Community Police Review Commission - Regular Meeting

Pursuant to the city council meeting rules adopted by resolution number 24255, 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 and 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.

Good evening. We'd like to welcome welcome you to the Community Police Review Commission meeting of July 23. This meeting is called to order. Roll call.

Okay. Taking roll call. Chair Bell?

Here.

Vice chair Gutierrez? Commissioner Teichert? Here. Commissioner Ferguson? Here. Commissioner Ward?

Here.

Commissioner Lundy?

Here.

Commissioner Dillon?

Here.

Commissioner Garcia?

Here.

We have quorum.

Thank you. Would commissioner Lundy please lead us in the pledge of allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the flag

of The United States Of America

to the republic for which it stands one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Now we'll observe a moment of silence. Thank you. Now we'll move on to 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 comments from the audience?

We have no participants in chambers. We do not have any prior e comments and we do not have any callers online.

Thank you. We'll now move on to the consent calendar. Does anyone wish to pull an item from the consent calendar for discussion? No. Do we have a motion to approve the consent calendar as is?

I move that we, approve the consent

calendar as is.

Thank you, commissioner Teichert.

And I'll second that.

Thank you, Commissioner Dillon. Now, please vote.

Motion passes unanimously. I'm sorry. With Garcia Epstein.

Thank you. Now we'll have a presentation by captain Dittmer with the Riverside Police Department.

Good evening, members of the Commission. As many of you know that have been on the Commission a while, it is our duty to report to you whenever we have an officer involved death. It's not just officer involved shootings that we have to report to you whenever we're involved in an incident that leads to the death of a civilian. It is also your responsibility to conduct a review of that investigation when it's concluded. We had an incident back on 06/20/2025, which was not an officer involved shooting, but it did involve a use of force incident, which I'm gonna give you a very brief synopsis of what happened just to kinda put it on your radar, let you know a brief overview of what happened. I can't fully comment on it because it is new and it's an open investigation, but I want you

to be aware of it.

So back on 06/20/2025, we had an incident that occurred at the McDonald's at 7474 Indiana. An employee from the McDonald's called because a man locked himself in the bathroom and was not responding when they were knocking on the door trying to get him out of the bathroom. Our officers were dispatched to the location at 06:38 in the morning. The first officer arrived on scene at 06:44 in the morning. Upon talking to the employees at the business, they wished prosecution for the person for trespassing in the bathroom and not coming out.

The initial officer made contact with the man in the restroom and asked him to exit outside of the store. After talking to him for several minutes, requested a second officer to come to the scene. The second officer arrived at 06:59 hours. As you can see I'm sorry, I'm not going through the PowerPoint. As you can see in the picture depicted here, that's when the first officer had him come out, and that's at 06:51 in the morning.

He had him come over to his car, just pat him down and try to identify him. A second officer arrived at 06:59. After trying to get him to comply, both officers tried to place him under arrest for trespassing. Suspect was resistant to the officers, and a use of force incident occurred. Keep in mind, this is at 06:59 in the morning.

After they were able to place him into handcuffs, the suspect was transported by AMR to Riverside Community Hospital. He was resistant to the paramedics also while they were trying to treat him in the ambulance. He arrived at the hospital at 07:35 hours. After being in the hospital for roughly over two hours, he passed away. The Riverside Forest investigation detail responded to conduct an independent investigation.

Their investigation number is disclosed right here in the PowerPoint on the bottom of the slide. And that's just giving you an overview of kind of what we know and what happened at this point. We're not handling the investigation internally. As you know, when we have any kind of officer involved death investigation now, the forest investigation detail from the county takes over the investigation, kinda similar to the officer involved shooting that we've been reviewing for the last couple months. We'll have more details as they become available.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Did you have a question, boss?

Commissioner Teichard?

Yes. Thank you for that overview of the incident. Could you give us the name of the individual who who was deceased?

I don't have that available to me right now.

You don't?

No.

Alright, thank you.

Any other questions? Thank you.

Thank you. Now move on to the discussion calendar. Item number six, determine whether the absence of commissioner Garcia from the 06/25/2025 regular meeting should be recorded as excused or unexcused. At this time, we invite public comments 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 6 to speak. To participate by Zoom, select the raise hand function, and you will have three minutes. Do we have any comments from the audience or online?

No participants in chambers and no callers online.

Thank you. Do we have any comments from our commissioners? Do we have a motion to excuse the absence? Commissioner Dillon?

I mean, guess we need some details. Was there a phone call made? Any kind of advance notice regarding Commissioner absence.

There was no notification within twenty four hours.

I believe I notified Frank.

So the Yeah. The attendance policy states that it has to be within twenty four hours before the actual meeting. So if you notify us the date of the meeting, it's not twenty four hours.

Do the, do the rules specify who is to advise or who we are supposed to advise if we're gonna be absent?

You can advise the staff, the chair, the vice chair, or Frank.

Okay. Thank you.

Do we have a a motion to excuse or unexcused? Commissioner Ferguson.

I would like to make an a motion to excuse the absence.

Thank you. Motion to excuse the absence by commissioner Ferguson. Do we have a second?

Just a quick question before, we continued. Was it 24 when he notified Frank? I I didn't hear that detail.

No. He called that he, he he called and notified me the day of that he was ill.

Thank you.

Okay. If we since there's a lack of a second on that, do we have a motion to not excuse the absence?

I'll make that motion.

Alright. Commissioner Dillon, motion to not excuse the absence. Do we have a second? Commissioner Tykert seconds that motion. So please vote on the not excusing the absence.

Motion passes unanimously with one no and one abstaining.

Okay. Now I'll introduce Frank Hupton, who'll present and provide direction on concluding of stage two and three and reviewing of stage four for the criminal case book for officer involved death of Jay Tracy.

Thank you, chair. Good evening, chair, Commissioners, City Staff, also Captain Detmer. So we are here still in the process of the review of the Joseph Thomas Tracy the fourth OID case. The incident occurring 01/18/2022 in the city of Hemet at the Trebelodge Motel, 2625 West Florida Avenue. We moved last month from stage 3 and there was an agreement to go to stage four, which is still part of the it now becomes part of the deliberation process.

And just as a reminder, as you get to stage four, had one of the commissioners was concerned about submitting the rationale worksheet, which is something that is used with the final report. And I just want to mention that as a reminder. When the rationale worksheets are going to be due, I will provide that information to you. The issue here is you have three months actually, two to three, well three months in which to or sixty days, I'm sorry, to deliberate and make a determination in stage four. So there was no reason to provide if you're not prepared already on this rationale worksheet.

Now the holdup here at this juncture has been a request that was made for body worn camera videos, surveillance videos and some of the reports. As you all know, in March 21, a PRA request was made to the city of Hemet and also to RSO in regards to the materials of the body worn cameras and also the surveillance camera videos from the motel. And at that time, we received a response on the March 26 from the Sheriff's Department that had mentioned that back at the time that this review was occurring, that referred the commission to go to their public page to take a look at the public information that they provided, which is not what was requested or asked for. The city of Hemet never responded. And as a result of this being non responsive and not providing the information to the PRA, it was decided by this commission to proceed with subpoenas.

And so the subpoenas were drafted and organized, put together through the city attorney's office. And the subpoenas went out, were issued. And we received a response from the city of Hemet, which was refusing to provide the information and related a lot of detailed information as to why they would do that, which and I will defer to the city attorney in just a moment in this regard. The sheriff's department has not responded yet in writing or anything to the subpoena, But I believe that there is some, we're in the process of I believe getting some cooperation from the sheriff's department in regards to what was initially asked for in the PRA. So I will defer to Ms.

Cook at this juncture to provide any other details you think that they should be aware of.

I beg your pardon. So I'm gonna start with the easier one is gonna be the sheriff's department. They're cooperating. In fact, if I would have pushed it, they would have produced something today. But I told them they were a little bit concerned about a couple of legal issues that we're going to work through, and we anticipate having the records by August 8 that they're willing to produce.

I'm cautiously optimistic we'll get everything. Now as to the and and we're allowed to do that. We can we can we we're friendly with other agencies, and they're friendly with us. And we don't wanna get too aggressive and have to go to compelling these things. And the law allows for us to have, these discussions and me to, convey a status and then advise you of what your options are.

And it's a little bit early in that process to talk about more aggressive options. I'm anticipating from the sheriff's department we'll get everything that you've asked for. And I'm not guessing they've all but conveyed that to me. Just need a few more days to pull it all together. Hemet's a little bit different.

They're taking a very hard line. It's my legal opinion and my research of their objections that they're they're they're wrong. They're they're not well taken. And so I've responded back to them, and I'm also gonna give them till the eighth to open up this dialogue, and I'll report back to you because you may if we don't get if you don't get everything that you ask for, we have options because, frankly, the objections that they asserted are legally insufficient, not because of what I think about their merit objections alone is not enough to respond to a legislative subpoena they they have to go into court and move either for what's known as a protective order or a motion to quash, and they didn't do that. A legislative subpoena by this body is a little bit different than your garden variety subpoena that can be issued by me as an officer of the court.

It has constitution behind it and they can they they're technically in contempt of this body and you have options available to you. But we want to try to work with them at least for a little bit of time, but I'm anticipating by the next session, we'll have potentially all the documents. Or I'll move forward and recommend that we go to court because I do think that based on the law, they have an obligation to provide everything that you reasonably asked for and all that you asked for in that very detailed meeting from last month where we went almost to a childlike level of, let's be real specific about what authorizing when wrote it down. I'm glad we did that because they're taking the position that you weren't you didn't authorize the subpoena, and they cited places in the record. And I'm sure they're watching they they will watch this and and say the same thing.

So we by erring on the side of caution, it strengthened the subpoena. So that being said, I I still am cautiously optimistic that by the next time that the next commission meets, you'll have those die, that which you're looking for. And if not, I will have recommendations for for you make a determination of how you want to proceed.

Thank you. If per chance before the next meeting there are items that could be made available, I'll certainly ensure that they are made available in the Laserfiche system. Think I said that right. System, but I'll notify you in that regard. So that we can continue to move forward because right now as you're in this stage four, let's face it, the stages are not hard and fast.

They can be moved around a little bit. They were there in order to just provide a roadmap as to getting through the process of a review of an OID case. So if it's necessary, this stage four could go another month, another two months. It just depends on where things stand, what information you have, and when you're at a point that you feel that you can make a decision. So I'll keep you informed on that, And whatever else we can get into the Laserfiche system for you to look at, we'll do that and we'll let you know. Any questions?

Thank you. Go we go to questions, we have to open it up to public comment first. At this time, we invite the 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 via by Zoom, select the raise a hand function to speak. You will have three minutes. Do we have any comments from our audience or online?

No callers online. No participants in chambers.

Commissioner Ward, you had a comment?

Could you remind us the difference between the material that the sheriff's office would have versus Hemet in terms of what's been subpoenaed? So where is it the same and where is the variation? This is a refresher to me. Thank you.

The sheriff's department has all of the reports and they took Hemet's reports and included them into their investigation itself. So the the sheriff's department has all the the reports from Hemet, and it's in their file. So

So when they cooperate, it means that there's another channel to getting that information if we wound up getting into some kind of contest with HEMET?

Well, potentially. Know, the way we'd love to look at this is as far as what does the sheriff's department have. And if you in reviewing that, you'll notice that all of Hemet's reports were made, there was a reference to them and they put a Riverside sheriff's cover sheet on it and they just included it as an exhibit or as an inclusive report. So it was the appearance here is that the Sheriff's Department has everything. So if there is anything missing, which we may discover, then we'll have to make a determination as to what does Hemet have that Riverside Sheriff doesn't have. Does that make sense?

And to give you additional information based upon my conversations with the representatives, to echo what Frank has said, it's our belief that both agencies have all of the records that we're asking for.

Commissioner Dillon.

Did Himmett provide the state investigators all of information they requested or did they also withhold as far as you know?

Well, the Department of Justice took over the investigation, so they had everything.

Okay. Thank you. You're welcome.

Commissioner Garcia?

What I'd like to share is what I saw in the past when I was on CPR at the beginning of the century. So what happens is that the department will be notified and they will have to come here with their attorney to then say no because that's what we had previously with an officer from Riverside PD. So she had to come and present herself, and then it was her attorney that said that she would not be speaking.

That's an entirely different issue.

Right, right.

But I'm just sharing what can happen when this does happen when they choose not to speak?

It's still a different scenario completely.

Okay.

So if I can add, I I think I might disagree just a hair with Frank. I don't think it is entirely different, and I'll explain what the point of similarity is. This body and its power to subpoena, again, is constitutionally driven. It's a little bit different than other subpoena powers. Actually gives it more weight.

So when this body issues a subpoena, the burden to it is on the responding party so this body doesn't have to take more acts other than issuing the subpoena response to its request. The other side, if they don't wanna respond, they have the burden to go in and get a court to say what they are thinking, which is we don't have to do this, and it raises the bar for them. So like the one before from years ago they had to come in and assert something before this body. It's not it's not this body's job to have entitled to it it's the other side's job to prove that this body is not entitled to it it's a little bit different because you can do it other ways with other types of subpoenas but the subpoena power that this Commission has particularly strong. So that's how it's the same.

So when that person came in with their lawyer, that was the right thing to do. Hemet didn't do that at all. They can't do that.

Yeah. That was a personnel issue in a citizen complaint. That's my that that's one of the reasons I'm mentioning the difference of what took place in that particular instance. Anyone else?

Yeah. I just had a I had two quick questions. What is the typical response time for a subpoena?

Thirty days.

Thirty days. Okay. And you made a you made a comment about opening it up until the eighteenth, and that was for the sheriff and possibly extending that to the city of Hemet is correct as well as correct?

Right. So there's like a it's kinda like a guard variety in thirty days. That's the date we gave them, and it aligned with the next meeting. Okay. But this informal process of let's try to work this out, that was by mutual consent, and I gave them until the eighth. And, again, because I was vacation and I just got back yesterday, I just out of out of fairness with Hemet, and I just late last night sent our response to their objection. I gave them until this meeting to get back with me, and they didn't. I I thought that was a little unfair. So I'm gonna reach out again and say, look. I'll give you till the eighth so that we can meet and confer.

So you can do that by stipulation. I think it's generous of this commission to take that approach, and it also gives us strength if we move to compel it.

Okay. And you also made a, a comment about, the sheriff is cooperating, but there's pending some legal concerns. What do you need from the commission on behalf of those legal concerns? Is there anything that we need to decide on?

So nothing at this time. I wanna flesh out if we can come to an agreement. I think that the most likely agreement will be I've offered potentially that the commission might be agreeable to maintaining confidentiality of the records that they've requested and that seems to be a compromise they're willing to undertake. And I would come back and say if to you, you'd have to authorize that and to agree to the confidentiality, and they'll I think they'll produce the records too. But that would be action taken upon presentation of that offer, but it's a little premature at this time.

Do you suspect Hemet may have some of the same concerns? I don't I don't know if they've alluded to that. Or

You know,

it's it's hard to say. I I think that they've asserted those concerns, but they've taken a what what appears to be a very hard line, but generally, that's just posturing. So I wanna give them benefit of the the benefit of the doubt. Yeah.

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

So then you'll just continue to proceed with staying in stage four, the deliberation process. I believe that's where you're at and probably where you should be until this gets itself resolved.

Okay. Thank you, Frank.

You're welcome.

All right. I believe we moved to did we move to stage four last last time?

Yes. You agreed to move to stage four at

the Yeah. I believe we voted last time. To the best.

I'm sorry?

There's no formal motion required. City Clerk, please announce the closed sessions.

The Community Police Review Commission will adjourn to closed session pursuant to government code 54957 to discuss case number PC25Dash01002, PC25Dash02006, PC25Dash02007.

Thank you. Get back started from closed session. Commissioners. Commissioners. Alrighty.

Item 11 on the agenda is the city attorney report on closed session actions.

No reportable actions taken.

Thank you. Brief reports on conferences, seminars, and meetings attended by the CPRC. Any commissioners like to share? Commissioner Ward?

Yeah. I can share. Yesterday, we had our training session with the police department, over in Magnolia. There were a number of items covered, so it was very comprehensive. They went through restraint techniques, different restraint techniques.

They went through I forget the acronym, but it's kinda like this situational assessment process that they go through to kind of try and deescalate situations or keep them from from getting to a point of of confrontation. There was a taser demonstration. There was a traffic stop for routine versus felony and the difference between the two and how they approach. And then the last one was the shoot, don't shoot exercise, if you will, which was entertaining to say the least. But what it what it made me think about was how if you don't know what to do in that situation, how things can really, really go astray.

Because as I'm sitting in there in this simulation, I only know to do a certain a couple of certain things. So the the quickest thing to do is draw, and that's not always clearly, it's not always the thing that you wanna do. But it just it stressed to me the importance of training and ongoing training that people that the officers receive so that when it happens, it it's there's there's an automatic good reaction or proper reaction that takes place. And that only happens with repetition and doing things over and over. So I was impressed with the fact that you really have to know what you're doing out here when you run into these situations.

And if you don't, that's when people get hurt, and that's when things kinda go astray. So

Thank you. Commissioner Lundy, know you were there as well. Is there anything you want to add?

Yes. First of all, thanks to Riverside PD for, you know, putting all that together. I know it takes manpower and time and all that. But, I highly encourage everybody to go again because, know, there was so much you know, I was in law enforcement for thirty two years, and things have changed. And, I was very impressed by everything I saw yesterday.

I also would encourage everybody to go on ride alongs. We were invited to go on ride alongs, and and I'm going to. Like I said, I haven't pushed to black and white in ten years, but, I'd be more than happy to go and, you know, take a ride along with whoever and experience what they're experiencing now that I didn't experience for, you know, ten years ago. Like I said, I was I was impressed. And, like I said, I think everybody I think we all should go. Again, if you haven't been in a year, I think you things have changed. Mhmm. And, you know, it it would be good for all of us to revisit that.

Very good. Yes. I I also attended yesterday, and it was it was it was great to see just the the progression of where they were with TASERs and where they are now and just how effective they have been in the deployments and even touring the defensive tactic tactics little area. That was a it was great just to see, like, you know, there actually is something that they're they're teaching, you know, outside, you know, of the academy and they're reoccurring, you know, like, because I wanted to make sure that they're they're following policies and the sergeants that were there so that they review, you know, body cams and, you know, hey. Okay.

We need to emphasize this more or something, you know, just to kinda make sure the training's up to date. But thank you for putting that together, captain. CPRC Ad Hoc Committee updates. I know commission vice chair Gutierrez has been leading that efforts with commissioner Teicher and myself. We did meet last week.

We started going over procedures and policies, and then we're also going over the bylaws. We're meeting again next week to continue with that that review. And then once we kinda go through both, we'll set up another meeting to include you, Frank, to kinda make sure. And then, I think we'll be able to present it to the the commission. Item 14, the Riverside Police Department updates.

Yeah, so I think probably the biggest update we have from the police department is, I don't know if any of you are aware or saw the City Council meeting last week, but City Council moved forward with going into phase two of our new downtown headquarters building. So if all goes well, we'll be breaking ground on that next July. So that's a big thing because now we gotta move everybody out of the downtown station and find new housing and things like that. So that's really all that I have that's new in the department as far as outside the scope of what you might know.

Very good, thank you.

Thank you.

City manager's office updates.

Lorena Verdusko, assistant city clerk. I just wanted to let the commission know that Daisy will be taking over the commission full time. So you will be receiving your communications directly from her. And I I will be available to fill in for her whenever needed. And it's been very nice working with you.

Thank Thank you

for your time. Items for future community police review commission consideration and requested by members of the CPRC. Only items that fall within the powers and duties of the CPRC are set forth in the city charter and or the Riverside Municipal Code will be agendized for future discussions. Commissioners? Commissioner Garcia?

Yes. I just wanna share with commission that I was in a shelter facility for four months, so I was able to stay on the commission because I was still considered in my ward. But now, two weeks ago, I moved into an apartment now in Ward 2. So I have to step down as war five representative, but I did make a call to our councilwoman for war two. But in speaking to staff, she's got someone that's that they just need to do a background check.

But I'm also gonna stay open if she's still looking for someone. I could be her representative for Ward 2. So if we can put that on the agenda, then I hope we'll be stepping down next month. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioners? Very good. Frank, did you have any?

No. But thank you for asking. But I'll continue to work with miss Cook in regard to those issues that we were talking about earlier to hopefully get some resolution to that. But she's been great with, working with these things, so thank you.

Thank you. The next regular scheduled Community Police Review Commission meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, 08/27/2025. Meeting is adjourned at 08:13. Thank you.