Community Police Review Board - Regular Meeting

do that again. Okay. Uh before proceeding, I would like to provide the board members some guidance on how to use technology at the disdas. Uh to speak, you will need to use the mics which are activated by pushing the talk button. You will need to wait for the chair to acknowledge the speaker before uh proceeding to talk. Will the clerk please call the role? Board member Beasley Day. Board member Bryant. Board member Bird present. Board member Christensen here.

Vice Deal here. Board member Grant. Board member Smith. Board member Han here. Chairman Solorio, Vice Chairman Deell, board member Grant and Chairman Solorio are absent this evening. We would like to ask the board to consider the request for an excused absence which meets our criteria for the granting of an excused absence. At this time, we ask for a motion from the board to grant the excused absences. Does anyone have a motion?

Second. What? Oh, we do need a vote. Okay. So, let's vote on that motion. Uh the Nico and um member Grant are not able to attend today, so we'll just excuse them. I'll call for a vote. Okay. Me? All in favor? I. All opposed.

Do any of the board members have any conflicts of interest pertaining to these items listed on the agenda tonight? Um, as noted in the public or the as noted on the agenda, public comment will be open uh only in person. Zoom will still meet uh or will still be available for viewing and wordly translation. I we did receive an email uh making comments and public comments and uh everyone it has been distributed to everyone uh on the deis. Um please note there are no public comment for items five and eight as these items areformational only in nature. Does anyone wish to speak on any item under public comment? This excuse me uh this is not for the agenda. We have you have three minutes to speak. Anyone wishing to address the board is asked to follow the rules of decorum. The rules of decorum are posted at the entrance of the chambers. They are please be respectful of all presenters, board members, staff and members of the public. Please refra refrain from clapping other than following a presentation. All speakers are encouraged to state their name and city of residence. All questions must be directed to the chair. Please do not block the view of others by holding up signs during board meetings. Time limits for public comments are three minutes but may be limited at the discretion of the chair to manage the business of the board. Speaking over others or interrupting while others are have the floor is not permitted. Cell phones should be turned off and shall be set to vibrate during the meeting. Um I'd like to

have ush consider the minutes from the last meeting. I'll move it. Um you would need to close comment. What? Oh, I need to close public comment. Yes.

Did we already get past that already? Oh, I'm sorry. Out of order here. Sorry. Um, no public comments. Seeing none, we close public comments. Let's uh move on to the um minutes from the last meeting. Would anyone like to uh remove Oh. All in favor?

All opposed. All I have is this. I actually need an actual um agenda. That's why I'm losing my place. Sorry about that. Okay. So, new business. Um, we have presentation from staff. Uh, does the board have any questions from staff? No. Um, am I supposed to read this like this?

So, essentially, you'll uh go item four, new business. You'll read the title of the item. Oh. And then you follow the cues below. New business. Um, it'll be Nicole the Nicole 2025 debrief presentation. Um Nancy Smith and Leticia Latricia Beasley Day who's not with us.

I could just make a suggestion that we reverse the order of A and B with the um OIR report coming first. Latric Latricia is I believe delayed with some car trouble but intends to be yes I I think that's very doable. So, can um in light of that, can we uh please move on to item B, new business, the independent police roles auditor and responsibilities by Steven Connley, please.

Good evening, Acting Chair Damrell and and um members of the board. Uh I want to start by lodging a formal protest. I was expecting a little more time to settle in and and prepare, but if that has been established for the record, I will I will go ahead and move forward. I'm actually very happy to be with you again in in person. It's been a few months, but it certainly has been an eventful few months for your board in terms of some of the issues that have have uh attracted a lot of public attention and and uh different focus. And I know that you have been navigating your responsibilities and and the the very high level of feedback which probably the last few months has has been uh I would say the most intense since you started your work back in June of of 2023. There she is. uh one of the uh outgrowths of that I think was that a lot of people have have become sort of newly interested in in oversight issues in in the city of Modesto and wanting to understand a little bit about the model of oversight that you have and some of the the mechanics of it. And obviously your board is is a a very large part of that and has been on the front lines of of dealing with um some of the recent issues uh starting in the summer. But the the thought was that it would be useful for for me on behalf of the independent police auditor's office to just provide a refresher for the board and also any members of the public who are kind of newly paying attention about how exactly oversight works in in Modesto and and what my role as the independent police auditor representative is is all about. So with that uh if if you can thank you. Um so let's talk a little bit about first of

all who am I? What is OIR group? So OIR group was selected uh two and a half years ago as the independent police auditor for the city of Modesto. Um OIR group is a team that's based in Southern California. Uh there are four core members of our group and and my partner in Modesto has primarily been Michael Janakco whom you've seen depicted on the slide there and has been with you in person on a couple of occasions and I know he was just in Minneapolis with the with the Nicole group. U so every so often he he lets me out of the house without supervision. So I have been able to come and and represent our office on on several occasions. So, uh, we're obviously relatively new to Modesto. We started at the same time you did in June of 2023, but we've been doing this kind of work for a long time. We have been involved on a full-time basis in the the civilian oversight, the independent outside oversight of law enforcement since 2001. And although most of our jobs over the years have been and are in California, we also work in some other jurisdictions as well. There are several other states that that we have had um different assignments for of of various kinds. And so we hope that that experience and that familiarity with a lot of different models of oversight and a lot of different ways of doing things is is useful and we can bring some knowledge about the way we've seen different agencies make adjustments and and enhance their their systems and uh try to be as constructive as possible in in that regard. So, we are part, as the slide says, part of a what was is considered to be a hybrid model of police oversight. And again, I'm stealing the thunder of our Nicole people a little bit, but one I'm I'm sure one of your takeaways from the

conference in Minneapolis was that there are so many different models of oversight in in all the jurisdictions. And as as um Mike Janco and I have said many times, if there were a perfect one, if there were one that was just right for every jurisdiction, obviously we would have figured that out by now and everybody would have had adopted it. I think there are strengths and limitations to every model of oversight. And so there are a lot of factors that go into what works for a given jurisdiction. How did the model come to be and and what what are the key components of it? So I want to talk a little bit about that model as it works in Modesto. Um so again not to belabor the stuff about us. We do all kinds of different things. Um we we actually do internal affairs investigations at times for small departments uh who who want to bring in an outside group to do it. So we have a lot of familiarity with that. uh and sometimes we'll come in to do a particular project just for for a few months to look at the aftermath of a critical incident that has generated some concern. And so we'll do an assessment and a review and make a report on that. And there are some jurisdictions that we've had relationships with going back you know 15 or 20 years now where we do kind of annual audit functions and just provide uh different assistance to them again depending on the model and and what they need. Next slide please. So to talk a little bit more about the hybrid model as it works in Modesto, the the the model of oversight that the city has and that you folks obviously are a big part of is a a product of the forward together process that went on for a considerable amount of time. I know some of you participated actively in it and it had a lot of different components to it. But one of the things that it was trying to do was establish make some recommendations basically to

the city council about some approaches to oversight that that might be beneficial to the city. And a lot of different models were were considered the pros and cons of some of the different uh ways that different jurisdictions do it. And what the forward together committee ended up recommending and that the city council approved was this hybrid model. And obviously the hybrid is is got a couple parts to it. It's a combination and as you can see from the slide on the one hand there's sort of the the inside piece which is that actual there's a new level of transparency to some of the departments investigations into complaints of officer misconduct critical incidents such as officer involved shootings that so the model is designed to to provide a mechanism for a new level of access and transparency and accountability as far as that process is concerned. And then the other piece of it is that that and as I've said here a few times, we certainly know a lot about internal affairs investigations. We know a lot about policies and uses of force and and some different ideas for how police departments can and should be doing things differently. What we don't have that that you people are bringing to the the um process is the the the sense of this city, the priorities of the city, what's going on in the neighborhoods. You're you live here. You're residents. You're invested in the community in a way that that we're not not because we don't care or because we don't love visiting here, but we just don't have our finger on the pulse of it the way that you do. And the idea behind the hybrid model is it's fine to have professionals who do this for a living and have the experience and the knowledge about police practices. That's a valuable component. But for for the best potential contribution to oversight

there there ideally is also going to be a public um facing piece of it where where residents community members are contributing in one way or another. And the mechanics of that contribution are going to vary right from from place to place again depending on how the model is set up. Here you're you're as you well know you're able to provide input and influence to the department in a variety of ways. Your meetings are a forum. They're a platform for to hear presentations and to learn about different issues and different things that the police department is doing. I attend the meetings or watch the meetings every every month and I've seen a lot of very informative worthwhile presentations that the police have given to just shed some light on processes that they have and ways that they do things. They get questions from you and feedback from you and and that's again hopefully contributing to public understanding and and at times even given the department things to think about. And then of course there the reports that um that you your annual report that you put out which sort of distills your experiences of the year and and makes some recommendations to the department based on your insights and experience and things that you've learned. Makes recommendations to the department about how they might do things differently or better to be more responsive to to the the people that they serve. Next slide please. So uh again we we we've kind of covered this. I just want to focus on on my part because that's my favorite part. Uh to talk a little bit more about the independent police auditor role. You can see the key a couple things are really highlighted there and one of them is is the access. So, one of the major components to the the Modesto model is that the oversight the the um

professional oversight entity, the independent police auditor has access to confidential investigative files and records that are not available to the general public and are not available to you under the structure of of the the model here in Modesto. But the idea is we will the city will provide the independent police auditor with a window into these processes that are obviously very very important for in terms of effectiveness of police operations in terms of accountability for officers when they're accused of misconduct or engaged in misconduct and I ideally in terms of public confidence because obviously when the police are investigating their own issues. There's sort of a natural skepticism in in some parts of the community like really are that they're really going to do a bi an unbiased investigation when a member of the public comes in and complains about you know a partner or somebody that I see in the in the locker room every day. There's this idea that the police aren't ideally situated to investigate themselves. We've taken the position over the years that it's actually really really important for the police to be able to do that for a lot of different reasons. And the agencies that we've worked with that that we're most impressed with and that we think are the healthiest and contributing the most to their communities are ones that absolutely have their own uh standards of accountability, their own high expectations for their officers, and they've invested in processes that are appropriately thorough and objective and and rigorous. And when a member of the public makes a complaint to the police, state law requires certain things, but then it's up to the police themselves to really genuinely take the process seriously. And the independent police

auditor role in Modesto provides a window into that. We don't conduct our own investigations. That's not the way this is set up. We have done that in some places. But the idea here is the police are best situated to do that for a in a lot of different ways. They know their own people the best. They know their own policies the best. They know what they've been trained the best. And they ought to have on some level the responsibility for holding their own people to to the standards that have been set. Th those are the kind of the key concepts here. And we again, as much as we appreciate the the importance of civilian oversight and the outside perspective, we have have long agreed that there is a lot of value to a police department having ownership and doing a good job with these processes. So the idea is we'll we'll leave that responsibility in the hands of the police but we will provide a window into that some checks and balances if you will by not just expecting the public to take every hey we do take these things seriously. We did a great investigation. trust us that although they're they I'm sure they're very sincere when they say that it helps to have some outside mechanism to evaluate that to confirm that to question that to the extent that there are potential deficiencies in it and also from an outside perspective looking at it in a little bit of a different way. And again, the the a police agency could have the very best of intentions, but inherently, you know, you're kind of limited by your own perspective when you're kind of looking at your own investigation. We've often said this about about OIR group. If somebody came in and watched us for, you

know, a few weeks and and evaluated our work product and the way we do business, they would probably have some ideas about the the strengths of what we do and ways we could have improving that wouldn't occur to us just because we're too immersed in it. So, it's accountability, it's outside scrutiny, it's looking to see, hey, do they take these investigations seriously? Are they actually reviewing the body warn camera evidence, interviewing people, doing as much evidence gathering as they can to reach an appropriate conclusion? And is that conclusion legitimate on the back end, is it supported by the evidence? And then last but not least, on those occasions when uh there's a finding that yes, a policy violation occurred, yes, this officer didn't meet our expectations. is the consequence the the the resolution of that appropriate in terms of the significance of the discipline or whatever other intervention the department decides on. So Modesto has allowed that process to get an outside pair of eyes for the first time to look at it and to be able to either validate it or or criticize it and then share that with you and share that with the public in the form of of the reports that come out once a year. So just to reinforce the key terms, we don't investigate. The department investigates. Our role is to look with with very experienced, familiar, expert eyes at these things. Our role is to look at those investigations once they are complete to say, "Hey, we can tell you that this process is a legitimate one and and and they are appropriately rigorous and thorough and objective in how they handle these things. Next slide, please. So, scope of work is a phrase that I've used on on at this uh podium on a

variety of occasions. So, just to remind people um on on your board and again any new audience members, members of the public who are are trying to get a handle on how all this works. Our scope of work is set forth in the ordinance uh that that created your board and created the independent police auditor concept in Bedesto. It's part of my contract. It's available online. I was just looking at it yesterday. Uh it's there's a link to it on on your website. So pe any member of the public can get into the weeds to whatever extent that they want. And the scope of work is set out before the year even starts. These are the types of cases that that are going to be presented to the independent police auditor upon completion uh for the yearly audit so that they can be evaluated um in the ways that I was just talking about and you can see the different categories of case that are um under that umbrella. So uh last year's report for example was the first one that talked about the department's response to a couple of officer involved shootings. um any allegation of biased policing is going to automatically be part of the review because obviously there's so much sensitivity involved in that particular concern. So, if somebody makes an allegation that he or she has been the victim of biased policing in any way, even if that's just an a an added component to a complaint that has a few different other um elements to it, we're going to be getting that and have the opportunity to see did the department do an appropriately objective and thorough investigation because that's obviously such a sensitive concern. We've also set it up again with the city that that any allegation involving a supervisor because the concern there would be the higher ranking people who have the

power, have the authority, the concern is they might be less likely to hold, you know, so the decision makers might be less likely to hold peers accountable, higher level management people accountable than the the line level officers who are, you know, they're not associating with. So anytime a supervisor is involved, we want to make sure that those investigations are are are uh being again handled appropriately by the department. And then we take a random sample. We don't look at every single case, but we take a random sample of the remaining cases. And literally I will get a print out from from Lieutenant Clyber with a listing of case numbers. And a after we've we've kind of pulled out the automatic yeses, I will put a a highlight on the the third of the remaining ones that I that I am interested in in seeing without knowing anything about them and he will provide me with all of the information relative to that. So it's a se you know semi-random sample basically after the the um first three categories are removed. And then another big part of the um independent police auditor role which I haven't really talked about yet has to do with with use of force cases. That is another along with again complaints about officer misconduct. Anytime an officer uses force is a significant exercise of police power. It's something that the public is obviously inherently concerned about. And so the city set it up so that the department's process for evaluating the appropriateness, the justification, the the uh compliance with policy, anytime an officer uses force, that gets looked at through a protocol within the department, it gets reviewed by several levels of supervision, and if there are

issues, then those issues are going to be addressed. If it's a policy violation, it's going to get referred over to internal affairs because that was excessive force or you weren't allowed to do that. And if it was, okay, this isn't a policy violation, but we we we're looking at this and seeing things that are concerning to us. The tactics were poor, the officers didn't communicate well with each other or with the subject, and even though there's no need for an internal affairs investigation, we want to intervene. All the force cases are given that level of scrutiny. And we have the opportunity to again latch on to that process to evaluate it to look at its strengths and limitations. And if you think of the public reports that we've written in the past, our the basic takeaway in both categories has been the department absolutely takes these things appropriately seriously. their investigations are are credible, appropriately thorough, as rigorous as they need to be, and the outcomes that they reach are are reasonable. That said, in each of our reports, our first couple of reports, we have identified places where we would encourage the department to adjust this or that either in terms of the process or in terms of a specific officer. uh not an individual officer, I mean a specific bit of officer tactic or behavior or a trend that we're seeing. And so we make those recommendations that are intended to say, hey, the process is is a legitimate one. It's not that they're just, you know, throwing these things behind a filing cabinet and ignoring them. They're absolutely taking the complaints and their own internally generated investigation seriously. But that said, from an outside perspective, we feel like there are ways that it could be enhanced, refined, improved upon, and um

we're gratified that the department has has by and large been very responsive to that in our first couple reports. Next slide, please. So again, we were just talking about the annual report and it's this is a review of completed cases. Again, not investigative in nature, it's evaluative in nature. We're auditing, we're monitoring, we're we're evaluating what the department has done based on our familiarity with these these the the kind of the appropriate standard for for uh internal review mechanisms such as these. Next slide, please. So, what are the goals of the annual report? And again, that is definitely the signature piece of work product that is is part of this model as it's currently constituted. its transparency into the process, its accountability because now the department has to answer for its the the the legitimacy of its investigations in a way that it never has had to before 2023 because those investigations were confidential. Those investigations were secret. Those investigations were shielded from the department and we basically just had to take the department's word for it. And now there's a mechanism in place that there's an added layer of of accountability and scrutiny for the department uh in terms of how it is doing these things. And last but not least, and in some ways from a the perspective of being constructive and if one of the goals here is to is to make law enforcement in Modesto better, more responsive, more effective, then ideas about systemic improvement that are forward-looking that instead of saying, hey, in in February of 2025, I wish you had investigated that case differently, the idea is in February of 2026 or February, of 2027, you'll have changed your your

protocol for doing that so that the the product uh when when something like this arises again will be more effective. Next slide, please. So as far as your board is concerned, the the ordinance absolutely means for there to be a certain amount of interaction between uh the independent police auditor's office and your board. And of the the stuff that's up there on that slide, I would say the the simplest way to put it is that we really are there to at least in part to be a resource for you. We know a lot about this stuff. So when you have questions about particular aspects of policing, particular policies, particular recommendations that you're thinking about making to the department, and you want to bounce that off the independent police auditor's office just to say, "Hey, you're you're not part of the police department. You're independent. You do this in in several other places. Does this make sense to you? Does this sound right to you? How do you do do you think this this recommendation is is doable or are we missing something? And that's that's a perspective that that we're always happy to share. And again, if there are ever issues along the way where you're saying, "I'd like to learn a little bit more about this or that or can you tell us how it works in some of the other places that you work?" We're we're happy to be responsive in in that way as well. Next slide, please. And and here we are. Uh, board member Beasley Day, I hope you have had the chance to get fired up for your presentation because they switched the order on us so that we would be sure to have you here for the Napole presentation. But I'm certainly happy to answer any questions that that uh anybody has about about um the model here or this presentation.

Thank you, Stephen. Does anybody on the board have any questions for Stephen? I do. Hi, Stephen. I'm so glad that you um are here and I think that you've done a lot of good. There were a couple things though that I was a little disappointed about. Uh, one was back in the Modesto be did an article back in October of last year where they indicated that blacks make up 4% of the population but 17% of the use of force cases and that it's been this pattern for over 13 or 20 years or so. and I came to um the OIR to see if you could assist in investigating that or coming up with uh researching and having access to information that we don't to try and help give us a better understanding of that and and you guys weren't able to. And then the second was with the um our ad hoc committee with um doing our research for the ordinance. We again asked questions of the uh or in terms of uh giving us a legal opinion or something about the ordinance whether it was you know what what does the law really say about that and and there again I don't think we got the level of um answers or support uh that we expected or at least I'm speaking for myself I I didn't I don't think that we got the level of um support in terms of answering our questions about that ordinance that we expected from from you guys.

So, I'm happy to to respond to that. I I I certainly have always appreciated that your feedback and your interest in in kind of incorporating the independent police auditor's office into your work. Uh so, I let's start with the the um the issue of racial disparities. I know you and I talked about it at the time. We certainly talked about it with the city staff and the police department because the the article and the attention that was raised and some of the things that that the NAACP was responsible for certainly generated a lot of appropriate attention on what is a very sensitive issue. And we talked a little bit internally uh as far as city staff and the police department about what what are some options uh and what are some ways that we can address this. And I think that the the chief talked about it on a couple of occasions just in terms of some of the the options that were out there. And there are jurisdictions that we've worked with and around where they've hired uh professors to conduct an academic study and do data collection and do this massive number crunching. The reality is those processes are very elaborate and they're they're oftentimes very expensive and still they they they haven't found the the magic answer. I guess the the the um the disparities end up being uh hard to pin down to a specific cause. The disparities are real. The disparities are concerning. But there haven't been a lot of studies that have have um firmly established in any jurisdiction necessarily um what the the source of the racial bias or or if there is racial bias or if there are other explanations for the the numbers that that are out there. So, uh, if you'll recall, one of the things that I thought one of, the the the things that we participated in

and and that you, I think, were were largely responsible for was that February forum in the King Kennedy Center that talked about a lot of those issues. So, we've covered a lot of this ground. I am appreciative of your interest in what is a very concerning issue and if there is a specific role for us that that makes sense, we're always responsive to that. With regard more specifically to the ordinance issue, uh you said it yourself and that was the place where it kind of hit the the wall for me a little bit. You were saying you were asking you were interested in getting a legal opinion from me or from OIR group about the constitutionality of the ordinance and that is that's really more of a city staff issue or that we're not in the business of giving legal opinions about particular matters and the other piece of that was the ordinance which I know you ended up spending the the board ended up spending a lot of time and attention on it. It obviously overlaps significantly with police issues and with what happened at at the um protest days back in in June, but we um the the ordinance and whether the ordinance should be changed or not is really a city council issue and you made your recommendation to the council for the reasons that you made. We're our role is really more focused on the police side of it. It's like here is the law and did the police follow their own policies and practices in enforcing that law on that day as opposed to is this a legal law? Is it an appropriate law? Is it a constitutional law? So that's where we really refrain from getting involved at that level. But to I appreciate what you're saying. I know exactly what you're talking about and I hope the dialogue will continue.

Thank you. Thank you, Andy. Nancy,

um I do believe member Han was next. Member

I don't really I don't care have to be next. Well, notwithstanding what uh W member Wendy Bird said, I I have been in this from the very beginning from when we had poor together. And other than some procedural things and I think sometimes we lose sight of what our job is here because we're advisory and we are always looking backwards. We're not looking forward and that's the way it's set up. But I think the public may have a different view of that and maybe that needs to change some. I don't know. But I have been very very impressed with our police department and and your scrutiny o over that. Maybe scrutiny is a little not the right word, but but the things are working out pretty well. And I'm from the from the public's perspective of people I know, we're very happy with the police department. And this just makes it better because we're able to to be a little bit more transparent. And and I I love the idea that you come up with recommendations and some of them the police says police chief says, "Yeah, that's we'll do that. That's great." And I don't we're not going to do these three for this, this, and this. And I think that's that's what this board is about is trying to make make us move. And nothing is perfect. And there's always going to be because people are involved, there's going to be things that happen that we don't ever anticipate. But as a a member of the community, I I really am very happy with where we're going with it. I I think there's a expectation that we do more than we really do and that's where we get in trouble is when we think that that's where we go. But um so anyway, that's I've been waiting to say that for a long time, but I really

appreciate everything everybody's doing because I think we're we're doing a good job. Okay. I believe you're next, Nancy.

I I had a question about the types of cases for audit. You indicated a fourth uh of force cases. Does use of force for your review? And I'm not sure if it would be include an officer pointing a weapon at a suspect or a community member. Just I'm throwing this now. We had some discussion about this at the Nicole conference. Yeah. So it is not is it's not anything that I have seen and it's very interesting for you to ask that because a couple of the other jurisdictions that that uh we work with at OIR group have begun moving in that direction. Some more formally and substantively than others. But but that is definitely kind of the next frontier in terms of uh should police departments be capturing this information and evaluating these things when when they happen. I think that there has been a much greater recognition in national law enforcement that hey it's it's a big deal to point a weapon at some to point a firearm at somebody and there's you know lots of justification for that but it's something that the police should be accountable for. But believe it or not that's still a relatively new concept in terms of the the oversight infrastructure and the internal monitoring. Thank you. Um, member Bryant, you have a question.

Uh, I don't know if it's a question or just a comment, an observation. Steve, um, you work with a number of your organization works with a number of different uh, agencies in and uh, in California and I'm assuming beyond our borders. Um, do do you are you aware of another jurisdiction that you have a relationship with that has a system or process set up exactly like this one?

No would be the short answer. Uh, but I never stop with the short answer. What I would tell you is that that there are some similarities but interestingly enough that that there are little nuances that to to the way uh different jurisdictions do it. So to put it very simply, I would say there are probably six or seven jurisdictions where they have this hybrid model. There's some sort of community component as well as the professional auditing component. But even within those six or seven, the the the contents and responsibilities of the board and and of our office are different from place to place.

So follow up to that. Um, I don't know if you're willing to answer this or if you have an opinion on this, but how would you say this process compares to other agencies?

So, uh, we love all our agencies, just all of our communities. Um, what one thing I would tell you and in in all sincerity and I've said this in some different contexts, I have been genuinely impressed with with this board uh and the way that the city structure has worked. In part, I mean the the level of community engagement is is certainly on the high side compared to what I see in other places. Sometimes, you know, there is sporadic interest, a controversial incident will come up and so you might have double the attendance at a particular meeting, but the the regular group of people who who come to this meeting and obviously the the larger groups that came throughout the summer, uh, very unusual and it's I think it's a it's a tribute to the the relatively high profile that your your board has and the the level of community interest, which I I think is Great. So, I I would tell you that that this board's um work product and level of engagement, your ad hoc committees, your annual report, and the the extent to which your your efforts have resonated with the public uh are are certainly at one end of the spectrum.

Thanks. And I would say those expectations that I was talking about, if I think we're a little more seasoned now, I think we can say that's outside of our realm. If you want that change, if you believe the board should have more this, that, or the other, go talk to the city council because we we don't have that authority. We're this is our sandbox. And so I think that and that could possibly help the frustration of some that okay, it's not you guys. I need to talk to them about it. And and if if city council wants to change it, they can, right?

I believe that's why Steve was even asked to present tonight to kind of clear clarify whose sandbox is what, how the lines are drawn. Any other questions from the board? At this point, I'd like to open it up to the public. Anybody in the public?

So, if I could just throw one more thing out there before you turn it over to the public, if that's okay. I I just want to go back to what what you were saying, board member Bird, in I'm thinking about the the racial disparity issue and and uh I'm kind of remembering that process in that meeting in in February, which was which was not a um not a CPRB meeting, but it was I it was the night before a CPR meeting at the King Kennedy Center. I just thought that was such a good conversation and it was sheriff's office representatives and and the chief of police was was there and it was a really good dialogue. Austin represented your board, I think, on the on the uh the the podium that night. And one of the things that that that is, I think, an important takeaway is that first of all, the the the characteristics, the demographics, the dynamics of individual cities are very different from each other. So, it's hard to look at a a study that was done in in Waco, Texas, and find a lot of of immediate ways to apply it here. But one of the things that came out of that that those sessions and I think the conversations that that we had at various times was that if if the idea of a um definitive statistical study is daunting for a couple of reasons. One thing that that can be done and I think is a big part of what your board is all about is to say, well, we can't be sure that that if we hire a bunch of academics from UC Berkeley to study the department and all this information for a year that they're going to solve the the question of why those disparities exist. But what can be done is that on a community basis that that the the dialogue can continue and people can work to understand each other and to address hey why is this happening so much in my neighborhood or we didn't like the way this particular incident

unfolded and to have the police be accountable to people and to engage with people on more of a grassroots level and I know the department has has uh been involved in a lot of initiatives that are communityoriented and that I we've all heard about over the over the uh time we've been together that I think are very positive and I think there is absolutely a role for your board in that process.

Yeah, our chief has been really uh good about attending a lot of community conversations and things like that. I've seen him do more than than anyone and so I have to commend him on that. Um but again the the being out in the community, the conversations and different things like that did help. I just think that there was a community perception about what the um uh OIR uh group was about. Um that there was um more of an expectation that you would be um provide more information or resources about um the different issues that came up especially related to the biased policing and the use of force and systemic impact were some of the words that were listed in here,

right? that we felt that it related to all of that,

right? And and I totally respect that. Don't give up on me. Keep asking questions and and bringing things to my attention and we'll we'll try to be as effective as we can be in our role. And that's why I think the biased policing um emphasis that in in terms of the the um the the criteria for case review that we do, we're going to see all of those. So anytime somebody feels like they have been discriminated against and are willing and able to re to report that to the police, we give those very very careful scrutiny, we see all of them and we recognize the sensitivities and we've talked to the department about ways. Hey, this is a hard hard question to investigate and explore because so much goes into the you know the motivation subjective motivations of the officer that it can be that that can be hard to know. But are are is the investigation doing everything it can to to reach a a fair conclusion about whether this was biased policing or or something else?

And another thing that I think is helpful, the reports that Lieutenant uh Clyurn uh puts out because now they have it listed of the different types of uh reports and how much is used of force and all the different categories and what different types. So, I think uh public education is really important and and a a good strategy in helping to build positive relationships. I I think you make such a great point about education. And again, not to not to keep rambling on, but to that point, I know in the aftermath of of some of the articles and and some of the the focus that you brought to the issue, I know the police presented on demographics and and tried to explain, well, these were calls for service or this percentage of the of the arrests had to do with this or that with the point being that information and education that you're talking about. So, it's not necessarily everybody's going to agree and think, "Okay, we don't have an issue here anymore," but they're going to be able to assess it in the most knowledgeable way, and that's why the the information the department puts out is helpful.

That's very helpful. Okay. Thank you.

Remember how I said I was I was going to sit down? I I the only thing I want to say is as long as I'm standing here and just in the interest of efficiency they they put me on the agenda for you know a a a regular weigh in for for every meeting. So, I think I'm 5A here and I don't have, you know, any particular additional news to to share. Uh, except to say I had I did have the opportunity to sit with with Lieutenant Kber for a couple hours this afternoon and kind of begin wrapping our arms around the the collection of of materials for next year. So he gave me a feel for for the the universe of cases and some of the things that are in the pipeline and and that's the first big step that we take towards assembling and turning me loose in January to start doing my audit process. So I was happy to be able to come up and help with that. And that is it. I am really stopping now. But thank you for your attention.

Thank you Steve. Thank you. And at this point, I'd like to open it up to the public if anyone has any comments or remarks related to uh OIR and Steven's presentation. I'm out of turn. You close the public hearing and then I have a question on this.

Okay. I'd like to close public uh comment period now and take it back to the board. Did anyone have anything to say? I would like to I think that we need to do something have put together a little flyer or something that condenses what you said because the people that are concerned about that aren't here tonight and they'll be here next we next month maybe asking the same questions and here here's here's our role here's what we do and here's the independent auditor and just a three-page something synopsis of that so that we can keep that going instead of uh have something to give to them and then make reference to to this uh meetings on online would be very helpful. I I think that that that'll help even having them out out there that here's here's our role. this is what what our duties are and this is what the independent auditor does and just a kind of a synopsis bullet point thing maybe your PowerPoint type thing but I'm always a lot of times you you have a the meeting and you discuss the issue and the people that are upset about it or want resolve aren't here so I and it's our job to be proactive I Okay, thank you. That's good input, Brad. I think at this point we're going to move on to the next uh agenda item for new business. We're going to hear a update from our board members who went to the Nicole meeting. Tesha and Nancy

testing one, two, three. And Stephen, you're up like a preacher. Give me five more minutes. Give me five more minutes. All right. I wrote my stuff out. Ah, so for our community members, I had the privilege of attending the 2025 NAKO National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement Conference 2025, where oversight practitioners, community advocates, and law enforcement leaders and legal experts from across the nation gathered to strengthen civilian oversight practices and build safer, more accountable communities. The experience was both informative and empowering, providing tools that will help us continue developing our community police review board's capacity here in Modesto. I do want to personally thank my beloved city of Modesto for allowing me to go and represent us. Thank you to my fellow board members who couldn't go and allowed me to experience this year with Nancy and Nicole. Thank you very much. So some of the key highlights and takeaways that um were at the conference this year was strengthening oversight through transparency and accountability. These sessions emphasize the importance of clear accessible processes for investigations, complaint reviews, and data transparency. Many cities demonstrated innovative models that ensured community members understood how oversight works and how their concerns move through the system. My takeaway was our board can continue enhancing transparency by improving our public communication, reporting practices, and accessib accessibility of

our processes. something that you just mentioned um making it more um engaging for our community. Um another course uh a class that I went to was the power of community engagement which was really good. Um and a major theme was uh that effective civilian oversight must be rooted deeply in community voice. Workshops highlighted strategies for outreach, relationship building, and public trust, particularly among the marginalized communities who are historically been the ones who have had strained relationships with our law enforcement. Um, my takeaway from that was we uh as a community police reward must continue intentionally building trust through regular community conversations which we must start having um public education. We just heard that a minute ago and partnerships ensuring residents know that the community police review board is their avenue for justice and participation. we got to make it known. Um, another was, these are, of course, some of the ones I went to, trauma-informed approaches to oversight. Um, a lot of the sessions focused on trauma both in the community and um, officer trauma. Um, so how it shapes interactions and influences complaints um, and how oversight bodies are learning how to incorporate traumainformed practices in their interview processes. Um because some boards have investigators, so they're training their investigators about the trauma. And again, community communication. My takeaway from there was um maybe we should integrate trauma-informed methods

that can support fairness, reduce harm, and lead to more accurate understanding of um some of the critical incidents that happen in our community. Um we had our opening of the national best practices and police oversight. Um so city shared that they have independent investigations of critical incidents. Um strengthened use of force reviews. Um clear implementation of corrective recommendations. collabor collaborative but accountable relationships with their police departments. And my takeaway there was u Modesto can benefit from exploring which best practices align with our local needs and capacity as we continue refining and defining our oversight or our community police review board and the hybrid model that we have. Um nobody talked about hybrid models. I think you should put that in the next Snake um conference. Um also building effective relationships with our law enforcement leadership that is mucho important. Uh, our presenters stressed that oversight is most successful when oversight bodies and police departments maintain a working relationship grounded in constructive accountability, not adversarial conflict. And so my takeaway there was uh continued relationship building within our Modesto Police Department, which I believe we do have a good relationship with them. Um is essential to foster the transparency uh that the public needs uh from us and to foster our shared goals and the consistent

implementation of um the reforms. also um the role the equity social justice and the role of oversight. Uh so the conference center the reality that policing oversight is part of a broader movement for justice, equity and community safety. Oversight must pay attention to disparities, listen to those who are most impacted, and advocate for system level change informed by community needs. My takeaway there was our board must remain committed to equity and human rights as foundational principles guiding every recommendation and decision that we uh get to make. Um, one of the most relevant frameworks lifted up uh, which was on the last day of the conference for me uh, and one that resonated deeply with me is the AR Armstein ladder of citizen participation. It's a model that outlines the eight levels of public power and influence in government decisionmaking. Um throughout this there was a ladder that was presented to us um that talked about manipulation therapy. I won't go into all of it because it would be too much to read and we'd be here all night. Um but on that ladder it had levels of where um a citizen uh review board or civilian re review board would be at and what level we should be at. Um the bottom was a non-participatory uh level where it's uh built upon manipulation and uh kind of being a therapeutic thing to kind of basically pacify the community and not really

involving the community. Um another one was tokenism which was informing con consult consolation and placation. Um all of which uh I think I am going to go ahead. Yeah, I feel that right now to read it. Um informing uh states that um it acknowledges that informing citizens of their rights, responsibilities and options can be the most important first step toward legitim legitimate citizen participation. Um, too frequently the emphasis is placed on a one-way flow of information from officials to citizens with no channel provided for feedback and no power for negotiation. Um, meetings can also be turned into vehicles for one-way communication by the simple device of providing superficial information, discouraging questions, and giving irrelevant answers. uh not so much that we fit into that, but we're more about informing um than we have authority or power to make a decision. Um consolation is uh similar. It's inviting citizens opinions but not really uh processing forward with them uh to give them a true voice in uh what's going on with the police uh oversight um board or commission or whatever the name is or for in our case the review board um and then placation. So what they call that on the ladder was tokenism. Um which means that you have a board that is formed almost as if it's a pacifier uh to maybe a complaint or to positioning but you gave them no real

teeth. And what we should be striving for is citizen power where we are in partnership with our law enforcement in making decisions. um having delegated power. Uh being able to uh really work side by side as citizens who are concerned and are in partnership with our law enforcement department so that citizens have control and say in um how we move forward as a community police re review board. Um so that latter clearly illustrated that not all participation is equal and true civilian oversight must move beyond symbolic involvement and into genuine shared power. Um so based on our current structure authority and level of influence in Modesto I feel that our community police re review board currently exists within the tokenism category. We are informed, consulted, and occasionally heard, but we do not yet hold meaningful decision-making power. Our ability to review, recommend, and speak on behalf of the community is super important, but it falls short of true partnership or shared authority as envisioned in the effective oversight models nationwide and the learnings that we found out there. Um recognizing that this is not a critique. It's just a call to action for us as a board to clarify the work ahead of us and to align with what many oversight experts at Nicole emphasize. Civilian oversight must continually evolve strengthening its authority, independence, and power to reflect the needs of the community it serves. So, how will we support our work in Modesto? Um, my participation at NAL

conference will has strengthened my ability to examine and improve how we receive and evaluate our community concerns. hopefully by doing more outreach, being more visible in our community and to build trust and rapport so that the community has trust that we here on the board are representing them and that we are hearing them and we're out and we're not just sitting here um in chambers twiddling our thumbs and just checking a box. Um that we want to adopt best practices that will improve safety, transparency, and fairness. We do want to advocate for stronger and more empowered uh review board um so that the community will actually use us as a tool to be in communication with our law enforcement department so that we have justice for all. That's it. Nancy, take it away. That's on.

I would like to thank the city for giving me the opportunity to go to the Nicole conference. Um, it's an expensive proposition for the city and I really appreciated the opportunity to be there and learn. Um, and I would also like to encourage the other board members who haven't been to one of the conferences to try to make time to go. It is a big time commitment and while you're there, you're pretty much in sessions from 8:30 to 5. There is a lunch break. Um, but it's pretty intense, but it's very worthwhile. Next year, the conference is in Louisville, Kentucky. and it is from November 8th through November 12th. And if the city is able to fund um to board members to go again, I would just really recommend it to the rest of you. With respect to the Minneapolis conference, um, what I'd like to briefly focus on is the eyeopening range of oversight boards and agencies that we heard about or met members of. These range from first morning I was in line for registration and I met somebody from the Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission. They handle discipline. hiring, discipline, promotion, and work rules for their police department. The commission has full access to observe and review all department activities and all aspects of the operations of the police department. City of Cincinnati has a citizen complaint authority which

receives and reviews complaints from the public. The DC Office of Police Complaints investigates complaints, sends as necessary to an arbitrator, and makes a determination on the merits of the complaint. The Detroit Board is elected. And we did hear uh another panel that discussed election of board members or even appointment by city council district. Um Berkeley has you can imagine a police accountability board with nine members who are nominated by the mayor or the city council. There's also a director of police accountability. That board is authorized to make recommendations to the public, the city council, and the city manager regarding the operation of Berkeley Police Department. It reviews all memos of understanding between the police department and other local, state, and federal law enforcement. It recommends discipline based on citizen complaints when misconduct is found. and it even participates in the hiring of the chief of police. The Richmond board investigates citizen complaints and makes recommendations for discipline if appropriate. It does not have the final word on the discipline imposed. Many of the agencies that we heard from um employ staff. Richmond has one staff member. the presentation I heard from one of the New York attendees, New York City, their outreach staff was like 8 to 10

people. Um, and that was only their outreach staff. Um, so there's a real range of agencies, responsibilities, and authority. And the authority for each of these agencies is grounded in their uh enabling statute. During the first morning as we sat down for for uh the session, a participant from the city of Antioch asked me how our board handled complaints. When I said we didn't, she asked, "Well, what do you do?" And so that question and the various conversations that I had with other attendees, sometimes at lunch or standing in lines or around the coffee earn um and the various panels that I attended led me to review again the forward Modesto materials and our bylaws. And my conclusion was and Stephen addressed it this uh evening, our board is not really an oversight agency. We are set up to be a liaison between the community and the city and Modesto police department. Civilian oversight as you heard is provided by OIR. forward together indicated that it would be important that the re review board be able to raise community concerns to the city as well as to help dis disseminate information to the community forward together encouraged the city to build on the Anaheim model that they borrowed from to create quote a long-term structure for community engagement.

sort of between the panels or workshops that I went to at the conference and looking at our own uh materials, I came to the conclusion that if community engagement is our principal charge, this board needs to focus in the coming year on community outreach and that will require some money and greater flexibility in scheduling where our meetings are held. And although I think u community outreach is undoubtedly important, I think the board um should also be given access to actual citizen complaints with the names of the complaintants redacted and the officers names but not their badge numbers redacted. so that we could begin to have more of a feel of what's going on in the community, hopefully where it's happening and and see if there are any patterns that we can develop in relation to citizen complaints. Latricia and I both attended different workshops on community community outreach and engagement and came away with a lot of ideas. Um, Essentially what I gathered from my workshop was outreach is based on effective and multiaceted communication strategies. Based on what I heard, I believe that we should we need to devise a public engagement plan. We as a board need to be able to clearly present to the indivi individuals and groups we try to reach who we are, what we do, how we do it, and describe for the individual or group we're addressing,

how they can help with that. For example, one of the presenters was talking about their goal is to make their city police department the best it can be. Um we can try to engage as uh Latricia said with other stakeholders such as our public defenders office. We could create consider cocreating with the community a youth advisory board. We could cultivate institutional partnerships with for example criminal justice programs in the area. We we've said this at any number of meetings, but this board needs brochures or the flyer that Brad mentioned, a banner, possibly a know your rights flyer, a board member card. People hand you their cards if you want to talk to me about this more. Can write this down here. We need a table if we're going to attend community events. And we need a social media presence. We need funding and an experienced person to assist us. Either city staff or short or a short time term separate hire from city staff. As a board, we need to go where people are, which may mean taking our meetings to the community as we did do in February. There were a lot more specific ideas that that we could both share, but I'll leave it there for now. There were so many interesting panel discussions uh during the conference and one in particular um was about AI and oversight. And that discussion

leads me to recommend as an agenda item a presentation from MPT about what um AI it's using at during the panel they talked about it can be used um writing reports case management uh analysis of data uh actual technologies like facial recognition drones license plate readers that sort of thing. And that as board we should know what AI our police department is using. And it I think it would be of interest to the broader community as well. There was an interesting um panel led by Stephven's coworker Mike Janako about the effect of officer created jeopardy in evaluating the appropriateness of deadly force. Um and that that dealt with uh among the among the factors that are are considered in evaluating the appropriateness of deadly force is whether the event indicates the involved officer engaged in decision making that created jeopardy for the officer and or third parties. Um there were various discussions as literature pointed out on use of force principles and we learned that some police departments in this probably fairly limited I grant you um include a statement regarding the san sanctity of life in their use of force principles as well as a requirement of mandatory use of deescalation techniques. There was an interesting discussion about state preeemption of local jurisdiction of police oversight. Um we heard about this

particularly in relation to uh a new Florida state law which assures that only law enforcement agencies will investigate reports of misconduct by law enforcement officers. And it moves, the new statute moves civilian panels under the control of Florida police chiefs and sheriffs similar to the the what the sheriff's department has created. Um uh at the other end of that spectrum uh was civilian oversight of citizen complaints. For example, in Minneapolis, there's a a civilian deputy chief that handles all um citizen complaints. And one North Carolina police department made the entire office of professional standards, which I would be aid all civilian, which was not the most popular thing uh that chief did. Um other presentations of interest included one on mediation of of civilian complaints which is used in LA uh in DC, Chicago and Phoenix and there were they published some very interesting interactions and and what happened at the mediation and of course the one they gave us they all ended well for everybody and the officer and the complaintant understood where the other one was coming from. And so that seemed an interesting um concept. The amount of information that we received and a lot of it was online and I printed out like this much was a bit overwhelming but clearly all worthwhile. There you go.

Thank you, Nancy. Anybody on the board uh have a question for Okay, Ken. Um, first of all, thank both of you for um the presentation you just made. That was uh very informative and um I would like to request if you're comfortable with it, a copy of your notes so that we can uh evaluate them as board members. Yes.

Okay. your notes from the conference and and the notes that you used in your presentation, Latricia. I think um you know there's a lot of information there and I'm not that good a notetaker and so it would be helpful to me to have a copy of it if that's permissible under the our authorization. Does that John is that is that copathetic? Yeah. Go ahead John. Yeah. Uh Nancy and Latricia are able to to put something together. We could send it to you, Simei. Yeah. So the distribution could be to Simei and then she can send that out individually

because a lot of it was the each class you could download their notes and their presentations. Is it or if there's even a link that you have to the presentations? Can we just send that we can share that? Well, that's a lot. No, I might we might have to look at that first to see if there's a copyright copyight. Clearly I we can send you these five six pages. Yeah. The other is massive and it's only available on the website for I think a limited time

be downloaded but there were a couple of things I downloaded on juvenile justice issues that I thought that subcommittee might be interested or It would make sense that anything spoken tonight is part of the public record and that can be shared, right? It can be viewed again. Yeah, that's that's true. But the material that's prepared by by Nicole and other presenters, it could be subject to copyright and not sure

disre his his organization probably would would share their material, but I don't know about the others. Yes, we're very uh collaborative in that way, John. Yeah. Uh but yet I think it it's a fair point. I think Nicole wants the information to be out there. Uh you know it's not proprietary in that respect but and I think there are probably mechanisms for getting it but it absolutely makes sense to kind of figure out how to appropriately do that. Yeah. Because we have access to pretty much everything they presented. So that's how we were able to save it and download it right there,

which they encourage, right? They want Yeah. It's on the schedule when you sign up for your class. All the attachments that are going to be there are there. Well, whatever you send over, we'll confirm it with the city attorney's office and then we'll share what's what's possible. You can also have my notes. I have a couple questions. Sounds like it was really a great experience and thank you for for going. I can't wait to go to one of those maybe next year. Um has the um do you ever see any city managers or city council members attending those?

Yes. Uh we met an Antioch city council member who actually is on their community police review board. Uh so yes, there are city managers there from various places. Yeah. I think our chief went to one, didn't he? Oh, okay. So it might be helpful to to um to uh have the city manager or city council member or the police chief attend some of those. You went? Yeah. Last year, Brian went with us, our city manager rep over here. Scotty went. Yeah. Even went. Okay. There were over 300 people there. Yeah. Okay.

And and there were a lot of law enforcement. Uh the other question has to do with the complaint form. Um because the way our complaint uh process works right now, if someone wants to make a complaint to us, they don't have the we don't have the mechanism set up for them to do that. They make the complaint, and correct me if I'm wrong, um I guess through the the complaint form through the police department and then that goes to the city manager, but it bypassed us completely. Yeah, that's is that how it works? That's something we can discuss. It's not on the agenda. Oh, okay. Okay.

But we did talk about that last time and we should put it as an agenda item. We talked about doing that. Yeah. If I if I may make a suggestion just regarding some of these ideas and various things like that, I would just ask you just to kind of think about those, remember those because we are going to be discussing the CPRB's board priorities in the next couple months and possible followup for those for topics.

Okay, at this moment I'm going to put it out to the community. Anybody have public comments? This is the appropriate time for public comments. Not seeing anybody um bring it back to the board. Any final comments? Seeing none, I'm going to move on to uh item C. Consider the cancellation of the December 17th, 2025 Community Police Review Board regular meeting as scheduled.

Wow. If we were to do this, it would move our next meeting to January 21st, 2026. And then I would I was just going to provide just brief context. It's regarding um these it was mentioned at the last meeting by a couple of the board members. I know board member Grant and uh Chair Solorio had mentioned it. So that's why we placed it on the agenda for your consideration tonight. Any any of the board have any comments? works for me. I I actually have a uh party at my house for my granddaughter's soccer team that night.

That I'm going to go to whether you have a meeting or not. Are we all invited? You're invited. I I'm going to heat the pool, so bring your bait inside. Oh my gosh. Um, any other comments? Anybody in the uh public would like to make a comment? This is the appropriate time to make a comment. Seeing nobody, um, I think we should put this to a u action making an action item out of this and and see if anyone wants to make a motion. move we cancel the December 19th meeting and reconvene in January.

December 17th. Have a second.

December 17th. Do we have the correct date? Do we have a second? I'll second the motion. Yeah. All in favor say I. I. All those opposed say no. No. Did you just second it? Want a discussion? You want a discussion? No. I I just I I don't think there's valid reason for canceling it. That's my personal opinion. That's why I voted no. I'm sure I was outvoted. So,

I'm sorry. Could I get a clarification? I got to first remember Han and then I thought I got a second from Ken. You did, but then you voted against it. I did, John. That's fine. Okay. Just want to make sure. Got to have a second to vote on it. Okay. At this at this point, um, this was staff comments and reports. My, uh, notes say independent police auditor update. That, did you already give that?

I'm good. If you're good, happy to talk more if anybody has any other questions. I think we don't want that. Okay. Um, staff comments and reports. Scotty, anything at this time like to make a brief announcement? No. Uh let's move to item number six, board comments and reports. Um item A, policy goal eight, review of force to minimize likelihood of death resulting from use of force. Anybody have a comment to make?

Am I on? um we we didn't meet uh obviously Nancy was out of town uh for part of the month and uh we just uh didn't have the opportunity to meet. I do want to make a comment though about u some of the advice that we've been given uh regarding these committees and um I know u one of the topics I think for January Scotty correct me if I'm wrong is going to be uh how we structure these committees going forward and um you know what we need to do in order to be in compliance with the Brown Act uh relative to these committees and um you know I think uh it's been pretty clear to me that we've not been complying with that and so I think whatever we do um you know regarding this subject in the future uh we need to be in compliance with the Brown Act and I'm sure John will keep us on track regarding that but um it's my understanding that these committees have to be of a limited duration and um obviously the ones we've had have just gone on for an extended period of time. um and really doesn't have a specific uh issue that we're trying to address. And once we've done that, then that committee should come to an end. Am I right with that, John?

Yeah. And we'll we'll discuss that on the the next item seven. Okay. A future agenda item. Yeah. Okay. Back to the board comments and reports. Oh, back on Nancy on um our our policy goal. We did meet during since last meeting I think we met with Chief Gillespie and Lieutenant Fiber and had a very good discussion for a couple hours about um various policies and procedures that we wanted to discuss. I thought that was prior to last meeting. We did.

I think it was prior to last meeting. It last month. Okay, take that back. Um, policy goal number one, improve relations between the community and the department. Trish, do you have any update? Uh honestly the only thing I can share honestly is our committee from subcommittees and other directions and scheduling we've met. We have not met since January or February. So I feel it's not inappropriate to say we concluded the research we were going to do. We shared what we had and we're essentially dark. So look forward to restructuring in January.

And policy goal number three reduce arrest youth arrests particularly among the Latino youth. No report. We spent most of our time working on the ordinance uh information. So, we don't have a the ad hoc. Okay. Yeah.

And uh board comments or reports? Anyone have any other items that they want to um mention? Any any things they've done in the community? Hearing none. Um the next item is our uh future agenda items and that one of the items uh Ken was alluding to is the overview of the ad hoc versus subcommittee. Anyone have any comments to make about that in addition to what Ken had to add? I I can make a comment on that. And so that is an item that we have um tentatively scheduled or planned for in January. And just reminding the board that um in January there you know it's kind of the b business to be conducted for the the rest of the year starting with election of the chair and the vice chair and some of those things um and this is going to be included at as well as right now planned for the you know just a reminder kind of a refresher on the brown act. Yes, Ken. I

I think um also when we um have the discussion relative to future agenda items, I think you know from what Latricia and uh Nancy shared with us tonight, there's a plateful there that uh we can parse out and make agenda items out of. And I think um you know, I think my request to get their notes is going to lead to a robust discussion of that. So, I think it'll be a healthy discussion.

Thank you. Yeah, I think that that's a a good thing to think to think about some of those things. We're also going to be talking about setting, you know, the board's priorities. Um, in January, we're going to visit that's going to be kind of a, you know, a big like a kind of a more robust meeting to kind of cover some of those topics. So, taking uh December off, I think that's an opportunity to give you some that time to digest some of that information and then come back in January ready to discuss some of these things for next year. Okay. Um, that brings us to the end of the meeting. Everyone have a wonderful Thanksgiving and we're not going to meet in December. So, have a wonderful uh holiday through the new year and we will see you again on January 21st, 2026. Thank you.

Happy holidays. I won't see you