Community Police Review Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, good evening, everyone. I call to order the Monday, June 8th, 2026, 536 p.m. meeting of the Community Police Review Commission. Will the clerk please call the roll to establish a quorum?

Thank you, Chair. Commissioner Johnson?

Present.

Commissioner Coleman is absent. Commissioner Korbs? Present. Commissioner Villegas, Jr.? Commissioner Buenrostro is absent. Commissioner Griggs? Present. Commissioner Lewis is absent. Commissioner Janulius? Present. Commissioner Brookins is absent. Commissioner Espinoza-Salazar? Present. And Chair Sample? Present. Thank you. We have quorum.

welcome everyone happy monday. We have a great agenda ahead of us so I' m going to ask if everyone will please rise if you' re able for our opening acknowledgment in honor of To the original people of this land, the Nisenan people, the southern Maidu Valley and Plains Miwok, the Patwin Wintu peoples, and the people of the Wilton-Ranchera, Sacramento's only federally recognized tribe, may we acknowledge and honor the native people who came before us and still walk beside us today on these ancestral lands by choosing to gather together today in the active practice of acknowledgement and appreciation for Sacramento's indigenous people's history, contributions, and lives. Thank you. Now I'm going to ask Commissioner Griggs if he will lead us into the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation,

Okay, thank you All right, so moving into our agenda tonight Commission without any objection. I would like to move the public comment on Matters not on the agenda up. Is there any objection to that? That being said, Clerk, do we have any members of the public who wish to give comments on items out on the agenda?

Thank you, Chair. I have no public speaker slips for that item.

Okay. Thank you very much. And now moving to our consent calendar. There we go. Is there a motion on our consent agenda? Okay. And for, there's a motion, is there a second? Second. Okay. There's a motion by Vice Chair Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Griggs. Is there any member of the public who wish to speak on the consent agenda?

Thank you, Chair. I have no speaker slips for the consent calendar.

Okay. For members of the public, that is the approval of our minutes as well as our follow-up log. So, see and none. All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Aye. Oppose? Aye. abstentions? Seeing none, the motion passes. Okay, moving to our discussion calendar, item three, staff updates from Sacramento Police Department. Captain Buchanan, welcome and thank you for being here tonight.

Thank you, Chair. Good evening. I'd like to introduce Captain Brian Kinney, who's in charge of our Internal Affairs Division. He's going to give you a brief overview on what our Internal Affairs Division does there on a daily basis.

My name is Brian Kinney and I'm the Captain of our Internal Affairs Division or IA as we call it. I would like to thank the Chair for giving me the opportunity to provide an overview of the IA process. The Internal Affairs process plays a critical role in thoroughly investigating allegations of employee misconduct. It's important to emphasize that IA serves as fact finders. We conduct comprehensive investigations, but we do not render findings on misconduct cases. As we walk through our IA process tonight, you will see that in addition to our internal layers of review, there are multiple external review and accountability mechanisms designed to ensure thoroughness, fairness, and transparency. We will discuss each of those in more detail shortly. First, who can make a complaint and how is that done? Anyone can make a complaint. This includes individuals directly involved in an incident, witnesses, parents or guardians, or any member of our department. A complainant may also remain anonymous and their complaint will still be investigated with the same level of thoroughness. Complaints can be filed in a number of ways with any SPD employee, by mail, by phone, email, in person, through the Office of Public Safety Accountability, also known as OPSA, or through the California Commission on Peace Officer Standard and Training, also known as POST. Once we receive a complaint, it's entered into our database for tracking and it's assigned a case number. In most cases, a complaint must be investigated within one year, which is required by law. The complaint is then assigned to an IA investigator who begins the investigation. Typical initial first steps include a more in-depth interview with any complainant or witnesses, a thorough review of body worn or in-car camera footage, and an examination of any and all related reports associated with that incident. That initial review is then forwarded to the IA captain for an intake decision. During the intake review, it's assessed whether the complaint involves potential employee misconduct. If it does, that matter is then reassigned to an IA investigator for a full impartial investigation. It's at that point that OPSA is notified, and if the alleged misconduct meets the definition of serious misconduct under state law, POST is also notified. If no employee misconduct is identified, the case may be referred to the employee's captain for review or closed with no further action. Once an IA investigation involving potential misconduct is completed, It is then forwarded to the employee's chain of command for review and recommendation on proposed findings. After that review is completed, the entire investigation is sent to OPSA. OPSA then has an opportunity to fully review the investigation, provide comment, and or request additional follow-up. After OPSA has completed its review, the involved employees are notified of the outcome and if appropriate, discipline may be imposed. If the complaint was initiated by a community member, we notify them of the outcome of their complaint. For misconduct cases that were initially reported to POST, and those would be the ones under state law of serious misconduct, we then forward the entire investigation to POST for their independent review as well. It's then up to POST to make a determination on whether that case will impact the officer's certification. In closing, I want to reaffirm our commitment to accountability and transparency. Every complaint we receive, regardless of who submits it, how it's submitted, or whether it's anonymous, is reviewed carefully and investigated thoroughly. We approach each case with diligence, neutrality, and respect for our community's trust. Our goal is to ensure fair and accurate investigations uphold the highest standards of professionalism and continue strengthening the relationship between our department and community we serve. Thank you, and like I said, we have a year to investigate all of our complaints, and I tried to sum all of that up into about three or four minutes for you all, so with that, thank you.

Oops, there we go. All right, thank you very much, Captain Kinney, for that report. Are there any members of the public that wish to speak on this item?

Thank you, Chair. I do have one speaker slip. Keyon Bliss. Thank you.

Greetings, Commission. It's been a while since I've been here because, honestly, I've had a lot more important things to do because, honestly, Right now, there is an ongoing effort, an attack, on any measurement of civilian oversight of the Sacramento Police Department in real time, and it's not happening at the ballot box. It's happening on the budget cycle, where there is a concerted effort by a handful of white, right-wing activists backed by Sacramento's business community and the Sacramento Police Officers Association to water down and prevent and eliminate any form of outside oversight beyond the Internal Affairs Division. There are members on this board right here, which I will point out district for Commissioner Karen corpse is actively coordinating with the Sacramento Police Officers Association But I will note to their members of City Council who are accepting who have accepted tens of thousands of dollars from law enforcement lobbyists to not only water down this body and even in fact right now tomorrow they're going to be discussing cutting back on Commission meetings which could very well include this body but they're also cutting staffing on the one actual civilian oversight agency in the Sacramento City the Office of Public Safety accountability which I know is going to be on the agenda tonight to be discussed. I think there are some serious questions that need to be asked considering the fact that besides all that overtime continues or for the police department continues to exceed its budget and there are over 222 vacancies worth no less than $34 million that the city is just leaving on the table this budget cycle. I think that is not just fiscally responsible, it's ethically and morally correct. Thank you for your comments.

Your time is complete. Chair, I have no more comments.

Okay. Are there members of the commission that have any comments on the staff report? Vice Chair Johnson.

to us and I just want to say that I know it takes a lot in dealing with the city with we've even heard some not so much complaints but so much of actions not being taken here at the council but one good thing about it is we know from our standpoint that you are doing your best again with the personnel that you have to to deal with each and every day on the job and i'm glad that hearing you that the process is leased down to a basic seven steps it's not accumulated to the point where it just goes on and on and on the final You're trying to find the best way you can to shorten the steps, shorten the time period, because I know there's volumes that just keep going. And it could really outstaff your office automatically in doing that. So I applaud you all in doing that. And I ask that you just keep doing what you can do the best way you can until we can all come to some solution of how to better help and offload what you're trying to do. And I'm looking forward to another presentation later on from you all, because I like the way you have it in different divisions that take control, take ownership of what the police department can handle, what they're doing, even with a couple of years ago. when you had the new department come on board of how they took over strategically trying to move within the city districts of how to improve that area where the police department is. And I know within my district itself, District 2, that we do see more and more now of police presence that we haven't seen in the last year. And that's real good for us because it lets the people know that we're having activity in the community, but yet still there's police presence there. They're not just stuck over in the McKinney Station or downtown at Freeport or even the Richards, but they're clearly coming together to make it better. So I'm glad that we're moving in the right direction and I can see us breaking in some areas now of getting involved and trying to help you. So thanks again.

Okay. Thank you, Vice Chair. Commissioner Corpse.

Thank you, Captain Kinney, for that presentation. I know when OPSA was here before Jody was here, he would give stats about like the concordance or the correlation between OPSA and what IA had. And so I'm asking you, Captain Kinney, do you have data on that at all? And then I'm going to be asking OPSA the same question. So if you guys just want to prepare that.

Just to understand your question, are you asking of our cases the ones in which we're in agreeance on? I don't have the exact number, but You know, like last year, for example, we had well over 300 complaints, and by far a large percentage we come to an agreement on. It's a very small percentage. I don't have the exact number, but very small.

And I believe that Jody said the same thing, and I was just, I know I wrote down that percentage, and then I can't find it on my old documents, and I was just wondering if we could find it. So very high percentage. from what Internal Affairs sees and what OPSA sees, that you guys are agreeing on the majority of outcomes for these cases?

Yeah, and I'll make it clear, just like any relationship where we're asked to judge different things, there's not 100% certainty by any means, but by and large, there is agreement on the outcomes, yes. Okay, thank you. You're welcome.

Okay.

Other commissioners who want to speak on this? Okay, again, thank you captain Kenny for that information update so we will consider that a receiving file. All right moving to our next agenda item, which is agenda item for the office of public safety and accountability presentation. Like to take this opportunity to welcome Mister Joseph gray. Our community stakeholder engagement administrator and As he's coming up, I want to say thank you to you and your entire team. I had an opportunity last month to meet with the entire team, and it was very educational, informational, and greatly appreciated. So thank you so much for being here tonight.

Yes, thank you, Chair. Thank you, Commission, for having me here today. Like he mentioned, my name is Joseph Gray. I'm the Stakeholder Engagement Administrator for OPSA, Office of Public Safety and Accountability. I'm joined by my colleague, Randy, who will join us in a moment. And again, just thank you for the opportunity to speak with you all and share about what we do. So I actually prepared some visuals for you all just to help explain who we are and what we do. A lot of people call it OPSA. We don't correct people, but it's usually pronounced OPSA, Office of Public Safety Accountability. And we do oversight for the City of Sacramento Police Department and Fire Department. So does this right here work? Let's see. I don't know. Is there anybody that could help me change the slides? Let's see if we can both keep trying.

Okay.

Oh, there we go. Yeah, I can do it that way. It's fine. I'll just step over and step back. So OPSA... A lot of people are surprised to learn that OPSA has actually been around since 1999. We've been around since 1999 and we kind of revised, we got a revised rule in 2005 to start off with, I think it was called Office of Police Accountability. At that time in 99, we only provided oversight over the police department. In 2005, the city decided that it was also pivotal to provide oversight for the fire department as well and provide that support. So at that time, it became OPSA and we started providing oversight for both Sacramento Police and Fire Department. A little bit over two years ago, City Council, Mayor and City Council unanimously voted to increase OPSA's capacity. We went from having five people in the office to having 11 people in the office in just 2024. And that is very interesting because As one of the community members mentioned that our office recently with this current budget cycle has been reduced. Once again, we're losing four positions that we had. One of the reasons why those positions were unanimously voted in in the first place is because it allowed us the capacity to be able to review 100% of the cases that came in. Previously, we were only able to review about 40% of the cases that came in. So whether they came through OPSA or whether they originated in the police department's office, we were only able to kind of review about four out of the 10 complaints that would come in, which didn't really allow us to do our job quite adequately. We weren't able to put eyes on everything. The thing on this slide that I'd like to highlight is that we are independent and impartial oversight. We're a completely separate office. We have no public safety servants that work within our office. And so we are able to provide oversight that is completely impartial, unbiased, and independent. Let me step over really quick.

Okay.

All right. Awesome. Thank you. So I like to break down kind of what OPSA does into four categories just to help people understand it. The first is, like Captain Kenny mentioned, we've received complaints from community members that are in regards to the Sacramento Police Department or the Sacramento Fire Department. Appreciate it. And so we received these complaints. The complaints go to either the police department or the fire department for the initial investigation. And once they conduct that investigation, they're sent back to our office to review the investigation. I'll go a little bit more into that in a second. When we get those investigations back to our office, we then review them very thoroughly and fairly, and then we compare our findings, the conclusions that we came to, with either the police department or the fire department. Another thing that our office is responsible for doing is conducting audits within our charter. It's written within our charter of our office that we have to conduct audits every so often or per request of the mayor and council of the police department and the fire department. These audits are meant to kind of highlight trends and patterns that we wouldn't see just from the complaints, reviewing the complaints alone. We're able to see things like what areas in the city get the most attention, if there's a demographic within the city that maybe gets you know, different intention than other demographics. We're just able to kind of highlight and spot things just to point it out, just so all of us are aware. Within that, we submit our findings to mayor and council, and we also recommend policy adjustments just to help us continue moving forward as public safety servants. Another thing we do is that we respond to and investigate critical incidents. So I'll go into that a little bit in the next slide. which I have now, awesome. There's a position within our office called the Inspector General. What the Inspector General does, he's pretty much an investigator. And so when critical incidents happen, the Inspector General will also go and concurrently investigate these incidents. These incidents include officer-involved shootings, incidents of great bodily injury resulting in death or serious injury, and then also in custody deaths. So deaths that happen while the community member is in the presence of, or in custody of the police department or the fire department. And so the inspector general will go and do these concurrent investigations. This is actually one of the positions that is within the current budget proposal going to be cut, a very important position to us. And so that's, One of the things that we are figuring out how to move forward without this very important position for our office, we do have a Deputy Inspector General which hopefully can work on taking over the duties that the Inspector General was previously filling. I know you have questions. I'm going to try to get through it and then ask away. I also wanted to give you guys just kind of a visual of the different complaints that can possibly come through our office or, of course, the police department as well, or the fire department. So here are... just the list of different complaints that community members, citizens can make. Keep going. This is a part I wanted to get to because it's a visual that kind of helps it make a little bit more sense to a lot of people. A complaint is received, regardless of which office receives it first, we share it with each other. So if the complaint originates through OPSA's office, which means the community member reaches out to us directly initially to make the complaint, we will then immediately share that complaint with the police department or fire department. Likewise, they will share it with us so that we both have record that that complaint was made. IA stands for Internal Affairs, as you just heard Captain Kenny speaking. and PSU stands for professional standards unit. That is with the investigative unit within the fire department. So very similar bodies, just kind of two different acronyms for that. They will conduct the initial investigation. send it to our office, our office will review the investigation and at that point we see whether we agreed on the conclusion or not. And I'll go into answering your question also, Commissioner. The way that the process is built out, we are supposed to come to an agreement. That is part of the process. We're supposed to come to an agreement because when we don't come to an agreement, there's a process in order to come to an agreement. And so the question is a great question. The response without my further explanation could be a little bit tricky just because a successful process does come to an agreement. When we are unable to come to an agreement, then that matter is supposed to be raised to the chief of police. And if it needs to go further, then to the city manager. So what will happen is if our investigators are not able to come to an agreement initially, then the matter will get, like I said, raised. And then our director, which we don't have on right now, We'll have conversations with the chief of police. If they are not able to come to an agreement, then the matter will continue to get raised to the city manager, who will then make a final kind of decision on what we have a disagreement on in regards to that case. So rarely does it get to that point, which I think that number reflects how often are we able to come to an agreement before it actually gets escalated to the city manager and no agreement is reached. And that number is not significant at all. It's not high at all. But there are many discussions that happen between that point. I'll continue. Here are the possible dispositions that can be reached. Sustained, not sustained, unfounded, exonerated, and not actionable. These definitions are taken directly from PD's definitions. I won't read them, but you guys can see them there. These are the possible conclusions that we can reach for each complaint. And I won't go through all of this with you all. Just, you know, when I do these presentations, I like to remind everybody why it is important that we do have our body, the Office of Public Safety and Accountability, to be a support to the police department and the fire department, just to maintain trust and accountability throughout the community, and just that second extra layer of support and extra eyes to make sure that everything goes how we would like it to go. And so thank you guys, and I'm, you know, happy to take any questions that you guys might have.

Thank you. First, before I go to the commissioners, are there any members of the public who wish to speak on this item?

Thank you, Chair. I have no speaker slips for this item.

Okay. Comments or questions from the commissioners? Okay. Commission.

I apologize.

I do have one. Oh, okay. I greatly apologize. I have one speaker slip for this item. Mr. Keon Bliss.

Want to give a shout out to the office public safety accountability doing tireless work with that is sorely underappreciated by members of City Council and the police department and other members of the community and want to point out a few things that we've known like on this commission for a few years and as well as just noting some of the things that we wouldn't be able to find unless we looked on the website and studied this issue beforehand. Case in point, since at least 2021, the number of SPD cases reviewed by OPSA has never been more than 50%. Half of the cases, the complaint cases, don't end up getting reviewed by OPSA because they're still waiting for the police department oftentimes to turn over their reporting. Even as OPSA is able to complete all complaint cases that are made against the fire department, year after year. I would also note that the last time that OPSA published a quarterly complaint activities report was Q2 2025. I don't believe it's in any fault of their own. As was just mentioned before, this fiscal year, we're cutting at least four OPSA positions, including a freezing of the OPSA director's position, all to save about $4 million of programs or so, even as we make layoffs in other city areas. But none of that is like none of that includes, the vast majority don't include the vacant positions, again, which there are over $90 million worth of vacancies, many of which are more than five years old, and we're not touching that, but we're gonna be touching a department that takes up not even.

Thank you for your comments. Your time is complete. Chair, I have no additional speaker slips for this item. Thank you for your comments. Your time is complete.

Chair, I have no other speaker slips for this item. Okay, thank you, Jacob. I had Vice Chair Johnson, and come on back up, Mr. Gray. All right, Vice Chair.

Thank you, Joseph, for that report and presentation on behalf of you all in the department. My question is because we have seen the presentations here over the past by community coming in and voicing their complaints or voicing what they're having on their mind. Is that, do you feel that if a community member comes to you directly, it's a whole lot easier for go through the layers and go through the process than trying to come through here directly and trying to voice it through us. And then us trying to give them information and trying to sit them on their way where they need to go versus when they're able to come to you and say, this is what we need to do. That's a great question.

I think there is an additional layer of reassurance that the community members feel when they come through our office. The process is the same. We make sure that the process is the same no matter where the complaint originates, who handles the initial receiving of the complaint. We want to keep it the same for everybody. But I think that just that little piece of reassurance that it will get thoroughly reviewed, that they feel. Not to say that that's different, whether it originated in PD's office or not, but I think they feel a little bit different. This isn't a local thing. This is a kind of global and society mindset that the police department overseeing themselves is not something that can be trusted. And I'm not referring to Sacramento, I'm just referring to the mindset that the community has about anybody policing themselves. When I used to grade my friends test in school, there was some questions about whether, so that's the mindset of the community. So just them having that reassurance that there's another body that's also supporting the review of this investigation, I think it gives them a little bit more vote of confidence that it will be thoroughly and unbiasedly reviewed.

I agree. And that's why I asked this, because I know that in our attempt now to get out the word out and to do an outreach to the community, to our community that we serve in, it's good to let them know that and to entrust in what we're telling you to go to them directly, to let them know. And then you have the, because we even discussed this a while back with ourselves, it's a layer to the point where you take off to the point where you have it in action. You have been given a case number. You have been given a way to follow up with that. And one thing I like about Sacramento is that we do have police departments in areas of regional areas that you can go into and they're not just blowing you off. They are just really trying to take you, your situation. It's now up to you as a citizen to follow up on that and to look at that as your personal thing to take care of.

Yeah. Yeah. Thank you for your question. Yeah. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Vice chair, commissioner corpse.

Thank you for your presentation. So I just want to confirm that there were 300 complaints that Captain Kinney mentioned. Was that for last year? Approximately 300 a year?

Yeah, and that's an approximate number.

OK. So I assume it's the same number with you. Approximately. Yeah. I mean, I'm just wanting to make sure we're all on the same page here. And out of those 300 complaints, I know you say that you can't give us a percentage of what the concordance or the correlation is, but do you happen to know how many of those actually went to the city manager or city council? Like last year, was it 1, 0, 10?

You know, that number I do not have. I'll say I had a feeling that some sort of this question might be coming, and so beforehand I had my office take a look. Over the past, I believe it is, 18... I believe a better way for me to explain it might be, like I said, the process that happens. A lot of times we have conversations that lead to modifications on the cases. And so we looked at that. What that means is that from the initial dispositions that they gave to our office when we first received the investigation from them, Do adjustments or changes happen from the point that we initially get it to the point where we all finally agree on the disposition? With that, it's about 25, around 25% of the cases receive modification before it is finally agreed on. And so that's the closest thing that I can give you, which means about maybe one fourth of the investigations that we review There's some changes that happen through conversation. These aren't disagreements. These are agreements. You know, these are agreements that we come to that, oh, yeah, now that after conversation, we might need to add this or we might need to take this person out or little things like that. But there's some modifications that happen before that case gets closed. That's really kind of the best picture that I could paint. Oh, that's thank you for sharing that.

And of course, I mean, two different independent entities are looking at something. You know, there's going to be probably disagreements, but at the end, you come to an agreement at the end.

And I call it conversation. You know, I don't even necessarily call it disagreements. We have conversations. Like I said, we really support each other in making sure that we get to the most accurate conclusion that we can reach. Right.

No, that's great. And then one quick question also, that you're only getting to about 50% of the cases, but Of those though, would you say that you're definitely getting to the ones where there would be an officer involved shooting or use of force? Those are the ones that are not getting looked at.

So the 50% of the cases, that was prior to us having the extended capacity that we received in 2024. So in 2024, that's when I mentioned that after Mayor and City Council unanimously voted to have our office capacity increased, At that point when everybody was hired and our team was fully staffed, we began reviewing 100% of the cases. So since I believe around December, I might have the month off by one or two, December of last year. No, 24. Oh, excuse me, 24, December of 24. So for close to about a year and a half now, we have actually been reviewing 100% of the cases. Now that our office has the capacity reduced again due to the budget cuts. I'm not sure what that's gonna look like. It may go back to around 40%. But the critical incidents that you were mentioning, the critical incidents, honestly, we're still figuring that out. The one that investigates the critical incidents is the Inspector General position that I mentioned is one of the ones that's proposed to be cut in the budget. I believe they're landing on the final decisions for the budget tomorrow. So if that position is cut, which at this point, I believe that's the direction that it's headed, we will still have to have some conversations and figure out what investigating critical incidents look like for our office. So honestly, I don't have an answer for that quite yet.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, Commissioner Villegas, Jr. Hello, I just want to say thank you and I really appreciated your presentation, Joseph. Thank you. And that was... really informative on how you went through pretty much from start to end what OPSA is doing. And I also wanted to acknowledge your comments earlier. You reminded me of that one comic. It's like, who watches The Watchmen? I come from a background of cybersecurity. I do risk assessments there, so I'm very familiar with trying to see what happened and trying to prove what happened in the cyberspace realm. at the end of the day i believe even be seen yourself in between i a m between the community and even uh... this commission there's lots of avenues of a approach to trying to find in what we're all working toward the same thing which is trying to figure out what what happened, the truth, fairness for all parties. And I believe when we can work together to do that, that it is the best way forward. So my only question for you is, like, how can we support you as a commission? And if, like, we're talking about potential budget cuts and maybe there's ways that we can help support you, please let us know in any way that we can do that. Appreciate that.

Yeah, thank you. I will. Thank you so much.

Yeah, I think, thank you for that. It probably dovetails to what I was going to ask is, are there areas where, you know, our commission, we give recommendations, could support OPSA's work?

Yeah, thank you. I will... give my personal opinion. I'm not a spokesperson of OPSA in this moment. I think that our mayor and council, they handle a lot of things. And our city manager, the budget, of course, is huge for Sacramento. Cuts have to come from somewhere. I think without having a director during this current budget cycle, OPSA didn't really get to effectively share like this. We didn't get this opportunity necessarily this year to the mayor and council as to remind them why what our office does is so integral to the city. it's always helpful to have voices coming from other places. You know, you all being the commission, I know you understand, um, how much oversight is a part of public safety. Um, and that's one of the things that we always try to emphasize that the city has prioritized public safety, which is absolutely amazing. And we a hundred percent agree with, however, they have at the same time and same breath reduced oversight. Like they separate the two. But oversight of public safety is a pivotal part of public safety and continues to help it function and operate effectively the way that it has and the way that it does. And so that's all that I would say. The more voices that can help emphasize that public safety is extremely important. I think we all know that and oversight is a part of public safety. I believe if you look at the city budget, don't quote me on the numbers, but when you combine the fire department and the police department, it's close to 68% of our total city budget, somewhere around there. Also oversight, we're less than 1%. We're less than 1%, we're close to half percent half of 1% of the overall city budget. However, our budget is reduced and cut. And so the more voices that could help express those sentiments, I think the better. Great.

Are there any other questions for our team members here? Well, again, Mr. Gray, thank you so much for this. Just to, again, share my meeting with you and the rest of the team was very informational, very engaging, and I do appreciate you taking the time to walk me through the department and even share the work that you're doing.

I appreciate the time and the opportunity. Thank you all. Thank you.

All right. Moving to agenda item five, which is our ad hoc committee report backs. So I'll just leave this now open for our ad hoc committees. If you have a report back that you would like to share, I do have one that I'll share out. Any of our ad hocs? Commission of Corps.

So our ad hoc committee got together again and just working on. You know what we're looking at for training or on boarding and we have obviously agreed that we're going to do it during the staff report. So you heard tonight about internal affairs and it was a perfect opportunity to hear OPSA. I think I was pronouncing it incorrectly. OPSA at the exact same time, so I think that was nice to see the difference between the two and how they have come together. According to both of them. the majority of the time on what a resolution should be. And so our next session is going to be on the budget. And then the one after that is going to be on community policing. It just depends on how often we're going to be having meetings because of the budgets. I know that I think you were going to talk about the future. And then I will be working with Captain Buchanan on that.

Okay. Great. Thank you, Commissioner Quirps. Other ad hocs? The one that I did want to bring up is our military equipment use. We need to, from that ad hoc, solidify our date, which, without objection, and just to hear from the rest of the group, would like to look at the last week of July. I would like to offer and suggest that we go back to the Oak Park Community Center. And so I just kind of want to put that out there with the group and if there's any concerns. And then Captain Buchanan, would that work within the timelines for SAC PD if we looked at the last week of July?

Yeah, that'd be great. That gets us right before the deadline, which is July 31st, to have the meeting. We're hoping to have the report online by Wednesday, close of business Wednesday, this Wednesday. Hopefully there's no reworks of the draft. I'm halfway through the revision of it right now. But yeah, I think the last week of July would be great if we could schedule that. I know I've got dedication from city staff on the IT side, and I'm just waiting for others until we find a location to figure out what we need.

And then a question for the city attorney. We still would not be able to, I think at our last meeting, Commissioner Johnson or Vice Chair Johnson brought up, could we do where our entire commission, and I don't know if Vice Chair, you wanted to go deeper on that, but would our entire commission be able to attend that meeting or would we be still left to less than a quorum?

It was my understanding of talking with council that if we could possibly arrange to have, instead of using one of our meetings here in chambers, to use one of those meetings off-site supplement of not worrying about being caught up with less meetings to have. But using that meeting on off-site to come together and to meeting with the public still suffice of us meeting. But then that came down to be is that could we do it still and not have to worry about the quorum restrictions.

If you're doing your meeting off-site, then you're meeting the Brown Act requirements by having a public meeting. But I think it would be the logistics with the clerk's office and how to arrange all of that. But as long as it's a Brown Act noticed meeting, you could essentially move locations, barring... whatever logistical issues. And then everybody could attend that meeting because it would be a Brown Act body meeting.

And I think that was just really kind of our thought is to get as many of us in the room to be able to gather here from our community. Would that be a possibility? So, okay. So then I will say that the chair and vice chair will follow up the vice chair will follow up with the city clerk's office. I feel like it is if we can get the okay. So, but we will definitely follow up with the rest of the commissioner corpse.

So I'm just, what happens if we select a date? Does that mean that the clerk and the attorney will have to be there too?

Yes.

Okay.

I've attended in the past public meetings on off-site, so it's not a problem.

Okay, and it would be an evening like this. What would happen if, for some reason, we all say we're going to be there and then we don't have a quorum? Would the meeting be able to still take place? No. That's something we have to think about, too.

And my thought is the only single...

If you could have it, it wouldn't be... The official meeting would be canceled. I mean... But the MEU portion would still be able to go forward? I mean, it would just be a regular gathering, right? It just wouldn't be a public gathering. So you wouldn't have to leave the building.

Oh, okay. So if for some reason we didn't meet quorum, you'd still be able to have the MEU community event?

Yes. Yes. I just think you'd have to cancel the meeting logistically and then pause maybe and then move forward with the rest of it. But I don't know how that works with.

Yeah, that's what I was going to say. Per the legislative mandate, we have to have that community meeting to get this passed. That's part of the process. So I think if we're saying it's a meeting, then we end up having to cancel it. that's going to be a wrench that we don't, I don't know, I don't know what that looks like, to be honest with you, but I don't think, I think that's kind of a problem because I think there's the face value, like, well, you had a meeting, but then it was canceled, right? So our public meeting did not occur is what some people may say in public opinion. So I don't know the answer to that legally, but I know that legally we have to have that one publicized, well-publicized community meeting on military equipment.

And I would say going so far in July, we don't have much room for error, meaning it's going to need to be that week.

Yeah, well, we have basically, we have until, if we get the report up, we have 30 days that it needs to be posted on our webpage so people have access to it. So basically, we do have like the last two weeks of July to work with. So that is our thing, but we do have to have it completed by July 31st.

And I think kind of again commissioners where this came from was just a place of having us all be able to be there to hear our community to engage with them as a commission versus a subset so. If it could work, I think it would be nice.

And we see it as a public meeting, meeting the Brown Act. And also we see it as a meeting to where we also come together as a commission to be and hear a public and not have to worry about the restrictions of being over the quorum. if we just had just a meeting without, you know, just a regular public meeting. So I guess we're looking at that point. Then also to the point where we would still meet the need of answering through our reports that we have met so many times annually.

Jacob Redberg, Office of the City Clerk. While having that type of meeting may... ease the quorum restrictions. There will be heightened restrictions on public comments and public comment time periods. That meeting will have to be obviously pursuant to the Brown Act and council rules of procedure. So public comment time would have to be, they'd have to fill out slips. They would need to, they'd be limited to two minutes. So there are all those considerations as well.

Yeah, that's what I was going to say. There would be restrictions on communication between you and the public.

As with these meetings, there is a one-way public comment towards you and not the full commission back to the member of the public for clarifying questions and whatnot. So that may limit the type of conversations you may want to have at this community forum.

I guess my thing too is that since we're coming down to the end of public interaction with EMU and it's not so overwhelming as it was a couple years ago, even last year to now, to a point where we probably would not have to worry about so much. And I don't even see that where the police department have to worry about engaging with the public on their particular opinion. because right now the public opinion is not as like it was before. So we probably possibly dealing with MUE get through a type of setting we wouldn't have to worry about that. And I think we still could work in with the restrictions of time. And I think we kind of worked on that the last time we talked about it. Even the last time we met with public, we discussed with them that there's only going to be so much time to discuss that item they had because there's so many. And I think people are really kind of respectful of that. So I think we can try it.

Chair, if I may, and just realize this year we do have the three extra months before it has to be passed by council. So even after the public, the community meeting, because the element of law and legislation committee, then there's a two-month gap before that has to go back. So we actually spread it out. So we have much more time than we did last year. It's not like we're compressed. We're just compressed for the community meeting to get that out there because The intent of extending it was to take that community feedback and be able to implement it in and then run it to L&L. If we have to go back to L&L more than once, we can do that. We have that option.

Thank you, Captain Buchanan. Commissioner Forbes.

As much as I appreciate... I might have muted there. I just worry that the commission would not be able to interact with the speakers then or the police department wouldn't be able to respond if there was information that was stated and they would like to respond to. I just worry about that. And if we held it that way, as much as I think we all should be there, and I will keep saying that, I remember last year our old chair sent an email saying, everybody can come. And then we were busy. So I don't know why that was sent out at that one point. Or did we decide we can go as a community member, not as, no, can't do that. Okay. I don't know why she sent that out.

So I can just send out an email that says, everyone's going to show up.

I should try to see if I can. It doesn't matter. I'm just giving my point of view that I think that the point of having a community event is to communicate. And if we're not going to be able to communicate, or whoever's going to attend, be able to, you know, respond or interact, and especially for the police department, for them to be able to respond to questions. Because I think people have had pretty specific questions at those meetings, and if you're not able to respond to those, what's the point?

I agree. Okay, thank you. So I would just say then... I would request support from SAC PD in helping us to secure the Oak Park Community Center for that last week of July.

All right. I will get some dates and I will send them to you and the chair to say here's the dates that's open and available and then we'll go from there. Thank you, Captain.

All right. Are there any other ad hoc committee report backs? Okay, seeing none, we'll move to our next agenda item, which is the update on the 2025 annual report presentation to the Personnel and Public Employees Committee. Oh, I'm sorry. Oh, sorry, public comment.

We have one public comment for item five, the Ad Hoc Committee report back. Keon Bliss. Sorry, Keon.

I can't imagine there's too many comments coming in right now these days, unfortunately. Yeah, just to help with the military equipment use conversation, I mean, that is a state mandated meeting. And for folks who were on the commission when this was first like, you know, process built out, the council specifically directed this commission to handle the community engagement process specifically because of the disastrous rollout within the first year. A lot of community members, as Vice Chair Johnson points out, did not trust the police department, and when they went to that meeting, a lot of their concerns were not heard, and it really just felt like it was a checkbox. which is one of the reasons why we haven't had this meeting as an official meeting of the commission because specifically of those rules and structures that are in place, which the chair, as the chair, has wide discretion of giving people more time to speak, but it's those onerous rules of quorum, which is higher for this commission than most other city boards and commissions. to actually meet. With a public engagement meeting, we specifically intended for people to be able to voice their concerns. It was a structured, facilitated community conversation that can be done with community-based organizations and whatnot. in order to do that. And I would really encourage y'all to reach out, not just to the community centers, but also get buy-in from other community organizations as well as the Office of Public Safety and Accountability and see if there's a partnership or whatnot willing to be done with that. As is a state mandated conversation and past years it's been a really truncated timetable on it. Facilitating, being able to get honest community feedback to give not just. Your comments, your time is complete.

Thank you for your comments, your time is complete. Chair, I have no additional speakers on this item. Thank you for your comments. Great, thank you. Chair, I have no more speakers.

All right, commissioners, any other comments? All right. Moving to item six, update on 2025 annual report presentation to personnel and public employees committee. Are there any members of the public who want to speak on this item?

Thank you, Chair. I have no speaker slips for item six.

So, Commission, I want to first just thank Vice Chair Johnson, who did a phenomenal job representing this commission to the PP&E. And so with that being said, I will throw it over to him just to update everyone regarding the presentation, as well as any discussion around committee members' comments. And we'll go from there.

It's a great presentation and work plan that was put together by this commission to present to the review board. And we did come together with them and thank for Captain Buchanan and the staff being with us on that day also. When it came down to it, they were really pleased about how we had been operating the last year. How we had been communicating with them and being very open to them about how that we work together. as a commission our main thing was to let them know that we do need the staff to support and we do need staff help and so with that mind they said well what we're going to look at here is that we take your your recommendation very seriously of what you're doing and what you have presented to us but we also want to let you look at possibly look at the other office with inside the Sacramento Police Department and their review commissions and their commissions of possibly you all coming together to work together and to build the staff to be using with one another. So I think we're on the right track. The main thing was again for us is that they're good that we're coming together to do an outreach. We're doing meeting the needs of our community as well as commission the recommendations to them and they encourage us to continue to talk to our our district council persons and to keep them engaged to keep them in knowledge about what's going on because again this does help them get a feel of what is needed for us and again It was positive, they really were thankful for how we put it together and how the chairman was able to kind of coordinate all this. And again, they thanked us and told us to keep up the good work and let's continue to work good together in the coming year, 2026 is 2027.

Okay, thank you, Vice Chair. Members of the commission, who would like any questions? Well, again, no questions, but truly an affirmation to Vice Chair for doing a great job of presenting the priorities of this commission, as well as the work that we are working hard to do. So thank you, sir, for that. Appreciate it. OK. Moving to item seven, which is the Community Police Review Commission letter regarding proposed reduction in commission meetings. Are there any members of the public who wish to speak on this item?

Thank you, Chair. I do have one speaker slip. Mr. Keon Bliss.

The potential reduction of commission meetings is by no means an accident. $35,000 is how much savings that this city would actually get from reducing the number of times bodies like this meet. out of a $4 million one-time savings that is ultimately looking to do. And that's in addition to like tens of millions of other cuts, dollars worth of cuts that are already being made, including those four positions that OPSA has noted. It's not because that, it's not, I don't believe for a minute that it's because this is a necessary cut. It's not fiscally responsible. It's really following through on a campaign promise or an insider campaign promise that the mayor of Sacramento, Kevin McCarty, decided to make last year when after the police department contributed for his mayoral cycle no less than $35,000 and campaign contributions from the Sacramento Police Officers Association. And if you all remember, back in February 2025 was when the mayor tried to put on the consent calendar an item to fundamentally restructure this commission to allow family members and former members of Sacramento Police Department and law enforcement to qualify as members for this body. Right now, we already have a family member of a police department here from District 4 Commissioner who has a, that's a glaring conflict of interest as far as the public is concerned. But this is simply, by reducing the number of meetings, it reduces the ability of the community to actually participate in real review and consideration.

Thank you for your comments. Your time is complete. Chair, I have no additional speakers on this item.

Thank you for your comments.

All right. So are there any members of the commission that want to discuss this item? All right, so I'll share with you what we have here is a draft letter that the vice chair and I have worked on that we would like to submit on behalf of this commission. Again, the letter is attached, but just for our purposes and sake, I'll read it out. On behalf of the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission, we respectfully submit the letter regarding the proposal to reduce the number of commission meetings by half. After reaching out to the city clerk's office, we were advised to provide our feedback directly to the mayor and city council for consideration. While we understand the city's interest in improving efficiency and reducing administrative burdens, we respectfully express concern that significantly reducing commission meetings may limit opportunities for public engagement, transparency, and timely review of matters relating to public safety and community trust. As your appointed representative serving on the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission, we believe there are alternative approaches that can help accomplish the city's goals while still preserving the commission's effectiveness and accessibility to the public. We are willing to take responsibility for evaluating and limiting the length and scope of our monthly meetings in a manner that better aligns with the council's recommendations and operational expectations. Additionally, we would respectfully request consideration of allowing the commission the flexibility to conduct an additional meeting when necessary with quorum within any council district. These meetings could focus significantly on commission reports, community concerns, and strengthen communication between the commission and the communities we serve while maintaining efficiency in the commission's regular business structure. The Sacramento Community Police Review Commission values its partnership with the mayor and city council and remains committed to serving the community with transparency, accountability, and responsiveness. We respectfully ask the city council to reconsider the proposed reduction, and to work collaboratively with the commission to identify solutions that maintain meaningful public participation and oversight. Thank you for your consideration and continued support of the commission's work. So, Vice Chair, is there anything you wanted to add to that? No. Thanks. So is there any objection to, I believe the motion tonight would be for the Chair and Vice Chair to finalize this meeting and to transmit it to the Mayor and Council in advance of tomorrow night. Okay, that being said, I don't have anyone in queue to... speak on this. I believe this is an action item. So the motion would be to authorize the chair to transmit the finalized letter on behalf of this commission. Is there a motion? I make a motion. Okay. Moved by Commissioner Griggs. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Seconded by Commissioner Villegas, Jr. Any other discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Oppose? Abstain? Okay. Seeing none, that motion passes and we will submit this forward. Okay. We're down to staff and commissioner comments, ideas, and questions. All right. Seeing none, I believe that concludes our business tonight. One item is, you may notice on our calendar, we do not have a July meeting. That is our normal recess period. And so we will be back on August the, whatever that date is. My apologies. Yeah, no. Second Monday of August. Second Monday of August.

It's going to be August 10th. And for members of the public who were not here at the beginning of the meeting, the chair took public comment matters on the agenda at the top of the meeting before the consent calendar.

All right, so we will see everyone August 10th. Have a great summer. Obviously, some of you will see at the MEU community meeting. And with that being said, oh, yes, Commissioner Corbis.

Sorry, I do have a question. Since we're not going to be having a July meeting, how are we going to know who is going to be attending the community event? Sorry.

It will be through email like we've had in the past.

Uh, so attorney, what, what, how can I do that?

And still our commissioner Lewis is the one that was in charge of the MEU meeting and she hasn't been here for a couple of meetings. So I'm not sure. I hope that she's going to want to be involved with that.

Let me do this. Are there any commissioners that are interested? I will attend as chair. Okay. Okay. So

We don't have it yet.

So I'm at three right now.

You can put me at an alter. I can go either way. I'd like to be there, but by the way, it's going to take someone's place.

Okay. Gotcha. Okay. Thank you. All right. So right now I'm at four, and I assume, again, our chair for that ad hoc, that's five. So I could do one more? No, I'm at five. Five is max. Yeah, thank you. Okay. Thank you for that. Okay. All right. Seeing nothing else, we stand adjourned.