Community Police Review Board - Regular Meeting

coming out tonight. Um, it having reached the hour of 5:30 p.m., I'm calling the September 17th, 2025 Community Police Review Board meeting to order. Just a couple brief announcements. Um before proceeding I would like to provide the board members some guidance on how to use the technology at the dis to speak. You will need to use the mics when which are activated by pressing the talk button or push button. Uh you will also need to wait for the chair to acknowledge the speaker before proceeding to talk. Um will the clerk please call the role?

Member Beasley Dick. Member Bryant present. Member Burn present. Member Christensen present. Member DeL here. Member Grant. Member Smith. Member Han here. Chairman Zoro here.

All right. Up next is a declaration of conflict of interest. Do any of the board members have any conflict of interest pertaining to items listed on the agenda? Okay, seeing none, we'll move on um to public comments in person. Uh as noted on the agenda, public comments will be only in person. Zoom will still be available for viewing and wordly translation. Uh does anyone wish to speak on any item under public comment? Please note that there are no public comments for items there are no public comments for items 5 through 8. This is for items not on the agenda and you have three minutes to speak. Anyone addressing the board is asked to follow the rules of decorum and the rules of decorum are posted at the entrance of the chambers, but I will also be going over a few of them for you tonight. Um, please be respectful of all presenters, board members, staff, and members of the public. Please refrain from clapping other than following a presentation. All speakers are encouraged to state 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 the board meeting. Time limits for public comments is three minutes but may but may be limited at the discretion of the chair to manage the business of the board. Speaking over others or interrupting while others have the floor is not permitted and cell phones should be turned off or shall be set to vibrate during meetings. And again, if there's anyone that would like to leave public comment on any items that are not on the agenda

tonight, um, which is including the annual report and, uh, direction of the mask ordinance 4-23.02. All right. I apologize. I didn't see that on the agenda. I thought that was only a public comment. Uh, the mask part. Yes. Okay. So, opposite. Yeah. So, if there's going to be any public comments in regards to the mask, we'll wait until that agenda item. Okay. Thank you. I apologize. No, no worries. Um, but if there's any other comments on items not on the agenda tonight for discussion, uh, ple please feel free to come up and speak.

Hi, my name is Priscilla, uh, Modesto homeowner, concerned citizen. Uh, I want to first thank you guys, the CPRB. Uh you guys give your time and energy and heart to this. Even though the city hasn't given you tools and the power to be effective, your dedication deserves some recognition. So I appreciate you guys. Uh but I also need to be clear. The way this board has been structured makes it powerless and that is by design. Chief Tilpotsy and the city have turned what should be a vehicle for accountability into a delay tactic, a performance to silence community voices rather than elevate them. We've seen it repeatedly. Brandon Gilepsy primes both city council and CPRB, steering conversations and outcomes by meeting with them prior to public meetings, often shaping what can even be discussed. When data is questioned, legal analysis is declared off limits. The board is left in a gray area, unable to move forward without real findings and independent judgment. What is this body left with besides rubber stamping? Even more concerning is how much sway the chief of police has over the flow of information. By meeting with both council and CPRB ahead of time, he sets boundaries of the convers. He sets the boundaries of the conversation and frames what reaches the public. I ask you directly, is our local government supposed to be guided by our police department? What are the implications when law enforcement has that much influence over what the community can know? That undermines not only CPRB but public trust and city city leadership as a whole. The irony is the community members were told to trust this board as a tool for oversight. Yet the city ensures you cannot provide it. If your recommendations are not grounded in data, if you are blocked from analyzing policy, then they are not recommendations at all. They are opinions boxed in by city limits. That is not accountability. That's obstruction.

I urge the city to stop treating CPRB as a symbolic body. Instead, give it it the independent authority and resources it needs. That includes allowing real policy analysis by independent legal counsel, not just city attorney whose loyalty is to the city and not the community. Without power, this board is little more than a performance. But the community sees through that per performance and we will continue to name it for what it is. A tactic to delay justice and silence accountability. Thank you. Thank you, Steve. I want to start by you guys can hear me, right? Yes. Um

I'm assuming you're just having a good time and your weird smirk is not directed at me. Um anyhow, um I just want to say I 100% absolutely agree with the previous speaker. Um nothing personal against you guys, but it really is just a show and it's not a very good one. I recently, um signed up for Netflix, so um I can watch Trailer Park Boys. Um you know, if I want to be entertained, what we want is a real body that really does things to keep police accountable. Um, I'm just gonna go with you're a nice guy and your face stuck stick sticks that way sometimes. It's really awkward though. Um, anyhow, I noticed that you guys still have these dudes sitting right here. And I do want to remind you despite your personal ideology, despite his control over what you're allowed to do, there are indeed lots of people in this community who feel extremely uncomfortable. You probably noticed I started shaking. feel extremely uncomfortable. By allowing these violent thugs to sit where they do, you are ensuring that far fewer members of this community, okay, not everyone is as stupid as I am. If I end up going the way of uh of of was it Ed Stark because I say too much. Okay. Like I don't know if that's going to happen, but these people have like literally publicly executed people. Why are they sitting there? Why do I have to be within 10 ft of this guy? Explain that to me. It's wrong. And I hope that you members of the board will take it to heart because you're supposed to be serving this community. Okay. The other thing I want to add that pertains to what I just said and also the previous speaker, um you could very very easily be offering um the public the uh chance

to speak during public comments uh via Zoom. We only started doing that for because of COVID is the council's excuse. But if you put a little tiny bit of work into that, use the resources that we pay for, use the talents and the knowledge that your trained staff has, it wouldn't be hard and nobody is buying that. I So I I I very strongly urge you to take steps to include this community and those include not having these men. I'm sorry I couldn't accept your uh Facebook invitation, Brandon. I'm I hope you'll understand that you're not my friend and I I'm getting tired of being stalked by you and your boys. They shouldn't be sitting there and we should be able to share public comments from home. A lot of people in this community deal with uh like disabled conditions of all kinds. And some of that means some people are not courageous or stupid enough to come up here and speak truth with this violent thug sitting there smirking. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Steve. Uh, next speaker.

Hi. Uh, Ray Ruiz. Um, Trevor Sever's dad. Uh, longtime resident of Modesto for 30 years, but we recently moved to Ribbon. They were happen happy to be out of Modesto. Um, I think this whole CPRB is here due to my wife Darlene who I think fought endless hours to get something like this here, but after a couple years or how long we've been here and and we've rarely missed a meeting, it just doesn't seem kind of piggybacking on a lot of stuff. It just doesn't seem like a lot of stuff's happening. I mean, and Maybe I hope everyone on this board is frustrated because it doesn't seem like anything gets done. I mean, in my opinion, this is not the CPRB. It's not the community police review board. It's the PRCB. It's the police review the community board, and that's how it works. So, hopefully some more things can get done, but I've given you guys a couple years, and I don't think anything's happened. In honor of Trevor Sever, thank you.

Thank you. Good evening. Um, my name is Madison Condit. Um, I I do agree with the the past speakers and and before I get to what I wanted to say, I do think Zoom comments are really important. Um, we all understand like we're always working. People have to work and at 5:30 it's hard for a lot of people to get here. I'm blessed. I know a lot of the people who come here are blessed to be able to be here. But, um, making it more accessible, there's nothing wrong with that. And, you know, at least putting the effort into, um, having, yeah, having this meeting be more accessible, I think, um, is a good idea. Um, I wanted to bring up an incident that I had witnessed um on Friday the 12th on the corner of 11th and Jay uh right in front of Traces. Um, I watched a MPD officer give a citation to an unhoused man who if you spend any time downtown, you you know this guy. Um, and the citation was for what I heard being described as um digging through the trash can. He told the the officer told demand that the next time he was seen doing it, there would be um an escalated consequence, but I couldn't make out what exactly that was. I just knew that there was going to be some type of escalation. Um and you know the I don't not necessarily that it matters, but there was no trash thrown on the floor. This guy sadly is always in the same places looking in the same trash cans. Um, I've never seen him be harassed um for that by a police officer. It's the first time I'd seen that. I've been working downtown for 3 years now. And I know that these things probably happen when

I'm not looking, but it was just the first time that I had seen and heard a police officer give a citation for what was digging through a trash can. And um I was able to look up what the um what exactly the ordinance was. I think it was point Well, I I won't say it because I I don't exactly remember, but um the fine was no more could be no more than $500 and um and or jail time no more than 6 months. Um I mean, obviously that's like a horrible thing to do to somebody who's experiencing homelessness, right? But I I guess I'm curious first of all um how the police officers in those moments calculate how much each person is going to be cited for. You know, you're going to get cited $50, you're getting cited $200. How is that calculated? If that can go all the way up to $500. Um and then also, is this something is this a citation that's being more enforced now? Is it one of those things that lies dormant then the whoever is in charge says, "Hey, let's look for this thing and um start writing more citations for that." I don't necessarily think he would answer any of those questions, but maybe that's something that you guys can ask because I don't know if if all of these different organizations and people are are working to help the homeless community and then you have police officers giving citations for digging through trash. I don't know that just seems like it's they're not helping each other. So yeah, I just want to bring that up. Thank you.

Thank you. Um you guys don't have to, but since it was about the police department, do you guys want to respond or anything? No. Okay. Sorry. Um if there is any other public comments um for like right now. Yeah. Oh, go ahead and just come up.

Thank you. Hope everyone's having a good evening. I know we've been so caught up with the matters that will come later in the agenda, misconduct, June 14th, ordinances, all that, that I feel like we've hardly had the chance to really talk. I've kind of missed you all. Um, and I know I've mentioned in this chamber before that I have the privilege of teaching government and economics in this city. I truly do live my dream job and I'm very lucky to be in such a position. Uh, and thinking about that, I actually wanted to give a little econ lesson here tonight. Unlike my students, you don't have to take notes, but you might want to. You see, I was talking with a student last semester, and during lesson on personal finance. I had an assignment where the students were asked to balance a budget. That's a skill that every person needs in life. It's amazing how many adults go through their entire life without any budget sense. But I digress. I was working with a student, top of my class, made short work of any assignment I gave them. And this assignment asked them to balance a budget, accounting for all the things that they might need to live a good life. And this student was struggling, and I mean really having a hard time with his assignment. And I had never seen that having been their teacher for quite a while. They said, "Mr. Drobnick, there's just not enough money. I I want to go to MJC next year. I need money for textbooks. I I want to move out. I need money for rent. And if I move out, I don't want to be dependent on my parents. I need money for healthare. It's all it's so expensive. How do I afford it all? I want to spend things or spend money on things that make me happy, too. I don't want to just meet my needs. I want to live. Mr. Dropnick, how do I do it all? So, like any teacher, I offered to review their work and give some constructive feedback. And I thought, oh, they're probably spending too much money on their subscriptions. It's, you

know, the video games or something. But no, if anything, they were spending too little on joy. What I found was more shocking. They were spending 48% of their budget on guns. 48% of my paycheck. If I spent that on guns, they'd call me crazy. But when the city of Modesto budget, we call it the fiscal operating year budget for the city of Modesto. Imagine that. So why do we need to spend 48% of our budget on the police? They have not earned our trust. Why should they earn our dollars? Many of our elected officials have been running victory laps saying no homicides in Modesto yet this year. When crime is down, the cops get more money. When crime is up, the cops get more money. Now, I recognize this is a recommending body. But is it not alarming that there is not more discourse in this chamber during these meetings about our embarrassingly bloated police budget? Surely 48% of our funds could be spent somewhere better. What about healthcare? What about education? What about housing? Anytime you see an unhoused person on the street, that is the fault of our misallocated funds. The money is there. The money is right there and that needs to change. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Laurana. I am a concerned community member and resident of Modesto. Uh, sorry, wrong public out too, but okay. So, um, I want to thank the board for hearing out community members at these meetings. Um, I also want to take this opportunity to make visible and dispel a certain narrative that has been floating in the public discourse which has taken place over the last few months both inside and outside this chamber. Specifically, the narrative that people of color and everyday people in the community who are informed of our rights and possess a baseline understanding of how power, privilege, and oppression operate in society are biased in our perspectives. The implication being that our input is therefore questionable, illegitimate, and invalid. I vehemently disagree with this assumption. I want to be very explicit and name that white men in positions of power and influence are also biased. The insinuation that white men who work with law enforcement or in law enforcement are somehow impartial objective experts while people of color and conscientious civilians are not is racially biased, deeply offensive and unequivocally false. I encourage everyone in this room to think about the ways in which we all may have unconsciously or not uh to varying degrees accepted or perpetuated this faulty narrative. I make explicit this unconscious bias in hopes of rooting it out. Just because someone wears a badge or has fancy credentials and gets their opinion legitimized in the newspaper does not mean their point of view is neutral. I reject the notion that being biased is reserved for black and brown people. I reject the notion that the police are objective participants in this process. I reject the notion of neutrality when it is wielded as a weapon to diminish the legitimate lived realities and experiential knowledge of everyday people who bear the brunt of

oppressive policies written by the powerful, moneyed, and privileged. Every single person by virtue of being uniquely human is biased. The weaponization of the concept of bias needs to stop immediately, especially from those who benefit from several centuries worth of institutional and systemic bias. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any other further public comments on items not pertaining to what's on the agenda?

Good evening. My name is Efron and I'm a member of CV Bipok. I'm one of the organizers who put on the June 14th ICE out of the Central Valley protest and I'm here to urge the board to recommend the city council that the anti-masking provision to municipal code. Um I'm sorry. Uh so for that comment, I feel like it will coincide better with the agenda item that we have later on tonight um on the discussion about the ordinance. So if you don't mind waiting to to give that comment, but if you have any other comment about anything else, please feel free to continue. That's okay. I'll go wait for the other.

Okay. Thank you so much. Sorry about that. Yo, what's up CPRB and Modesto residents? Um, so look, I know I can't talk about what's on the agenda tonight, so I'm just going to talk a little bit about American history. Uh, let's roll it back. 1940s LA, the zoot suit riots, dudes from the Navy beat up on Mexican kids in sharp outfits, and the cops were like, "Yeah, those pants are definitely the real crime here." So they arrested the Mexican kids. Like, bro, imagine getting cuffed cuz your drip game had too much RZ. 1960s civil rights marches, peaceful protests, people just walk in and cops go, "Unlawful assembly. You're too rich and melanin to be in a straight line, homie." Boom. Straight to jail. 1970s loitering laws, aka if you're brown, poor, or young, congrats, you're loitering. But Karen standing outside the country club for three hours with a Chardonnay. Totally chill. No biggie. 1990s, 2000s, New York's stop and frisk DLC. Nine out of 10 stops were black, black people or Latinos. Basically legalized vibe checks. And then a judge was like, "Yeah, this is racial profiling. Stop it. Bad cops. No donuts for you. Curfews. Oh man. Supposed to protect the kids. But somehow only the black and Latino kids got stopped. Meanwhile, suburban white teens are shotgunning natty lights at midnight. And cops are like, "Boys will be boys." Masks. Don't get me started. The OG anti-mask laws were made to stop the Triple K. But who actually got hit with them later? Uh, my black and brown homies. Talk about cringe. That ain't it, chief. This is why vague laws are the the cop's favorite weapon besides a Glock. It lets them cheat and exploit the game until

the new patch notes drop. So, yo, shout out time. Uh, let me give props and mad respect to written history, especially Wikipedia for giving us endless case studies of the same is. And hey, I'm not talking about what's on the agenda tonight. Nope. But I'll just say history doesn't repeat, it rhymes. And right now, Modesto's dripping the same dropping the same verses we've all heard before. And trust me, this track is a massive L. So, I'mma hit the the dislike button and unsubscribe. Thank you. You have anyone else?

Hello. Good evening, committee. Um just a couple of things. Uh I just want to emphasize stuff that has already been said by other community members. Um I think this uh committee really needs better um independent oversight uh and more um actual teeth in holding um our uh MPD accountable for their actions. Um the stakes are quite high. We're talking about people who have lost their lives at the hand of MPD members. Um, and these people have not yet uh these culprits have not yet faced real justice um from our legal system. Um, for example, at the June 14th protest, the ISO protest, there is video evidence of officers pulling up on people with unmarked vehicles and weapons and taking them Gaspacho style to jail without giving any reason. There was no conversation. Um, and it seems I've also seen uh several times officers harassing unhoused people um and arresting them unfairly. Um, that is not uncommon um and not un known knowledge. Um and there seems to be a lot of a benefit of the doubt for officers um and scrutiny of community members for their intentions. Um when we are just speaking about the things that we are observing um our agenda is making sure that we are safe and our community members are safe. Um, and the MPD, I can't speak to their agenda, but it has been pointed out they get a lot of funding. Um, so perhaps they might be a

bit more biased when they have more money and power to lose. Um, I also want to add that I think Zoom comments um online would be a good idea. It makes it more accessible for our um disabled community members who perhaps can't make it to the meetings, for people who are just getting off of work or who don't have transportation. Um I think accessibility is really important in making sure every community member is heard at these meetings. Um also perhaps more investment in a better publicity for these meetings so more people know about them. Um I don't think most people in Modesto know we even have a committee police review board. Um, also the website is kind of hard to navigate and it's hard to find the agenda. Um, so perhaps a better um more accessible website would be uh great as well. Um, that's all I have to say. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Um, I've heard the comment about the Zoom a few times tonight, so I just wanted to say what I believe is true. So, John, if you can chime in real quick and tell me if I'm right or wrong, but I believe the the Zoom public comment stuff that comes down from the city. Um, so council voted on that and they took away the public comments over Zoom and that goes across the board for every board that's open like this. So then in order for it to be um reestablished to our board, I'm I believe the city has to do that. But we can definitely talk about any special requests to allow our board to do it. But the original thing was broad across the board for all boards from the city. That's that's my understanding.

Are you guys allowed by the city and by the feedback on that? Yeah, I think that is something that we can talk about in like our next annual report meeting where we can we can say like this is something we need to, you know, bring up. I appreciate it. Thank you. Um, is there anyone else in the public that would like to speak? Thank you.

All right. Uh, good evening. Um, I apologize. I don't have anything super prepared between school, work, family obligations, and just trying to have a life. So, uh, bear with me. Um, I am a student at Stan State. I'm a history major focus on a minor in political science. Uh, I'm to not to toot my own horn, kind of disgustingly educated with, uh, history, uh, Marxist thinking, capitalist thinking, democracy, and all that stuff. So, um, uh, just to say, uh, I heard earlier today, um, that the, um, Modesto City budget goes nearly 50% to the policing, which is honestly insane to me. Um, to quote, uh, somebody who's probably not wellliked by a lot of people here, uh, Markx, he says, uh, your material conditions determine your reality. and hearing that 50% of the budget of from Modesto, the material conditions are going to policing, that tells me that um the city values more enforcing um and keeping the people down as opposed to actually lifting people up. um the fact that uh it goes to things such as new cars, uh military hardware, which for the record I don't think most civilians should have, but it's also restricted by them that we can't have it tells me a lot. Um the fact that um material material conditions such as yourself like the Zoom thing doesn't go to you guys to get fixed is kind of crazy. Um so then it tells me that this uh city values um restricting fair free and fair access to um what the city board should be doing which is allocating resources to the public and serving the public. Um, another thing, the fact that um, the history and system of policing in the United States was founded on slave catching and it's never really been reformed um, highlights the history of

uh, racism in the United States and what the policing in the United States values is more disenfranchising not only um, people of color but the average citizen as a whole is is very telling. uh and the fact that they also don't want to be reviewed or reformed is also very telling. Um when no other recourse uh in reform is allocated, it leaves no other option by the public. So I think the the very minimum if the police wants to keep existing in terms of a system institution that it needs to be defunded um at the very least. Um um I appreciate what you guys do. you guys um you know listen and you listen to what the public wants, but ultimately you guys seem to be a system that is just um controlled opposition that you're basically just a figurehead for um public critiques that ultimately goes nowhere because you are ultimately given no power to do anything. And especially if the city council just listens to you guys or throws us to you guys, nothing really seems to change. Um, and history tells me as a history major who has studied history not only in the US but across the world that doesn't really bode well. Um, especially with what's going on um, in the United States as a whole. Um, it's not very good. So, thank you guys for your time.

Thank you. All right. Are there any other public comments that are not pertain to what's on the agenda tonight? Okay. Seeing none, we will move on um on to consent item. Consider approving the minutes from the community police review board meeting on August 20th, 2025. Move to approve. All those in favor say I. I.

I. Okay. Um, moving on to new business. Uh, final presentation from the CPB annual report. Um, for the term January 2024 through December 2024 discussion, we'll be having a presentation of that annual report and going over any questions if there's any questions from the from the board and then move on to public comments. So, um I don't Are we putting it up there or are we just kind of Okay. Yeah. Um Nancy, if you want to give a quick update on just those two quick changes that were made.

Discussed this pretty fully last meeting. Um and there were a couple of that were pretty minor that we incorporated. We added the um portion about the complaints, no complaints um and just basically track there were no public complaints presented to the board over the course of the year. um and um track the language from the the bylaws or the statute that indicates that any public comments are referred to the city manager and then referred to MPD. Um there was a change um actually it was from the time before about the officer interviews after deadly force and we tried to meet the concern of board member Bryant about um the deescalation requirements. We did not want, our suggestion was not that the Modesto Police Department list all of the possible deescalation methods, but just that the the department should recommend, not recommend, but the department should require by use of using shall language instead of should language. Um and that that's in the um recommendations. We also made a a small change in how the recommendations were separated. Um there was a 5A and a 5B and we separated those out. Um and now nothing's numbered so that's hard to um but anyways each

recommendation was was provided separately. I don't think that

there was really any other changes. Um we discussed a brief change this morning. Um the biographical sketch I mean this afternoon um see and I for board member Han indicated he was chairperson which he is no longer. So that'll be corrected and that'll just be changed to member. So I don't know if anybody on the board given the fairly lengthy discussion we had last time has anything they want to add, subtract, question. I think I'm good with the way the the report looks now. Um, but if there's any other board members that have questions, please feel free to to speak up. But at this time, I think we'll just go ahead and open it up to the public and then bring it back to the board for any final uh discussion. So, if there's anyone in the public that has reviewed this annual report that we have out here tonight, um, and you have any questions or comments in regards to the annual report, please step up. you have three minutes um just like any other public comment and it's pertaining to the annual report. Okay. Um thank you. I'll keep this one brief. Uh I do like seeing the language in here of the monthly critical incident updates. I know that's something that was asked for and I'm glad to see it in here. So, thank you all for uh recognizing some of the feedback that was rendered there. Um, and then I noticed that uh there's still nothing in here about the potential of a youth rep next time seats come up. I really think you all need to get someone like under the age of 18 on

here. I know I've stressed that before. I know several of you all said you like the idea and I noticed it wasn't here. We've talked about it a little bit. We have youth reps for uh other arms of our city and I think that if we really have the goal of reducing youth arrests, particularly Latino arrests. I can talk about how I'm a high school teacher all I want. I don't speak for those kids anymore than you do. Getting someone who actually knows that life and lives that role in this community, I think would make a lot of sense. And that's maybe hard to do when people don't know about the CPRB, which is why I'm glad to see that y'all are asking for an operating budget for publicity. Uh, I would extend that and say that I think you'll need a budget for more than just publicity, but I think y'all should be able to call for independent investigations beyond just, hey, can we get OIR to see how conduct was handled because sometimes I think that those critical incidents require a little bit more than folks investigating themselves. But I think my biggest concern there is that youth rep piece because we've talked about it and that's one that I think really could have made this uh report and didn't. That's one that I think was I think pretty common sense and could have been done very easily. Okay. So, it's a little disheartening to see that's not there at this time.

Thank you. Briefly respond. Yeah. Yeah. Um I think that's a a very good idea. Unfortunately, and I know this seems very technical that was discussed this year. And so I I if I were involved in or ultimately approving recommendations, I would include that for our 25 report. I know that's not very satisfactory, but I think it's a very good idea. That is elucidating. Thank you. Anyone want to go on the record right now and say they'd support it?

I I would say our plan for the next meeting is to go over topics for our calendar year um to finish off the year and to start next year. But if we are to come back in the next meeting, put it on the calendar for a topic, have the discussion, and then that gives us more input that we can make it a a formal recommendation on next year's annual report.

That's helpful. Uh to that end, I would hope that we could uh maybe have listening sessions in the community for those kinds of things beyond just these meetings. I know we had a much bigger turnout when we were at the King Kennedy Center. I so I hope that's an ongoing conversation, not something that just is isolated to next meeting. Thank Thank you so much, Steve.

I would just like to say that um I absolutely love the previous speaker's um idea that he's suggesting of having um some young folks in on the action. Um in fact, I think it's um y'all are a miss if that's if if if we're not doing this because you know what? you you all go out into the community and brainwash kids about cops. You do like cool like car projects at the high school, right? So So let them actually be involved. Let it let them like like share what their life is like without it being like cops taking their cool cars out to the campus to brain wash their brains, brainwash them. Okay. Um, and just to be perfectly clear, um, to add on to that, um, when you guys do, uh, implement that, it this this person needs to be free, this this minor needs to be free from being coached, harassed, or anything being influenced by these thugs on my left. Okay? So, there's no way on earth for me to know what y'all do when I'm not around, right? I know uh Sheriff Derxy meets behind closed doors with farright groups, but when it comes to Brandon, the closest thing I know is that when the president of the local chapter of the Proud Boys came in here and they all aggressively hijacked the city council meeting, Sean Kendall, um who by the way did assault the mother of one of your PD's murder victims, but that's that's not what I'm talking about right now. Um, he said, "We have friends in MPD." I don't know how how long it took me before I gave up, but I was asking Brandon for a while, at least like a a year, hey, can you answer that? Can you tell us? Can you confirm? Do you have Proud Boys on the force?

Um, so what I'm getting at is like it's disgusting to think that they already have programs where they brainwash children, but just to bear that in mind. Um, especially if you're bringing a minor in on the work. Um, please keep these dogs away from their young minds. Thank you. Um, is there any further public comments in regard to the annual report?

All right. Uh, like I said originally, you know, showed up here late, so I don't fully know what we're talking about. U, but the first speaker is a colleague of mine, and he, like I said, I'm disgustingly educated on history. He's disgustingly educated on what's going on. So, I take everything he says, um, as word in law. Um, I believe I agree with everything he says. I think it's a good idea, especially if community is supposed to be community. Um, having community involved with oversight of what's going on in the community is is a really good idea and that's how you get everybody involved, get everybody caring, and ultimately um has been proven will actually do a better job of um lowering crime um helping with unhoused and poverty and uh ultimately um a community that cares about each other is a community that doesn't, you know, really have any problems. So, uh, not only having community oversight, but also having community in terms of, uh, um, younger aged kids, high school getting involved in this stuff and knowing how, um, city works, uh, local government and government as as a whole, which, um, because a lot of high school and education as a whole is defunded and they don't really have either the time or the uh, material conditions to do so, I think is a fabulous idea. um because I myself and in my age don't really know how all of this works and um I'm in my 30s which is very telling about the US education system which is obviously not you guys but um getting um high school age kids involved with what's going on I think is a great idea um because it teaches them their material conditions and everything that's going on in their life so they are better educated and aware of what's going on as opposed to what they're just told and take at face value which to some degree even I'm doing but I have a colleague who does all this research who is really aware of what's going on and if he says that's what should be done I believe it because that's in my opinion how community should be run community should take care of itself and community should be involved in each other's lives and care

about each other's lives as opposed to just this hyperindividualistic um society that we have where nobody cares about each other because nobody has the time to do so or the material conditions to do so. So community involved in it. Um getting somebody a program that involved in local high school involved in oversight is a great idea. So everything the first speaker said should be taken. Thank you. And going on. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Are there any other public comments before I bring it back to the board?

Okay. Seeing none, go ahead and bring it back to the board. Does anyone on the board have anything else further to add? on this discussion. Okay, seeing none, um do we have a motion to approve the annual report as given?

I'll second. All in favor say I. I.

I. Okay, motion passes. Thank you. All right. So, on to the next item. Um, it's a discussion of possible direction regarding ordinance 4-23.02. Um, it's a presentation from the ad hoc committee, an update, and um, yeah, so Sammy, if you don't mind, just go ahead and bring that up. Mr. Chair, if I could just real quick, um, so there were presentations we initially placed out here. Um, we provided, they didn't have all the pages, but we reprinted them and then I distributed to everybody that was in the room at the time copies of the presentation, so those are available.

Okay. Yeah. If there's anyone that doesn't have the presentation and would like it, um, Okay. But if if we're all out, we do have it up on on the board as well.

We can share. All right. Thank you. All righty, let's continue. Uh, Wendy, you want to go ahead and get started? Sure. Thank you. Okay. Well, um, we were charged with, uh, putting together a report which we have. I'm going to start off and it's on the screen so you can follow me. This this report is presented actually to the board and it was produced by myself, Brad Han, Nikico Rio, and Latricia Beasley Day. Uh, Wendy, do you mind maybe bringing the mic a little closer? How's that?

Yep.

Okay. All right. Next slide. What? Next slide. Next slide. First of all, I want to give a disclaimer. This report is not intended to serve as a scientific, professional, or legal analysis. It represents the results of a layman's independent study and interpretation of constitutional and related laws. Its content should not be relied on as legal advice or an official legal opinion. So, what is this briefing? Uh, it's a factual summary of materials we receive, observations from recent events, and community input. What it's not is legal advice or a finding about constitutionality. It's not a formal legal analysis uh that comes from the city attorney. So our uh recommendations uh are a summary of different materials that we looked at. We number one looked at the ordinance, the um original ordinance uh in 2019 and then we looked at the revised ordinance. We looked at civil liberties definitions because you know you hear a lot about all these different terms and so we just did a general of what civil liberties definitions are. We did a few comparisons with other cities which we'll talk about a little bit later. And then uh we also took into consideration letters from the public. We u attempted to put together an ad hoc uh sample survey and um we concluded with findings, conclusions and

recommendations. So Scott, in the packet that the community has, does it include everything? Yeah. Yes, it includes all of the slides that are you're about to present. Well, there's no suspense.

Next, we'll go um with our interpretation of our assignment, which was to research, analyze, and inform the community police review board of our findings. Our goal is to assist assist the board in making a recommendation to the city manager regarding the ordinance. Now, I know that um there's been maybe some misunderstandings that we're supposed to provide a recommendation to the city council. U according to our bylaws, our charge is to provide recommendations to the city manager and then the city manager takes those recommendations and moves them forward. Next slide. So the ordinance yourself and in your package you can have a it has a link of where you can uh look. It's pretty long um but you have a link where you can look to find it and where we looked to find it. Uh the first uh slide after that we we looked into civil liberties uh first. What does that mean? And so under that uh the items that we pulled up was um freedom of speech which is protected by the first amendment according to the literature that we read. It covers spoken words, signs, chants, music and symbolic acts. It includes unpopular or critical views of government. Freedom of assembly, right to gather peacefully and protest. Time, place, and manner restrictions are permitted, but restrictions must be applied content neutally. Next slide. Freedom of association. Rights to organize and join advocacy groups

protects protesters from retaliation for group membership. Next was protection against government retaliation. Government cannot punish lawful protest activity. Arrest or surveillance based on viewpoint are unlawful. Next, another civil liberty is equal protection. The 14th amendment. Protesters must be treated equally under the law. Targeting groups or movement is unconstitutional. Due process protesters must be told why they are arrested. Right to legal legal representation in fair process. Laws restricting protest must not be vague or over broad. And then we looked at California Penal Code 185. It makes it illegal to wear a mask only when tied to committing or attempting a crime to avoid ID. It shall be unlawful for any person to wear any mask, false whispers, or any personal disguise, whether complete or or partial, for the purpose of number one, evading or escaping discovery, recognition, or identification and commission of any public offense. and number two, concealment, flight, or escape. When charged with, arrested for, or convicted of any public offense, any person violating any of the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor. So, in looking at some of the other cities,

first of all, California has about 482 incorporated cities in almost 39 uh might as well say 40 million people in population. Uh we looked at the city of Oakland with with a population of 443,554 people and there is a um if you're interested in looking at the ordinance that the city of Oakland has that's the information that you have there. We're not going to go in detail with with all of what they are, but we're providing input for you to do your own research. Modesto, which has a population of 220,592 people. And then the city of Lomida with a population of 20,662. Um, these are the three cities that have uh that we are that we saw that have uh mass ordinance. Um, next slide. On a national context, uh, Georgia and Virginia still enforce anti-mask laws. New York State and Washington DC repeal theirs in 2020. North Carolina rolled back a recent expan expansion after backlash. And Los Angeles, California does not have a mask. And the trend is is um that broad anti-mask laws are usually involved.

All right, on to the next slide. Um and here, uh we just wanted to inform, you know, the board on the letters that we received from the public. So, uh, American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU, the First Amendment Coalition, the NAACP, um, the CV Bipok. We also received, uh, a letter from Phil Trumpeter and a letter from the fellowship of Stannis Laws Unitarian Universal. Um, these letters uh, reflect different perspectives. Um several of them urged to repeal the mass subsection. Other suggestions um suggest you know amending to clarify intent exceptions and procedures. Uh common themes across these letters uh include clear communication, language access and alignment with state law. uh we have not received any additional uh submission beyond these. So you know we just worked with what we what we got from the community here and then onto the next slide if you can. Um and then on this slide here it talked about a community engagement survey. So our ad hoc committee um did create and develop a sample survey that we wanted to put out to the community. It was a series of 10 questions. Um they asked anywhere from how did you hear about the survey to what do you feel about the ordinance? How do you feel it should read? Do you feel repeal amend? Um asked a series of 10 questions. But um we also wanted to not put that survey out to the public quite yet because we wanted to bring it to the board and let them review the survey. Um at this moment the survey is not included in this presentation but

they will be um be able to look at it to give their um responses. Um but then to another point is we also sent the survey to the city because we wanted to include the city in our process. We wanted to make sure that um they can be a part of the creation of this be transparent with what kind of survey we're thinking about and the response from the city was they expressed a lot of interest in partnering with the CPRB on the survey. They wanted to add, you know, possible questions or even figure out how we're going to administer this survey so that it's um given fairly to everyone in the community. Let me just look at a few other notes here. um you know and when it comes to administering to the public, I feel like it is fair to ask for it to be given out fairly so we get an equal amount of responses from different community members. But I also think that this survey should be anonymous to where people don't have to give any of their personal information except for maybe a zip code. um no name, no address, anything like that. But these are all just things that we are going to have further discussion on. Um so tonight, you know, you guys can feel free to give any input on that, but we are still working with the city on that. Um and yeah, further discussions are underway. So that's pretty much what we're at with the survey. There are a few other possible rows that we can get into and I think at the end of our presentation I'll be getting into that a little bit further because we have a couple options that we've been in communication with with the city. So after this presentation we'll go into that. Thank you.

Am I on? Yes, I am.

All right. The mass ordinance concerns first amendment concerns chilling effect on free speech and assembly. Courts recognizing that mass can be used for expressive purposes. If a law broadly bans masks, it risks detering people from attending protests altogether, especially since the co era. Um, freedom of speech. Symbolic acts such as masks or face coverings with artistic or graphic expressions could be argued as a freedom of speech. Another concern is overbredded doctrine. If an ordinance criminalizes wearing any m excuse me,

next slide. Sorry.

Oh, sorry. I'm not looking at the slides over there. I'm looking at them here. Um, if an ordinance criminalizes wearing any mask or face covering at a protest, even peaceful ones, it may be struck down as overly broad since it punishes a substantial amount of constitutional constitutionally protected activity along with any unprotected conduct. Equal protection and selective enforcement. If police officers themselves wear tactical gear while prohibiting protesters from doing so, it could show unequal treatment. Selective enforcement, especially targeting certain groups, raises 14th Amendment concerns. Next slide. Discriminatory intent or impact. If evidence shows the ordinance disproportionate oh I couldn't pour glasses disproportionately um enforced against specific racial get ameliated from here ethnic or political groups it could be challenged as unconstitutional under equal protection principles vagueness and due process if an ordinance does not clearly define what qualifies ies as a mask or face covering or if it leaves too much discretion to law enforcement, it risks being struck down as void for vagueness. Vague laws can lead to arbitrary enforcement violating due process. Next slide. In conclusion, our current ordinance is in need of revision. With political violence on the rise and more protests

expected, public safety must be understood as a shared responsibility. The relationship between law enforcement and the community is reciprocal. Each depends on the other. While the ordinance highlights important challenges, it also creates an opportunity to reimagine how law enforcement and the community can collaborate to strengthen public safety in ways tailored to our community's unique needs. Next, this muted. Yeah. Our committee recommendations to our community police review board to repeal the mass ordinance provision section MMC 4-23.02 sub subsection 13 and refer the remaining sections to the city manager and legal council for review of other potential amendments. authorized the use of megaphones by event organizers to ensure safety and effective communication with participants during protests. Human capital, people and relationships are the most effective tool in identifying and catching suspects with ill intent. train organizers and volunteers on crowdsourcing public safety that can provide additional eyes and ears to report suspicious activities. In closing, this is our moment to learn from the past, grow with wisdom, adapt with courage, unite in purpose, and move forward together together toward a stronger future. Thank you for your attention.

Thank you. All right. So, moving on from that, I ask the board, are there any questions that they have so that we can uh have this discussion or comments in regard to this as well? Since we don't have the um ordinance directly in front of us and you suggest repealing this certain portion, can we can somebody read what that portion is that wants to be that needs to or is being requested to be repealed? What what specific is that?

Is is it I mean I know they need a mask, but I can mask. Yeah. I think I have it right in front of me. I can look it up. While we wait, is there anyone else has any uh comments? Yeah. Um, chair, I I have a question for the committee, and I'm not sure who wants to respond to this, but

um, did the committee go back and look at the um, documentation that the city council reviewed prior to their adoption of the ordinance in 2018 and then again in 2021 when they amended sections of the ordinance? Did you go back and look at the documentation presented to the city council in order for them to come to a conclusion about whether or not to adopt this ordinance?

Yeah. Um, so that was one of the first things we did was we gathered the ordinance, the original ordinance when it was established. Um, we read that out, you know, within our group and then we also did the same for the amended ordinance uh, 2021, I believe it was. Um, so yeah. Yeah, we did take that into consideration as well. There were some key findings within that ordinance prior to the city adopting it. So, we looked into that and um, we did question some of the things that were on there, but um, that those key findings were in regards to the ordinance as a whole. And so this part of our mask recommendation to the board on what to do with the mask is solely just a subsection 13. Okay. Uh uh the next uh comment that I have is regarding the um potential of a community survey and I'm very much in favor of that. However, I believe uh a neutral third party needs to craft the uh survey and the language and the methodology for uh collecting the data um for contacting members of the community. Um, I'm certainly not an expert in that and I don't know if anybody on the board has experience in that or um if anybody, you know, in the city manager's office has expertise in that, but I suspect um that in order for this to produce uh meaningful uh data that's objective, um it would have to be crafted in such a way that it isn't it isn't slanted to produce a certain outcome. And um I think in order to do that you have to have I I would suggest you have to have a a neutral third party craft the survey and how it's presented.

Okay. Thank you. Yeah, we can go deeper into that. I do have options in regards to that comment made. Um and yeah, Frank, I pulled up the subsection 13, so I'm going go ahead and read it. Uh the wearing of a mask scarf, bandana, or any other accessory or item that covers or partially covers the face, shielding the wearer's face from view, and conceals the wearer's identity. Except for covering coverings worn due to religious beliefs, practices or obser observation observations or due to medical necessities. You're welcome. Um any other board member? Um, I'll jump in just to initially to offer appreciation. Clearly, you put a lot of time into this. I am appreciating how broad you went about it, the different sources, the different things you looked at and considered. Um, it's a lot to take in all of that at one sitting. This is the first time at least I am hearing this. So, I don't know if it went to some of the committee uh some of the board ahead of time. At the time of my briefing, it wasn't ready. So to do a full wash through with some of this, it's a lot of good content, but can't digest it all in one moment.

Yeah. The hard part with that is of course our briefings. Um we don't always go over the presentations until the meeting gets started. And then we also can't have one of the ad hoc committee members in the room or in the meeting with everyone else. Brown Act kind of rules and things like that. So even if it was ready, there's there was not really a guarantee that we'd be able to go over it. I'm not offering a complaint. No. Yeah. Yeah. Acknowledgement that first time. Of course, Nancy.

The the third recommendation about training organizers and volunteers um on crowdsourcing public safety. What was the ad hoc committee's um idea of who would do that training? We thought that the police department would do the training because when you look at um when people are caught in different events, large events like that, no matter how many police officers you have, you can't watch everything. So the more eyes and ears that you can have on the ground mixed in the crowd. And so the ideal of that is that um perhaps the uh police department could train volunteers to be the eyes and ears out there, boots on the ground. Um you know, and if they see something suspicious, you know, if you see something, say something. Uh they would be trained on how to contact law enforcement right away. They would be given numbers. And so all of the responsibility of keeping the community safe would not just be fall on the shoulders of law enforcement, but it would give the community part of that responsibility too. That's how you catch people too. You put something out to the community and you'll be surprised at all of the information that comes in.

And then also I just want to kind of add into that remember these are just recommendations to the board on avenues that we can go. So, another kind of part of the human capital and relationships. There's also a topic that I would like to bring up in a future topic of discussions about public order policing and what it could look like for the police department to have um a police officer in kind of a dressed down uniform in the protest in the middle of the protest to have eyes and just follow along and things like that. It's a it's a it's a concept. Uh there's other states that use it in Washington and things like that, but it's something that we can bring out and talk about. So that's another thing.

Well, since we're not going to talk about it too much now, I mean, I I think there's a few problems with those ideas, but if we're not going to spend time discussing it now, that's fine with me. Yeah, this is again just a presentation to the board, not anything that's going to the city manager. Nothing is a final recommendation from this presentation. I mean I I totally agree with the recommendation probably should press that again to repeal the ordinance and authorize the use of megaphones. I just have some questions about that third. So and I do appreciate all the work you all did. I thank you.

I can speak too to the megaphone issue. Um a lot of the event organizers who um and and quite a few work with the police department in helping to communicate. But for example, when you're out and you have a bunch of people and they have to and I know this true because um at the the one ordinance it was very hard to hear the person the organizer that was trying to give out different rules and tell their group stay on the sidewalks. I mean they can be really resourceful in helping the police control their following. they're trusted amongst the the people that they are um gathering for the event. And so, uh just allowing them, not everybody, but just allowing these event organizers to have a a megaphone to help control their their float.

And I have talked to some other event uh organizers and they think that's a great idea. I that got added late in the game on our work and I I have a problem with it because how do you enforce it? I mean, who's who's going to say that I'm not an organizer and I have a megaphone because the the um they can also be used to incite if if the wrong person has that. So that and plus there's a noise ordinance. I live right near where the this activity was and I wouldn't have liked to have you know, all of that. It was already pretty loud. So, I I'm not saying I disagree with it. I think it needs a little bit more refining of of how that would come about because it's impossible to enforce.

Yeah. Talking to uh more of the event organizers and getting their perspective on Yeah. and then also working with the police department and you know seeing how we can all work together on making that available to protesters. Um I have another comment. Yeah, chair. Um since this is a report from this ad hoc committee, what is um what is the intent for us? Is I mean are we supposed to take a vote on this at some time or uh what what is the what's your thoughts on that?

Yeah, so I can go ahead and give a couple options on routes that we can take. Um I have about three or four, so I just kind of go over them and then we can continue the conversation. um one option. Um so when you brought up when you brought up the third party survey um you know to be crafted by a third party. So the city um and meeting with the city in regards to the survey they have a partner um by the name of probosski I believe it is. Probolosski and they are currently working with the city for a civic engagement survey that goes out annually to a specific like a they have a strategic plan how they release the survey. It's very strategic but this is something that's more rushed. It is one of the options um where basically we can recommend the repeal of the mask ordinance. We could recommend the survey be passed on to the city and and the third party research partner because they they said that they can include maybe two to three questions in that survey for you know future council discussions on this uh on this item. But the thing is that you know the question is we don't control that at all. We don't control the instrument, the sampling or the roll out of that. The city controls it all. Um why would we choose that option? I have uh it's fast because this is something that will be put out within the next like two months or two oh two weeks. So they already we they already asked their third party to come up with some some sample questions. So they're already in the works of that. But it is going to be only two or three questions. Um it's fast. It's likely more

representative. The CPRB can still proceed with the a mask recommendation tonight if they wanted to independent of the survey results. The trade-off is just a limited depth and no CPRB uh fact sheet or anything. The survey that Proplosski also puts out is there's no there's no information tied to that survey and something that no like information about the ordinance. So, something with our survey, um, it's my fault. I should have kind of planned it better, but in the survey that we kind of drafted is there's a link to show, uh, you know, a lot of these letters, and it's more to inform the public on what is going on. It has the mask ordinance, the city ordinance as the, you know, 4-23.02, 2, the full ordinance, the amended ordinance, the letters from the public, sample um sample amended ordinances that we received. And with that avenue, um I feel like the the community can be more informed on the topic and make a educated response in the survey. But if we go the route to just passing on to a third party, they won't have that advantage of be actually knowing what those questions are about. Um, so again, one option is just to pass it back to the city, two or three quick question survey within the next few weeks. Um, option B, adopt a special recommendation tonight asking the city manager or city attorney for a timebound review of the ordinance and subsection 13. um with some safeguards as in you know let's just let them put the legal analysis because that's not within our scope of work to do. So if we just give a special recommendation tonight telling the city we don't have anything except that we

want you guys to give a legal analysis and come back to us and let us read the report and then we can make a final decision on the mask ordinance and what we want to do with that recommendation. um you know why choose that route to immediate risk mitigation, community input before final action and the trade-off is just more coordination work and more steps to getting to that final decision, that final recommendation on the mask ordinance and what we choose to do. Um another option, option C is we make a recommendation now and we do the survey later. So, we move forward with the recommendation on subsection 13 tonight and we still try to partner with the city on the survey to give an informative um survey at future council deliberations. So this is decisive and timely and the trade-off is just it may be perceived as less input driven because we'd be making a recommendation without the community survey without the community giving us their thoughts on it. And you know the third option is to move forward with the survey and you know partner with the city and have no recommendation tonight. It could just be let's just partner with the city on the survey and see how they want to roll it out and have further discussions. Um that maximizes input before we take any action and the trade-off is it just delays an immediate guidance. It delays it a little bit longer um before we make any formal final recommendations. So those are a few options that I came up with that I wanted to share with you guys. Um, so we have a few different routes and this is kind of why we wanted to have the discussion to see where it is that we want to go as a board. Um, so yeah, if there's any other comments

or questions about that. Uh, I have a question for staff. Uh, the city survey, you're expecting to have it launch in the next two weeks. Do you have an estimate of turnaround time for results from that?

Uh, yes. Uh, board member Christensen. So, um, the the city actually has a workshop that we're going to be planning with the council um on several topics where this survey is going to inform them and I believe that's sometime in November. So, that means we've got a pretty quick turnaround. What they do is um I mean it's a lot of information. Um, they actually did one for us I believe last year kind of around this time. Very comprehensive. Um so it takes some a little bit of time to put well some significant time to put that together as a firm but as mentioned before um that's very comprehensive it's objective got a very scientific approach it's got a very um you know methodical uh um approach in making sure that the whole city is represented businesses and and residents uh alike and so yeah it takes some time but I'm sorry should have been a short answer it's in November Um, and you may not have this answer. Is that anticipated before our November board meeting? Our meeting?

Uh, it may be. I don't have the I don't have that information at the ready right now. I apologize.

My off-the-top feeling um chair is we don't have to necessarily pick or choose one route here from the options you laid out. Um, in my opinion, we could insert the three or so questions that they can all lot us that are completely neutral, broader audience, see what we get. Whether or not we choose to wait for those results, we could sit with the ones you guys have crafted, come up with an ability for it to be shared with us so we could one off respond with thoughts or feedback. And I don't see anything wrong with asking. It still goes to staff to have a legal analysis done. At least it shows the community we're taking steps to better understand where the legality sits so that we are more informed in helping guide a suggestion or recommendation to city manager.

Okay. Thank you. Great.

Yeah. Um I don't know what purpose we have to determine legality. I was told that was not really not our our purpose. Our purpose is to discuss policy and make the policy proposal. It's going to be discussed. Uh the legality is going to be discussed no matter what we do. Uh and all we have to do is propose the the policy. Um as we're not attorneys and even if the attorney came back to us, I mean, that's just an extra step that we don't need to be involved in. Uh they they need to talk to this council, not us, the attorneys. that is um my my idea is I I like the first proposal uh number one uh repeal of the mask uh mandate. I um agree that um that there should be uh the use of megaphones uh by organizers but only by organizers. I can see uh Brad's concern that uh it just be a cacophony of all kinds of noise makers. Um you do want to have some kind of organization of of um the organizers. they have to maybe identify themselves uh both to the police and then to and the city and then possibly uh at the event uh the event I went to they were wearing uh brightly colored fluorescent vests and uh I don't I did not see anyone else uh utilizing um megaphones um and I don't think that's by design I that's just people weren't that they I don't think that's and people went there to use to just be loud. I think they were there to be purposeful. Um maybe that won't be every event. Uh so I definitely think they should be

identified and uh to to the police. Um I don't like the idea of putting an unloved officer in the in the midst of everyone. I think that's a little dangerous uh for the officer um and for the people. Uh I I was I just wouldn't entertain that. And um but I do like the idea. Number three, we do need um some kind of engagement and coaching um in the future so that we um we're all on the same page. I know that there was the BIPO group met and a lot of people did weren't even aware of the mask ordinance. they weren't aware of uh the the megaphone issues and um I think that kind of devolved uh because of lack of our uh lack of communication to these groups that will be protesting. So

thank you chair. Yes. Um, I believe that uh for us to take any action prior to having the community's input from a professionally crafted and and strategically presented survey. Uh, I'm not in favor of that. Okay. We yeah, we're um we're going to have a couple more board members speak and then we'll pass it to the public and let them talk and then we'll bring it back to the board and then we can try to discuss what it is we're we're going to do from from here. U Brad, did you have anything? Yes.

Okay. Um I was on the the subcommittee and spent a lot of time looking at all the ordinances and all the information that's there and um my gut feeling on this is that we need to deal with the mask ordinance that it what what is maybe not understood is that this is uh being able to be uh arrested for having a mask period. nothing else within the U California Penal Code and also in our ordinance down if you read down it linking wearing a mask to hide your identity while you're doing something wrong is brings it into a misdemeanor but not just the facial wearing of a mask to me that seems like sort of like a no-brainer to to to do just eliminate that and and continue to study the ramifications of making things better. Uh that's the survey, the human capital, the megaphones, those are all things that can be studied in the future. But to I just feel I you know you'll kicking the can down the road. I think that's where we're going to end up with this. And so and I think it's on just face value. forget about what my views or other people's views are that the mask ordinance by itself being a misdemeanor is very difficult one and um and it's a matter and as a matter of policy and I know the I'm not getting into the legal part but that's that's kind of where I'm I've ended up on this thing.

I got a couple comments. So, it's not the mask ordinance um by itself. It's when you use the mask ordinance alone absent of behavior to arrest people. That's that's what the problem is. And then too, um I think that there is a little urgency in it because there are other protests that are being planned

and so I think a lot of people in the community are confused. So, um, I think at some point somebody has to, and it's not going to be us because that's not our job. That's the city manager's job and the the city attorneys and all the other folks that are legal um to try to do something sooner than later to um provide more direction for the community because um there are other protests that are being planned. And so, what's going to happen? Are people going to get arrested again for uh wearing masks and because you suspect they may be guilty of committing a crime? Is the same repeat thing, you know, going to happen again? So, I think that u there needs to be some more immediate uh clarification on uh when a person is arrested, whether they have a mask on or not.

Thank you. Okay. At this time, um, we're going to open it up to the public for public comment. So, if you have a public comment in regards to the presentation that we just gave, please, um, I will also read names off of what I received, but um, please proceed. You guys will have three minutes.

Thank you. Good evening. U, my name is Ryan Roth Gallo and I live in the city of Modesto. Um, I am an attorney. Um, I have a sole practice out of my home. Um, and I want to thank the ad hoc committee for the time and effort that you put into this. It's a really good report and I want to thank the board for your very interesting discussion on it as well. Um, I I am very concerned that this code violates constitutional rights. It's overly broad. It's vague. Um, and I think it really needs to be repealed. Uh, it you can't really amend it to make it right. it needs to be repealed and I think it needs to be repealed before the survey. Now, normally I wouldn't say that because I like data and I feel more comfortable with the idea that everyone in Modesto would get a chance to think about it and give some feedback. I mean that that does sound nice and that would be nice but it's time is of the essence here because people's constitutional rights are being already violated and we're asking the police we're asking our police if we actually care about the people who are policing us because they are part of our community. We are asking them to violate their brothers and sisters rights to continue doing that and that's not appropriate. So, I'm very grateful to hear there is support for repeal of this ordinance. Um, and I think that we should just urgently consider doing that before the survey in this in this particular instance. Normally, like I said, I would want more data and I would want the whole community to have input into something like this, but it it's just under we have to we can't always have that. You know, sometimes we have to act to protect rights that are being violated. Um just briefly also very um in favor of the Zoom comments um better publicity and uh I want to thank you all again for your service.

Thank you so much. Um Ste Steve,

I do want to say thank you to the ad hoc community. There are um a lot of things in this that I see that I'm liking. And I actually I wanted to say Miss Bird, I just my my my thoughts went back to my memories of all the like crazy experiences of me coming in here. Um, and it's just nice to have you back and you seem healthy. I don't I don't know all the details of your life, but it is I've said this already, but it it is it is truly to see you sitting good to see you sitting there with us. Um, wow. So, I know you guys are going to cut me off, but I So, I have to I have to hurry here, don't I? Um, the first thing I brought a prop in with me tonight. Um, and it was easy not to forget it like I'm prone to because it's attached to my arm. Um, you can't really tell, but the finger that the pigs broke is still a little bit wobbly, but um, most of what's left is like the stiffness, so it's healing. And it just struck me as an interesting metaphor. Um, do you guys remember when Brandon did his presentation on uh trying to justify his uh enforcement of this ridiculous code? And it basically amounted to him using like cop basically saying that they arrested people that was that were a part of the crowd that looked like the bad guys. By people, that's what we're talking about here. by pocket and people with like somewhat barely even leftist ways of looking at the world, right? Yeah. So, they attack they went after the bad guys um knowing that they did not have to have a conviction. So, they just haphazardly threw six of us into jail, breaking my finger. And you know what I'm doing now is I'm working damn hard to keep my life

going and to keep on trucking, to keep John smiling, right? Okay. So, this is my life. Now, this dude over here might not think, "What can I do to [ __ ] over that guy that talks too much [ __ ] about me and my violent thugs?" But that doesn't mean that this is not a desired effect. It doesn't mean that. By the way, my finances are screwed because of my arrest. Long story short, like there's a hiccup and I am not able to work right now and it's hopefully going to be cleaned up really uh cleared up really soon so I can go back to work. You know, you guys, it's disgusting that you only give us three minutes. It's disgusting. I'm I'm not even messing around. You guys think I'm being hyperbolic. It's disgusting. I have no time to talk about all these things, but I want to point out a couple things very fast. Phil Trumpeter worked for the Modesto Police Department for how many years? I just want you guys to bear that in mind, okay? His daughter got a great chance to boost her career with Forward Together. Kate's a great person. She's always been very kind to me, but it's something to bear in mind. Lastly, I don't know what happened and maybe I just got confused, but it sure sounded like this community police review board all of the sudden stirred off course in the com in the discussion a little bit earlier and started talking about putting together brown coats throw out in the street in the middle of protests. Your job is not to come up with ways to help the cops control us better. Which is what it really started to sound like. Hell no. I don't want some cop in the middle of me trying to speak out for what's right. That's that part was super duper awkward.

Yeah. Appreciate you guys. There's there's a lot of no brown coats.

There's a lot of information about what I did bring up. Um and that's going to be a future topic to where you guys will be able to understand a lot more. It's a it's a really good concept and with future topic we could talk about. Thank you. Good evening. Um, thank you so much for this. Uh, I came here um not realizing that this was on the agenda. So, I had a statement prepared, but um first of all, I'd like to My name is Mary Rogers and I worked in the criminal justice system for 30 years in Alama County. I know all about red tape and I understand the reasons why it goes in that direction so often. Um, my biggest concern after hearing the presentation and reading it is what you said, Mrs. Bird, the urgency. We have major protests coming up soon. I I don't want this mask ordinance to be on the records when those occur or at the very least there needs to be some deep understanding that it will not be implemented by the police. Um I realize that the board here is going to be giving a recommendation to city manager. So, and I I understand the survey. It sounds good, I guess, but um I don't what I don't understand is how the urgence urgency of this is going

to be resolved prior to future protests. And that's my biggest concern. So, I urge you to make a recommendation as immediately as you can and to stress that the your board uh considers this to me a matter that at least the mask portion of the ordinance needs to be lifted until a final decision is made. Thank you. Uh so yeah um as I further or earlier had mentioned about um you guys kind of being controlled opposition uh basically a funnel for um outrage um criticism and everything to just basically die. Um I'm kind of after some of the suggestions that were given I I I'm fully believe that now some of the suggestions were um to review the police um policies and review were to give them more power and um basically train people to report to the police. Um I don't know if anybody's horror fans but it kind of sounds like the call is coming from inside the house. Um, I don't understand if if you guys and I know I previously stated and I understand it, you know, that you guys don't really have any fangs. You guys don't have any weight. You guys don't really have much power. But to suggest things uh to review police action is to give them more action is redundant. It's asinine. It's it it I don't I don't I don't fully understand it. Um, but maybe just I'm just, you know, um, yeah. Uh, but just to give a quote. Um, like I said, I'm a history major, political science. I do a lot of reading, uh, not only on, you know,

policies, politics, um, just things in general. But this is by, uh, Chris Hedges. He's a American journalist and, um, someone who's very educated, further than me. He has his masters in, uh, history from Harvard. Um, I don't know history, but anyways. Um he says the final stages of capitalism Karl Marx predicted would be marked by global capital being unable to expand and generate profits at former levels. Capitalists would begin to consume the government along with the physical and social structures that sustain them. democracy, social welfare, electoral participation, which we see literally within this last week. The common good, the investment in public transportation, roads, bridges, utilities, industry, education, ecosystems protection, and healthcare would be sacrificed to feed the mania of short short-term profit. These assaults would destroy the host. And in order for that to be done, you need somebody or a system to receive more of that funding in order to enforce that. And as I learned today that the police receiving about 50% of the Modesto budget is just proof of that to me. Um history proves um and everything that I've learned this far that the more power and more money you give to enforcement, the more you descend and more the the more freedom is taken away from the civilian population and you get descent into fascism. every everywhere I have studied and learned, you see that by more concentrating power and wealth into certain groups, you see more infringement and more rights being taken away. And to suggest that the police should be given more is just asinine to me. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, I know you guys love doing your research. So, if you guys want to go ahead and and just look up public order policing and also known as dialogue policing, you guys can feel free to do the research. But it is a topic that we will um I'll bring to the table that see if it's going to be a future topic to discuss. It's just a way to try to help the community and the police have better communication, guys. So, um that's all it is, but go ahead, please. And thank you. Hi, good evening. My name is Nora. I'm a resident of Modesto. Um, some of my planned comments were addressed by the presentation and other speakers, so I apologize for any redundancy. Um, first, I I really appreciate the presentation given today and its conclusion regarding lifting the mask ban. Um, in the past months, this board has stressed the need for well-thoughtout research before making any recommendations and as the reason why this report was delayed for months after the incidents of the June protests. And it is clear from the quality of the report that we saw tonight that that is exactly what happened. Uh, so I appreciate the the thorough um research there. Uh, but it does make me wonder why when considering whether or not to amend a problematic regulation, this city does take months of analysis, but when a Modesta police chief decided to present the ordinance in the first place, all it took was a halfbaked PowerPoint presentation with no real relevant data for it to be approved. The difference between tonight's report and the picture book of fear-mongering MP and PD prepared both before the mask ban was put into place and afterwards by Chief Gillespie to justify it would be laughable if it didn't impact our community the way that it does. Second, I would like to agree with

previous speakers and urge this board to separate the recommendations to remove the Basque ban from any future coordination between police and organizers, uh, megaphones or any other matter. Um, as a separate issue, the issue of the mask ban has been delayed enough and adding another topic would only prolong that more. And lastly, I am deeply concerned that this board would even consider suggesting MPD having the power to educate or identify organizers. The entire reason we are having this discussion discussion is because MPD acted in a biased way when choosing who to arrest and which organizers to target to target in the first place. Um, I would hate to see future protests being affected by this bias. Um, and have certain organizers not educated and then penalized for not being educated by the police department and restricting their speech in their organization even further. Um, I'd love to live in a future where officers and the community can fully trust each other in the way that TV has lied to us in the past several years. But we have to register that there is an imbalance of power and the relationship between the public and the police. Currently, it's toxic and we need to keep this toxicity in mind before giving the armed historic abusers, like the previous speaker said, even more power than they already have. That's my time. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello, CPRB. My name is Harlen Divven. I'm a resident of Modesto. I'm a local attorney. I'm a civil rights attorney and a legal aid attorney. Um, I work closely in the community, which is what brought me to the jail on September for or on June 14th to talk to different protesters who had been arrested that night. Steve's hand was broken. Um, I asked for ice from the sheriff's three times. They literally laughed at me. It was really offensive. Um, I've worked with Oakland PD. I've worked with LAPD. I've seen tactics very similar to what Modesto PD put in place on the 14th. One of my concerns is that this body is not asking for an investigation of those tactics. It seems to be completely looked over. People have asked for it over and over again in city council in this body. This body has the right and the responsibility to make that recommendation to city council and I would urge you to consider that going forward. What you are considering is this survey. And what I would say to that survey is you've heard from the public for three months. We're right here. The public has been in city council meetings in these meetings. And I looking back on the minutes from the last month, every comment that was made was anti- this ordinance. So I would ask, who are you listening to? Who do you want to talk to? And who have you not reached? It's a question of outreach, not of a survey. Again, the public is here. I don't have time to be here, but I'm here because this matters. So, the survey, I think, is um there's lots of good energy being put into that, but you only have so much energy and it's going to be a huge lift, that survey. And for what? Really, for what? And if you're talking at bringing in a third party, that costs money. You're spending city money on a survey that you already have heard from the public again for three months and

we've been saying the same thing over and over. So, I'm asking for an investigation. I'm asking you to reconsider this survey very seriously and the time you're going to put into it and where it could be better spent by this body. People who join this body care about the public. They care about police oversight. I was just considering joining the sheriff's oversight board, but I looked at where are the teeth? What can I do? Where do I want to be in my community? I want to be on this side telling you guys this is wrong. This is dangerous. This law is like people have been saying, vague, over broad. Oh, I'm running out of time. And constitutionally untenable. So, um I agree with moving forward with this um repeal now. I'm concerned about the other two pieces, the megaphone and the human capital piece. I'm gonna say this very quickly, the megaphone, asking organizers to identify themselves to police is dangerous. Organizers were targeted here in the protest. That's part of why we're here. Secondly, the human capital turning citizens into informers is not what this body should be doing. Thank you.

Thank you. Good evening. This is Lur Connor again. I want to express my genuine appreciation to the members of ad hoc committee for standing with the community and standing on the right side of history by putting forth a recommendation in this presentation to repeal Modesto Municipal Code 4-23.02 subsection 13. I urge the remaining members of CPRB to join your colleagues in support of immediately pushing forth this recommendation to repeal the masking provision in the ordinance to the city manager without further delay. It is confusing to me to hear from some of you that community input in the form of a quote unquote professional survey is needed. Community has been giving you input and I don't appreciate the eraser of our voices. I am a community member and I am sharing my input as myself and many community members have shared in multiple public comments in the past three CPRB meetings. This ordinance is unconstitutional. It represses our freedom of speech and does not keep vulnerable members of the public safe. Again, I want to emphasize the ordinance was weaponized by MPD on June 14th at the Central Valley Bipok Coalition's anti-deportation protest where police officers targeted, arrested, assaulted, and detained for nearly 12 hours six peaceful protesters. three who were unhoused youth and three who are people of color while predominantly white protesters at the No Kings demonstration who also wore masks on that same day were left unbred. It is notable that while white organizers of No Kings are already happily sharing their plans for their next protest, the people of color who organized the anti-deportation protest have been stuck in city hall meetings for the last three months fighting to protect what should be our inherent and uncontested right to safely and peacefully assemble in public spaces. Experts on civil liberties such as the ACLU and the First Amendment Coalition stand with us and agree that this ordinance, as written, creates the conditions for law enforcement to profile and discriminate against people who wish to speak truth to power while protecting ourselves from surveillance, doxing, harassment, and militarized aggression by both the police and

violent vigilantes. This contextual information is critical for everyone who is taking the proposed community survey on the ordinance to know. Although I don't agree that the survey is necessary and is yet another bureaucratic delay and derailment, should the survey be pushed forward, then survey takers must be provided with the knowledge of the recent events and discourse surrounding this ordinance. Otherwise, people are being asked to provide input in ignorance. Most importantly, I want to emphasize regardless of the nature of the survey responses you receive, this ordinance will still be discriminatory, unconstitutional and a threat to community safety, contrary to what out of touch aren't experts may compel or coers anyone to believe. Uninformed public opinion does not negate this reality. I truly hope the board is not led astray by institutionally biased authority figures who are afforded protections, privileges, and impunity that everyday people of color, unhoused people, and young people and immigrants are not. Simply put, masking in public should not be a crime. The First Amendment has no dress code, and any policy that indicates otherwise is a gross violation of our right to protected anonymous speech. Municipal code 4-2 uh 23.02, and 02 subsection 13 must be recommended to be repealed immediately and nothing less. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Efron and I'm a member of CV Bipok. I'm one of the organizers who put on the June 14th ICE out of the Central Valley protest and I'm here to urge the board to recommend the city council that the anti-masking provision in municipal code 4-23.02 be repealed as well as a private investigation of MPD's conduct, tactics, and use of power. Before I continue, I want to state that I am grateful for the hard work that some members of the board have put into working with community members and community organizations to demand justice. The people of Modesto know firsthand how difficult it can be to make change in a city that is controlled by the police, specifically by Modesto Police Chief Brandon Gypsy and his thugs. We understand that your frustration when this board was created to hold the police accountable, but yet was left without any power to do so and is undermined by MPD and the city. We see your efforts and acknowledge them. Nonetheless, we urge you all to recommend to the city that the anti-masking provision is repealed. Like many of my colleagues and comrades have stated, this ordinance has created a condition for MPD to enforce the ordinance as he see fit. On June 14th, MPD chose to utilize a mass ordinance to to detain our protest, point 12 gauge shotguns to an unarmed crowd, and throw civilians in unmarked vehicles. You would think that the way they acted that day, they were bounty hunters or Proud Boys, but no, they were our very own police department. Some people have called their behavior professional and said they were doing their job. And I agree. They were doing exactly what what the police were meant to do, which is social control and protection of property. They wanted to intimidate the relatively young protesters that were people of color who refuse to collaborate with the police. When we arrived at the Crusader Park, indivisible Santa had megaphones, speakers, flags, and masks. Yet, we were the ones targeted, detained, and followed through the streets and harass. You look back at that day and told me that wasn't a violation of our right to protest. that we weren't targeted by the color of our skin. The ACLU agrees with us and will sue the city and we'll win.

So, I ask you all again and continue to ask you to recommend the city council to repeal the mask ordinance. Thank you. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Leah Hassid. I live in Modesto. I've been here several times and I want to reiterate what the last speaker and the speaker before said and I was outside for a bit but um I just want to second everything they said. Um I was there at the CB bypac um protest and I saw people being unlawfully targeted and arrested and it was devastating and I lost my trust in the Modesto city police. Um, and I was very interested and encouraged listening to the presentation tonight. I was very encouraged about the recommendation to repeal the mask part of the ordinance and I would encourage that to go forward. The the idea of having a survey doesn't sit right with me at all. I'm trying to understand what a survey would do. Whether or not I it just doesn't doesn't it it seems completely wrong. It feels like a distraction. It feels like um like abdicating responsibility for making a decision. It feels like allowing other people to decide what's right for people who might be um sick or feeling afraid to be sick when they're in a crowd of people. Um it it it just feels completely wrong. Um and you know it would just yeah it seems like it seems almost like an election like well let the people I just no no that's just that's just wrong direction. I also want to say that I really really would encourage people who you know and I and I I know I don't know if people have a his know the history of American protest but I think that you know especially

like the police could really use um maybe a different viewpoint about what protesters do. I was really struck by one of the people that got up at one of the earlier meetings talking about CB Bipok and mentioning all of the things that that organization does for the community. And I would maintain that the people that are here tonight and the people that are pro ones that would care to protest because it's hard to protest. You know, it takes a lot of energy and it's really hard to organize. It's one of the hardest jobs I've ever seen anybody do. So those are people that care. These are the good citizen. I mean these are the really really engaged people and people that show up for protests are. So maybe instead of doing the thing where you don't trust them and think they're closer to criminals maybe think they're closer to um you know pillars are of our community because that's what I really feel is true. I just really encourage you and all police to to look at the good that um people do when they hold their governments to account. Um and that's all.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Janessa Gonzalez. Um, I wasn't planning on speaking, so it's probably a little scattered. Um, but I just wanted to comment on the recommendation for the human capital. Um, I don't know. This idea that MPD is going to train us when they've proven to be biased and aggressive and untrustworthy, like that doesn't draw us to want to participate with them. Um, like as someone who was at the ICE out protest, even at the last presentation that the chief gave where he stated that the ICE out organizers were unorganized and not communicating, I was there. I was there with my friends, like we were all repeating, we were doing the exact same things that they did at the no kings protest, but we were targeted and just harassed the whole time. Um, and like the fact that he can stand up here and give a false testimony, why would we trust them to want to work with us? And like that's just kind of ridiculous. Um, and I think if this board wants to have an impact, then you need to use tactics that can reach people, especially since most of these meetings have the same amount of people and it's the same one showing up speaking over and over again and you guys aren't even like taking these into consideration. It feels like um like and even the comment about MPD basically having 50% of our budget like they can be using that budget to communicate better with the community especially like MPD has 56,000 followers on Instagram. City of Modesto has 12,000 followers. like they have a huge domain where they can be if they're actually concerned about these protests and wanting to educate people on suspic suspicious things to look for. Literally make a video, especially when half of these protests are young people who are concerned. A lot of young people and even older people are on social media. This is where we're getting all of our information. This is how we find out about protests. Like why would they not

use that as a tool? We know that they're on social media. He said that they were monitoring before the protest, after the protest, everyone's posts. Like, they're already looking at all of our posts. So, why would they not want to engage with the community in ways that we feel safe where we know that, you know, they're not like in the middle of our protest crowd or whatever. Um, especially with the idea from earlier about having someone on the board who's under 18. Like, people don't know about this. Like, young people don't know about this, especially when young people are are like, it's 5:30 on a school night. like why would they be here? Um so I don't know. I just think we should utilize better tools to communicate and speak in language that our community can actually hear and know about. Um yeah, sorry I'm running out of time. But yeah, I don't know. I just think that there's better ways that they can use their resources and if they're actually concerned about these protests becoming violent when they're organized to be peaceful protests like the ICE out protest only became aggressive because MPD made it that way. Um like I don't know. I'm just not compelled to want to interact when they haven't respected us as peaceful protesters using our own rights. So yeah, that's it.

Thank you. Is there

Hello again, Madison. Um, I have a couple of questions. I don't know if you'd wait until the end to answer those, but um, one of my questions about the survey, and I'm sure there's some, you know, I'm sure there's a way that they do it, but I I was wondering like who was receiving that survey? Like, is this survey being done in the mail? Is it online? So, how's it being sent to people? like what database are they, you know, getting people's information from? Um, another question I had was about the meetings. I think it's the the I think it's called an ad hoc meeting or whatever the people who are looking at the mask ordinance. Um, I'm confused on how often they meet. Um, cuz I know you we you guys we all meet once a month. Um, and then so I understand that you know you guys went over this information, this slideshow, but like as a community member, like I don't know if everyone else knows and I just don't know, but like I'm super confused on how this board communicates. And this is kind of just like also going off of what Janessa said and um something I've thought a lot a lot for um a long time about this board and and the city council is like it's not hard for you guys to make it more easily understandable like what's going on, how you guys um communicate because like after sitting here tonight and listening to you guys talk, you guys seem pretty confused. I'm like kind of getting more confused. And to me, what it sounds like is, well, he said November. Okay. Well, if the city council is going to look at that survey in November, well, are we looking until like literally this upcoming June until until this like actually gets repealed? The timeline to me is like just it seems it's I just feel really like I just feel more confused, I guess, after all this. And like everybody else, we've been waiting months. Um, and we make time out of our days as do you guys like make

time out of your days to to get here. Um, but I don't know if you guys can like clear up some questions or maybe just before you guys close this out, provide more clarification. Um, and also yeah, kind of like what Stephen said, it's like I we only have three minutes to stand here and just talk at you and then you answer and then I just hope that you answer my questions and if you didn't, well then I'll wait another month, you know? So that's um not good. And I mean, if I can just end with one thing, it's like, yeah, this needs to be repealed. Like, we can't protest. That's our first amendment right. Like, I I you know, that can't be lost upon this board is like this being drawn out. Well, people can't protest. Like, I think that's a problem. I don't know if you guys think that's a problem that people feel scared to go out and protest, but I'd say it's a pretty big problem. should be pushed, you know, and clarified as well so that when people do come up here, they know exactly what they want to ask and I we don't have to like ask all these clarifying questions over and over again.

Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Um I think I'm going to try to take a stab at answering your questions there. So I'll start off with the ad hoc and your question on how often do we meet? I I want to say our ad hoc committee on this met probably about six times um within the last month and last two months probably a little more than about six yeah about six seven times. Um and the hardest part about that is getting the time for us to meet. You know we all have personal lives we have jobs. We all volunteer for other positions as well. Um people are just busy. So there's times where it's like same day we have meetings where we're like, "Hey, is anyone available to meet today?" And we're hoping that the entire ad hoc, the four of us can get together and talk about all this stuff. And then when you talk about the board in a sense of being confused about certain things, this was where it comes down to the Brown Act and we're going to have a discussion about the Brown Act and how it works. But the four of us established the ad hoc committee to talk about this. If we were to talk about this with the entire board together, it needs to be an agendaized item like it is tonight and then we talk about it. And the reason why we create the ad hoc is so that we can leave tonight, plan a meeting outside of tonight and continue the conversations that we're having. So, and then when it comes to like questions on answering your questions um like the following month or something like that, we all have a contact email that you all have access to online on the city website. You know, we're hoping that with the budget that we are asking for, we can get maybe some some contact cards so we can pass out our email to you guys. But there are emails that we all have that you guys can send us an email to clarify any questions, to ask any further questions, and we're able to

respond to you guys that way. Um, so that you don't feel like you have to wait a full month. Um, and then when it comes to the survey, um, so there was a couple different options like our own survey. So I'm not sure if you're asking about the city survey or our survey, but when it comes to the city survey, there's a group that they partner with named PBloski. who's going to receive that survey. That's a strategic plan that that third party gives the city on, you know, let's just give an example from what my understanding was. So, please correct me if I'm wrong, but we have several different zip codes in the city of Modesto. The third party is going to say 25 survey takers in this in this zip code, 25 in this zip code. um five of them are going to be business owners, five of them are going to be x, y, and z. There's different parameters that they put on the survey and the city they they uh agree on those parameters. So that's how they look at it in a strategic way. Um, as far as our survey, our plan is, you know, to have that list of 10 questions, to have documentation so that the community is informed. And our plan is to really just put boots on the ground on going to different businesses and posting a one-page QR code. Police review board has a survey that's going on. Please, please take the survey. take the time out of your day and and take 15 minutes to read through some stuff or or longer and then take an informed uh questionnaire here. So, there's different ways. Um, and I I hope I answered some of your questions.

Yeah, that's that's an option. That is an option on which which route we want to go and that's why we're having this discussion. Um, and we may not come to a conclusion on the survey, but we may come to a conclusion on some sort of recommendation. Um, so yeah, I hope I answered your questions. If if there's any further questions from anyone, please just remember that we all have emails and you guys can reach out to us directly. Um, and if you want those emails, um, reach out to us after this and if we don't have them right there for you, I mean, maybe a phone number or something, we can we can try to figure it out. So, um, yeah, I hope I answered some questions there. If there is anyone that hasn't spoke, um, I didn't catch everyone's names and I didn't mark off. I still have three cards, but if anyone hasn't spoke on this topic, is there anyone else that has any comments or questions in regards to the presentation? Okay,

cool. Hello again. Hello.

Hi. Um, so I just want to say I appreciate the work of the ad hoc committee so far. Um, and your uh, forming the recommendations. Um, I do think the survey is uh, I agree is also unnecessary uh, as you've had community feedback for the last few months from the public that is um, you know, the most likely to be affected by uh, um, this mask ordinance um, at protests. We are involved and active in our communities. um and speak up for what is right. Um I am also not a fan of the uh third recommendation and the implication of the second that um organizers must be identified to hold micro uh megaphones um and the forming of a sort of um I guess community police force. uh the organizers and attendees of protests. Um as an attendee myself um not of of of in the past but um we are not interested in collaborating with or being identified by the police. We do not want to form a cointtel pro style uh watchdog force. Um the police have proven uh not to be our friends and our allies. they um they've proven this recently um and in the past. Um if they haven't received if those um on the June 14th um ICE out protest, if they have not received consequences for their conduct, what is stopping them from identifying us and kidnapping us at gunpoint when we are alone and vulnerable? It is our right to protest and demonstrate without their permission or surveillance. That's why we're fighting for our right to mask and protect our identities.

And I will say um yes, we are angry. We are frustrated. And our emotions do not make our opinions less valid than others. We don't have the luxury of being aloof or impartial. Our own bodies and our friends are at risk and we ask that you act with the appropriate urgency. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other public comments? And excuse me, guys. I'm going to stand just for a while, but I'm still here, still listening. Okay. All right. Well, um I first of all I do want to say I'm thankful for the recommendation from the committee to repeal the mass ordinance as well as um be less restrictive on the use of a megaphone. But um I'm just going to reiterate what everyone else said and I want to say that I'm completely against the survey. It just feels like it's completely against it's a complete waste of time. Um you don't need to survey the people to know that a law is unconstitutional. If we had a law in the book that basically said, "Hey, uh, black people, you guys can't go out and protest. You don't need to survey the people of the city to know that that law is unconstitutional." Um, that's pretty much it. Like, I mean, I don't have much more to say besides that, but that I just that's just the point I really want to home in here is it's unconstitutional. It goes against our freedom of speech. It goes against um expressive language, you know, through, you know, through masks, through what we wear, through signage and all that. It's it's against our freedom of expression. So, it is unconstitutional. You don't need to hear from the people. Even if the majority of them agree with the mask ordinance, it doesn't matter because at the end of the day, it infringes on our constit constitutional rights. And that's it. That's where I'm going to leave it. Thank you. Um, are there any other further public comments? Okay, please. I don't blame you for standing. Long meeting. Well, I would like to wish you all a happy constitution day. Uh, 238 years ago today, our constitution was

ratified. Uh and even the most patriotic among you uh should have no problem admitting that our constitution is far from perfect, especially at its time of first ratification. The first amendment took us another 2 years to come into effect. Now, I don't make a habit of taking moral guidance from the founding fathers. They thought it was morally acceptable to own enslaved people. But nevertheless, I do find myself wondering what the founding fathers would think when they see what's happening in Modesto these days. Would they say it's just? Would you think of justice when you see an anti-first amendment ordinance that was uncritically dictated to a prior city council by a prior police chief? Would you think of justice when MPD uses this ordinance to target minority groups and those with differing political opinions? Would you call it justice when MPD shows that bias in a manner that is not only unprofessional but unconstitutional? Would you call it justice when the current council and the current chief exacerbate these stressors by failing to take meaningful action to protect the people of Modesto, would you call it justice that the CPRB lacks the tools to actually provide meaningful oversight and accountability? I wouldn't call it justice. But that is the context in which we meet tonight. And frankly, I think the notion of conducting a survey on something that is so blatantly unjust is a slap in the face to the members of this community. There is a clear and present violation of our rights. Our rights are not up for debate. I'll say that again. Our rights are not up for debate. Why do we need a survey to tell us what we already know? If you want to conduct a survey for the sake of outreach and getting the CPRB out there, great. But don't tie it to this recommendation. the recommendation to review and hopefully the council will eventually repeal this problematic ordinance. You could make that recommendation. You need to make that recommendation tonight. I spent years as one of the lead coordinators for

indivisible status laws and now I'm a member of CV Bipok. I've been on both sides of this and I can say having been on both sides, the political discrimination by MPD against these two group oops from one compared to the other is palpable. Well, we're treated much worse than they are, and it's not a coincidence. The city council is sits on their hands and uses this body, the CPB, as an excuse for their inaction. Now, I recognize that as a whole body, you only meet once a month in that you make recommendations. I understand you cannot change this policy by yourself, but you can remove the city's biggest excuse for their inaction, their cowardice. So please help us stop their stonewalling and use what little power they have provided you to force them to do their job. What better way to honor the 238th anniversary of the US Constitution than to take a stand in for our right to peaceibly assemble. Thank you.

Thank you. Um are there any other public Thank you. Not a problem at all.

Um, hi, my name is Ryan Hall. I'm an administrative manager for Cal Pride. Um, I'm extremely thankful to be supported, uh, by fellow community activists and advocates here today. Um, I'm proud to hear all of their statements, uh, all of which I agree with. And second, uh, but I'm here today as another member of an organization, an organization that serves the same communities you do, to say that I'm embarrassed. Um, it's embarrassing that it took three months, countless community members uh addressing their concerns at countless sitting meetings, and a threat of litigation to finally talk about it. The CPRB claims that they were building this report with community insight in mind. But building a report starts to look a lot like inactivity, passivity, incompetence, and corruption if it takes too long. Your comments about sitting and waiting and asking and taking steps are frankly not promising. I appreciate you providing your direction on the ordinance tonight, but I will not forget that law enforcement officials have already made their racist, discriminatory, and hostile direction clear. Mentioned further down in the agenda is one of your policy goals, uh, improve relations between the community and the department. It's far too late to improve. Uh, the city and the department must take accountability for the irreparable harm they have caused in their inaction and ignorance. And listen, CalPride knows what accountability looks like. Uh like the CPRB, CalPride considers itself a liazison and a bridge. We believe that community safety starts with willing collaboration, but we train you, not the other way around, actually. Um one of the executive directors of Cal Pride, Calie Zambrano, provides uh comprehensive training to crisis intervention teams and academy recruits. Some are receptive. uh others refuse to respect marginalized identities even after receiving this mandatory training. They make a conscious choice and that behavior cannot be ignored.

Accountability is necessary to ensure that harmful patterns do not continue. The CPRB is here to do that, but you are failing to protect the communities we both serve by urging the city um by not urging the city to repeal the ordinance and investigate MPD. It's embarrassing. I also have a small note about dispersing a survey if you guys have to. Uh again, only after the city immediately repeals the ordinance. Um through Cal Pride, I personally have developed effective outreach methods with the state uh in partnership with the Office of Community Partnerships and Strategic Communications. It's a program called the Trusted Messenger Network. I got to be frank with you guys, uh no one trusts you guys. Um, if you guys have to perform surveys, uh, which I understand that you guys might, uh, I highly suggest that you adopt this approach of the trusted messenger network, uh, my card if you'd like to discuss more. Also, the, uh, stance on an objective or neutral survey to identify and evaluate the layered experiences of privilege, oppression, and systemic violence is just further handwaving. You guys are running out of time.

Thank you. Um, anyone else with the public? Okay.

Hey y'all, this is uh John Carlo from uh CV Bipok and uh let me remind you that is Central Valley Black Indigenous People of Color Coalition. It's very important for later. Um so as the ad hoc committee had mentioned that um there are only three cities in California that have mass ordinances. Uh, and I'm I'm pretty sure it's very obvious that the out of the total 482 cities in California, those 479 that don't have them are perfectly fine and safe without them. Okay. Uh, and we know the reason why these mass ordinance do exist. Okay. Um, and I love how they uh that the ad hoc committee had mentioned that these do violate constitutional rights uh and even state ones like the California Penal Code and due process which mean you know these these laws are vague. Okay. Uh and they're vague for a reason to interpret uh people's actions to justify uh enforcing laws against them. It also directly goes against uh the 14th amendment for equal protection uh because the protesters at that past uh in July were not treated equally as we know again the the protest uh created and and and ran by Central Valley black indigenous people of color and the those that were participating were the ones who had these laws harshly enforced against them compared to the no kings rally. It's very obvious uh there and we know exactly again why this is going on. We know why these the these ordinances do exist. It's it's why they exist in Georgia and Virginia like y'all mentioned how they still enforce anti-mask laws is to suppress disscent and to discourage that type of disscent. Okay. It's to spread fear for anybody who wants to kind of h share express their rights to freedom of speech. And this big ordinance serves that exact same purpose. Is not for public safety.

There was no issue of public safety. Um again, Central Valley uh CV Bipok, we we've had a track record of organizing and holding peaceful protests. Earlier this year, we had one and then the year before we had two or three major ones. We had masks, we had loudspeakers, we even had flag polls, which people were also arrested for. Yet in those protests, nobody was arrested. So, so, so why are we picking and choosing which what what protest and when we are enforcing these laws? Okay. Um, and that's the problem there. There is no need for a survey. We know what the right thing to do is. It's to repeal this because it is unconstitutional. It's not for public safety. Okay? It is to spread fear, to suppress dissent, okay? It is to prevent people uh from basically practicing their first amendment rights. And we all know that. It's obvious. So for those that are pushing to want to repeal this and have that recommendation, you are on the right side of the history. And those that are not, I don't know what the hell y'all are doing, okay? But it's unnecessary unless you want to repeal this. All right. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Is there any further public comments? Okay, seeing none. Oh, good evening CPRB members. Uh, I want to begin by thanking the ad hoc committee uh the subcommittee I should say for their effort and time in preparing this report. Collecting information and reviewing ordinances, policies, and procedures is serious work, and I appreciate any effort to engage in the issues that affect both public safety and civil liberties. That said, I must be very clear tonight. I am deeply concerned with the presentation that you just received. It lacks neutrality, balance, and sufficient research research before offering proposals to the full board. When this board created the ad hoc subcommittee, it was asked to evaluate the ordinance, collect information, and and make a recommendation. That process should have been thorough, impartial, and reflective of of broad community input. Instead, what has been presented is largely a repetition, a regurgitation of advocacy letters from the ACLU, NAACP, and other aligned groups. From what I understand, the recommendations offered tonight were developed from discussions amongst the ad hoc committee members and research on the internet of which I would be curious to understand what those sources on the internet were. At the outset, I and I believe many others assumed that the committee would solicit meaningful input to gauge overall sentiment on this ordinance. That did not occur. While a draft survey was created, has been mentioned, no scientifically valid or statistically reliable method of collecting community feedback was pursued. Nor were perspect perspectives sought from a wide cross-section of residents, business owners, faith leaders, victims, families, or others who may view view this ordinance differently than the group of voices who regularly attend

these meetings. Drawing conclusions about the entire will of our community from a set of like-minded advocacy groups is not only inaccurate, but it's misleading. I caution the board not to prioritize speed or appeasement of certain special interest groups over the more difficult but necessary work of gathering gathering balanced representative input. The credibility of this board depends on it. I think we all understand that community input is important and that that is why I as the police chief spend a lot of time listening and engaging with people from all walks of life in Modesto. If this board wants to assess community sentiment, it must mean all of our community, not just a fraction of it. Families who want to feel safe downtown, business owners worried about disorder, residents concerned about protests escalating into violence, those voices matter every bit as much as those represented in the advocacy letters. To ignore them in favor of a predetermined conclusion diminishes the integrity of this process. Members of the board, your legit legitimacy rests on your credibility to be fair, impartial, and thorough. When recommendations are one-sided, lack actual research and community input, or driven by advocacy, your credibility is at risk. This board was created under the banner of forward together to bring our community a diverse perspectives into a thoughtful robot.

No, stop. Stop. We're not going to do this, guys. And I'll finish my thoughts. Thank you. You guys get extra time as well. He has respected you during he Steve he is respect Steve he is everyone has been respected during their time from the police chief. All we ask is the same respect for him. That's it without interruption. Just like they gave you guys. You're still speaking. Stop speaking please. Thank you.

Thank you. It's created under the banner forward together to bring our community's diverse perspectives into thoughtful robust discussion about policing and Modesto not to serve as a watchdog group or an advocacy arm for any special interest. I would have not supported it if that had been the intent. It purpose to provide balanced input on matters of community concern. And whether not I agree or disagree with any given recommendation, I take your input seriously and I value it because of the range of perspectives that help me make the best decisions for this department of the city. I'll close with tonight. I ask you to consider whether you truly have the correct unbiased information you need to move forward with any recommendations at this time. The city the citizens of Modesto deserve nothing less. Thank you.

Thank you, Brandon. We're not going to do that either, guys. Hey, hey, hey, Steve. Steve. All right, guys. We're going to continue this meeting and we don't need to have any dis you had to inter like tell us to stop interrupting. What I'd like to have a comment. Okay. So, to me, one sec. I'm so sorry. I'm going to officially close public comments and we're going to bring it back to the board for for further comments for me. Uh, you know, things like the survey and things like that's opinions. Brandon,

we're talking about law. So, you're talking about opinions versus law. And the things that I read about the First Amendment and some of these violations are concerning. And so I don't care how many people you ask, it's really not about opinions. It's about are we breaking the law or not? That's what I think has to take priority. So I'm I'm not what does that mean? Well, are are we violating the first uh amend amendment? Are we violating freedom of speech? All of those different civil liberties are violated.

And and those answers we cannot give because of our scope of work and and what we can do is recommend the city take a legal analysis on this. And of course other things, but it's not our job to determine whether it is legal or not. Um I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is, guys. Like flat out. Okay. Um, I don't know if you were finished with your or or you had something, Nancy. Well, I think my my inclination would be to make a recommendation to the city through the city count uh city manager to

before any recommendations, let's just make sure the board members have a okay time to speak to. I'm sorry. Just if there's any other board members that would like to speak on this, have any comments, um, concerns about anything we've talked about tonight regarding this agenda item?

I'm interested in hearing the rest of your thought. Actually, it wasn't a direct recommendation. It was your thought about a recommendation. Yeah, I I think that we should go ahead and recommend to the city manager or communicate to the city manager that our recommendation is that subdivision 13 of the ordinance be repealed. Um, and you know, I I guess my inclination is to agree that a survey isn't needed. So that's my thoughts on it. Any other board members have any comments,

Frank? I'm interested to hear more before I speak. Okay. Is there anyone else? Okay. No, I mean, you have the floor. Yeah.

Okay. Um well due respect uh to those who think they know the law. Uh it's pretty well established um that freedom of speech is a primary constitutionally protected um right that each and every American has. And it's uh definitely uh anybody proposing a ordinance in a city council level uh has to take serious consideration of it. Um I've had a number of conversations with attorneys. We've heard from attorneys here tonight. I know uh I I have pretty good authorities that have told me that this is uh illegal, but we can't make that decision from here. We are only here to recommend a policy and then we'll let the city's attorneys uh manage the the the actual legal um their legal evaluation. And then ultimately depending on how they determine there will be a court that sounds according to the ACLU there'll be a court that will make the final decision but we're only going to make a policy proposal and um to that extent I don't know that the surveys are significant. Um the city survey only goes to identified select few. So, we're not really getting a complete city uh a survey of everyone who's interested in the city. Um, in fact, many of us will probably be left out of that survey. Um, if we were to do a survey, I'm not sure if we have a budget assigned to us that we can do something like that. I don't know how much time it would take and um I'm not sure if it's indicative uh

depending on what the law is going to ultimately determine anyway. So, I like uh Nancy would uh propose that we uh push the policy forward to the city manager uh of repealing the the um measure. And I also think we should uh we shouldn't wait for any surveys. That's just uh you've heard the the the citizens who do show up here are very uh um engaged. Uh the um police chief mentioned other people that aren't here um and there are concerns but um you know they're not here right so I there are there business leaders or people who have concerns um all I can say is that we for three months we have heard an awful lot from a lot of people not just the people sitting here in this room. Uh, I've had this conversation with neighbors and u all kinds of people have reached out to me. So, it's not just and many of them are business owners by the way. Um, anyway, um, I I see this as an issue of your safety and the safety of your members as well as the safety of the community. I don't think the physical engagement with people uh on a on a a misdemeanor like that is um is a healthy uh trust developing um uh exercise. And I also think it it it it can escalate. It just seemed like it just entirely escalates things that don't need to be um at the most maybe a ticket, but I can't imagine arresting anyone for for walking down the street with a mask. That just it is a preposition. You're supposeding that they're going to be uh bad actors,

which is what the state actually says. You have to be in the commission of a crime. You can't just look at a person and say that well that's that's going to be one of those people. So anyway, um I also know that what we make the decision here tonight doesn't just affect uh CV bipok. It can also be a total spectrum of people and protesters from across the spectrum. There there were Proud Boys. I think that was the the uh one of the groups that prompted this whole thing in 2020. And I'm willing to say to both sides, uh, that's that's your that's your right. Wear a mask. That's personally my opinion. I'm going to leave it there.

Thank you. Is there anyone else?

Actually would like to add to the idea of coordinating with the uh, police department and having your um, having your organizers meet with him. I want that to the to the same the same same thing applies. I want I would like the uh far right, far middle, far left, whatever the group is, they should all uh I think it's just a matter of uh for civic uh safety that we meet with the police chief or whoever he designates for these events in the future. Um, but I also do think we need to move this forward and not wait for another another month.

Thank you. Um, Trish,

I'm I'm sitting here. Go ahead, Ken. I'm still thinking I'm I'm going to be unpopular here, but that's comes along with the territory. Um, we've heard repeatedly from the folks that are gathered here tonight and at previous meetings, and I respect your opinions. I think you have valid points, but I think there's a an entire community out there that deserves to be heard. And the fact that they don't show up here doesn't really mean anything to me. I think their their viewpoints and their input is just as valid. And I think we need to have some sort of comprehensive professional method of gauging that sentiment. And so I'm in favor of doing this survey before we take any formal action and recommending anything to the city manager's office. And like I said, I know I'm going to be unpopular, but I think it's important.

Thank you, Ken.

Uh, one of the individuals that spoke earlier made a reference to lifting the ordinance versus repealing the ordinance. And I feel like a way to try and meet in the middle in this urgent environment that we are discussing here tonight that it might be reasonable for us to consider a recommendation to city manager to lift the ordinance in this point in time until we can come back with what we need to to encourage further action on either side. So, I I lay that out asking for I don't want to put anyone on the spot. Yeah.

But asking for kind of consensus on that as a consideration, as a way to move the needle forward and not be absolute at this time as we have mixed feelings about engaging the rest of the community. I feel um one of the most important val valuable statements that came from your report was in your conclusion in the statement that the relationship between law enforcement and the community is reciprocal. And I think that has to be an expectation from everyone to work together one way or another, but in this moment doing something to help tone down the fear and the passion. um to keep everyone safe on all sides is a way to at least offer a step.

Thank you. Uh Brett.

Yeah. I um while I understand what you're saying, I don't see the what the research that I've done and u the vast opinions I've I've been taught that is going to change my feeling that because we're not revealing the mask ordinance period. We're saying it doesn't stand alone as a misdemeanor that gives, you know, a violation of wearing a mask. If someone wears a mask, fine. But when that person engages in the litany of list of other things, the mask's a problem. And and no, you can't violate the law with while wearing a mask. So, I I don't see this as a I don't see us ending up anywhere other than this because we aren't we aren't taking the whole ordinance and throwing it out. We're just saying when it comes to wearing a mask alone, does that give you uh does that is that a violation of our ordinance? And so, I feel really comfortable saying that we aren't taking the teeth out of the ordinance by doing that. We're basically saying just on its own that doesn't give anyone the right to uh to to go out and do anything else. And it's clear in in the the in our ordinance. It's clear in the the state law that that's the case. And it it never it never gives wearing a mask cart long if you're going to go to that next level of So, I I don't I really don't see more people. This the survey would be good. I would like to do the survey just to get more information, but on that particular item, I don't see us I mean,

I don't see me changing my my opinion about this. Okay. Um after is there an action you're comfortable taking recommending right now, Brad? Yeah, I would I have about three of them listed down if what I have about three motions that we could possibly make. I have one that I can make. All right, cool. Let's Let's go ahead.

Move to recommend the city manager to um remove Modesto Municipal Code 4-23.02 2 subsection 13 only uh which is the mask ordinance that is a standalone violation of the of the of municipal code and to you know take that in consideration and he goes to the city council or whatever with it. I'll second. So we understand his motion correct everyone. There's no clarifying questions. Um I just we just got to be make sure it's It's clear.

Yeah. So, it's it's to the recommendation is for the city manager to recommend removing subsection 13 or 2302. That's A13. A13, correct? The recommendation, the motion is to to convey to the city manager that it's the board's opinion recommendation that section 13 of 40 A13. Yes. Yes. Yeah. I mean,

and some clarifying question on that motion. Is there a way that we can tie in lifting A13 until there is like a a legal analysis for the city and let them figure it out, but I don't think there's a need since there's a motion it completely motion was made to make the recommendation to repeal. Okay. So, we already had a a motion. We've had a second. Um all in favor? Hi. Okay, let's just start with the calling the role. Um Sammy, if you don't mind, um just calling the role for us.

Just call the name tag. Member Basley Day. I think she just walked into the room. Um do you can do you mind repeating the motion so she hears it? It's a recommendation from the board to the city manager to repeal uh municipal code section 4-23.02 A13 say I we're sure that that's the section. Yes.

The recommendation. Say it again, John. Recommendation from the board for the city manager to repeal that the city repeal. That the city repeal 4-23 2 subdivision A13. It's A13 to be specific. Yeah. Yeah, it's Yeah. So, we're on a roll call. Sorry. Member Beasley Day. Member Bryant. Yes or no on the motion? Yes. Member Bryant? No. Member Bird? Yes.

Member Christensen? Yes. Member Drell? Yes. Member Grant is absent. Member Smith. Yes. Member Han. Yes. Chairman Sorio. Yes.

Uh the motion passes 7 to one with one out. Um, after listening to further comments as well, um, I just want to entertain this. So, let's just entertain it and see where it goes. Um, I would like to make another motion that the CPB make a recommendation to the city manager to review 4-23.02 2 in its entirety um for any possible first amendment violations. That's where they can do their legal analysis. I'm tell our recommendation is to tell the city manager to do a full review of legal analysis of 4-23.02 in its entirety, not just A13. So this this one includes all the rest of those restrictions. Can uh we add on to that in regards to state and federal laws. Th this is more of a I mean yeah to coincide with state penal code 185, but it's it's a legal analysis review of the entire ordinance.

So you're talking about like sign thickness, wearing a helmet, what wearing everything? Yeah, but that was already done when they the legal analysis done. There's nothing. It's we're asking for it updated. You you can make that recommendation, but the city attorney's office can't provide the the results because we have attorney client privilege, right?

Where our, you know, duty of confidentiality applies to the the city. So, Do we get say we move this forward? Are you able to tell us city manager said yes, they will look into it or city manager denies that recommendation just so that we can be aware and know? Uh I you know I can tell you that we've looked at it. Okay. Um feel less compelled for that.

It was just it was just a something to think about. There's no second. If there's no second, there's no vote. Um, but that was something I wanted to bring up. Um, another thing I heard tonight, so another motion I'm willing to bring forward on the table, um, a recommendation that the city manager investigates and does a legal analysis on possible police mis misconduct for the June 14th protest, including a review of police uh, policies for 12 and procedure 466 and how the police department responded to the protest on that Okay.

Thank you. Um, a motion to recommend the city manager to investigate the June 14th protest and any possible misconduct from the police department, including a review of their policies and procedures um 412 and 466. This No, this is directly to city manager. Just the

I I' I'd need to know more about what was done. I know the police had internal investigations. This might have been done already. Yeah, this is just based off of public comments and a presentation given by um the police review board. I mean the the police yeah if there's no second then there's there's nothing to be moved on here. But yeah, the the agenda item for tonight is the the ordinance itself. So this actually goes outside the

last last meeting we we had conversation and presentation on protest. So I feel like it's not necessarily connected to the mass thing, but it was a topic that we that we brought forward and I I understand but there's no there's no reason

I want to second that because I think that when we're talking about building trust um we're looking at accountability. We're also looking at um transparency. And so just because you look into something or you investigate something, that doesn't necessarily mean that um you're going to find a lot of things wrong. But in order to show that we really are about transparency or accountability, what's the harm in looking into it? Well, Brown Act doesn't allow you to take action on items that haven't been agendaized.

And I understand that point. I think the difference would be under new business. It's not one of the items listed. So if you wanted it to be brought as a topic in the future is where a discussion would be made about getting But we had the presentation. That's my point is that we had the presentation on the topic of protest from the police department. But I understand where you're saying it's not agenda tonight.

So you're saying we can't make a recommendation on that. Okay. My apologies. Um I understand now. So I guess it will have to be something further. But as Wendy said, it just coincides with our our main goals of, you know, police accountability, alternative response models, and policies and practices. Um, but yeah, we can bring it up for a future topic. Um, so tonight, um, I mean, that's what I I don't know if there's anyone else that has any other

I actually would be willing to put a motion forward that we take advantage of the invitation we've had from city to include three questions in their survey survey. We lose nothing by taking advantage of that opportunity and maybe we consider using the response we get on those questions to validate whether or not it would make sense for us to do our own further one. But at least get three in there. It's not we're not having to pay anything. Why not take advantage of at least a test market agenda agenda? That's something we can do tonight, right? Because that's part of the conversation that Yeah, that was part of the I'll second that.

Do you need a clarifying motion? Yeah. Can you re restate that? I make a motion that we take advantage of inserting however many questions allotted to us in the citywide survey to go out in the next two weeks. Brad second already second on on the um 4-2302 A13 in particular or 4-22.0 4-23.02 2 and is that what the survey was that you guys were building was sold the survey that we were building was masks alone

which part was included in the conversation and then with the city the conversation we didn't go into what the questions would even look like or anything like that um the city and Proploski went into that conversation together so I'm not sure what so as as staff I just say that um it was pertaining to what was contained within the presentation that uh you all sought tonight. So that's the questions that were that were you know and and the discussion around partnering with the city about the mass correct section subsection 13 and that and the not sure it's needed then we're already

I mean they could use it in further deliberation to city council on the the data that they receive in that survey. So, you know, I think it's worth it. That's a good point. We'll I'll I'll stand on it. And we have a second. Um, can we get a roll call? Can I make a comment first? I apologize. I have a question for staff. Scotty, um, do you know how many questions are going to be asked or is that up to negotiation between u your office and a consultant that's going to do this work? That hasn't been determined, but I mean in knowing what our survey contains and the number of questions and all of that, it's probably going to be about two or three. I'm just going to tell you.

Okay. Roll call. Member Beasley Day. Yes. Member Bryant. Hi. Member Bird. Yes. Member Christensen. Yes. Member Deal. Yes. Member Grant is absent. Member Smith. Yes. Member Han. Yes. Chairman Sorio. Yes. Motion passes. Page zero.

Okay. Thank you guys. Um on to we will be moving on now on to um staff comments and reports. Uh Stephen, are you still with us? We have an update on the independent police auditor.

Good evening everybody. I absolutely am still with you, Chair Sorio, and and thank you for letting me dip in for for just a moment here. I've obviously been following the the evening's events very closely, and I appreciate the the robust discussion. I do not have a substantive report from from the independent police auditor office tonight based on the the the cycle of of activities that we pursue as part of our role in Modesto. But just based on the conversation tonight, I just want to offer the board and the public a a very quick reminder that certainly one of the meat and potatoes of our function is to conduct an independent assessment, an independent evaluation of any of the internal processes that the department has with regard to complaints of officer misconduct, critical incidents, uses of force, etc. My understanding, I know the topic dour is is June 14th and and the ordinance and there's been a lot of talk about the ordinance. With regard to June 14th, my my understanding is that the there are pending investigations that the department has initiated and that would fall under the the umbrella of the work that my office does and and publicly reports out on. So, I just wanted to provide that reminder to everybody. uh and we'll certainly be interested in in tracking the further progress of these issues in the coming weeks and months. Thank you.

Thank you, Stephen. Thank you for that update. Um on to staff comments and reports. Uh Scotty, at this time no uh no comments from staff. Um on to the next item, board comments and reports. Policy goal number eight, review use of force policy to minimize likelihood of death resulting from use of force. Is there any update? Yes, we did meet and we um have that based on suggestions that were made at a prior meeting. We would our committee is going to try to arrange um a meeting with um MPD to consider some issues and questions that we had that we wanted to run by MPD first. And I talked to Lieutenant Clber about that this afternoon earlier. And um I'm going to be in touch with MPD to try to set up um a meeting with our committee and a representative of the department um by the second week in October.

Thank you for that update. Um policy goal number one, improve relations between the community and the department. Is there an update on that? No. again carrying forward allowing time to get through annual report and the subcommittee time that Latricia has um so willingly given I've waited um I anticipate we will hold a meeting within the next three weeks or so. Thank you. Uh policy goal number three reduce youth arrest particularly among Latino youth. Do we have an update on that?

No report. We've been busy working with this And are there any and are there any uh board comments or reports at this time? Board members may make a brief announcement or report briefly on his or her activities. No. Okay. Seeing none, um on to future agenda items. In the future, we will be talking about Brown Act training and we'll also be bringing up the CPRB calendar update. Uh Scotty, did you want to speak on that a little?

Yes, thank you. So, that'll be um just discussing topics to the end of the year and probably through January just like we did last year. And then in January, we'll also be bringing the same topic back to really kind of talk through uh this next year in 2026. Understanding that we probably won't fill up the whole calendar, but providing uh topics for consideration. And this is at the next meeting. Will we have both of these items or uh that's to be discussed for Yeah. Right. Right now it's anticipated that that would be the case unless something else comes up. Um and again it's it's that other one is just to talk about topics for the next you know the meetings until the end of this calendar year.

Perfect. All right. And finally the meeting is adjourned. Our next meeting is October 15, 2025. Thank you.