resources that are available, but we frankly just do not have enough resources for our unhoused population. So it becomes very challenging, but we have, again, I think this would be more for Jim O'Keefe to speak to, but we do have a citywide encampment response in which the police are really in a supportive role and are only getting involved really for either a safety or security issue. And if people are refusing to leave, but we really try to go with warnings, getting people the resources they need and getting them a place to relocate. But that's, we really are trying to have a consistent citywide approach. And so we're just one part of it, but not the lead for those initiatives.

President Madison, I think it might be useful for Director O'Keefe to just provide a little bit of an overview of that encampment protocol. It is a relatively new thing this year that we've really formalized our approach, and it's due to the really good work, particularly of Sarah Lim in Director O'Keefe's department. But, you know, I made the point earlier that we're really trying to not lead with a law enforcement response. And this is another situation in which we're really trying to not lead with a law enforcement response, but rather with a services response. And I think Director O'Keefe can detail that.

Yeah, thank you, Mayor, and you've done a good job of outlining it. It is very much a policy designed to coordinate and make more uniform how different city agencies respond to homeless encampments. Importantly, we're talking about encampments that are on city-owned property. We're precluded from acting directly on in other situations, but it is about, as the mayor said, it is about leading with outreach. It's about doing what we can to connect individuals to services when that is possible. It's about triaging our responses so that they're more uniform and not so dependent upon who's calling but what the situation is and what degree of of disruption or issues are presented by the encampment. I will just say, speaking for community development on this regard, as Assistant Chief Tai said, the Madison Police do play a supportive role and we have been very, very satisfied with that support as we've tried to implement this new policy.

Thank you. All right. Last question in this area. What authority does the Common Council have to specify policing policies and procedures such as policies regarding the use of lethal force and de-escalation and training details related to those policies and procedures? I'm guessing Attorney Haas.

Sure, thank you. I can start on that. You know, the council, of course, is a policymaking body for the city. It has pretty broad authority to dictate policy. For all of its agencies, including the police department, there's been some reference to statutes regarding the police chief's authority to supervise the actions of the agencies subject to lawful orders of the mayor or the council. And the term lawful orders, of course, is a little bit broad. There's virtually no circuit court decisions that give us examples. There's one or two that we have seen. But the idea, I think, is that policy decisions can be implemented or directed by the counsel as long as they are lawful. They have to be policy directives. So, in other words, the police chief has statutory authority to run the day-to-day operations of the police department. You wouldn't think of a policy directive to be, for instance, put this officer on third shift or arrest this person or don't arrest that person. Those are day-to-day activities of the police department. But there can be policy directives related to use of force, use of body-worn cameras, et cetera. You know, the details really matter. And in the past, when we've been asked similar questions about this, our approach has been to advise that the council in the first instance can issue its directives. If we're asked, we can give an opinion about whether we think it's a lawful order. And then subsequently, the police chief would need to decide if they can or will implement the order. And if the chief decides that it is within their lawful authority to make that determination and that they will not, in fact, implement the order. And the remedy for that is, of course, the Police and Fire Commission has the sole authority to dictate any discipline regarding the police chief. So it's really, you know, in most cases. I think governing bodies and the police department generally try to work those things out to make sure that everybody's on the same page. But there is some distinct authority for the council, the mayor, and the police chief.

Thank you. So that wraps up the submitted questions with the exception of my questions. I'm going to ask my question first because I didn't submit anything. So Alders, if you had follow up questions, I know Chief Patterson has to leave in probably like 15 minutes, but I believe Chief Ty, you're sticking around. Correct. OK, so my first question is, oh, y'all are quick. Oh, Chief Patterson, were you adding something?

I just wanted to remind everyone that we have a long practice of posting any procedure changes to our website in hopes of getting community feedback on them. And then every quarter, just as a reminder, I share all of our SOPs that have been adjusted and the edits are highlighted for all of you. And really that's meant to generate discussion and feedback on those changes. And so I know sometimes the You know the reports are are long, but you know we have. We have well over 100 procedures that our staff are expected to follow, so. I just wanted to throw that reminder out there.

Thank you. Okay. My question, I believe maybe for public health and then followed by myself, it's Alder Lieberman and Alder Matthews. I want to know more about what role did public health play over those few weeks? And more importantly, were there like harm reduction supplies maybe provided? We received Countless emails about things that were happening more so in the overnight hours, like, you know, folks selling drugs or doing drugs, some mental health challenges, some screaming, just multiple things. But the drug, the use of drugs or drug purchases stuck out. So I'm just curious, throughout the two weeks, whether it was in the daytime or overnight, what was public health's role down there, whether it was food, mental health, drug use or harm reduction supplies being provided there?

or some combination of public response. Hi Alder, thanks for the question. So I guess I'm going to start perhaps in my mind what's the easier or simpler response to the question. And I hear that through the vein of providing mental health support or harm reduction support. We do not have staff nor operations that do that type of service in the field. The staff, the limited staff that we do have, one, we do not provide mental health case management nor referrals unless they are connected to other services that we provide. With regard to harm reduction, those programs are administered out of our physical locations in South and East Madison. So at no point did we have staff on the ground with the sole purpose of providing support or resources. I do believe that there were conversations that we had with different community partners about encouragement for them to be present in that space and who are organizations that may be more likely to be in the field.

Thank you. Alder Lieberman, followed by Alder Matthews. Are you able to unmute?

I'm able to. Please excuse the crying toddler here. My question is a follow-up question for the mayor. You had said that this was viewed initially as a protest, but shifted to being viewed as an encampment and not a protest. I was just hoping you could give some more information about how you draw that distinction in your mind, how you distinguish between a protest that has an encampment present versus something that is an encampment without a protest. And then... in a scenario where you do view that most of the people there are encamped without an intent to protest, but there are still some protesters present, how we preserve the rights of the protesters while still clearing the encampment.

Alder, thank you. I mean, I... I think you answer your own question in some ways, that it really is about sort of numbers. And, you know, in my mind, I think that's really a lot of what it came down to was seeing the rapidly growing number of people experiencing homelessness that were camping overnight at the site. I mean, I don't want to repeat what I said already with respect to the safety concerns. That was a large part of it for me. You know, I think I don't think this was a clear-cut situation. And I think, you know, just thinking back to during the pandemic when we had multiple large encampments and I don't think it would be a stretch to say that there were some people there who perhaps felt like they were expressing their First Amendment rights also. But at the end of the day, you know, I think the thing that the common theme here was that we had an untenable, unsafe situation that was people were people were illegally staying on city property. And it wasn't something that we could allow. I mean, again, I said at the start, I knew from the beginning that we couldn't allow it to go on forever. And so it was really just a question of when did the balance shift from this is a memorial, this is people are grieving, they need time and space. to this is now really primarily a homeless encampment with some other stuff going on. And we can't let it take root in the way that, for example, things took root at Rheindahl. It's not a clear distinction. It's not an easy answer. And again, I will say that I think we were making the best decisions we could with the information that we had. And one of the unfortunate truths about certainly local government, but I imagine government at every level is that you are never going to have all the information you want. And the decisions are almost never easy. So I don't want to pretend like this was an easy decision. It wasn't at all. And we had you know, multiple conversations about the desire to not further traumatize people experiencing homelessness. And that actually did influence, those conversations influenced a lot of the decisions that we made about how we proceeded. And I'm grateful to our colleagues in community development for their insights on that. That was definitely a concern. But again, we have experience in this city of what happens and how unsafe it can get when an encampment gets to be of a certain size. That definitely informed our decision-making process.

Thanks, Mayor. Alder Matthews?

Thank you. My question, I think, is for the chief. Is he still here?

Y'all are moving around. Oh, nope. I'm not sure if that's him or not. Look, he might have popped off already.

Yeah, he had to jump off. So you'll have to settle for me. I can try to answer his question.

Okay, no worries. So I think these are... I think this is one question, but I... wanted to ask about the use of surveillance technology and drones throughout the encampment area. Um, and then with that, if it is, you know, if there's a policy for, you know, folks who are doing dispatch or whoever is the staff person talking to, um, police officers through the audio during a call, to pre-identify the subject of the police call and share their previous record. I know there were some reports of folks being from the community of folks being like targeted by the drones. And I tried to look up the surveillance, the policies and stuff, and it didn't seem like that would be allowed per the ordinance, but I'm not totally sure.

Yeah, so I can answer that as best I can. The drones that we're using are part of our longstanding UAS program. And so we are not using the drones in private spaces. We do utilize drones as part of our SWAT team. Like if we were to have a search warrant and we were to send a drone in as a de-escalation tool so that we can limit the potential for, you know, violent, fast-paced interactions between police and community members. So we used drones in that setting for like a tactical situation for a warrant where we would send them into a private area. As far as the drones used for this encampment, again, we do not have city street cameras in the area of the encampment. And so we were using drones to view, and we've used them for Mifflin Street. That's a similar kind of situation where we don't have good camera coverage. And so we're using that. It's a live feed that goes into the command post. I'm aware of people thinking that the drones are somehow talking to people or there's different things going on that aren't. A number of people that were arrested for warrants were frankly identified by those of us in the command post in our criminal intelligence section that recognize someone as someone that is wanted, has an arrest warrant. So there's no AI technology that's just... Old fashioned policing, using their knowledge and their eyes to identify people. And the only thing that we're using the drones for, again, is live footage in the encampment area that is a public area. And so we're not going into private spaces. I think the other... The other piece of that that I would mention is that the drones have been very effective for us to limit and kind of as the mayor articulated earlier, we were really trying to limit law enforcement. So throughout this encampment period, I mean, honestly, we had one where. We had witnessed a violent assault by someone on people within the encampment. That person was sort of chased down by other members of the encampment and detained. We were able to witness that whole incident through the live feed before we had received a 911 call and then get back. resources close in the area so that we were safely able to take that person into custody. So again, we see it as a de-escalation tool. Our SOPs on the UAS program are available. They're public. This is not a new program, and we were using them specifically in this encampment. It's just because of the lack of other cameras that are available in the area.

Thank you. Thanks, Chief Tye. Alder Oglewicz?

Yeah, thank you, President. Mayor, I think this one's for you. You mentioned early on that staff were in the encampment. They were talking to people, but it wasn't a negotiation. There weren't clear leaders. You know, there were people claiming to be leaders. I'm just wondering if they weren't negotiating, could you say a bit more about the discussions that staff were having? And were they encouraging people to move on or just talk a bit more about what they were doing there?

I mean, I think it really depended on the staff and the day. So you heard earlier from Director O'Keefe that he and his staff were down there on various days trying to support people who are experiencing homelessness and see if they would accept services or hotels. So some of it was that. I think at one point, We had a question for public health if the food service was safe or sanitary. We had economic development staff go and speak to the individual businesses. We had various other staff were there talking to a variety of folks about Is there sort of a way that we could transition the memorial out of the middle of the street and maybe be on the sidewalk or in a parking space over here? And what might that look like and how could we help facilitate it? And so there were folks from planning and PCED that were part of those conversations. And there were folks from my office that were down there. But yeah, it was a very wide range. of things that folks were talking about. I think, I hope, that staff were fairly consistent in acknowledging that this was not a long-term situation that could continue and that we had real concerns. I know that there were some conversations with elected officials who, I don't want to speak for them, but about like, hey, could we maybe move this barricade back so this person could get into their house? So things like that. I think there were requests sometimes from folks in the intersection, can we get trash pickup, please? So yeah, it was a very broad range of things that the conversations were about.

Thank you.

Thank you. Before, because I said we would go around for everybody. So before I ask my second question, does anybody want to ask a question before I go back? All right. Vice President Glenn.

Yeah, I think my question is for the mayor, unless there are elders in here that could answer it. Who was noteworthy or notified with any questions? Sorry, my tiny dog has just decided to bark. What alders were notified, if any, that this thing got the 1030 call the night before?

No alders were notified. Nobody got any phone calls.

Thank you.

All right. Any other orders before I ask my second question? Alder Mayor?

Thank you, President Madison. I know that we are mostly asking questions of staff and the mayor, but I just wanted to be available if anyone had specific questions about things that I observed since I spent many, many hours down there. And of course, interfacing with a group that was there. So just to help back up or provide any color. That's all. Thank you.

Thank you. My question may go to that. So thank you for offering that. Alderjohn?

Could I just know exactly why we're only asking questions up to a specific point and not about the protests that followed the encampment?

Well, we're asking about, basically, I can't remember if it was an exact two weeks, I don't want to give that wrong date, but we're asking, or the topic of the discussion is the protests and the encampment related to the Willie Street and Baldwin area. So if it fits within there, then that's fine. It's not, I'm not sure if I understand your question correctly, but we're trying to stay within that window. Does that make sense?

Yeah. But In the time that has followed, there have also been protests. I'm wondering why we're not able, or we're not, that's not within the scope of discussion.

Yeah, because personally, the protests seem to be ongoing, and I needed to provide a window of what we're covering. So it would have kind of been difficult to say, let's add what happened yesterday, for example. What's happening might have happened this morning. So I was trying to find a window that we can use, one for legislature, one to give a scope for both staff and other alders. Does that make sense? Yes, thank you. Okay. All right, anybody else before I ask my second question? Just to stick to what I said. OK, so my second question is, again, really just going back to the overnight process. So I did receive phone calls from folks who were spending time in the area. Some of them were more focused on like the peaceful daytime activities, like maybe it's art, maybe it's like circles, that sort of thing. Some of it was related to what was happening overnight and maybe asking me about resources to refer people to. So I now understand that public health was not providing on-site kind of harm reduction. Then were there any contracted partners contracted to be there overnight or stayed overnight or came overnight? I'm guessing it was a no because some of the emails we were receiving were saying like, hey, there's nobody here to kind of like help facilitate this. This thing is happening. I'm not sure what to do.

Yeah, President Madison, I'm not aware of, anybody who was there overnight. In terms of our contracted partners that we asked to play a role, and Director O'Keefe can speak more to this if I go wrong, but we did ask the folks who do outreach to people experiencing homelessness to be down there. in during the day to check on folks experiencing homelessness to potentially offer them hotel vouchers or other services. And so that in terms of agency contracts that we have, as all I'm aware of, I do know that the, it's not an agency contract, but I do know that the county did ask the Behavioral Resource Center To have information down there. I'm not sure if there were staff down there from the county also. But that's the only other thing that I'm aware of. But Director O'Keefe, do you have anything else to add there?

No, Mayor, just to confirm that the outreach teams were there into the night, but not overnight.

Gotcha. And then just a quick follow-up. Outside of the county, public health, Contracted partners, were there other agencies that we might have missed? I'm just curious on just in general over those couple weeks, who was there providing resources or services? Like out of what we've already mentioned, like CDD, public health, the county's behavioral health folks, public, is there anybody missing?

Well, I think that there may have been other community partners, community agencies there, but I'm not.

I think there were other mental health services, but they're private businesses that went down on their own. Gotcha. Not as a contracted service.

Gotcha. Let me double check. I think I saw Alder Glenn first. Yes. So Alder Glenn followed by Alder Matthews or Vice President Glenn.

Hi, my question is for Janelle Public Health. Hello. So my question is, why wasn't the violence intervention team allowed to go down and do community violence intervention prior to being asked or told to go down there the day of the encampment being disassembled?

So Alder, as I think You might know better, more than others. The violence intervention team has been, I would say, building the ship as we are flying it. and have not included in our response to what we frame as state-involved or government-involved violence and therefore was not within the criteria that we use to deploy our team in the moments after the shootings.

And then why were they down there during the disassembling?

Um, I will jump in and I I think others may also have things to add, but we were asked to. I think my understanding is well after. The planning had been underway. We were asked to come in to support deescalation. That was my little dog compared to your little dog and. had to be very thoughtful in what that might mean for us as a unit, a program, and agreed that there was opportunity for us to be present to support de-escalation, to support, hopefully, minimization of community harm and to really think about opportunities for community healing at that point.

Thank you. Just one quick follow up to that. What is the difference between not being involved in state and violence before or after?

I think where we have an emerging set of criteria for how we would deploy the team and what we have been built upon has always been to be responsive to interpersonal conflict and violence that may arise from that, whether that's acute. and or whether that may have some history behind it, and that has never included responding to situations that occurred on the 22nd, and that has just been the practice and how we have evolved as a unit. Veronica or others, would you like to?

Veronica, do you have anything to add?

Not really. I mean, we were there with the whole purpose and intention to support the community and try to reduce any further harm done to community. And that's exactly what we did.

Thank you. If I can, President Madison, I wanted to add one sort of larger context to that. And I think that very much support what Director Heinrich and Veronica are saying. But I may be a little bit of a broken record here, but I just keep coming back to the theme of that we were trying to find any possible way to not lead with a law enforcement response. And accordingly, if you're looking for people who know how to do de-escalation, there are people who are formally trained in that, who live in public health. And then there are other people who may be good at that by virtue of their jobs and in other city agencies. And I think, you know, in a sort of forward-looking way, one thing that the council may be interested in is that as a result of this experience, I have a very strong desire now to make formal de-escalation training more available to a broader range of city staff, both because I think a number of the types of jobs that our city staff do are increasingly requiring de-escalation just in the course of their normal job. So whether that's somebody who is at the front desk of the clerk's office or the assessor's office, or whether that's a building inspector who's going out on site, or whether that's a park ranger, I think we have a number of staff who could use de-escalation training in the course of their daily jobs. We're also... I would say having a preliminary conversation about what it might look like to have those skills in a broader range of city staff so that they could be used in situations that are a little bit more of a crisis. And I don't think we have a very clear path forward on that yet, but, you know, in the same way that, you know, however many five years ago we started CARES because we wanted to have a mental health response that didn't involve law enforcement, I'm interested in exploring ways to have a de-escalation response that doesn't involve law enforcement. So I think, you know, welcome the conversation around that, but just, I think it's, maybe useful for the council to know that that is one thing that's come out of this and that those are conversations that we're beginning to have.

And I just wanted to add that as difficult as this was for our team, we count with a group of people that are really trained in this area of de-escalation and experience working in many different other scenarios as well. So we were able to handle the situation that we were fully at capacity to do this. No. However, we made it work. It took some time to get the community to trust us and to work on our side to support them in the way that they needed to be supported during this difficult time. Again, we were asked to be there with a sole purpose to deescalate and support the community.

Thank you to each of you. All right. So we have Alder Matthews, followed by Alder Pritchett, followed by Alder Lieberman. Alder Matthews.

Thank you, President Madison. This is a constituent question that was sent directly to me, but also, I think, to all Alders. But I didn't submit it to you, so I didn't see it in the list. So quote, this is for the mayor. The people who are at the vigil site are your constituents and members of our Madison community. Why didn't you come down and talk to people at the vigil site and attempt to find a solution that didn't involve more police violence? Unquote. And I think they mean personally, because obviously we know your staff was there.

Thank you, Elder Matthews. I think I've spoken already to the conversations that staff had and the fact that we did try rather hard to find a different solution unsuccessfully. As to why I personally didn't go down there, it was for two reasons. And I think I've said this publicly before, but first of all, it's not about me. It shouldn't be about me. And if I went down there, it would be about me. And I think we saw when other politicians went down there, it became about them. I don't like that. I don't think it's respectful of the community. And so I chose not to do that. And then the other reason was that honestly, I was flat out 12 hours a day trying to manage the crisis. And I think other people may have made a different decision and had different priorities, but I was working hard to make sure that we were mobilizing the resources that the community needed in a whole wide variety of ways and to do the work that needed to be done. And I felt like that was more important than going down to be seen. Again, I didn't want it to be about me. I didn't want to go to be seen. And and because we were having conversations in a number of ways and and I was talking to people on the phone and I wasn't at the site, but it doesn't mean that I wasn't talking to people. And so in my estimation, that was the best decision to make.

Thank you, Mayor. And just as a for the mostly the public and auditors who might have missed it, because I had to go back and watch it today. There was a city press conference which had the mayor and other city agencies folks there on August 5th. I watched it on YouTube, but I imagine you can watch it on the city channel, too. All right. Alder Pritchett, followed by Alder Lieberman.

So my question centers around the after. This is the aftermath. And my question is this. Using a thermometer, we know that the temperature was very, very high with respect to tension and things like that. So what is the temperature now? And I'm looking for the temperature as far as businesses are concerned and the temperature for residents. And then follow up with that. I want to know whether or not, you know, there is evidence or some sense of a flare up. You know, could it happen again, and if so, what what plans are in place, should you know there be a flare up about something that someone disagrees with. This is for whomever can answer the question what's the temperature, perhaps it should be to all the major.

Yeah, I was going to suggest that Alder may want to weigh in. Alder, honestly, I think what the temperature is is going to depend on who you ask. I think everybody's going to have a different opinion of that. I will say, not directly answering your question, and I apologize for that, but one of the considerations in every decision that we made over the course of that two-plus weeks is was exactly what is the temperature of the community and wanting to do what we could to deescalate that temperature rather than raise it. And that is part of why it was so important to have as minimal a law enforcement presence as possible so as not to further inflame things. It was why we were trying to have a variety of staff present in different ways and at different times. But that was a primary consideration. And based on what we learned from 2020, I think that was very much front of mind. I think generally the temperature is lower now. I'm not sure everyone would agree with me on that. But that's the sense that I get from the tenor of the communications coming into the office. I think to your point, that can change. Any number of things could change it. And obviously we have thought about that. And I hope you will forgive me if I don't detail the ways in which we have thought about that. Part of making plans is that if you share them with the whole world, they're no longer usable.

So I'm not asking to share. I'm just asking, you know, whether or not this is something that one has to think about. Yes. Should a flare up? Yes. No, you shouldn't advertise the plan.

Yes, we are. It is absolutely something that we should think about, that we are thinking about. And both in the short term and in the long term. And again, you know, some of the things that. that I think are important for us to think about coming out of this. There's a whole long list. This is only a few to your question. And one is this question of de-escalation training for a broader number of city staff. And another is to learn from our, I would say, very on the go efforts to have a non-law enforcement response to protests. don't think that we perfected that. And I think that it is something that we could work on. So I do think that, you know, learning from the ways in which we tried to deescalate to do a better job next time is really important. But I think, again, I think you could ask everybody on this call and they would all have a different answer to your question, but maybe, Alderman Mayer, if you're willing, yours is the most relevant.

Thank you, Mayor. Yeah, to answer you, I would say that the temperature is kind of on a simmer right now. Things are resting a bit, but people have not forgotten what happened just a few short weeks ago. It's still very much top of mind. People are considering, you know, the injustice that they saw. Witness some people personally and and why the question I keep hearing is, why does this have keep having in this neighborhood I think it's for the last 10 years and six if you go back further please involves killings. um i'll be very candid um i have great concerns for what will happen in the future when the um independence or when the state makes their determination when the da makes his determination i think the history has shown us what that is likely to be um and and i'm concerned about the anger that might result from that which is understandable um yeah so and there

So the last part of this question is this. If you had to use a scale from one to 10, what I'm looking at or thinking about is trust. With zero being no trust to 10 being a level of trust, where is trust at this point in time? Trust as far as the residents and trust as far as businesses.

Trust with the city?

Trust in general. Where is trust now? within Willis Street Mall, the entirety of Willis Street, especially.

I'm sorry, I don't quite understand. You're saying trust with... Who do you trust? I guess I'm not quite trying to answer that.

No, who, no. Is trust a problem there? If you ask the ordinary business person or the average citizen there, you know, and if you ask them, what about trust? Would they tell you that I don't trust? I don't trust the city. I don't trust the police. I don't trust. That's what I'm asking.

I suppose it's all over the board. I couldn't give you one number. I mean, if anything, this whole experience has showed how people react differently to one event and react differently to what happened before. I knew for a long time that whenever the encampment was cleared, it would be way too early for some and way too late for others. And so people are all over the board with how they see the city's response, how they see the protesters' actions. It's just, it's all over.

So it's like quicksand.

I can't possibly give you a single response to that. Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah, sure. Thank you. Thank you for the question.

I'm sorry, y'all are muted and still in 2026 doing that. All right, Alder Lieberman.

Thanks. This is going to be for the mayor. It's a quick question followed by a maybe longer one. I've received concerns from some constituents who had heard that the city had told community partners, specifically churches, a different timeline for the clearing of the encampment. I was just hoping if you could confirm or deny

Yeah, we did not tell anyone a timeline for clearing the encampment.

And again, as I said earlier, I think literally every day there was a rumor that we were coming in that day or the next day or no, no, somebody told me it's next week. It's going to be Wednesday. It's going to be Friday. It's going to be, I mean, I know people heard a lot of different things, but I, I, We did not ever give a timeframe. I will say that we were asked by members of the public, including members of the clergy, to plan for a month-long transition, which was never a possibility. And I think we were clear about that. I think we did say that we, you know, people asked, will you please tell us? you know, tell us when you're going to come in and tell, give us warning, you know, give us a heads up. And I mean, I think I spoke earlier to why we didn't do that. We didn't say that we would do that. We did say that we would be clear, you know, when, not specifically we were going to go in, but when we thought that it was untenable and, and, I was saying daily that the situation was unsafe, that it needed to come to an end, that I was asking people to leave voluntarily. And so, I mean, we were communicating fairly clearly that it was time, but because we wanted to do this in as safe a way as possible, we did not tell anyone what the timeframe was.

Thank you. And then I just was hoping if you could characterize the conversations you've had since the encampment was cleared with some of those communities and groups like the churches, especially those that are very prominent in Madison's black community.

So I think myself and members of my staff have had a number of conversations with leaders across the community in the aftermath. I don't know that I could, you know, sort of sum those up briefly. I think I would say, I think some folks understand that it was not a tenable situation. I will say that when asked, people have, when we, myself or members of my staff have asked, what would you do? People have said, I have no idea. And I don't know what I would have done differently. So I think, well, I would describe that, you know, that there is some tension in those relationships and maybe some disagreement. that there's also, I think, some understanding and the more that we share with people the kind of information that we're sharing here today, the more people understand why we needed to move in some time frame. They may not agree with that time frame, but I think they understand that there is some need there. Somebody said this earlier, but I think maybe President Madison said this earlier, but I think for folks that were at the intersection the first day or two or only during the day got a very different view of what was going on than folks who were there overnight. And I think that or folks who never went down to the intersection and only heard about it second or third hand or from social media and did not have a complete picture. And, you know, when we share more information, I think people get a more nuanced view. I don't know if that answers your question, Alder.

I think for the format we have now, that answers it. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. I have, I think, a quick or it's probably just really to help me understand and clarify for myself. Earlier, I think Chief Ty or the police chief answered about Like you kind of gave like a rundown of the logs for the fire, but I'm just thinking about something the mayor just said and I said earlier about that overnight versus during the day where I was personally finding it a challenge on how to refer folks because there were just folks reaching out and it wasn't stressful to refer them, but making them feel confident in where I was referring them that they were going to get a reply, if that makes sense. And so I'm curious, I'm not necessarily looking for like this happened, you know, you have folks overnight, these things were happening, but more so to help me think about what has to happen to allow us to plan for this potential to happen in the future. So I guess I'm curious for maybe the fire chief and for MPD, Whereas we were getting emails about what folks were witnessing or happening upon overnight, were those residents also making phone calls about what they were seeing? Or this might also be for Alderman Mayer too. I'm just curious, outside of residents emailing us and for some of us getting phone calls from folks who were present overnight or during the day or leading to overnight, how else were those challenges recorded, if that makes sense?

Are you asking about residents calling 911?

Yeah, because there were a bunch of different kind of calls. I remember an email we got and a person, I think they recounted that it was like 2 or 3 o'clock in the morning. Chief? Assistant Chief?

Yeah, I mean, we certainly, and I'll let Chief Carbon respond as well, but we, I'm not sure the timeframe you're talking about, but we had a variety of command posts set up in the days after the officer involved shooting and then with the encampment. And so, and there were a number of times where people did call 911 to make complaints of a variety of things. And I think that Um, we certainly, uh, you know, investigated a variety of things. Um, and I do, there were a number, I know that the drones were mentioned earlier, but there were a number of times that we were able to, um, we, we had 911 calls of, I think, trying to get the police to go into the area, almost like a swatting type call where we were then able to send the drone up and make sure that, that, that stuff wasn't occurring. Um, because we were, um, trying to police that area very intentionally, understanding that what the protest was about and people's fear and trust with the police, that we really wanted to keep the police out of the area as much as possible, but then also balancing if there is a true emergency where we need to potentially provide aid. And so, yes, we did. So a long answer, but there were a number of 911 calls to the encampment that

uh throughout and we can certainly get you more precise information yeah over time yeah that's i'm really looking forward just to understand what was reported to us but also just in general like not questioning whether or not things were happening but just to everywhere i can look to figure out what was happening and then my follow-up um i don't know that i'm really looking for an answer it's more so again there were folks who were hitting me up about what kind of referrals like a lot of it was around hotels for oh debbie i'm sorry were you going to answer that or alderman mayor

Yeah, thank you, President. So I was just going to give two examples for you that might help, too. During the first weekend, there was the heat advisory. There was a gentleman who passed out, and people called for 911 and said, Fire Rescue was able to drive up to the south end of Baldwin and come in with a stretcher and get him out in a reasonable amount of time. And, of course, we know about the incident with the, let's just say, troublemaker who came in and started fights. And protesters did call police to get him out of there, too. And I think that resolved as well as it could have. So just these two points here.

Thank you. And I think maybe I don't again, I don't know when I say maybe a question will come out. But I'm also just thinking about the folks who are there primarily during the day where I'm confident these are the times of day where we were hearing a lot of the positivity or seeing the positivity on social media like haircuts or maybe folks providing care or something like that. So I guess I'm just, I'm thinking about what the mayor was saying earlier about the community building aspect of it all. And then I'm also thinking about that Willie Street corridor. I know we got a couple emails where folks were recounting a number of incidents that have happened in that very small geographical area. And I keep thinking about What do we do around community in the area going forward? Not just for this most recent, but this trauma that have been on people in that area for 10 plus years, I think. And so maybe my question is, I think I know the answer as I'm saying this. So as community members who might have been engaged in some capacity in that Willie Street Baldwin area, I'm guessing that giving folks or just encouraging folks to reach out to their alders about ways to remain engaged in the community, to remain updated. Because I just keep thinking about I know some of the steps that I know that I am going to plan to take. But I think that maybe I'm saying this to the folks who are listening to the general public that. I want to say, like, I think not only did I hear you, but I do feel like the full council hear you, especially when it comes down to, like, traumas that have happened over 10 plus years in this area. And I really encourage you to share your thoughts with Alders. You know, not just your Alder, Alder Mayor. He's done a good job of sharing information with us. But tell us... about what does a trauma-informed approach look like for the area going forward. Because there was an email that really recounted instances that, you know, as you're sitting there reading, it's really heartbreaking if you lived in that area for like 20, 30 years, you raise your kids in this area, and this has happened in this area a couple times. So I just want to say that. I don't know that I have a question for you all, but I'm really just thinking about that Willie street corridor and what has happened over the last 10 years. And I'm thinking about community members who felt part of a community and creating community down there. How don't, I just want to make sure we don't lose their energy. If that makes sense. I think that's what I'm saying. So, yeah. Okay. So I saw the mayor before. I'm going to take it as a question, Alder.

Yeah. Okay. I'm trying to think through it all. And say that. So a couple of answers. And so I, One is I think you heard Director Heinrich refer earlier to community healing. And I think that is something that we are thinking about and what that might look like. I would very much encourage community members who have ideas about this to be in touch with their alders and for alders to pass that along as to Director Heinrich. I do think that there's a role for the city, but there's also obviously a role for the community. But the other thing that I really wanted to make sure to say is that People in that immediate area, people who live, work, and play in that immediate area who have experienced this trauma, I strongly, strongly, strongly encourage them to reach out to mental health resources. And so whether that's the Behavioral Health Resource Center or calling 211 to get connected with resources, there are other resources that are posted online. the public health Madison Dane County resources page, community resources page, and we've put them out. I think there's some in our FAQ and we put them out in various press releases, but it's very important for people to access mental health resources. And I will similarly say to the council, don't forget that our employee assistance program is available to you as well. And we have encouraged all of our staff to make Use of that and the resources, the mental health resources available to them. And through that you all also can access that. So it just really important for folks to take care of themselves and to reach out and get the help that they might need as part of that healing process. It's not the only thing. But I think it is an important first step. And then again, I think there's a larger question for the city, but also for the broader community on what supporting that neighborhood looks like in the long term.

Thank you. Okay, just to give the auditors who have their hands up just as a quick warning, it's 736. I'll give another warning at 755. So we have Alder Pritchett, followed by Vice President Glenn, followed by Alder Mayer, followed by Alder Matthews. Alder Pritchett.

Yes, I'm going to go back to something that the mayor said earlier about especially communities. And I look at this particular incident as a pop-up, okay? I mean, it was spontaneous. Everyone kind of came together. And situational kinds of things like that, when they do occur, you know, there is support. there's inclusion, there's a shared purpose, and there's a sense of belonging. And those are principle ingredients with respect to building community. Many times communities, you live in a community, you don't have something critical that will kind of bind you together. With this particular incident, the binding thing together was Cory and Louise and the way he was killed. So people shared that. People thought that and they knew and they respected each other because they had something in common together. So building community, you can have that happen, you know, without necessarily having some spontaneity. But it takes a long time for that to grow. This grew immediately. And therein lies the difference between the two in terms of how do you go about building community, especially one that's going to be long lasting. There has to be a situation where their support is needed, inclusion is needed, as well as a shared purpose. That's all I had to say. Thank you.

Thank you, Alder Pritchett, Vice President Glenn, followed by Alder Mayer, followed by Alder Matthews.

Thank you, President Madison. This is for Assistant Chief Tai. Is he still on here? Hello. Question. We got a lot of emails in regards to, like, the day after and the weekend that followed around arrests. There was a lot of videos about arrests for jaywalking, crossing the street. Can you talk a little bit about that and then kind of follow up with, like, where do you put... your level of de-escalation. We've talked a lot about de-escalation. Where is the level for police for de-escalating this? I've seen so many videos of these very hot moments pop up around Madison. So if you could talk a little bit about that, I'd appreciate it.

So, yeah, I think de-escalation is something that we always want to lead with. I think that using our ability to communicate professionally with people to explain the reasons for what we're doing, why we're doing it before, during and after any police call or any arrest. I mean, that's that's always best practices, not just for police. The Madison Police Department, frankly, for policing throughout the country, that's always the best practice. And it's something that I think we certainly strive for. I think that there's always opportunities to improve in any interaction, in any police call for service. In our profession, in anyone's profession, you can always look at ways to improve. But the standard is to de-escalate, to explain, to know the laws of why we can do things differently. And to follow our SOPs. And so to answer your question, I think that the arrests for standing in the roadway, obstructing the roadway, those kind of arrests, I think that this is a unique point in time in the sense that We really, after the efforts that were put forth to reopen that intersection, and frankly, I think at the request of a lot of businesses that were hurting a lot of people who lived in the area that were hurting and wanted to have businesses, the intersection back to the free flow of traffic and so that those businesses could reopen. That put us in a unique situation where we just were not in a position that we were going to allow people to sit back in the intersection and obstruct the roadway. And so that being said, still trying to do those good verbals, still trying to partner with our other uh city agencies that were out there public health was out there other community partners trying to continue to to dialogue with people and work with people and explain where you could protest uh that you could be on the sidewalks but that you just could not be in the roadway and so we uh efforted to explain that with uh community partners getting police out of the area as much as possible. We experimented with a variety of techniques of having police not visible, watching the areas for cameras, trying to have, like I said, our other partners from violence prevention, other city agencies community members trying to dialogue and a lot of the times unfortunately we would get people still wanting to go in the intersection and and frankly at times uh preventing really dangerous situations where we could see people nearly getting struck by automobiles because they're going back out in the as a one two three people out in the roadway it's dark um and so that's that's the um you know that is the that was the philosophy that we were operating under again trying to lead with other partners but always communicating um And then certainly there were times that there were arrests, but it was never the case to my understanding that it was a one time with no warning that we're going in arrest. And it was it was after multiple warnings from not just police, but from other community partners and then making those arrests with the intention that we just had seen the efforts that went in to reopen that intersection and concerns about it having been closed again.

Thank you very much. I just want to say since...

I think Lieutenant Imel might have one more thing.

Oh, okay.

Sorry.

Oh, go ahead. I just want to be mindful, y'all. We have two more hands up and it's 743. So, go for it.

I was just going to add, when we talked about those 32 arrests earlier, that wasn't 32 separate people. Some of the people that were arrested bailed out and came back with the express statements that they were going to re-engage in that behavior.

Thank you. Since Alder Pritchett just made a statement, I just want to make mine. I wholeheartedly agree with the de-escalation conversation as someone who's trained others in it and has thoroughly trained and trained my former violence intervention team. So I'm just on board with that. I think everybody could do some.

Thank you. Alder Mayer followed by Alder Matthews.

Thank you, President Madison. I'll be brief. To answer your questions about community, I wanted to share that, you know, there's a lot of different efforts for healing in the area. The Marquette Neighborhood Association is in the early days of putting together a community listening session, which will be held in person somewhere in the neighborhood. Also, as you know, there's multiple efforts to help the employees, employers in the area, including the resolution I'm trying to work on. There's also a private GoFundMe, and there's also another fundraising effort that is explicitly for employees in the area. As well, we have a couple of neighborhood festivals coming up, which is a great chance for neighbors and other people from Madison to get together talk about this because we are going to continue to talk about action items for a long time and things we need to change at the state level. We're not done talking about the previous police killings that happened, Tony Robinson and others, so this is something that we'll continue on, but I think I can say that the community is headed in the right direction. Thank you.

Alder Matthews? Thank you. I think this is a question maybe for Assistant Chief Tai. You mentioned there are 1,100 pages of police reports so far for the response.

is Alder Matthews cutting out for you all or just I'm cutting out okay Alder Matthews if you can hear me you are cutting out and that there there is work Alder Matthews you cut out so is it better now or no yep yep so just start over because it cut out pretty much with the substance of your question Oh, wait. No, not Lee, but... Oh, okay.

So just turn your question over. It was mentioned there's 1,100 pages of police reports currently and that, like, there's work being planned or work being done on an after... Am I cutting out again? Keep going. Okay, sorry. On an after-action report... so I was just wondering, and this might be too much and I, I'm sorry for that, but, uh, if, if everything was to stop like today, I guess, or, or here, it'll be two prongs. In general, if you feel like you could give even just an estimation of how much staff time you think that it'll take to kind of complete that after action work, um, I guess, based on the current situation. And then if that's too broad to ask right now, if it were to all stop today, right now, where you think that amount of staff time might come in?

Yeah, I'll do my best. I think you were cutting out a little bit during the response. But I think the question was wanting to have a time frame for when we might have an after action completed. And I think that, you know, I think that's probably something we would be. It's really very difficult to speculate right now because we included in those reports that we have information. We had continued protests and events that have occurred, and so it's all under one big case at this point, similar to what we did in the 2020 protests and civil unrest. And for that, as you may recall, we brought in an outside group to assist us with the after action, and it was great. Pretty comprehensive. So I think that's, you know, we're committed to doing that and providing community input, but I just think it's too premature to be able to give you a timeline about what that would look like. But I think that's something that the chief is very much committed to doing and will certainly update the council as as that moves forward.

Thank you. For authors who have not asked any questions, just I want to just make just ask again, do you all have any questions that you'd like to pose or any comments? I mean, I don't want to say thoughts because I know how you all can go, go, go, go. But all right, author figure all go.

Thank you. I have been in and out this meeting with other meetings on the queue. So you may have already answered this question, but for the mayor, so currently are you then, are you like having reoccurring meetings with staff to continue the work of preparing this emergency plan in the future? to handle the DA's announcement? You know, taking all the lessons learned and then how are we going to handle that? So are you meeting regularly to have a plan and a second plan and whatever, you know, like a backup plan or whatever to manage that announcement?

Yes, Alder, we are having those conversations regularly. And I say there's a number of strands of work that have come out of this, and certainly that's one of them. I referenced the desire to have a better non-law enforcement response for protest safety, to continue training on de-escalation, and to think more along that line. We also have been, I think, talking about the community healing portion and availability of mental health resources, et cetera. So, yeah, there's a number of things that we are strands of work that are still ongoing. And that response to future events is definitely one of them.

And a follow-up to that, if I may. So for people, I know that the first line of defense is or should be the city partners, the people that the city supports financially. So it is logical to go to them to get assistance first. But for other people in the private sector that may want to participate on... to be part of supporting the community in times like this. Is there a route or way for them to make that known? Do they communicate directly with you, with your office? What would be your recommendation for other people in the community that want to provide their own expertise and services to support the community during these times?

Yeah, I think folks should contact sort of whatever part of the city they feel most comfortable with. They can certainly contact my office. They could contact the police department. They could contact public health. They could contact community services. I will say that I know that the United Way is hosting some conversations. So if people feel more comfortable going to a separate entity, that might be one that you know, could hook people into some planning. Yeah, I think I certainly welcome, you know, broader community involvement.

So I mean like more, not so much for the aftermath. I mean like in order to prepare for the next event. Yes.

For that also.

Yeah, okay. Is it okay for them to directly contact with you?

They can certainly contact my office, yes.

Okay, perfect. Thank you. Thank you, Alder. All right, time is 7.52. Alder Zhang, followed by Alder Madison, followed by Alder Evers. Alder Zhang?

Yeah, this will probably be for Assistant Chief. I just wanted to follow up why Alder, And how are drones a de-escalating tool?

Yeah, so I think that in the plainest way is that they allow for observation of behavior and allow for the slowing down of a police response. And so I think, you know, one thing that happened on State Street in In the days after this had occurred, there was a march down State Street. There were people that were blocking traffic. There were people that were in their cars reporting being scared, intimidated. calling 911, wanting a police response. In that situation, we were able to view the area through drone footage and see that nobody was being physically hurt. There was no property damage occurring. People were certainly scared, but we were able to not send the police in there to deal with the situation. And it resolved without having that camera footage to ascertain that people were safe and crimes weren't occurring. The only way to do that would have been to send police officers because people were calling 911 asking for help to send the police officers into that area. I really believe that would have escalated the situation and that's one of a number of situations where we were able to slow down our response and get a visual in the command post and then make a decision. as to whether or not we needed to send law enforcement in there. So just as able to slow down the problem while still getting a view of what's going on to be able to make situations and make people, assure that people are safe and just slow down the response. In particular, when we're dealing with situations where it has been articulated by so many of our elected officials here, where the police are part of the reason that people are out protesting. So if we can not send police into that situation, but still ascertaining that people are safe, that's how it becomes a de-escalation tool.

Thanks. Thanks for the question, Alderjong. I just have a quick question, and then the last, Alderjong, is still on.

Assistant Chief, the mayor just spoke about the need for a greater investment across the city and DS trying to figure out how we can do things better. You know, I think it's a it's a longer conversation to start talking about this specific