Community Police Review Commission - Regular Meeting

Please review commission meeting of May 28. This meeting is called to order. Can we please play the recording?

Pursuant to the city council meeting rules adopted by resolution number 24,076, members of all boards and commissions and the public are reminded that they must preserve order and decorum throughout the meeting. In that regard, members of all boards and commissions in the public are advised that any delay or disruption in the proceedings or a refusal to obey the orders of the city council or the presiding officer, constitutes a violation of these rules. The city of Riverside is committed to fostering a workplace that provides dignity, respect, and civility to our employees, customers, and the public they serve.

Thank you. Would commissioner Ward please lead us in the pledge of allegiance? Thank you. Now we'll observe a moment of silence. Thank you.

We now move to item number one, public comment. To comment on matters within the jurisdiction of the Community Police Review Commission, you're invited to participate in person or call at (951) 826-8688. Press 9 to be placed in the queue to speak. Individuals in the queue will be prompted to unmute by pressing 6 when you are ready to speak. To participate via Zoom, select raise hand function to request to speak. Individual audience participation is limited to three minutes. Do we have any callers at this time?

There are no callers here in the chamber and no callers online. Thank you.

Thank you. I would like to acknowledge an e comment we received from miss Hall and ask to submit it to the record. Do we have any objections to that? Thank you. We'll now move to the consent calendar. Does anyone wish to pull an item from the consent calendar for discussion? If not, can we get a motion?

I'll make that motion.

Thank you.

To accept the minutes.

And a second by Commissioner Lundy. Okay. Now, we'll take a vote to accept them.

Vote carries unanimously. Thank you. For the consent calendar. Just for the record, Loraina Verdusko, assistant city clerk. I will take role at this time before we vote again for the consent calendar. If you are here, just state here please. Chair Bell?

Here.

Vice Chair Gutierrez? Here. Commissioner Tigert?

Here.

Commissioner Ferguson? Here. Commissioner Ward?

Here.

Commissioner Lundy? Here. Commissioner Dillon?

Here.

And Commissioner Garcia is absent tonight. Thank you. Just just for the record we will vote again for, the consent calendar. I have a motion from Commissioner Dillon and a second from Lundy. If you would please vote.

Consent calendar passes unanimously. Thank you.

Thank you. Now we will receive file report by the city manager's office regarding the 2024 racial identity profiling act.

Good evening commissioners, Ruby Leanne Castillo from the City Manager's Office. So this presentation covers an analysis of the 2024 and 2025 Racial and Identity Profiling Act reports, which I will refer to as RIPA. So Assembly Bill nine fifty three is also known as the Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2015. It was passed by the California State Legislature and signed into law. And the purpose of AB nine fifty three is to address and prevent racial and identity profiling and to address public concerns about racial bias and the disproportionate targeting of minority communities by law enforcement.

The data collected helps identify trends and guides reform to create trust between law enforcement agencies and the communities that they serve. So the key provision of this bill include a collection of data where law enforcement agencies are required to collect and report data on all stops made, including details about the perceived race, ethnicity and gender of the person being stopped as well as the reason for the stops, the actions taken during the stops and the outcomes of those stops. Increased accountability by mandating detailed reporting AB nine fifty three aims to enhance transparency and hold law enforcement accountable for profiling practices. The bill also established a RIPA board which consists of 19 members and the role of the RIPA advisory board is to analyze the stock data, work with law enforcement agencies to review racial and identity profiling policies and practices, review law enforcement training and to provide an annual report that details the data finding and provides policy recommendations and best practices. So a link to the 2025 RIPA report is provided in the staff report.

So AB nine fifty three applies to all law enforcement agencies in California. There are four waves when agencies needed to submit data to the Department of Justice. So agencies who have between three thirty four and six sixty six officers were part of Wave three and were required to submit data to the Department of Justice by 04/01/2022 and Riverside was part of that wave. So how RIPA data is collected? So officers complete a 24 question AB nine fifty three template for every stop that they do.

And the data is electronically submitted to the Department of Justice by the Riverside Police Department. And the 2024 RIPA report is from data from January 1 to 12/31/2022. And the 2025 RIPA report is from data collected from January 1 to 12/31/2023. So as you can see, there were some stops that were excluded from the analysis. And so stops that occur outside of city limits are excluded.

And we exclude those because an officer could have stopped somebody while they were on their way to or from work on a special assignment or on an unknown variable. So stops that are made outside of the city limits are excluded and the data being analyzed for Riverside are based on Riverside's demographics. So if we compare the 2020 census and include stops made outside of the city, it could skew those numbers. So in our analysis, we compare the general population percentages from the U. S.

Census Bureau from 2020 and the ratio breakdown recorded in the RIPA reports. We obtained Riverside's demographics from the publicly available 2020 U. S. Census, which is a reliable and comprehensive resource for population statistics and community demographics. So this data provides a reference point for understanding the racial and ethnic composition of the city.

And the '20 Twenty U. S. Census identifies the ethnic and racial background of the city of Riverside as follows. So Hispanic and Latinos are 55.9%, 25.3% white, 6.6% black or African American, 8.5% Asian, half a percent native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, a tenth of a percent American Indian or Alaskan native, and 3.1% as all other ethnicities. So the gender breakdown of The U.

S. Census identifies the city of Riverside as 49.8% male and 50.2% female. And the data peer cured for the RIPA report is also available to the public and includes data self reported by police officers on the Department of Justice's website. So the presentation will examine three things. It's the timing of stops, alignment to the racial and gender alignment to Riverside's population and civilian complaints.

So data from the 2024 and 2025 RIPA reports indicates that the highest number of stops occurred during two key time periods, which is six a. M. To 11:59 and twelve noon to 05:59 p. M. So this trend aligns with law enforcement deployment schedules. The day shift runs from six a. M. To four and swing shift operates from noon to ten. So the increased number of stops during this timeframe reflects the availability of patrol teams on the street. So the remaining tables will have the same format as this.

It's going to include the Riverside's demographics, the percentages of stops and the number of stops for each different RIPA report. And the overall trend to see is that the total stops declined by 9.6% from 2024, and Hispanics and Latinos increased from 48.89 in 2024 to 52.68% in 2025, and that's continuing to reflect that the city's majority demographic. So warnings by race. A warning is an informal or formal notice given by an officer to a person who has committed a minor offense. It serves as a reminder or advisory without imposing legal or financial consequences.

Warnings are often used to educate the public, correct behavior, address minor infractions that do not pose a significant threat to the public safety And there is a verbal warning where the officer speaks to the individual explaining the violation and advise them to avoid repeating it. And there's also a written warning where a document is issued noting the infraction but not resulting in fines or further legal action. And Hispanics or Latinos received the majority of the warnings during the reporting period for twenty twenty five. Citations by race, a citation is also known as a ticket. It's a formal legal document issued by an officer for a specific violation of the law.

It typically requires a recipient to take further action such as paying a fine or appearing in court. Citations are used to enforce compliance with the laws and address offenses is more serious than those warranting a warning. The top percentage and number of stops according to race that were given a citation were Hispanics and whites. Arrest by race with a warrant. So an arrest is a legal act in which a law enforcement officer takes a person into custody because they are suspected of committing a crime.

A warrant is a legal document issued by a judge or a magistrate that authorizes law enforcement to take a specific action such as arresting an individual, conducting a search, or seizing property. There were a total of seven forty seven stops in the 2024 report and eight thirty six stops in the 2025 report. Hispanic stops held steady at about 45%, while Whites increased from 29.45% in 2024 to 33.9% in 2025. African Americans decreased from 23.29% in 2024 to 17.34% in 2025. There were a total of twelve twenty three stops in the 2024 report for arrests with arrest by race without a warrant and there were sixteen ninety four stops made in 2025.

And Hispanic individuals accounted for the highest percentage followed by whites and African American. So regarding gender and limitations. So of these 16,465 stops reported in the 2024 REPA report, 75 stops were excluded. And of the 14,879 stops reported in 2025, 99 stops were excluded. And the omission is based on the discrepancy between the gender categories provided in the AB nine fifty three report, which relies on the officers' perception and the gender categories recognized by the U.

S. Census. So some gender categories example are transgender, nonconforming, multi gender, those are reported in the RIPA analysis and not captured in The U. S. Census data.

So they were excluded for the comparative analysis and only males and female data was used for consistency with the census. So to ensure consistency when comparing RIPA data to the twenty twenty U. S. Census, only male and female gender categories are analyzed and a key observation here is that the proportion of male stops increased by 2.43% in 2025, while female stops decreased by the same percentage. When officers issue warnings instead of citations, in the 2025 report, 84.31% of citations were given to males and 15.69 were given to females.

A key trend here is that the percentage of warnings issued to males increased year over year while warnings for females decreased. Citations by gender, for stops resulting in citations related to gender, in 2025, 64.72% were issued to males and 35.28% were issued to females. Female citations increased by about 1.83% suggesting a modest rate rise in enforcement outcomes for women. Arrest by gender with a warrant. So for arrests made with a warrant, for the 2025 reporting period, eighty six point three four percent of individuals arrested were males and thirteen point six six percent were females.

A key observation here is that the proportion of arrests made with warrants for males increased slightly in 2025. Arrests made without warrants related to gender for arrests made without warrants in 2025, seventy seven point three five percent of individuals arrested were males and twenty two point six five percent were females. A key observation here is that the overall gender disparity remains wide between both men being arrested more than women, but there was a slight upward trend of women being arrested. So civilian complaints. So during the reporting period for 2025, 23 civilian complaints were received during the reporting period and eight of those alleged racial or identity profiling.

So complaint cases received are reviewed by the Riverside Police Department's Internal Affairs Division as required by the RPD policy 1,009.1 subsection C and D and government code 3,304 subsection D. Civilian complaints are also independently reviewed through the CPRC, which is what you guys do, and that's outlined in our Riverside Municipal Code eight ten Subsection C. So a key takeaway here is that both the Riverside Police Department and the CPRC provide oversight to ensure complaints are thoroughly reviewed and addressed. So the review of the RIPA report and its data aligned with Strategic Priority five, High Performing Government, specifically supporting Goal 5.3, which aims to enhance communication and collaboration with community members, improve transparency, build public trust and encourage shared decision making. And our recommendation is for the CPRC to review and discuss the RPD data presented in the 2025 Racial Identity Profiling Act Annual Report and request staff to bring forward any policy recommendation to the Safety, Wellness and Youth Committee for further discussion.

And this concludes my RIPA data presentation, and I'm joined by Deputy Chief Payne if you guys have any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. At this time, we invite public comment regarding this item. The public is invited to participate in person or by calling (951) 826-8688 to comment on this item. Press 9 to be placed in the queue and 66 to speak. To participate by Zoom, select in the raise hand function to speak. You have three minutes. Do we have any comments in the audience or callers?

We have no callers in the chamber and no callers online. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have any comments from our commissioners?

I've got a question Just to make sure I'm understanding the process. When the data is gathered and submitted, the data typically tells us something or doesn't tell us something. Whose role is it to determine that? If we see issues or trends with the data, is that the city's responsibility to note that or send it in and let whoever is checking it note it?

So all the data provided by the Riverside Police Department is submitted to the Department of Justice. The RIPA advisory board which consists of the 19 members, their role is to review that data and provide training and policy recommendations to agencies based on their findings.

Okay, so it's another committee, if you will, that looks into what the data is telling Correct. Okay. Thank you.

Commissioner Ward, if I could just kind of jump in on that. Under RIPA, it does I guess, not impose but recommend that local agencies look at this data and consider making policy recommendations and changes. If you look at the RIPA report that gets filed with the state and you look at the Racial and Identity Profiling Advisory Board report, they have recommendations and best practices. And it's in that section that you can see that they have certain things. They're they're for example, they say municipalities and law enforcement agencies should, and one of them is, develop policies that prescribe the specific types of prohibited stops and thus limit the discretion officers have to determine what can be characterized as a public safety stop.

For example, window tint or registration that's less than so many months expired. Smaller things that don't have a public safety impact. So that's where we as the commission have the ability to make recommendations, and that's number two on your list on page 21, to request that staff bring forth any policy recommendations to the Safety, Wellness and Youth Committee. So that's incumbent upon us to look at this data. And if we see that there was a problem there, what recommendations would we make to have it brought forth to this committee and then the committee would then consider that and bring it forth to the city council.

Did I state that correctly? I want to make sure I had that process correct. Does that make sense?

Yeah, that does make sense. Thank you. And is that something that is done here at this session right now or is this?

We can. Yes. Okay. Because it's agendized so it's something that we can certainly discuss.

Okay. Yeah. I was just curious about the year to year or not the year to year but the comparison of the percentage within the population versus the percentage of stops that we've recorded each group. And some of them look to be a little bit larger, significantly larger than the population. So I was curious about that and didn't know if that's something again that we want to have a discussion about or not. But it stood out to me right away.

You guys are free to have that discussion now. Is there a specific slide you want me to go to?

Let's see. Maybe go back to slide five. So if I'm understanding this, when I look at Hispanic 2020 versus 2024 is trending down. Well, it's not trending down.

The 2020 US census data states that the city of Riverside is composed of 55.9% Hispanics.

Okay.

And in twenty twenty four's report, the number of stops Hispanics were about 48.89. But in 2025, the number of stops that were Hispanic or Latino were 52.68%.

Okay, so that's all listed there per group. When I get to the black or African American, we've got 6.6% of the population, but 14.46% of the stops. That just stood out in terms of the size difference in terms of the tolerance around the 6.6%. So, and again, I don't know what parameters we're working with as a city that says something is a flag or not. Typically, you you have parameters statistically that that tell you when something is an issue. So that's what I'm just trying to understand.

I see. I have no response that it's this is the data that comes from the officers perception of who they're stopping at that time and that 14.46% is based off of perception.

Yeah, it's not, I guess I'm just not making myself clear. It's not about the perception of who's whom. It's really about there seem to be more stops relative to the size of that population than the other groups. So, that's what I'm trying to get a better grasp for and whether or not, again, we think that's an issue.

So I think this is saying for 2024, 14% of that 6%. The population is 6%. Of the population of Riverside is six percent. And of that 6%, 14% of the people that were stopped fell into the category of African American.

Well, 14% of the total stops.

It's the total stops.

It's the total stops for that year.

It's the total. Right.

Right. So you're twice as likely to get stopped if you're black or African That's

what that would say to me. Yes. That's what that would say to me.

Yes. I think that haven't heard of any I guess criteria that the city has established for when something becomes is deemed a problem. But I invite you to go out to the California Department of Justice website, Google RIPA, and you can see several years worth of data. The city of Riverside data that's provided on the state website is condensed and you don't see it broken out as thoroughly. I wanted to circle back to my what I wanted to tell you, and that is you did a very good job of presenting this, and I think the data is presented clearly and fairly.

Appreciate Thank that so very much for that. So I think if you go out and you look at what's out there on the state website, you'll see this

is a great system trend. It's not easy to understand. There is thousands of cells with data and if you're familiar with Excel or Power BI, you're able to analyze that data. And that's what we have done here for you because the report that comes from the state is very convoluted and hard to understand. This is why she has asked us to break it down and explain it to you to this body.

Okay. Okay, I mean that's my observation. So it's a matter of whether or not we think it's worthy of suggesting some type of further review or establishing criteria by which we say something is an issue because pulling data in and of itself is kind of like the first step in determining concerns or issues but there has to be something you do with the data that says yes, either it is or no, it's not an issue. Then you go forward. So I don't know where we go from here, but that's my observation.

Thank you. What

I would suggest perhaps as a going forward since we do have a number of new commissioners, I think that when we have these complaints and you'll see the nature of the types of stops that get a lot of these are traffic stops in the complaints. I think you'll get a feel for perhaps areas that the commission could make policy change recommendation to reduce the number of stops Or maybe you feel you have enough information right now to have the Commission consider coming back with some categories where we may wish to consider making policy change recommendations.

So if you want to look at more detail, I have Slide eight up. And if you want to look at that line item, so out of the 16465 stops, 2381 was related to that line item in 2024 and it decreased in 2025 to 2061. And again that data the percentage of population is based off of twenty twenty's U. S. Census data whereas it could change now. There might be a higher percentage of that number living in Riverside now and it might align with the stops that we have the past two years.

I just had a quick question. I know this information comes from the states. When Riverside looks at it and RPD looks at it, do we look at the areas that these stops were made in?

I don't. Do you?

Typically, no. The way that the state requires us to gather and report the data, it's very anonymized. For example, we can't parse out, we can on the back end within our system, but we can't parse out within the official data whether the person actually lives in the city or whether they were commuting from another area through the city. It doesn't parse out what area of the city they live in or what area of the city they were stopped in. There are several kind of difficulties with the methodology of collecting reporting the data that are currently being worked on in Sacramento right now to address some of those issues.

Thank you. Commissioner Dillon?

Well, and you kinda got to the same point that I was either gonna get clarification for nothing in the report. In other words, you don't throw out stops that were made on people that do not live in Riverside.

Correct. It's

But census data is specific Correct. To the city of Riverside. So it I mean, it seems like apples and oranges to me almost. But

Thank you. Do we have any more comments? Do we want to motion to approve or do we want to agenda it further discussion? Yes, Commissioner.

Will throw this out there and see if the Commission agrees. I would move to approve receiving and filing this report with the understanding that the commission throughout the course of the year may want to revisit this data with policy recommendations that we may wish to make.

Thank you.

Please vote. Item number five passes unanimously with Commissioner Garcia absent. Thank you.

Thank you. Now we move on to the community police review commission membership structure role, potential consolidation opportunities and development of citywide governance resolution. At this time, we invite public comment regarding this item. The public is invited to participate in person or by calling (951) 826-8688 to comment on this item. Press 9 to be placed in the queue and 6 to speak. To participate by Zoom, select the raise the hand function and you will have three minutes.

Can I go? Okay.

Yeah, sorry.

Ruby Leanne Castillo again from the CD Manager's Office. So this presentation is regarding the review of Boards and Commission. So some background and context, in 2022 the number and role of the city's Boards and Commissions were discussed multiple times throughout the year. During the time that the City Council's rules, procedures and order of business was being discussed. It was ultimately determined that a comprehensive review of Boards and Commission should take place independently of the council's rules and be brought back for future consideration.

So there were some structural changes and proposals. In June 2023, as part of the initial examination of structural changes, the airport commission was presented with a proposal to merge with the Transportation Board. So the commission did not support the merger, citing its distinct and technical responsibilities that differ from those of the Transportation Board. And a correction on this slide, it's actually March 2025. The Budget Engagement Commission is the largest commission with 18 members.

They discussed reducing its size. So a recommendation to reduce membership from 18 to 11 was approved by the BEC but has not been brought back to the governmental processes committee for formal approval. So some of the questions that have guided this review is: are the number and scope of boards and commissions appropriate? Is membership size optimized for functionality? Are quorum and attendance issues affecting performance?

Are the opportunities to consolidate are there opportunities to consolidate or streamline? And is there a need for a standard governance framework? So under our current landscape, the city currently has 16 Boarding Commission's with over 150 volunteers serving in various advisory roles to the mayor and to the City Council. So six of these are established by City Charter each with nine members, the Planning Commission, the HR Board, the Board of Library Trustees, Park and Recreation Commission, this body right here and the Board of Public Utilities. All the other boards and commissions are established by ordinance and they have membership sizes that range from nine to 18 members.

So some ongoing challenges that Boards and Commission face, membership and participation remain some as key concerns. In calendar year 2024, 18 meetings were canceled across Boards and Commission due to the lack of quorum. This body typically meets 11 times a year. We normally meet monthly with the exception of November when we go dark. And in 2024, three of our meetings were canceled due to lack of quorum.

As of 05/06/2025, there were 31 vacant seats across all boards and commission and quorum requires 50% of the Board or Commission plus one and vacancies directly impact the ability to hold a meeting. So this body has seen several new commissioners recently and so we thank you for your service. And as of today, we only have one vacancy which is in Ward 2. So for governance consistency, each Board and Commission currently has or they operate under their own bylaws and standing rules. While the city charter permits boards and commission to establish their own rules, there's growing interest in creating a standardized governance framework similar to the City Council's rules and the goal is to promote consistency and clarity while respecting each body's purview.

So the CPRC has formed an ad hoc committee to review its bylaws chaired by Chair Bell and with Vice Chair Gutierrez and Member Tyker. The committee was established in February 2025 and is scheduled to meet through September 2025 to evaluate the CPRC's bylaws, policies and procedures. So this item aligns with strategic priority five point zero, high performing government goal 5.3. And our next steps is we are not seeking a formal motion today. We're simply looking for feedback and recommendation from this body as we continue the important review process of boards and commissions.

There's not really much we can do with this board and commission because you are in the charter. You guys are specific to doing you know based on your the bylaws and the policies procedures of this commission. But the governmental processes committee is listening to all the boards and commissions. They're reviewing the boards and commissions and they want feedback from everybody if you have anything to provide. So that concludes my presentation. And if you have any recommendations, any thoughts for the GPC, we welcome you to discuss that.

Thank you. Now at this time, we invite public comment regarding the item. The public invited to participate in person or by calling (951) 826-8688. To comment on this item, press 9 to be placed in the queue and 6 to speak. To participate by Zoom, select raise the hand function to speak. You will have three minutes. Do we have any comments from our audience and or online?

No speakers in the chamber and no callers online. Thank you.

Thank you. You. Do we have any comments from our commissioners? Commissioner Dillon?

Yeah. One suggestion. I mean, I think we saw it in the last round of people aging out of their police commission position. I think it's important that we start at least six months before their end of of their tenure to go out and find new board members to replace them, start the background investigation process, all of those things that take a lot of time. Because it seemed like that was why for the last couple of months, we went into a no quorum issue with this commission.

Commissioner Tekner.

I agree with Commissioner Dillon. He said basically what I was going to say. Thank

you. Noted.

Thank you. Mr. Dillon, see your name. Did you have another comment? Okay. Thank you. Any other comments?

Thank you. I'm gonna go to the city clerk's office if you have any timing.

Thank you for the question. For this commission it is a more thorough investigation so it could take up to a month. It just depends on the individual.

Okay. Thank you.

Alrighty.

Commissioner Gutierrez.

I would suggest also if when the new commissioners are being trained, if they can have an opportunity to possibly review cases in advance with the trainers so that when they arrive, they're actually ready to go and up and running. Perhaps they will know how to navigate the software platform, which is a little tedious and understand the use of the various tools like the synopsis and the like. And really understand the difference between the contrasting forms, those that come from the internal review and those that come from the synopsis and those that are embedded. What is the tool for? What is the reference for?

Because it's a lot of self learning. So I would just suggest perhaps maybe a deeper dive in the training.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any other comments?

Okay.

So I think we're I think we can move to number seven, which is the review and schedule proposed full day training options on various police procedures.

I'm your entertainment all night. I'll be here till 10:00. Okay. So the Community Police Review Commission has requested for training on key police procedures. Scheduling was postponed while we had several vacancies on the commission and now that we have eight of the nine seats filled.

We are going to be providing training in the following areas, shoot don't shoot scenarios, searches and arresting techniques, best practices for conducting traffic stops, taser use and presentation, de escalation techniques and processes. So last year we held a training session for this body at the Magnolia Police Station And to avoid the meeting requirements, we don't want to have a quorum. So we need to select two dates from this list and we need to divvy up those dates with four commissioners per session. So we are asking you today to select a date from this list and the training will be from eight to twelve so that we can get you guys signed up for your training. So my recommendation is that you select one of the four available dates and assign four commissioners session one and four commissioners session two.

So I can bring it back to this date if you guys want to take a look at your calendars and see what works best and we'll need a vote for the date and then we'll need a vote for the commissioners attending.

Commissioner Gutierrez, you have a question?

Is there a virtual option or a Saturday option for those of us who are employed full time?

Not that I'm aware. It's in person training. It's half a day, and these are the dates that PD is available for July.

So is there a target that we do this once every couple of years because I just did it, in fact I was with you at the last training session. How often is the goal to attend these trainings?

That was a recommendation by this body to offer the training. We're trying to offer If it you don't attend because you just went, I don't know if we're gonna go over anything new but also in your I think you guys are supposed to do ride alongs once a year

Correct. Or

We

won't do that at this training but it's also something that you can see I you've

was just wondering if there was a target for that or not. So I'll probably abstain from this group of training and attend the next ones because I Right. Just

Okay. Before we dive further in, we're gonna open it up to public comment. At this time, we invite public comments regarding the item. The public is invited to participate in person or by calling (951) 826-8688. To comment on this item, press 9. To be placed in the queue and star 6 to speak. To participate by Zoom, select the raise a hand function to speak. You have three minutes. Do we have any comments in the audience or callers?

No speakers here in the council chambers, and there are no callers online for item seven. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have any other comments from the commissioners? Commissioner Ferguson.

Sorry. Did you say we have to pick each of us has to pick two or we just can pick one? I also work full time.

We're offering two sessions, so we need two dates to be selected from this list and when they do it it's like a whole team that comes out. There's probably a good 10 to 15 officers who come to the training to teach you their specialty. So coordinating to get them to the training is ideal if you can pick one of the two of these dates. But it's not one date for one person. It's a group of four in each session.

Okay.

Thank you. For for myself, Tuesday is is best. I work full time as well. It's the easiest day for me to to get off.

Well, do also wanna let you know it is optional. This is training that minus the three new commissioners. This is training that this body has asked PD to provide. So if you don't want to do it or you're not available it is an optional training.

Commissioner Ferguson.

For me there's only one Thursday here and Thursday would be best

yes I concur I'll be going on Thursday the thirty first as well

commissioner Ward

For me, it would be the twenty second or the twenty third. I'll be out of

Thank you. Commissioner Tekker?

I'm flexible any of those dates. And I want to clarify that when you commit to going on one of those dates, it's only for half of the day.

So it appears the the twenty second and the thirty first. Does anybody have any other objections to those days? Or is there another day you you would prefer? Commissioner Lundy. Okay.

So I think we can I think the twenty second and the thirty first is that correct? Do we have a motion to approve those two days for training?

So

moved. Motion to approve.

Motion by Commissioner Ferguson. Do we have a second? Second. Second by commissioner Ward. Go ahead and please vote.

Motion passes unanimously.

Okay.

So, now we need four people to sign up for July 22 and four to sign up for the thirty first. No more than four.

Can we have less than four?

You can have less than four.

Okay.

We can't have more than four.

Okay. I guess we'll vote July 22. If you're available July 22, vote yes. Go through? Okay. So we'll go through. Commissioner Dillon. I'm available. Okay.

Well, let's have those who need a certain day pick the day that you need to go. So commissioner Ward, what day works best for you?

The twenty second works for me.

Okay. So I'm putting you as number one. Commissioner Ferguson?

July 31.

Commissioner Teichert?

I'm flexible.

Okay. Tuesday, the twenty second?

July 31.

Oh, thirty first. Okay.

July 22.

Okay. So would you like a Tuesday or a Thursday? Okay. And then Tuesday? Okay.

I have six. Okay. So I have

Six.

So for July 22, I have Commissioner Ward, Chair Bell, and Commissioner Lundy. And for July 31, I have Commissioner Ferguson, Vice Chair Gutierrez, and Commissioner Tyker. Do we need a vote?

No?

Okay. We don't need a vote. So we'll send a reminder out and an invite so that you know to attend. And if you do choose to come, you can come to either one of them.

Do we need to select the topic for the day or is that just going to be one

of All the topics are going to be discussed at both sessions.

Okay. You.

Okay.

Now, who will discuss item number eight, review stage number two of the criminal case book for officer involved death, case number 2022Dash0362.

Yes, thank you. Good evening, commission, city staff. Frank Hauptman, the CPRC independent consultant. And we opened up this OID case in February. And since that time, it was a meeting where there wasn't a quorum, and then we have new folks that came on board.

So where we are at, at this point is stage two. So the communication I've had with all of our new members is that they've all had the opportunity to review the cases. And I've had ongoing discussions during the month with several of them about the different reports and the protocols and how this works, also with the fact sheet and the rationale worksheet. And as a reminder, that rationale worksheet is something that I came up with and I provided to you to keep your notes throughout the time that you're reviewing this particular case so that you have something in front of you that you can refer to for discussion, certain points that you want to bring up in the process of deliberations. Also when you find that you're getting toward a position of wanting to make a recommendation for a vote, what you would like to say during that time.

So that's what that is for. And with the rationale worksheet, just remember that I will need those when this case is concluded for the public report. I write the first draft of the public report based upon what I've obtained from the rationale worksheets. I take the common themes and organize and put the report together. But it's a draft because it is your report, and it gives you the opportunity to make any changes, additions, deletions, whatever it is that you feel is important to be a part of that.

So right now, this is the incident that occurred January in the city of Hemet at the Travelodge, 2625 West Florida Avenue in the city of Hemet. Involved four officers that were part of a gang task force, one of which was an RPD detective. And in your review, as I stated before, as we opened up this case, is your review is focused upon the actions of the Riverside PD detective. So now that you're at this point, it's the fact finding request for training, any additional investigation that any of you may wish to have. You can certainly move if you'd like to onto stage three with any clarifications on policy and procedures.

And even if you wish to do so, you can move forward to stage four of the deliberation and finding process. So it's up to you as to how you'd like to transition through these stages. And if you have any questions before you discuss this or anything, please let me know.

Okay, at this time we invite public comment regarding the item. The public is invited to participate in person or by calling (951) 826-8688 to comment on this item. Press 9 to be placed in the queue and 6 to speak. To participate by Zoom, select the raise hand function to speak. You have three minutes. Do we have any comments from our audience or online?

No speakers in the chamber and no callers for item number eight.

Thank you. Commissioner Tekker.

Thank you, Mr. Hoffman, for your report. The last time you presented and I was here, I had raised the issue regarding receiving body worn camera video from city of Hemet as well as the Riverside County Sheriff's Department and you had checked into that and apparently were not successful at getting compliance?

Correct, from the sheriff's department and Hemet. And the sheriff's department simply made reference to the public review of the case that they do with every one of their incidents. And so that isn't what was specifically asked for. Now, I believe it was in the last meeting there was a discussion amongst the commission here that it felt that you could proceed without having to review what's on those body worn cameras or the surveillance camera from the motel, at least at this stage. And if at any point further on if there's anything additional that you bring up that you feel that you need this without or you couldn't go forward without reviewing this then of course that's up to you.

But at this juncture, we don't have anything else.

Okay. The reason that I had requested it was to me it was important to the determination as to whether or not the shooting was justified was to see the actions of Mr. Tracy when he was between these cars. And I don't know whether or not the body worn camera video from the Hemet Police Department would show him and his actions, but they seem to be positioned so that they would give us a better view. Because what we've received so far doesn't show us what he was doing if he was taking steps towards that would create a a threat of harm to the officers that would justify them firing upon him.

I wanted that information so that I could see evidence to support the verbal information, the statements that we heard from the officers that were involved, that he did this and he did that. But we couldn't see that on the video that we were provided. So that was the reason for my request for that. So I feel like I'm hamstrung here and not able to make a determination without seeing that.

Okay. Well, I said, I believe it was at the last meeting where others on the commission felt that they could proceed and move forward without actually seeing the body worn camera video or the surveillance camera video for what you have currently was sufficient. So it's really up to whatever you wish to pursue as a commission.

I'm just one commissioner, so I'm not the entire commission. That's just my opinion.

Right.

Thank you. Commissioner Dillon.

So just to be clear, the Riverside officer that was involved, he had no body worn camera on? Or it was on and not I'm sorry. He was wearing it, but it was not activated.

He did not have one.

He did not have one. Is that and I realize it might be a little bit outside our purview. Is that normal operating when they're doing undercover or not undercover but drug operations such as this one was?

I believe in most instances they do have the body worn camera. I believe that the department did look at this and address it. The Riverside Police Department did an internal administrative review of this case.

Oh, regarding the body camera or the overall case?

The body worn camera.

Got

it. Well, they also, of course, did the administrative investigation regarding the shooting, which they do in all cases. But again, this commission would not review the administrative investigation because there was no citizen complaint attached to it.

And again, just to reiterate, our responsibility is simply the Riverside officer, not anyone else that was there at the scene, their actions they took, anything else. Is that correct?

Correct. Okay.

Thank you. Any other comments? Commissioner Ferguson.

Thank you for this report. I have reviewed all of the reports as of the last Commission meeting. I wasn't up to speed. But you had mentioned that there's a process that can be done to actually request the body or to get that body worn camera. And I do agree with Commissioner and I forgot your tackert. I don't want to mess up your last name. I do agree. It would be helpful, although we can make findings without it, but it would be helpful.

Well, again, that is going to be your prerogative as a commission if that's what you choose to do. Now, the one thing that I had mentioned that the next step would be to use subpoena powers for that purpose. Because there was no response from well, the sheriffs did, but again, it was not what I asked for on your behalf.

A second question to that would be, do you know what the process or the length of the process for the subpoena?

I Can advise on that You this Commission has the power to issue subpoenas and direct me to do that it takes an affirmative vote of six to do that and then you can if that is what the instructions are in the action taken then I would take responsibility for preparing the subpoenas and getting them properly issued through the procedural course and get them served. The second part of your question being time frame. Subpoenas for documents generally take twenty to thirty days. So, we would probably get them by the next meeting. There are times because we have evidently reluctant departments and sometimes it takes a little bit longer, but it wouldn't take more than two months.

Do you know when the last time this commission actually exercised their subpoena power?

From my review, because I did some research on this to make sure that I was accurate, I couldn't find any time that the commission had issued a subpoena, or authorized it or directed it. But we did a lot of it's been thought about a number of times. Not necessarily in this context, in other contexts. So, at least from what I could review, and it's been about a decade, I couldn't find any issue.

Yeah, I can answer to that. I do know that there was only one in the time that the commission has been formed, and that was probably fifteen or sixteen years ago, eighteen years ago.

Thank you.

And the circumstance wasn't like this. It a subpoena for an officer, and the officer brought an attorney with him at the time. But that was the only time. It was quite a while back.

Commissioner Ward?

If we go through forward with the subpoena, we can still move through the other phases or we can move to the or does this

Actually stop us delay Commissioner Ward you can continue to deliberate and discuss, but hold to make any decisions or determinations until such time that you see everything that you feel is necessary to see. That's why I said if you discuss and at some point in your deliberations you decide, you know, it's important for us to see that, to make a finding on this. And so we do want to pursue that. And that's up to you at any given point in time. But you can certainly discuss the case, deliberate what's on the agenda, bring up any concerns or issues that you have.

And as I said, you can move from stages two all the way to four at this meeting or at the next meeting, it just depends on which steps you choose to take.

Thank you.

So if we move from stages two to four, what does that process really entail besides waiting for the videos and

Well, if you feel that I don't need any additional training or any additional investigation other than the videos, then okay, we don't have anything in that particular stage. So we don't feel that we need anything further with any policy and procedures, discussions, or anything like that, any clarifications of those. So then you can say we can bypass those because there aren't any none of us have raised any concerns or issues about it or wanting to discuss it. And then you can just start deliberating concerns or issues or things that you wish to point out that you found while you conducted your review?

Thank you. Commissioner Dillon?

Couple of things that seem relevant to me, and again, maybe we're too early into the process, but we we know that our officer discharged his weapon. Do we know that he struck the suspect when he discharged? Do we have a coroner's report or anything that gives us that information?

I don't believe it's in the coroner's report. At least the one that I did not see it.

And as far as I know, I haven't seen the coroner's report here. So we don't know whether or not he struck this suspect Well, or

coroner's report is available to you. I mean, you've had the opportunity to review it, it's in the case file.

Okay. I'll have to look for that because I did and I didn't see it.

I'll look and clarify which report that is, but I went through the various reports as I set up the fact finding as far as the reports that are important for you to review and look at. And one of those would have been anything that came from the coroner's office. Because everything that is involved in this case has been provided. It's all there. There are just certain things due to certain laws that govern things that are deemed confidential, particularly when it comes to

autopsies. Right. But I mean, obviously, it's within our purview whether or not our officers discharge of his firearm wound up striking the suspect. So we don't know that. Is that correct? No. Okay. Also another thing just so you're aware, it seems like within the commissioner folder, and I realize this is not your responsibility, but the city may need to be aware. There seems to be, like, all of our reports have been removed from the commissioner's folder. So there may be something going on with the IT group.

Well, I believe the reports were all moved over for the general public to view as well. Has that been done at this juncture?

I

don't know, but they're not here. I'm not seeing them.

Because the the the Sorry,

Frank. Just the I guess the procedure that we had done at one point was that we we move one at us. We would have the police department removed the files before the meeting, thirty minutes before the meeting

or Or something that's like only with the case review, it's not with the OIDs. Correct. The OID is Oh, I wasn't aware of that. The OID is, it's in laser fusion in the beginning, but Ruby and I had talked about and decided that after the first meeting that the cases will be moved into the CPRC website for the public to review as well. So if it was taken out of Laserfiche, it would very well be that right now it's on the public website.

I'll check the public website. I assumed it was still here because we were so early in the process.

Yes, will check that myself to see if the files are still in Laserfiche you can't just review it there but going to the website.

Thank you. Commissioner Tigert.

Yes, thank you. I wanted to follow-up on Commissioner Dillon's question regarding the bullet that came from the RPD officer. So is it correct then that the district attorney, when they were reviewing this, didn't have that information either as to whether or not

Well, DOJ

the D. Bullet hit

DOJ did their

Oh, DOJ.

Their report, and the district attorney's office reviewed everything.

Mhmm.

And in their review, the district attorney's office review is that they found that there's no criminal culpability on behalf of any of the officers involved, which is the same thing that the Department of Justice found. The Department of Justice also acknowledged that there weren't any policy procedural issues that were raised.

But again, back to my question, so did they have that information as to whether or not the RPD bullet hit Mr. Tracy?

I don't know for sure. I would like to make that request.

You find

that out? I will do that.

Provide us with information to answer that question?

Absolutely.

Okay. Then the other thing I'd like to do is I would like to make a motion that the commission request the city attorney's office to prepare a subpoena for the records from city of Hemet and sheriff's department as well and work with Frank on the phrasing of what falls within the ambit of that subpoena.

Certainly.

And do we need to vote on that? You said we need six votes.

Do we have a second for that?

Second.

Thank you Commissioner Ward.

Okay. Please vote. Motion passes unanimously for item number eight. Thank you.

Any

further questions?

Commissioner Ward.

Yeah, I had a question about the practice of using nonlethal means. And in cases like this, is that kind of a standard that is always done or is it case by case depending upon the circumstances?

It's case by case depending upon the circumstances, who's available, who's on scene at the time. It appears in this particular case because they were going all into a situation knowing of the individual having carried a firearm and being arrested and convicted of firearm possession before that other alternatives would be presented or brought forth. Sometimes when things are unfolding on a call for service, that just depends. You have the tasers which is one of the less lethal options. Here they use the rubber bullets And that's not always something that's readily available, at least to my knowledge with the correct deputy chief?

Yes, as far as the rubber bullets are concerned, use of

Use of lethal.

The lethal wound. That's not readily available to each officer. Every, and not each officer has that rubber, there's a name for it, it's not coming to me.

It's a drag stabilized, less lethal 12 gauge shotgun round, or a 40 millimeter plus lethal round, is what we authorize and what we issue. Are in Do to

speak to the mic? Into the mic.

They are in marked units. They are available to supervisors and to special teams. Most officers on patrol have access to them. Officers that are attached to special units may or may not.

Thank you.

And Commissioner Ward and the trainee, they will go over that. Less lethal forces.

Okay. And when they go off, the officers who are around hear it. I mean, loud, something that you know has happened?

Yes, there's protocols. And this will be part of the training that you get. There are protocols when there's going to be, for instance, a taser, their officers shout, taser, taser, taser. So there will be an announcement if there's going to be something less lethal. Even if it's any of the less lethal options, there's going to be notification made so all officers are aware and familiar with the fact that it's going to be deployed.

Thank you.

You're welcome. Anything else?

I actually want clarity for June's report. So when I prepare the report, are we continuing stage two?

I would like to make a motion to move from stage two to stage four knowing we have the subpoena coming. Okay. I can't. Okay. Would anybody like to make a motion?

I'll I'll make that motion.

Thank you. Do we have a second? Commissioner Dillon. And so, we're moving to stage three, or did we want to move to stage four?

Stage three is the policies and procedure clarifications, something of that nature.

From two to three.

Two to three?

Okay.

You want to remake that motion?

I'll make a motion that we move from stage two to stage three.

Okay. Thank you. Please vote.

Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Okay.

Thank you. And now we will move into closed session. Clerk, please announce the closed session.

The commission will now adjourn to closed sessions pursuant to government code section five four nine five seven to discuss issues pertaining to public employee personnel matters related to CPRC slash Riverside Police Department case number PC24Dash1004810050, 11053, 12063, and, 11054. Thank you.

From closed session. The city attorney report and closed session actions.

No reportable action.

Thank you. Number 15, brief reports on conferences, seminars, and meetings attended by the CRPC. We'll we'll go through. Commissioner Dillon? Commissioner Lundy? No, sir. Commissioner Ward? No. Commissioner Ferguson?

No.

Commissioner Tiger? Commissioner Gutierrez? And I do not have any. Item 16, the CPRC ad hoc committee updates. Commissioner Gutierrez.

So in accordance to the expectation of our ad hoc committee, I will be scheduling an up cutting upcoming event so the three of us can get together and review the matters relative to the bylaws and the like.

And we'll make sure we include Frank.

Yes. Thank you. I have I've already made some revision revision suggestions that I'll send to you, but thank you for that.

Item 17, Riverside Police Department updates.

Thank you, Chair Bell, and thank you for having me this evening. I was the liaison from the department to the CPRC since about 2020, so it's nice to come back. It's also really great. This is in all of that time, this is the most full I've ever seen the chamber on a CPRC meeting. It was great meeting the new commissioners tonight.

There was some talk earlier about training, some discussion on that. I just want to remind the commission that all of you are invited and encouraged to participate in the Citizens Academy. If that's something you're interested in doing, speak to the city manager's office or speak to Frank, and he will facilitate that with our department. And I can guarantee I will get you in if that's something that you want to do. Ride alongs, you're encouraged to do with our officers.

But also don't forget that you're allowed to do sit alongs and dispatch. And that will give you a very unique and different perspective on kind of how things transpire and not just from the point where the officer is dispatched to the call and goes out to handle whatever needs to be handled, but from the point where the caller calls in and you get a very different perspective on kind of how some of those incidents originate and some of the people that are calling in. So that's a good experience. Last thing I will tell you or want to mention is you might have noticed, some of you, that I'm wearing a different uniform tonight or a little bit of a different uniform. The patches are subdued with the blue line kind of design, the silver instead of the brass, and the silver badges that we have now.

May is law enforcement memorial month. May 15, particularly, is National Law Enforcement Memorial Day. And so our chief has authorized the wearing of a memorial uniform during the month of May, and then also on anniversaries of our fallen officers. So we're very proud of that. Thank you again for having me.

Thank you.

Item 18, the City Manager's Office updates.

No updates to report.

Thank you. Item 19, items for community police review commission consideration as requested by members of the CPRC. Is there any items that we would like to discuss? Commissioner Dillon? No. Commissioner Lundy? No. Commissioner Ward? No. Commissioner Ferguson? No. Commissioner Tekker? Commissioner Gutierrez?

Just simply, how do we schedule the sit along?

Just contact me. I can make the arrangements for the ride along. Just directly get the ride alongs scheduled as well as the sit alongs in

this Sit alongs, okay.

Good. Thank You just leave to let me know your the the kind of the time that you're considering and thinking, and I'll have them contact you and set it up with you.

Thank you.

You're welcome. Thank you. The next regular scheduled community police review commission meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, 06/25/2025. And that is it. The meeting is adjourned at 09:10.