Police Accountability Board Agendas - Regular Meeting

I'll call the Police Accountability Board to to order. First, we're we're gonna talk about the approval of the minutes from the October meeting. Has everybody had a chance to look at

them? Yes.

Anybody have any changes or any concerns about what's written in there or anything that needs to be added? I don't think we saw anything. Okay. So, the motion?

Motion to approve.

Second.

Yeah. All in all in favor? Aye. Okay. No discussions? No nays? Okay. The fine discussion on the annual report, our executive secretary, Sarah, has been working hard at that and also try to reformat it a little bit to meet the needs of the readers and take out some of the, I want to say, extraneous material. But also, it's looking more in the draft phase like the ones that the academy said they thought was better.

Yeah, the Maryland Police and Training Standards Commission, when we were there, talked about condensing because some are just containing way too much information and then people are just not paying attention after that and they're just like So you see changes. Condense it with the information that you and that's required and put that in and not a whole bunch of

And there is some blanks there, but that's to get wait till we actually publish it. It will be current as of that time period so that we'll have put everything in there. It will not cover probably the last couple of days, which that will be added later on if we have to if it's something important that comes up. But does anyone have any concerns or any additions or comments about the draft report? I'd say we press ahead with the draft as we're doing it.

Well, have

Oh, I'm sorry.

So when I look what you sent, so there's still the compliance or recommendations part that's blank?

We're talking about the recommendations. And the compliance, talked about Bob, Kennel, and I were discussing the fact if it's a self assessment compliance. Are you meeting what the law is requiring? So if bill six seventy, are you holding your

Yeah.

Quarterly meeting? Have you held your all your quarterly meetings? Are you satisfactory in that? You've appointed your members to the ACC and you're doing everything that you're supposed to be doing according to the bill and just kind of grading your sat you're satisfactory. You've done it. You're in compliance.

Well, not getting too much detail, but yeah, have you done it or not? And if and I think it's also the time where we can bring out limitations. If we can't do it, is there something impeding that? So it gives us the ability to reach back and say, Well, it's true. We didn't do that, but this was the impeding factor, money or training.

But it also gives us an opportunity to go back and work with the county on taking that impediment out, just like the budget issue that came up at the time, and also getting the stuff that we've got now to do a better PR with the handouts and everything. So I think as we bring those things up along the way, those will be assessed, I guess that's the right word but make sure we're doing what we're supposed to be doing. Because if we don't, we could be traveling for years and never know if we hit the goals or not. I think this would give the not only the executives within the county, but the cities that we represent a better feeling. Are they doing what they're supposed to be doing?

You know? So was my thoughts on that. And I think as we do it, it'll help us.

So the recommendations, are we going to talk about recommendations? Or how is this done? I don't to say I approve this. I haven't seen what the last two sections are. Okay.

That's why I say any recommendations, I ask that they had been sent to me. Like if you thought there was something we weren't doing, were doing

Or need to do.

Or need to do, you can still send them to me, and then they will get put in the recommendations. But try to get them to me

by Have just you not gotten any?

I have not gotten any recommendations. So

I'm going

put my comments back.

Just Bobs. I'm sorry.

Go ahead.

ANNE Is this the area where, like last year, we talked about the trends that we saw and the need for more education for county deputies or whatever? As soon as the legislature's over, there should be some kind of training for them when laws change so that they know. So that's where that goes.

Yes. If you have something that you want put in there, then make sure you get it to me by December 1 so that it can be added in there. Because the annual report this year will probably be sent the Friday before Christmas this year.

Because it has to be done by the thirty first, but as me and Sarah talked, we're going to put on the current as of. So if there's something happens between that date and the beginning of the new year, we sort of have that flexibility to add that later. But it will be current as of that date.

Okay. So in terms of identifying trends, I know last year we were able to identify it because we had the ACC report each quarter. And we were able to to do that. Am I on target with saying we didn't have ACC reports at every quarterly meeting?

Had one you had an ACC report at the October meeting, but everything that I put in that was for the entire year because I knew up until that point you guys had not received a quarterly report. So the information that I provided to Kate was at, you know, from the beginning of the year. From what I could decipher at that time trying to go through and pull the information that I could, So it wasn't just like, okay, this quarter this happened. It was more this was from January from what I can tell.

But that also shows that we need a process and that's what Sarah's putting in there to keep us on track. But also, what was that impediment? The impediment was that we weren't given the briefing every quarter. So we know we're going to put those, I guess, measures in place to make sure that doesn't happen again down the road for the next, year.

So we'll be able to identify trends for the next quarterly report probably, if there are any. I mean, might not be any. But if there are, we'll be able to identify it because we'll have that quarterly information in front of us. Exactly.

As I did before and as I'm doing now, I keep an extensive complaint log from the ones the PAB receives as to the ones that we receive from the law enforcement agencies that will tell me one the agency the date, what type of complaint it is, what they're complaining about to see, Okay, we're getting in my office now, that's what I'm working on now. Okay, out of this many complaints, complainant know, this many complainants said in their complaint there was they were discourteous. There was discourteousness. Or if there was use of force, how many complaints we had. Because sometimes a complaint will have multiple allegations.

So I have to note them separately that just because maybe we had 35 complaints, well, that could be 75 allegations for all we know because there could be three or four different allegations of something.

Are you also tracking the geography of them, the geographic location of some of the complaints? Like, is there a pocket that comes from, I don't know, Mount Eyrie, Newmarket, and then they're pretty much spread out all over Before agency.

Yeah, I just do it by the agency and what they cover. But yeah, no, because I got Brunswick, I have Thurmont.

That is a good comment.

But that is a thought that could be done going forward.

Especially if we see a trend like Brunswick, if you see 10 or 20 and they're all in a certain area.

We don't see that in Thermot. We know something's going on.

Right. And I think that's something but I haven't seen an extensive area that you're seeing those type of things. But it is something we could look at.

But how do we I I wouldn't even know how to pick up a trend because I haven't seen anything this year to look

for trends. Okay. So like last year in the report, there seemed to be a couple of traffic incidences. And when the AACC looked into it, what it was is that the police officers and I can't remember if they were sheriff's deputies or police officers were not aware of the new law that changed. Like, went into effect July 1, and then something happened in August, and they just weren't aware.

So that was a trend that we kind of picked up on in our recommendations last year, that somehow we know that there's supposed to be education when new laws come, but we wanted to know a little bit more about how that was happening so that every officer out there who's doing traffic stops is going to have the same law in mind. They're going to have the same things going on. And so that was one of the trends from last year. So it was education and re upping people on what happened in the legislature.

But it does make a point that when we have these quarterly reports, what are we looking for? And what should we be asking for? And I think that's been in the back of my mind. Are we asking these? Are we looking for these type of responses or feedback from that? Because if we're not looking and it's a checklist type or whatever in our heads, you know, location or officer, if we see the same name popping up two or three times or in a certain area. So those are the things we should be keeping in our mind. These are what we're looking for.

I will say something about you say officer names or something, and sometimes, you know, heads don't give it out because I will give you a prime example. Let's say you have officer a who, yeah, does what he has to do to get by, you know, does 20 calls in a week and maybe has one complaint. You have officer b who's all gung ho, works overtime, does a 120, you know, calls a week and then gets more complaints. Well, you're you're it it and and what officers work in a certain Right. Area.

So those are things that you have to be care that I do kind of pay attention to too because there are times that I that maybe that's come across and you can't. You have to look at it that way. Each complaint is separate and different.

But we also just got to be mature enough and also unbiased to look at it with open eyes and say that's what's happening. I'm sorry.

Two things. I like the idea of keeping track of where the complaints are coming from. It could identify problems. But we'd also have to be careful that that doesn't create data that stigmatizes certain parts of town or certain neighborhoods or certain parts of the county. The other thing is, do we keep information on officer characteristics?

Whether we're male or female, older or younger officers, that could be interesting as well. And I think the risk of stigmatizing there is probably less. But that could steer future interventions if we discover that the older police officers need more training or the younger police officers need more training in certain areas. So, that might be useful. And then I have to nitpick. I'm sorry, I'm a professor. Page three, administrative charging committee. It's supposed to be comprised, not compromised. The ACC became comprised of all new members, not compromised. I just spotted that. I can't let it go.

So she gets a B minus.

I'm wondering

I probably typed something and it went to the first word that And wanted when I'm looking at something and staring at it, I'm just

But now I can sleep tonight.

I'm as guilty as yours here.

So I wonder if instead of doing age, you could do years of service, too. And that may be a different way. And I understand there could be some older people who maybe retired from the city and went to the sheriff and is But a bit maybe another way, of doing age, that's just an idea.

Years of service.

Maybe I years was just thinking in Europe, they often put the older police officers at sporting events because the troublemakers are younger and they want these young potential hooligans to see their dads and their moms rather than another young guy to compete with.

I think those are valid points, but we have to be open minded when we look at it and not try to narrow down our but when you've done the case, then we could pull data from it. After you've made a decision whether guilty or not guilty, you're unfounded. But then go back and say, Okay, what is those trends that we're seeing? And not upfront when trying to make a decision one way or the other, but it is something to look at.

But I think with the information, we could also spot trends in which officers have complaints made against them that turn out to be baseless.

So I think this is what we need to do with the ACC is make sure that they understand our concerns and maybe what is valuable or maybe not. You know, is it is it worth it? And I think we can look at those in there.

My my my suggestion is going to be the things that you're telling me now. Email them to me. Yeah. So that we can make so that it's something that I can look into to see, one, if it's something that is in the scope of is this And okay to then once I have that, then, like, at the January meeting, it's something that I that I can have the ACC chair say in his update, we we will be tracking that. So if all the suggestions are good, but if they're what you wanna do going forward for, like, next year, make sure you send them to me so that I can find out, again, what we are able to do and because I do I also you know like to keep the law enforcement agencies included and involved you know because I don't want to tarnish our we have great work But

I like

to see how what their thoughts are on it also. So just please send me whatever you have.

Anybody else?

Yeah. So well, apologies. So with all of that right there, the IT professional, when he comes out, and then I get into the records retention. And how do we abide by that? I'm assuming and assumptions are dangerous that the ACC has a PII compliant way of storing everything, and that's adhered to by the county or whatever the case may be. If we start adding extra data points, there's other restrictions or other concerns that come into play.

And that's where I will have to meet with records retention for that too. So that's why I say if you send it all, that way I can find out what I can do, you know, because certain records I can keep, who's a custodian of what, and there from there. So, yeah, that's that's a person I will have to include.

Thank you.

Wait, I just

Wait.

Sorry. But I did have a question. The last meeting when the ACC, when they were doing their report, they talked about how there were some charges that were founded. And I guess there was a recommendation by the ACC that something would happen, whatever that was. Do we ever know that that something happened?

We've asked that question before.

The until

Adjudication.

Until adjudication or it's reached final disposition, which some of them may have not at this time. So if an update can come further down the road, it will. But I mean, if they say they've made recommendations, that doesn't mean technically that's as far as it's gone at that point. We have made a recommendation and it could still be ongoing.

But that is part of a feedback loop that we've we've asked before and that we probably need to keep, if that's important to us, see if the recommendations are being taken.

Well, I guess why even have the entire process if no one follows what the process is?

But individual can say, I don't accept that and I want to take it to trial, which we've not had. So there's an assumption that those things sometimes there's already been action taken for one reason or another.

But how do we know that?

Well, it is in the filings, which the ACC has that they review. But when the recommendation letter comes, it it sometimes it says that the person's been already counseled, but this is now the next step in that process.

And and at the quarterly meeting, like, at the last quarterly meeting too. And I don't I can't remember if it was in our report because I don't know if we had the information at the time of the quarterly meeting. But I think if I'm correct at that meeting, it might have been maybe two complaints where an officer you know, there there was a recommendation for an administrative charge and if okay. Maybe one officer accepted, but at this time like, we have one pending a trial board.

Yep.

So I I know there's one complaint out there that the officer did not

Right.

Accept their charges. So it's pending a trial board. And until we get that information, it's just still sitting out there. And I can't give you any more information than that right now.

Or

they can't get any more information than that right now because it hasn't reached final disposition.

But I think that goes back to your comment about the partnership with the agencies to make sure our relationship is there on a professional basis so that we will get that feedback when we ask for it, whether it's been taken, like you said, if that action has been taken or not. And that will be for the ACC to ask and then, you know, give it to us if that's what we, we think is important to us. But I think your comment is is fair because at the end of the day, how do we know? Well, we don't know, but we're assuming if they don't take it, then they go into trial court. And like she said, there's only one because if they don't set the the punishment or or they come back to the ACC, but we've not had the we've not had those.

I don't think we've had those interactions like that or feedback that they wouldn't accept it. They've been from what I saw, they've been very accepting of the recommendations by the ACC back to the law enforcement agencies. Am I right?

Well, that doesn't answer my question. I don't expect you to answer the question. Guess I'm just a little confused. We're supposed to oversee this like, be the person. Couldn't give you one trend to make a recommendation on because I have not seen anything that I could even possibly figure out a trend. And then the officers are sitting here. To me, I almost wanted to say, I think I wrote down the thing. It was three admin charged. The reports said three were charged. But I have no idea what happened to those three. But is this something this board should be concerned with? If it's not, I'll drop the comment. But I felt like this is something that we should be overseeing.

So one of the I hear what you're saying. And one of the new pieces of the new law that I think came out in 2023 or 2024 had a mediation piece in there. So that if the officer doesn't like what the ACC says, he gets offered mediation with the other participant. Or if the participant, the complainant mediation talk is participant. If the complainant says, we don't accept this, then mediation is offered.

And so that's before trial board. And that's to kind of like because that heals the community more. So when I was director in Howard County, we did that with the PAB and I guess ACC through Howard County. I don't know because we worked with the sheriff's office and the chair of the PAB. So I don't know how that came about. But that's just one more step. And then I would report that the mediation had been held. So there was a report mediation had been held, but I couldn't say anything more than mediation was held. That's all I can tell you. And that went in my report as the director of the center to the PAB and the sheriff's office and then to the Maryland state folks up in Sykesville.

I had to report to them too.

Mediation. Yeah, mediation was out so that we wouldn't even know what's going. Well, except that

oftentimes when the mediation was held, if it was the complainant that wanted the mediation, they were usually pretty satisfied. Because usually it's a misunderstanding, and all they really want is to be heard an apology and a heartfelt apology if it was a disrespectful situation. Now obviously if it was something more grievous, that's different. But if it was just something that you just felt like you were disrespected by the police officer, and when you said that to him he gave you grief, then that can be handled in mediation for sure.

Unless

I'm misunderstanding what I'm hearing, I think what we're essentially kind of circling around is potentially looking at a maturation of the ACC process and how the updates happen.

Maturing in our process. So I think that's what you're trying to say. And it brings up a good point, and I think we've said it before, but in different terms, that we would like to have that feedback loop to see if we're making an impact. And that's what we're all looking for. Are we doing what the law says we're supposed to be doing and it's bringing an impact and change, right?

So that definitely should be part of

the recommendation. Yeah,

the recommendations and the invoice. That's what you're saying. Right.

So please, when you get those emails from Sarah, respond to them because that's the only way we're going to get the material in there that we want and that we want to express what the board has done or not done and what we want.

And anytime anytime you have an idea or you can just make sure I get it so that I can address it.

So will we see it before we get sent to the

I will probably send it out to you guys a few days ahead and say, here's the final report that's going to go out. If anybody sees anything that needs to be changed, you'll have a deadline on. Make sure I have it by here.

So all edits, Kim, need to be

in by

Yeah, that's right.

All my spelling errors need to be corrected. I do know what it's like.

Yeah. So the report doesn't have to be voted on by the board. It's just written by you and the

It's written by the chair and the county attorney technically. But I write I generally write it with the help of the chair and legal reviews it to make sure and adds any edits or changes that she feels that need to be addressed or she correct she she tries to correct my just straight to the point writing going, if you let me write it, it'd probably be a paragraph. And and she she helps me make a lot bigger than that. I'm just like, here's your numbers. This is what

you want. This is what you need.

So yes, that's how it's written. But I'll make sure that you get it a couple days before it goes out in case there's anything

It's a team effort.

Need address before it goes out.

So if that's the last

I have a question. Do we know after all this outreach that we've done this year, and it's really the first time we've done a lot of outreach, we had a lot of information tables at a lot of events, Was there a measurable increase in reports?

Well, we're looking at reports as a measure, I think we're looking at informing the public that there is a process, that whether they use it or not

I haven't

seen I it haven't seen Have we gotten more complaints since we've done this outreach? Do we know?

I think this year.

And this is going to be our this is our first full

year

with the F with the FPD on board. So it's kind of hard to measure that from part of the year last year being this is our first full year. Yeah. I mean, we're we're a little a little more over what we were last year. But then again, like I say, we've we've now had another department for a full year. So I'm not see I haven't, like, seen it. Oh, you know, we did these events, and then all of a sudden, they were I did not see that at all.

Okay. That's kind of what I wanted to know. So it's really not measurable at this point. Got it. Thank you.

In addition to putting in the report that we went to these events, I know we were in the streets, we were clicking, right?

Yep.

Is it worth putting that into the report or no? That we reached 1,000 people or something?

We did public outreach and a roundabout number. So just showing that we were there. That we were there and that we did that.

This year will be like our first full year

Full year. Of doing outreach. Correct.

And Okay. We just got to remember that everybody within your communities, we have those events that we can do that. And it is worth it because every time you tell someone, they tell other people in word-of-mouth that there is a process. And we are doing what we're supposed to be doing. But but the biggest thing are we informing the public that they have a a venue that they could go to the to complain. Not that we're saying go complain. We're just saying you do have a way to do it and that it'll bring about something.

And I think at both of the events that I attended, I know it in the streets event, people were just like bawled over there. Like, we have this in the state of Maryland? Are you kidding? How do we access this? Where do we find out information on this? And do we have it in other counties? And yeah, it was really I thought it was really good.

I found the same at Pride Day. And I'm sure everybody else who did an information table had the same experience. They were like,

oh, cool.

So if we don't have any more comments, we'll move on to the discussion on the amending the rules of procedures.

Who did not get my change to the first patient? Because I just made a correction

on the

Thank you for sharing. Number oh, just on the first one. I'm sorry.

Right.

Number three, I reworded it a little bit. But everything else stayed the same in what I sent. That was just the change there.

So the other all the other changes that you did that you suggested is staying the same. That's that's the only one. Okay.

Okay. Everything else That's the only thing I've changed since I sent it out. And that just it's make sure I am getting the complaint and the chair is getting the complaint to and determine because generally I'm the one that looks at it determines does it meet all our criteria share it with the chair explain this is why it does or does not meet the criteria and send it on. If I were just to receive it myself and then I am for some reason not in this position to I don't know who would be the responsible for party. It would supposedly be the next person, but I don't know.

I wanted to be able to take out any any fences or or anything that would hinder that process so that we would have two eyes on it or three eyes on it to be able to say, That's that means instead of someone maybe pigeonholing it, thinking about tickets out of the position, but maybe the other person or the next people might not be as open minded about sending these to where they need to go or looking at them. They might just say, Oh, that doesn't meet the criteria. Then we're doing a disservice. We're trying to make sure we've a partnership with our executive secretary that when it comes in, we're looking at it from both sides and making that decision, teaming on that to either press forward or say, does it meet our criteria? I think that's a it gives us the next round of appointees, you know, the opportunity to press on with that instead of being impeded by it.

Anybody got anything else? So I do. Section eight, subsection A, the very last sentence, ACC appointments are for two year terms. A member of the ACC is the PAB chair. PAB chair has a three year term. Should we specify that, that the PAB chair is there for three years as well? I know it's a little nitpicky, but

And here's and here's the problem. The PAB bill bore the PAB bill changed the chair's term to two years because

I take my complaint back.

Because of that number. I, you know, originally back when I had it before I said these numbers aren't going to match up and you're gonna end up somebody's overfilling a term. So if you change these to two year terms then you're matching those terms. So that has been that was corrected in council vice president Bucket's amendment.

So

When was that? July?

Oh, yeah. This year. Summertime. So that means Bob will be here for two years

Yeah. Mhmm.

As the as an ACC member and not the chair? Or

He'll he'll be

Two for both.

Yeah. He'll be Okay.

Just wanted

to make sure that there wasn't like some weird disconnect there.

Yep. Nope.

Years create

another problem. Yeah. On the as the PAB chair and then two years on the ACC.

Thank you for the clarification.

No problem.

For the back to the part that section one part three, does what does the law say who should receive the complaints from the PAB?

The law says the PAB receives complaints. It doesn't really specify how. It just says. So the PAB receipt would be a complaint comes through a PAB mailbox. So we then determine, okay, how are we gonna receive the PAB receives it, but they have they have an admin an administrative person.

So we at the beginning decided, the best way and I was I like to say, I've been trying to talk to other counties because every single county is different. So it's the board chair that is supposed to, you know, make sure I think that's what it is. I don't I can't remember off the top of my head. Make sure that it gets to the agency within three it just says that it has to be to the agency within three days. So we then as it went before, it would come in. I get it. I get it through the PAB mailbox. Then that's why I say I review it. Does it meet all our terms? And then it goes from there.

And then I keep the complaints, and I have redacted complaints to where if any member wants to come in and review the redacted complaint, you can come in and redact the complaint. But there because there's no secure method of sending them to everybody, we don't do that. And I did find that we are one of the only we are one of the few counties that even send it through the chair first. A lot of them just get it and send it over. And then there's counties that they still just send it directly to the law enforcement agency. Have

you ever decided has anyone ever decided that it would not go to the agency? That's what I'm getting at it. If I was a citizen and I submitted this, I think I'd want my citizen board to make that decision that goes forward as opposed to someone who's employed by the county.

And that was the intent when the law was made.

So that's why asking

If this submit, the only time that it doesn't go to an agency the only reason it wouldn't come be PAB applicable is if it doesn't meet what if it doesn't meet the cry the the criteria in the beginning. If right now, if I get a complaint that if a citizen sends me a complaint that is either one, before the time of the law or two, that is for the Maryland State Police or three, I've had or if you get one for Mount Airy, but it's on the Carroll County side. That is not does not fall under the PAB jurisdiction. I do reach out to that complainant saying that our county will not handle this, but I have taken the courtesy to forward it to that lies law enforcement agency. We just don't have jurisdiction over it.

Yeah. Now if I mean, and I'm not I'm trying to think of something trying to have an idea of what somebody complain could complain about that, you know, we wouldn't. Like, I mean, back, you know, if, like, somebody calls and complains about the sheriff or the chief of police, we have no jurisdiction over that. We cannot do anything. I do reach out, let them know.

Here you go. It's against we we don't have jurisdiction over that for a complaint against this person. You will need to go here. I I try to inform them where to go, But for a majority of them, the only reason they're not PAB is they don't it just doesn't fall in our jurisdiction. So do

get some from the agencies themselves. They send them

to us. Well, the agencies themselves, if they complain directly to the agency, then yes, we will get that.

So there is two different ways. So she could get it from either the box, the PAB box, or from the agency itself.

There's it just at this time, the amount of people that are filing through our website is not a lot. They still go directly to the agencies. And that that is that's I think that's noted in the beginning.

That should be part of

our conversation. And that's, again, with getting your word out there, too. So that's something to think about for next year. But we really haven't had

you do a wonderful job. And this is not I just want to make sure that the citizen board makes this decision of that goes forward and not that the county employee. So is there a way to rewrite that? Maybe the Police Accountability Board chair will determine with the assistance of executive administrator or something like that.

That's why

I said it says and because Well, when I

read that, you both are making a decision. And I don't think that's correct or should be the way it should be. I don't know if anyone else does. Just Point

Point point.

So I

just want to clarify what you're saying so I understand it, is that you're saying that that should be reversed. It should say the board chairperson and with the assistance of the executive administrator of the PAB will determine whether the complaint is forwarded. So just reverse that. Is that what you're

Yeah.

It's something similar. Right now, looks like both of you make that decision. And I don't think we should be doing it that way. That's just my opinion.

Right. Well, and I agree with that. We had that conversation. Yeah. Is there an objection to reversing that? And I know that does a great job and you get it in

But you're box right. To get You're saying the person that comes after me may not have a legal background to know because I'm sure I don't know.

You keep saying that.

Are you

planning on leaving? You keep saying that, Sarah.

Someone in the South offers me a great job with a lot of money. It was nice for me, you guys. Okay. Whoever wants to go, I will find you again. I'm just saying, you know, because no, I'm not always gonna be here, you know. Won't be here for I don't I won't be here forever, but just, you know, I I understand your point in that and turning it around because, yes, it's one thing that I that I am able to help with it. But going forward, if the next person that may take my role doesn't have experience and that it may not know as much and that's that's probably when they'll go rely on their legal person also.

So so would that change?

But if if you want that reversed, it like, the the the board chair, with the assistance or with

In consultation with.

In consultation.

It's going be

in consultation with executive, administrator

of the team.

Is there any other

Everybody comments or anyone to say anything about that? Is that okay?

I have a motion that we

No. You we we can make the changes now, but

you can't

make a motion

to

pass it until January. Alright. I'll adjust all the changes and then if we're determining this is the wording we want, then in January we can

I'd also realize that we've had two documents here that we need to be pressing. We need to be providing feedback on and getting the getting it fine tuned outside of here when it when she sends it to us so that we're, we're going through every line, that we are able to give her the feedback. By the time we get to the meetings, we've got a pretty polished product.

One of the questions I asked Sarah when I first came in was, is there a way for us to all get everybody's emails, names, and phone numbers so that I know that at the last meeting, we talked about it. And I know Kim and I had some conversation. But I wasn't able to have conversation with everybody. And so I'm hoping that everybody agrees that we could do that and then Sarah could send it out. Is that right?

Here's what I'll say. It's one, for me to ask permission for members if they mind their information being given out. But having a conversation, you know, with more than one person and, you know, adding, That's why everything is blind cc'd and business wise, you start violating open meetings act. That's why that has been avoided to not do that. So you have to do

it at the meetings in an open

the fine tuning of it, but It's like could

message Bob Yeah. And say, hey, maybe on the meeting, can we talk about this or I have this idea? Or even if you were let's say you did talk to Tim about it. Hey, Tim and I were just discussing. But because that's only two of you and you're letting the chair know, so we're we're not you just wanna watch what waters you're getting into.

So my suggestion is if people are okay with everybody having that list, it's just in case but not a thing for let's because that happened previously. You know, there was something that happened, we don't want to be in any violation of that. That's why we're very careful about that.

I'm aware of the Open Meetings Act.

It's not filing that we're editing our paperwork administrative piece of it. Uh-huh. And I think when we get to the board, we're actually yeah. We like that or not. You know, it it I think you've said a couple you sent this out a couple of times to us. Right, Sarah? The rules and procedures

We've made amendments.

Correcting as we go along. Couple. With

the limited time, sometimes we don't have the time to go all the way through it. In our first look, if we bring up a recommendation and it maybe is way off course, you know, here we would spend a lot of time just on that one piece of it, you know, we don't want to do that. I would think we were impacted if we are more knowledgeable of it and we've already worked through those things.

That's why I just like if if it all comes to me, I can get it all in there or I can make sure everybody else has it

Right.

And then everybody's reviewing it and I'm getting everybody's information. And then I'm making sure it's distributed properly, and that I'm keeping us in compliance.

And we keep ourselves in compliance and also keeping ourselves informed to what the next meeting, what we're going to be doing. And we're we're gonna try to be better at that, I think. I think with informing the public, informing ourselves, it's gonna we're gonna be able to do more and and be more impactful, you know, into in the process. And I think just like you said about the info feedback, you know, we've been talking about that for a while, but I think now we're at the point where we can start really looking at that and trying to get that type of information.

So continuing on with one and three and the proposed changes about in consultation with or whatever, how is it that you envision this change? Because you said that complaints should go forward basically with the with the with the sign off of the board. Right? I'm I'm putting words in your mouth with the the intent, the spirit of what you were saying. So are you envisioning that a complaint comes in today, let's just say, and then tomorrow we're meeting to do it? To have some

sort No. Never said the board.

Just the board chair. Okay. That that that's

I I feel it could be the board chair and the vice chair. I don't Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No. It doesn't matter. It could be either one. I I just felt that the board should make that decision. You could tell him everything and tell him to make that decision. I just think as I'm a citizen and I understand that I don't want a county employee making a decision on my complaint.

Who's accountable? Who's responsible? Yeah, yeah.

That's all. I mean, she's going to say, this doesn't mean it, whatever. But I just don't think we should have it written out that she is making it. Because it really says right here, she will determine. Her and him will determine what will be moved forward. And we

can switch that, but it goes to the it would go to the board chair because he has has county laptop and he says that's your information.

I want

to make sure that we're very clear on that because otherwise if we input it in there that says the board collectively, we're going to start playing these games.

We may want to say because if it has to be three days

Three business days.

And you're out of town for a week, It may have to fall to the vice chair.

The laptop. It does. Have steer meetings.

The other section specifies if he's unavailable for whatever reason, then I have those powers Yes. Until

It would it would default to

Okay. It

would default to the vice chair. Mhmm.

Okay. With that with that Okay. Anybody got any other comments or recommendations that we can put a present on? If not, our next meeting will be on Wednesday, 01/21/2026. And hopefully that we'll we will have published our annual report and and have some good data that we can actually start looking at talking to the AC about, you know, and also the, you know, the site what we what we want from them.

And I think it the good thing is is that with the chair being on the ACC, you yeah. I could I can give you that nod and say, I I think it's covered without exposing any information that we shouldn't expose. Right? So yeah. And ask some of those questions that we're we're looking for or get answers for some of those questions later on. But I think as we mature, we're gonna get that process down. So anybody have any further comments or concerns or anyone? Sir? Yeah.

Doesn't look like it.

Sarah?

No. I'm done. I'm done.

Miss Kendall? I said thirty I said thirty minutes.

Yeah. I yeah. We were trying to yeah. We thought it was gonna be easy, but but

tell me thirty minutes.

Yeah. But but it does show that I I think we you know, we should really really look at the documents that Sarah sent in, especially with these in the last quarter of the year, but so that we can we can help her and the chair out, whoever that might be, to press on and get our concerns as a board in there written down. We're already streamlining it a lot, and we're hoping that it'll be a good product at the end of the day and that it'll prove to us and to the public what we're doing here and what impacts we've made, or at least what we're trying to envision that we've made. And with that I got a motion.

I'd like to make a motion to adjourn.

All in favor? Second. Second. Assert. Okay. No.

Said, yeah. Let's go.

Thank you.

We're adjourned.

We're adjourned.