Jul 16, 2025 Police Oversight Commission

GREAT.

THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.

OH, GEEZ.

UH, I'VE BEEN SERVING AS VICE CHAIR AND I'VE BEEN TO EVERY MEETING AND READ EVERYTHING DILIGENTLY AND ASKED QUESTIONS, AND SO THAT'S WHY I'D LIKE TO BE CHAIR.

ALL RIGHT.

UM, SO MADAM CLERK, UH, COULD I GET A ROLL CALL? VOTE FOR, UM, VICE CHAIR TUSHNET FOR CHAIR.

COMMISSIONER BENDER.

COMMISSIONER BROWN.

COMMISSIONER ATCH.

COMMISSIONER OROZCO AYE.

COMMISSIONER SOTO, VICE CHAIR TNI.

MOTION CARRIES.

ALRIGHT, LOOKS LIKE IT'S UNANIMOUS.

UM, SO, CONGRATULATIONS.

UH, NOW, CHAIR TUSHNET.

UM, I'LL NOW, UM, I'LL NOW OPEN IT UP TO YOU TO, UH, MAKE ANY COMMENTS IF YOU'D LIKE.

ALRIGHT, UH, CONGRATULATIONS AGAIN.

AND I HOPE I DO WHAT YOU NEED ME TO DO.

UH, SO I WILL NOW, UH, THE DECLARE NOMINATIONS OPEN FOR THE POLICE OVERSIGHT COMMISSION VICE CHAIR.

UM, EACH MEMBER MAY NOMINATE ONE PERSON FOR VICE CHAIR, INCLUDING YOURSELF.

THESE NOMINATIONS CANNOT BE AMENDED OR RECONSIDERED.

AND DO NOT REQUIRE A SECOND.

REQUIRE A SECOND.

UM, SO I WILL NOW OPEN UP NOMINATIONS I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE, UH, COMMISSIONER SOTO.

[00:05:04]

ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE? UH, COMMISSIONER BENDER.

ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? ALRIGHT.

THERE BE NO, NO, THERE BE NO FURTHER NOMINATIONS.

I DECLARE, DECLARE THE NOMINATIONS CLOSED FOR VICE CHAIR AND THE ORDER NOMINATED.

I INVITE EACH NOMINEE TO BRIEFLY SHARE WHY YOU WOULD LIKE TO BE ELECTED VICE CHAIR.

UH, PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO NO LONGER THAN TWO MINUTES.

UH, SO FIRST WE WILL HEAR FROM COMMISSIONER SOTO.

I WAS GONNA DEFER TO COMMISSIONER BENDER, BUT WELL, THANK YOU FOR THE NOMINATION.

I APPRECIATE, UM, CONSIDERING, UM, ME FILLING THE POST IT, IT IS JUST FOR TWO MEETINGS.

IT SOUNDS LIKE.

UM, I, I WAS THE PRIOR COMMISSIONER FOR THE CA UH, FOR THE CPCC FOR TWO YEARS.

UH, JUST LEADING, JUST PRIOR TO THE, TO CREATION OF THIS COMMISSION.

UM, SO I THINK THAT IT'S, IT'S A ROLE THAT I CAN FULFILL IF NEEDED, BUT IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE I WILL NEED TO DO MUCH .

BUT IN THE OUTSIDE THAT THERE'S AN ILLNESS OR THERE'S SOME TRAVEL PLANS, I'M, I'M MORE THAN CAPABLE AND HAPPY TO, TO FACILITATE AND, AND RUN THE MEETINGS AND, UM, THAT'S IT.

ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER BENDER, THANK YOU FOR THE NOMINATION.

UM, I AM HAPPY TO SERVE IF ELECTED, UH, COMMISSIONER SOTO IS MORE THAN EXPERIENCED AND CAPABLE.

I'M CONVINCED THAT HE'LL BE A GREAT VICE CHAIR, BUT IF FOR SOME REASON HE IS UNABLE TO DO IT, I AM HAPPY TO STEP INTO THE ROLE AND ASSIST, UH, COMMISSIONER TUSHNET, UM, IN ANY WAY I CAN.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.

UH, MADAM CLERK, UH, ROLL CALL.

VOTE FOR.

COMMISSIONER SOTO FOR VICE CHAIR COMMISSIONER BENDER.

COMMISSIONER ATCH AYE.

COMMISSIONER OROZCO AYE.

COMMISSIONER SOTO, UH, CORRECT VOTE.

UM, IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, IT'S PRETTY MUCH UNANIMOUS.

UM, SO WITH THAT, CONGRATULATIONS, UH, VICE CHAIR SOTO.

UM, I'LL NOW OPEN IT UP TO THE NEWLY ELECTED VICE CHAIR.

UM, IF YOU WOULDD LIKE TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS, THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD IS THAT JUST TO REMIND THAT MY CURRENT ROLE IS AS A CHIEF DEPUTY LAW ENFORCEMENT AUDITOR OF A COUNTY OF SONOMA.

I PREVIOUSLY WAS A POLICE SPECIAL INVESTIGATOR FOR THE LOS ANGELES POLICE COMMISSION.

UM, AND I, AS I SPOKE EARLIER, I WAS ALSO, I PLAYED A ROLE HERE ON THE COMMISSION, UH, PRIOR TO THE CREATION OF THIS CURRENT COMMISSION WITH THE CPCC.

SO I'M, I'M HAPPY TO BE A RESOURCE, UM, IF IT'S OF ANY VALUE TO THE COMMISSION AND TO THE PEOPLE OF LONG BEACH.

UM, SO PLEASE, UH, DON'T BE SHY IF, IF YOU HAVE ANY, UM, QUESTIONS, IF YOU WANNA SPEAK COMPARATIVELY WITH, WITH SOME OF MY OTHER EXPERIENCES.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VICE CHAIR SOTO.

UM, MADAM CLERK, PLEASE READ THE NEXT ITEM.

ITEM ONE RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE

[1. 25-55748 Recommendation to approve the minutes for the Police Oversight Commission meeting of Thursday, March 27, 2025. Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]

THE MINUTES FOR THE POLICE OVERSIGHT COMMISSION MEETING OF THURSDAY, MARCH 27TH, 2025.

IS THERE ANY PUBLIC ITEM COMMENT ON THIS ITEM FOR THE MINUTES? UH, FOR THE MARCH 27TH, 2025 MEETING.

ALRIGHT, SEEING NON-COMMISSION ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS CASTER, VOTE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE POLICE OVERSIGHT COMMISSION MEETING HELD MARCH 27TH, 2025.

COMMISSIONER ATCH? YES.

MOTION CARRIES.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

UH, MADAM CLERK, PLEASE READ THE NEXT ITEM.

[2. 25-55749 Recommendation to receive and file training on How to Interpret Police Investigation Review Report Data. Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]

ITEM TWO, RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE TRAINING ON HOW TO INTERPRET POLICE INVESTIGATION REVIEW REPORT DATA.

OKAY, I'LL NOW HAND IT OVER TO DIRECTOR CARRIAGE.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS.

FRANCINE CARRIAGE, DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF POLICE OVERSIGHT.

UM, BRINGING TO YOU TODAY SOME INFORMATION REGARDING THE TRAINING FOR REPORTS THAT YOU WILL BE SEEING, UM, IN THE NEAR FUTURE ABOUT INVESTIGATIONS THAT THE OFFICE OF POLICE OVERSIGHT HAS REVIEWED, AS WELL AS, UM, AUDITED FOR CLOSED INTERNAL AFFAIRS CASES.

I WILL TELL YOU

[00:10:01]

THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION THAT YOU HAVE IS GONNA BE A LITTLE OUTTA ORDER.

I DECIDED OUT AT THE LAST MINUTE TO CHANGE THE ORDER TO TRY AND MAKE IT MAKE MORE SENSE AND BASICALLY RUN SEQUENTIAL TO HOW CASES ARE REVIEWED.

SO PATRICK HAS THE CLICKER.

WE'LL TAKE OUR TIME.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ASK ME.

UM, AND WE'LL TRY AND COVER IT.

I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPERATIVE PRIOR TO BRINGING THE REPORT FORWARD TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE WELL INFORMED ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT, BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU CAN REVIEW THE DATA WITH THE APPROPRIATE KNOWLEDGE TO, UH, CRITIQUE THE NUMBERS AND CRITIQUE THE CHARTS, UM, WITH FULL INFORMATION KNOWN.

SO SOME OF THIS IS NOT COMMONPLACE TO PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT IN THE REALMS OF THEIR OVERSIGHT OR DEALING WITH POLICE COMPLAINTS.

UM, WE HAVE REVIEWED APPROXIMATELY 110 CASES.

I THINK THE LAST TIME THAT WE MET.

THERE WAS INITIALLY 30 PRIOR TO THE ANNUAL REPORT THAT WAS PRESENTED.

AND WE DECIDED TO HOLD THOSE 30 OVER TO PUT WITH A LARGER BATCH SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A DATA SET THAT WAS MORE COMPREHENSIVE INSTEAD OF JUST BRINGING FORWARD NUMBERS FOR 30 CASES.

SO, PRIOR TO JUMPING INTO WHAT THE PROCESS LOOKS LIKE, I DO WANT TO MENTION THAT THERE IS SOMETHING CALLED THE POLICE OFFICER BILL OF RIGHTS THAT'S HERE IN CALIFORNIA THAT'S FOUND IN GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 3,300 TO 33 13.

UM, WE WILL SEND OUT A LINK WHEN WE HAVE THIS REPORT SO THAT THAT CAN BE REVIEWED AS WELL WITH THE PACKAGE THAT WE'RE GONNA SEND YOU WHEN WE COME TO THE REPORT ONCE IT'S DONE.

UM, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I WANT TO PULL OUT FROM POBR IS THAT IT IS SPECIFIC AND GIVES INFORMATION AS TO HOW, UM, A POLICE EMPLOYEE ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION IS TO BE PERFORMED AND IT PROTECTS THE RIGHTS OF THE OFFICERS.

THAT'S WHAT'S WRITTEN INTO POBR.

IT'S NOT TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF THE COMMUNITY OR ANYBODY ELSE.

IT'S BASICALLY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE OFFICERS AND THE INVESTIGATION THAT'S HELD OVER THEM IS DONE IN A CERTAIN ACCORDANCE.

UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE IS THAT A POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS ONE YEAR TO IMPLO IMPOSE DISCIPLINE.

UM, AND THERE ARE CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS TO THAT, WHICH IS CALLED TOLLING.

WE WON'T GET INTO DETAILS ABOUT THAT, BUT WE WILL PROBABLY EVENTUALLY HAVE TO HAVE, UM, SOMEWHAT OF A CONVERSATION ABOUT TOLLING BECAUSE WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THERE ISN'T ERRONEOUS TOLLING DONE BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OR POOR TOLLING SO THAT THEY DON'T LOSE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCIPLINE AN OFFICER.

UM, AND IF TOLLING IS DONE INCORRECTLY, THEN BASICALLY YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DISCIPLINE AN OFFICER IF IT COMES DOWN TO IT.

AND I'LL, I'LL JUST SAY THAT IS THE MOST I NEED TO SAY ABOUT IT BECAUSE WHEN YOU DO GET THE REPORT, YOU WILL NOTICE, UM, THAT TOLLING COMES UP AS AN ISSUE POINTED OUT BY OUR OFFICE, UH, A FEW TIMES ON THESE REPORTS.

SO WE HAVE THE EXPECTATION THAT INTERNAL AFFAIRS IS WORKING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW THAT'S REQUIRED BY POBR WHEN THEY DO THEIR INVESTIGATIONS.

AND IF THERE'S A LACK OF CLARITY ON THEIR PART, THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED AND FIGURED OUT.

UM, SO THAT'S ALL I'M GONNA GO INTO REGARDING THE POBR.

UM, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO MENTION THAT THERE ARE NO STATUTORY LIMITATIONS WHEN IT COMES TO COMPLAINTS.

PEOPLE CAN BRING COMPLAINTS FORWARD ABOUT A POTENTIAL OFFICER MISCONDUCT FROM YEARS PREVIOUS.

IT DOESN'T, UM, HAVE TO BE SOMETHING WITHIN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME.

SO YOU DON'T JUST HAVE A YEAR TO COME MAKE A COMPLAINT ABOUT SOMETHING.

IF IT HAPPENED THREE YEARS AGO, YOU CAN STILL MAKE A COMPLAINT AND IT HAS TO BE INVESTIGATED.

SO THE CHART THAT YOU'RE REVIEWING RIGHT NOW, UM, IS BASICALLY THE PROCESS.

SO A COMPLAINT CAN COME IN FROM A MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY.

IT CAN ALSO COME IN FROM SOMEBODY WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

THE COMMUNITY MEMBER THAT MAKES THE COMPLAINT CAN BE A WITNESS TO POTENTIAL MISCONDUCT BY THE OFFICER.

THEY COULD BE A THIRD PARTY THAT DID NOT WITNESS IT, BUT HEARD ABOUT IT.

IT COULD ALSO BE AN ANONYMOUS PARTY.

THE LONG BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT DOES TAKE ANONYMOUS COMPLAINTS AS WELL.

UM, AND THE LAW REQUIRES THAT IF A COMPLAINT IS BROUGHT FORWARD, THERE HAS TO BE SOME FORM OF INVESTIGATION INTO THE POTENTIAL MISCONDUCT.

AS SOON AS A MEMBER OF, UM, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS MADE AWARE THAT SOMEBODY THAT'S IN A POSITION OF AUTHORITY, THAT'S WHEN THE CLOCK STARTS TICKING.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE 364 DAYS, BASICALLY, THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS TO IMPOSE DISCIPLINE, IF THERE IS A SUPERVISOR ON A FIELD THAT SEES THE BEHAVIOR OF A POLICE OFFICER THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE MISCONDUCT, THE CLOCK STARTS TICKING.

EVEN IF THAT SUPERVISOR DOES NOT ADDRESS WHAT THEY HAVE SEEN, THEY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN.

SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A FORMAL COMPLAINT THAT IS LODGED TO START THE CLOCK.

IT JUST MEANS THAT SOMEONE IS MADE AWARE OF THE ACTIVITY,

[00:15:01]

UM, THAT HAS THE AUTHORITY OR THE KNOWLEDGE TO SAY THAT IT COULD POTENTIALLY BE MISCONDUCT.

SO WITH THAT, THE CHART THAT IS MADE, WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT SHADES OF BLUE.

THE LIGHTER BLUE IS THE COMMUNITY COMPLAINT, AND THE DARKER BLUE IS THE ADMINISTRATIVE, UH, COMPLAINT.

SO IT COULD BE A SUPERVISOR, IT COULD BE A PEER, UM, ANYBODY WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION THAT THINKS THAT THERE IS POTENTIAL MISCONDUCT BY AN OFFICER, INITIALLY THE COMPLAINT IS RECEIVED.

SO THAT COULD BE THAT IT CAME IN OR THAT THEY SEE SOME TYPE OF BEHAVIOR THAT MIGHT BE MISCONDUCT.

USUALLY WITHIN A ONE WEEK PERIOD OF TIME, THERE'S A PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION THAT COULD INCLUDE PULLING ALL BODY WORN FOOTAGE DATA AND PUTTING IT INTO A SYSTEM SO THAT IT'S READILY AVAILABLE.

PULLING REPORTS, UM, TALKING TO WITNESSES SO THAT YOU DON'T LOSE POTENTIAL, UM, EVIDENCE OR DIGITAL FOOTAGE, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE DEALING WITH A COMPLAINT THAT DEALS WITH A DIFFERENT, UM, BUSINESS OR SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IN A NEIGHBORHOOD.

YOU MIGHT HAVE VIDEO FOOTAGE THAT'S LOOPED OVER AFTER A, YOU KNOW, ONE WEEK PERIOD OR 30 DAY PERIOD.

SO IT'S IMPERATIVE WITHIN THE FIRST WEEK THAT THERE'S AN ASSESSMENT OF WHAT EVIDENCE IS NEEDED AND IT IS GATHERED AND PUT ASIDE, EVEN IF THEY'RE NOT GONNA START THE INVESTIGATION, THEY HAVE TO GATHER THE EVIDENCE PRETTY EARLY ON.

SO CURRENTLY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS A SYSTEM THAT THEY CALLED ALTERNATIVE CASE REVIEW, WHERE IN THAT FIRST WEEK OF REVIEWING THE PRELIMINARY INFORMATION OF THE COMPLAINT, THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS INVESTIGATOR COULD POTENTIALLY DETERMINE THAT IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT EVEN IF IT WERE TRUE, THE UM, ACTION OF THE OFFICER WOULD RISE TO THE LEVEL OF FORMAL DISCIPLINE.

FORMAL DISCIPLINE.

THE EASIEST WAY I COULD DESCRIBE IT IS IT AFFECTS YOUR POCKETBOOK.

SO IF IT'S SOMETHING WHERE AN OFFICER MIGHT HAVE DONE SOMETHING WHERE THEY'RE GONNA GET A WRITTEN, UM, ADMONISHMENT OR A RETRAINING THAT DOESN'T AFFECT THEM FINANCIALLY, IT'S NOT CONSIDERED FORMAL.

AND THAT TYPE OF DISCIPLINE CAN COME FROM A LOWER LEVEL SUPERVISOR.

SO EITHER THE SERGEANT OR A LIEUTENANT OR SOMEBODY ELSE.

SO IF THAT IS, UM, SOMETHING THAT THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS INVESTIGATOR NOTICES, THEY MAY SEND IT DOWN TO THE LIEUTENANT OR THE COMMANDER OF THE OFFICER'S, UM, FIELD, WHATEVER FIELD THAT THEY'RE IN.

IF THEY'RE IN PATROL, THEY'LL SEND IT TO THE LIEUTENANT OF PATROL TO SAY, HEY, THIS COMPLAINT CAME IN, CAN YOU REVIEW THE FOOTAGE AND ADDRESS IT DIRECTLY WITH THE OFFICER? SO THAT KEEPS IT FROM GOING THROUGH THE SYSTEM, WHICH HELPS THE SYSTEM NOT BE CLOGGED UP.

AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT PART IN A LITTLE BIT.

SO THAT HAPPENS WITHIN LIKE THE FIRST WEEK TO MONTH.

UM, IF IT IS SOMETHING THAT THEY DEEM THAT IF IT WERE IN FACT TRUE THAT THE OFFICER COULD POTENTIALLY GET DISCIPLINED, THEN THEY'RE GONNA SEND IT THROUGH THE FORMAL PROCESS.

UM, WHICH GOES AFTER PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION TO SOMETHING THAT'S CALLED AN INTAKE PRESENTATION.

WHAT WE HAVE NOTICED WITH THE CASES THAT WE ARE REVIEWING RIGHT NOW IS THE TIME IT TAKES TO GET TO INTAKE IS RIGHT AROUND EIGHT TO 10 MONTHS.

UM, SO THE FIRST TIME THAT IT'S BEING REVIEWED BY A BODY TO MAKE A DECISION ON THE INVESTIGATION ITSELF IS RIGHT AROUND EIGHT TO 10 MONTHS.

SO TO KEEP IT, UH, SIMPLE INTERNAL AFFAIRS IS THE BODY THAT GATHERS THE INFORMATION.

THEY DON'T MAKE DECISIONS.

SO THEY'RE THE FACT FINDING BODY.

THEY'RE GONNA PUT THOSE FACTS TOGETHER AND PRESENT IT IN FRONT OF THE EXECUTIVE STAFF OF THE CHIEF, WHICH COULD BE DIFFERENT.

UM, DEPUTY CHIEFS, BUREAU CHIEFS, LIEUTENANTS, UM, THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED ON THE EVIDENCE THAT IS BROUGHT BEFORE THEM, DO THEY BELIEVE THAT THE OFFICER VIOLATED POLICY.

THE PRESENTATION COULD INCLUDE, UM, BODY-WORN CAMERA FOOTAGE, UH, REPORTS, VIDEOS, PHOTOS, WHATEVER IS PUT TOGETHER TO MAKE A DETERMINATION.

AND FROM THERE, THAT GROUP IS GOING TO DECIDE IF THEY BELIEVE THAT THE OFFICER DID POTENTIALLY MORE THAN NOT VIOLATE POLICY, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO SEND IT ON TO THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION ROUTE.

AND THAT GOES JUST TO THE RIGHT.

IF THEY BELIEVE THAT THE OFFICER DID NOT VIOLATE POLICY OR THEY CANNOT PROVE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER THAT THEY VIOLATED POLICY, IT'S GONNA GET A DISPOSITION FROM THE GROUP AT INTAKE.

SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE ARROW THAT GOES BELOW, THE DISPOSITIONS THAT WE HAVE IS NOT SUSTAINED.

AND I HAVE THE, UH, DEFINITIONS COMING UP LATER, BUT I'LL JUST TELL YOU QUICKLY NOT SUSTAINS MEANS THAT YOU CAN'T PROVE OR DISPROVE THAT THE OFFICER VIOLATED POLICY.

UNFOUNDED MEANS THAT IT DID NOT HAPPEN.

THE EVIDENCE THAT CAME FORWARD SHOWS THAT IT DID NOT IN FACT HAPPEN.

EXONERATED MEANS THAT IT ACTUALLY DID HAPPEN, BUT IT DOES NOT VIOLATE POLICY.

SO THE OFFICER COULD HAVE DONE WHAT THE COMMUNITY MEMBER ALLEGED, BUT

[00:20:01]

IT DOESN'T VIOLATE POLICY.

UM, AND OTHER IS A CATEGORY THAT'S PRETTY UNIQUE TO LONG BEACH.

UM, AND IT MEANS THAT THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT THEY DON'T BELIEVE COMPLETELY VIOLATED POLICY, BUT THERE IS ROOM FOR TRAINING.

SO IF THEY'RE GONNA GIVE AN OFFICER DOCUMENTED RETRAINING, THEY'RE USUALLY, UH, DIS DISPOSED OUT.

THE DISPOSITION IS GIVEN ANOTHER FINDING, AND THEN THERE'S A TRAINING ASSOCIATED WITH IT.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS SO FAR? OKAY, GOOD.

WE'LL SAVE 'EM TO THE END.

'CAUSE I KNOW YOU HAVE SOME MICHAEL.

I SEE IT.

UM, SO THEN FROM THERE, BASICALLY THEY'RE GONNA CLOSE THE CASE.

WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, UM, IS APPROXIMATELY EIGHT TO, IT'S PROBABLY CLOSER TO 11 AND A HALF MONTHS.

UM, BUT WE DON'T WANNA GIVE YOU, YOU KNOW, FICTITIOUS NUMBERS, BUT IT'S CLOSER TO EIGHT TO 11 AND A HALF MONTHS TO CLOSE COMPLAINTS.

UM, THIS IS A LOT OF WHAT WILL BE COVERED IN THE AUDIT THAT WE HAVE THE OIR GROUP DOING.

IT'S THE PROCESS THAT'S SLOWING IT UP.

UM, IN MY OPINION, INTAKE HAPPENS ONCE A WEEK AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT GETTING APPROXIMATELY 13 PEOPLE ON A CALENDAR, UM, FOR ONE DAY.

AND THEN THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS LIEUTENANT IS GONNA BRING MAYBE SIX, 10 CASES FORWARD AND JUST GO OVER 'EM.

AND THEN THEY MAKE A DECISION, GO OVER 'EM, MAKE A DECISION.

SO SOMETIMES THE CASES ARE STARTED IN WEEK ONE REGARDING GATHERING THE FACTS, BUT THEN IT'S SHELVED FOR ABOUT SIX MONTHS UNTIL IT'S ALMOST TIME TO GO TO INTAKE BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO CATCH UP THE INVESTIGATORS WITH WHAT'S COMING UP ON THAT WEEK'S CALENDAR AND MAKING SURE THAT EVERYTHING'S READY TO GO.

SO THE PROCESS IS VERY STAGNANT, UM, AS IT IS.

THAT'S WHAT I ALREADY KNOW THE AUDIT IS GONNA SHOW.

UM, BUT THE PART THAT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE DISAPPOINTING REGARDING THE INTERACTION IS SOMETIMES THE ONLY INTERVIEW THAT TAKES PLACE OF A COMMUNITY MEMBER THAT MAKES A COMPLAINT IS WHAT IS SENT IN.

SO IF YOU SEND IN AN EMAIL, YOU'RE ONLY GETTING A FOLLOW UP FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO SAY, WE'VE RECEIVED IT, WE'RE GONNA OPEN YOUR CASE.

AND THAT MIGHT BE EIGHT, 10 MONTHS AGO.

UM, IF THERE'S FOLLOW UP TO IT, THEY MIGHT CALL YOU RIGHT AROUND THE EIGHT MONTH MARK IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT THEY HAVE.

UM, I KNOW I COVERED THIS LAST TIME WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS WE MADE, BUT IT CAN CAUSE A LITTLE BIT OF, UM, DISSATISFACTION, IF YOU WILL, WITH THE COMMUNITY ABOUT HOW THEIR COMPLAINTS ARE BEING HANDLED.

IT'S ALSO DISSATISFACTION WITH THE OFFICERS ABOUT HOW LONG IT TAKES TO EITHER BE UNFOUNDED OR EXONERATED AS WELL, IF THAT HAPPENS TO BE THE DISPOSITION.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING, UM, THAT I THINK THE AUDIT WILL SHOW AND DEAL WITH AFTER IT MOVES INTO THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION ROUND.

YES, GO AHEAD.

DUST.

SORRY, QUICK CLARIFYING QUESTION.

SO FROM DAY ONE TO THE INTAKE IS EIGHT TO 10 MONTHS? YEP.

AND THEN FROM INTAKE TO CASE CLOSED AT DOWN AT THE BOTTOM IS ANOTHER EIGHT TO 10 MONTHS.

SO, OR IS THAT STILL SAME TIMELINE? IT'S THE SAME TIMELINE BECAUSE AT INTAKE IS WHEN THEY GIVE IT A DISPOSITION, THEY'RE EITHER GONNA DISPOSITION IT OUT OR SAY WE NEED TO MOVE IT FORWARD TO DO A FORMAL INVESTIGATION.

UM, THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINTS OR INVESTIGATIONS SKIP INTAKE ALTOGETHER.

SO THEY GO FROM PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION TO FINAL.

THAT'S WHY YOU DON'T SEE THE DARK BLUE IN THAT ONE.

UM, THE ONLY REASON I COULD GIVE IT IS YOU'RE, YOU'RE, UH, TALKING ABOUT SOMEBODY THAT WORKS WITHIN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT HAS BROUGHT THIS COMPLAINT FORWARD.

AND TYPICALLY THEY KNOW THE RULES WELL ENOUGH TO SAY THIS CLEARLY LOOKS TO BE A VIOLATION OF SOME FORM OF POLICY.

EVERYTHING ELSE IS JUST PUT TOGETHER TO SEE IF THAT IS IN FACT TRUE.

IF, IF WHAT THEY THINK THEY SAW IS BACKED UP WITH EVIDENCE AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

UM, AND WHAT WOULD COME OUT OF IT IF IT IS TRUE THAT THAT OFFICER VIOLATED POLICY.

SO IF FOR SOME REASON AT INTAKE IT'S DECIDED IT NEEDS TO GO THE FORMAL ROUTE, THAT'S GONNA GIVE THE INVESTIGATOR AN ADDITIONAL, UH, THREE MONTHS TO TWO MONTHS TO CLOSE IT BEFORE THE 364 DAY MARK.

SO IF THERE'S A LOT MORE THAT NEEDS TO GO INTO THAT INVESTIGATION, THE TIMEFRAME IS VERY SMALL.

UM, IN MY EXPERIENCE ON AVERAGE FROM THE OVERSIGHT WORK THAT I'VE DONE OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS, IT, A TYPICAL CASE TAKES ANYWHERE FROM A MONTH TO SIX MONTHS.

THE MOST COMPLICATED WOULD TAKE SIX MONTHS TO CLOSE IN MOST JURISDICTIONS OF THIS SIZE.

SO TO ME THAT THAT'S A PROBABLY A SYSTEM ISSUE THAT WE'RE GONNA TRY AND HELP WORK OUT TO REALLY GIVE BETTER SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY, UM, AS WELL AS THE OFFICERS.

ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GONNA SKIP TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH IS GONNA BE NUMBER FIVE.

YOU PROBABLY DID SOMETHING WRONG.

SO A SAMPLE OF A COMPLAINT, UM, THAT MAY COME IN COULD BE FROM A COMMUNITY MEMBER.

SO THE FIRST ONE YOU SEE, IT DOESN'T SAY IT ON THERE, BUT IT SHOULD SAY ALLEGATION NUMBER ONE AT THE TOP.

SO ONE ALLEGATION COULD HAVE SEVERAL

[00:25:01]

POLICIES IN IT.

IT'S GONNA GET A LITTLE COMPLICATED, BUT I NEED Y'ALL TO JUST STAY WITH ME.

JUST HOLD ON TIGHT, OKAY? IT'S NOT GONNA MAKE MUCH SENSE, BUT THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE GONNA BE READING.

SO I DON'T WANT YOU TO GET LOST IN THE SAUCE.

ALL RIGHT.

SO WE HAVE A, A FICTITIOUS SITUATION WHERE AN OFFICER COMES TO A CALL, THE COMPLAINANT IS UPSET BECAUSE THE OFFICER DID NOT TAKE A REPORT AND HE WAS ALSO RUDE WITH A COMMENT THAT WAS ALLEGEDLY MADE, RIGHT? YOU HAVE TWO OFFICERS THAT SHOW UP.

ONE OFFICER DOES, YOU KNOW, ONE PARTICULAR THING WHICH HAS MADE THE COMMENT, THE OTHER OFFICER DIDN'T TAKE THE REPORT.

SO IN THAT SCENARIO, YOU COULD HAVE TWO OFFICERS WITH MULTIPLE ALLEGATIONS PER OFFICER.

THE WAY THAT THE, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BREAKS DOWN THEIR ALLEGATIONS, IF YOU WILL, ALLEGATIONS THE BEST I COULD DESCRIBE IT IS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED.

SO IT'S MORE LIKE A SENTENCE.

SO ALLEGATION ONE IS OFFICER COLOMBO DID NOT WRITE A REPORT FOR THIS PARTICULAR CALL.

SO UNDER THAT ONE ALLEGATION, THAT ONE ACTION, YOU MIGHT HAVE WHAT'S CALLED CS ARTICLE 7 84 1, WHICH THE DEFINITION IS VIOLATION OF ANY RULE.

THE NEXT ONE IS NEGLECT OF DUTY.

THE NEXT ONE IS PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT AND RESPONSIBILITY.

THE NEXT ONE IS GENERAL RESPONSIBILITY AND THEN ANOTHER NEGLECT.

RIGHT? SO FOR THAT ONE ACTION WE HAVE, HOW MANY IS THAT? FIVE DIFFERENT POLICIES THAT THAT ONE ACTION COULD HAVE VIOLATED IF IT WERE IN FACT TRUE.

THE NEXT ALLEGATION IS THAT THE SAME OFFICER MADE A RUDE COMMENT TO THE COMMUNITY MEMBER.

AND YOU'LL NOTICE THAT SOME OF THESE SAME POLICIES ARE REPEATED, THEY'RE DUPLICATED, RIGHT? SO YOU HAVE CS 84 1 VIOLATION OF ANY RULE.

IT JUST GOES DOWN THE SAME THING.

THE ONLY ONE THAT MIGHT BE DIFFERENT IS, UH, 84 10, WHICH IS DISCOURTEOUS OR DISRUPTIVE CONDUCT WITH PUBLIC OR OTHER EMPLOYEES.

SO IF THERE WAS ANOTHER OFFICER, HE MIGHT THEN AGAIN ON THERE, 'CAUSE I PUT THE SAME NAME TWICE, BUT HE MIGHT THEN HAVE CS 84 1 VIOLATION OF ANY RULE.

SO WHEN WE SHOW YOU THESE UH, NUMBERS, WE'RE COUNTING EVERY SINGLE 84 1.

WE'RE COUNTING EVERY SINGLE 84 10 BECAUSE THAT'S BASICALLY TELLING YOU HOW MANY TIMES SOMETHING HAPPENED, RIGHT? IT'S NOT THE WAY THAT MOST DEPARTMENTS PUT ONE ALLEGATION PER CASE, PER OFFICER.

SO YOU'RE GONNA SEE BIG NUMBERS AND IT MIGHT LOOK A LITTLE CONFUSING.

SO WE'RE GONNA SKIP TO THE NEXT ONE, WHICH IS NUMBER THREE.

SO WE'RE GONNA ADD A CHART WHICH TALKS ABOUT TYPICAL TIMEFRAMES, AND IT'S IN A BELL CURVE STATE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PRESENTATION.

THESE ARE JUST, UH, SAMPLE NUMBERS.

THE NUMBERS THAT WE HAVE WILL BE PRETTY CLOSE TO THIS, BUT THIS IS JUST SAMPLES.

SO YOU CAN UNDERSTAND WHEN IT COMES TO UNFOUNDED AND EXONERATED, THE DEFINITIONS ARE PRETTY CLOSE TO EITHER IT DIDN'T HAPPEN AT ALL OR IT DID HAPPEN, BUT IT IS NOT AGAINST POLICY.

SO WE ARE GONNA PUT THOSE TWO TOGETHER.

WHEN IT COMES TO SUSTAINED AND NOT SUSTAINED, WE CAN'T PROVE OR DISPROVE IT DIDN'T HAPPEN, OR IT DID IN FACT HAPPEN.

WE'RE GONNA PUT THOSE TOGETHER.

AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SHOW WITH THESE CHARTS WHEN WE BRING THEM TO YOU IS THAT THERE ARE SOME CASES THAT CLEARLY IT DIDN'T HAPPEN FROM THE EVIDENCE AND IT STILL TOOK RIGHT AROUND ON AVERAGE 10, 11 MONTHS TO CLOSE IT.

WHEN IT COMES TO THE SUSTAINED ONE, YOU CAN SEE A PEAK IN IT, BUT IT'S THE SAME TIMEFRAME.

SO INVESTIGATIONS THAT IF YOU JUST LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE, IF YOU WILL, WILL SHOW YOU IT DIDN'T HAPPEN PRETTY IMMEDIATELY.

IT'S TAKEN JUST AS LONG.

SO IF YOU HAVE A COMMUNITY MEMBER THAT'S COMING IN TO MAKE A COMPLAINT, BUT THEIR ISSUE CAN BE ADDRESSED IMMEDIATELY, THEN IT WOULDN'T TIE UP THE ENTIRE SYSTEM.

AND THAT'S WHERE FOR US, THERE'S A DISCONNECT BETWEEN EXPLANATIONS AND HELPING THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTAND WHAT'S EXPECTED OF THE OFFICERS AND THEN GIVING THEM SOME RESOLUTION TO THEIR COMPLAINTS A LOT FASTER, NOT TAKING ALMOST 11 MONTHS TO GET THEM SOME TYPE OF RESOLVE TO THEIR COMPLAINT.

ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS CHART? AND THEN ONE OTHER CHART THAT WE'RE GONNA PUT, BUT I DIDN'T WANNA, UM, JUMBO THE, THE SLIDE OR CRAMP THE SLIDE IS OTHERS, OTHER FOR US IS BASICALLY A SUSTAINED, THE OFFICER DID DO SOMETHING THAT REQUIRED, UM, SOME FORM OF RETRAINING OR ADJUSTMENT.

THEY'RE NOT DISPO IT OUT AS A SUSTAINED.

UM, WE'RE GONNA TRY AND FIGURE THAT OUT ALONG THE WAY.

BUT IF YOU DID SOMETHING THAT NEEDS CORRECTING, I MEAN TECHNICALLY

[00:30:01]

SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE A DIFFERENT CHART FOR THAT IN THE TIMEFRAME IT TAKES.

ALRIGHT, SO AFTER THAT, THESE ARE COMMON, UM, INTERNAL AFFAIRS, WHAT THEY CALL ALLEGATIONS.

THEY'RE ACTUALLY DEPARTMENT POLICIES.

SO IT IS JUST HERE BASICALLY FOR INFORMATION.

ALL OF THESE CAN BE FOUND ONLINE.

WE'RE GONNA ADD THE LINK, UH, TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT MANUAL IN CASE YOU JUST HAVE SOME DOWNTIME READING.

UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE PREFER THE DEPARTMENT TO GO TO GO TO OR TRANSITION TO, AND IT IS, IT WAS A PART OF OUR RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE MADE IN THE ANNUAL REPORT, IS TO USE COMMON ALLEGATIONS THAT ARE USED ACROSS THE WORLD, BASICALLY.

UM, AND COMMON ALLEGATIONS WOULD INCLUDE CONDUCT UNBECOMING, DISCOURTESY, DISCRIMINATION, DISHONESTY, FALSE ARREST, FIREARM DISCHARGE, UNREASONABLE FORCE HARASSMENT, IMPROPER SEARCH AND SEIZURE, IMPROPER TACTICS, UM, INSUBORDINATION INTOXICATION, MISSING PROPERTY PROFILING, NEGLECT OF DUTY.

UH, WHEN A COMMUNITY MEMBER WANTS TO MAKE A COMPLAINT AGAINST AN OFFICER OR ANY ACTION, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO SAY TO INTERNAL AFFAIRS, UM, YOU KNOW, I WANNA MAKE A COMPLAINT OF 3.1.

THEY'RE BASICALLY GONNA SAY, I WANNA MAKE A COMPLAINT 'CAUSE HE WAS RUDE AND DISCOURTEOUS.

AND IF FOR SOME REASON SOMEBODY WANTS TO GO AND PULL THE DATA FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND SAY, WELL, HOW MANY DISCOURTESY COMPLAINTS DID YOU HAVE IN 2024? IT WOULD ALMOST BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO PULL 'EM WITHOUT GOING INTO EACH INDIVIDUAL CASE BECAUSE THEY HAVE ABOUT A GAZILLION THREE POINT ONES, WHICH IS A VIOLATION OF ANY RULE.

IT'S NOT CLEAR.

SO IN, IN THE INTEREST OF TRANSPARENCY, THE MORE CLEAR IT IS TO THE PUBLIC, THE BETTER THE DATA IS.

THE DEPARTMENT KNOWS WHAT A 3.1 IS, BUT 3.1 CAN COVER A LOT OF STUFF.

SO WE JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT WHEN WE BRING THIS REPORT FORWARD, THERE WILL ONLY BE CERTAIN CASES THAT WE'RE GONNA PULL OUT AND HIGHLIGHT.

THE REST OF IT IS AGGREGATE DATA.

'CAUSE SOME OF WHAT IS ALSO COVERED BY A POLICE OFFICER BILL OF RIGHTS IS PERSONNEL FILES ARE KIND OF PROTECTED, IF YOU WILL.

AND THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH INFORMATION THAT WE CAN PUT OUT PUBLICLY WITHOUT VIOLATING THE LAW.

SO AS MUCH AS WE CAN PUT OUT, WE WILL PUT OUT.

BUT WE WANT YOU TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT, UM, A LOT OF THESE CASES TO TRY AND BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ISSUES ARE.

BUT THE WAY THAT THEY CATEGORIZE THEIR COMPLAINTS, YOU CAN'T REALLY TELL WHAT THE ISSUES OF THE DEPARTMENTS ARE.

SO I HAVE TO PULL SOME OUT TO HIGHLIGHT THOSE CASES.

SO HOPEFULLY THAT PART MAKES SENSE AS WELL.

UM, WHEN IT COMES TO DISPOSITION, I KIND OF COVERED THIS ALREADY.

IT BASICALLY FALLS INTO FOUR KNOWN CATEGORIES AND ONE MADE UP CATEGORY OF OTHER.

UM, SO THAT'S JUST SOMETHING YOU'LL SEE.

ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU'LL SEE ON THE REPORT IS EVERY TIME THAT BODY-WORN CAMERA FOOTAGE COULD HAVE RESOLVED THE ISSUE OR THE COMPLAINT, WE TRACK THAT.

UM, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE CASES, WE'RE LOOKING AT A FEW MAJOR THINGS.

WAS IT DONE IN A TIMELY MANNER, THE INVESTIGATION? DO WE AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT? UM, WE'RE ALL ALLEGATIONS COVERED? SO IF A COMMUNITY MEMBER IS ADDRESSING CERTAIN THINGS OR BRINGING UP CERTAIN THINGS IN THEIR COMPLAINT, WERE THEY ALL INVESTIGATED AND ADDRESSED? WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT THE QUALITY OF THE INVESTIGATION.

UM, WHAT WE'VE NOTICED IS THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES THAT HAVE COME UP THAT IT MIGHT NOT DEAL DIRECTLY WITH THE INVESTIGATION, BUT WE HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE QUALITY OF THE INTERACTION.

AND IT IS, UH, BASICALLY OUR DUTY TO ALSO POINT THOSE OUT TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AS WELL.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE STRUGGLING WITH IS THE OPO REVIEWS.

CLOSED INVESTIGATIONS ONLY.

WE'RE ONLY GIVEN INVESTIGATIONS THAT ARE COMPLETED ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE PROCESS OF THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS INVESTIGATION BASED ON THESE NUMBERS.

BASICALLY WE'RE LOOKING AT 2023 CASES, UM, AND SOME 20 FOURS AND TRYING TO ADDRESS THINGS AND ADJUST THINGS THAT ARE TWO YEARS OLD IS ALMOST A MOOT POINT UNLESS THEY'RE STILL DOING THEM.

UM, SO BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO PRETTY MUCH CATCH UP, IT'S LIKE WE CAN POINT A LOT OF STUFF OUT AND THEN IT LIKE, WELL, WE DON'T DO THAT ANYMORE.

THAT WAS ALREADY ADDRESSED, OR WHATEVER IT IS.

BUT STILL, UM, GOES TO THE QUALITY OF THE INVESTIGATIONS THAT ARE BEING DONE AND WE CAN ONLY ASSUME, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'S COMMON PRACTICE.

WE DO KNOW THAT THE, THE PROCESS THAT THEY CURRENTLY USE THAT'S MAKING IT SO SLOW THAT WE'RE GETTING THESE CASES SO LATE, UM, IS CURRENTLY BEING USED AS WELL.

AND I WILL PAUSE THERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU COULD ASK 'EM ALL.

JUST MAKE SURE YOU PUSH THE BUTTON SO EVERYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE CAN ALSO HEAR YOU.

[00:35:02]

10, EIGHT TO 10 MONTHS.

EIGHT TO 11 MONTHS.

IT, IT SEEMS UNREASONABLY LONG GIVEN, YOU KNOW, ON THE OTHER SIDE, IF A CRIMINAL OR ALLEGATION WERE MADE AND SOMEONE WERE TO BE INVESTIGATED, UM, I PERCEIVE THAT THE TIMELINES SHRINK QUITE A BIT.

NO, WELL IT JUST SEEMED LIKE QUITE A LONG TIME TO ADDRESS A COMPLAINT.

IS, IS THERE A REASON OTHER THAN MAYBE THEY JUST ARE BACKLOGGED OR THEY DON'T HAVE PEOPLE DEDICATED TO THAT? WHY IT TAKES SO LONG? FROM WHAT, WHAT I HAVE DEDUCED IN THE ALMOST TWO YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN HERE, IT'S THE PROCESS.

IT'S ALSO THAT EVERYTHING IS GIVEN THE SAME LEVEL OF INVESTIGATION.

UM, THE LAW REQUIRES THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO INVESTIGATE A COMPLAINT, BUT EVERYTHING DOESN'T HAVE TO MIRROR EACH PROCESS.

WHEN THAT LAW CAME OUT, THERE WAS NO BODY-WORN CAMERA FOOTAGE.

IF YOU CAN IMMEDIATELY GO TO THE BODY-WORN CAMERA FOOTAGE AND SEE, YES, IN FACT THIS OFFICER DID THIS, PUSH IT TO FINAL, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF INTAKE TO THEN HAVE THEM LOOK AT IT TO SAY, OH YEAH, WE SEE IT, IT SHOULD JUST GO STRAIGHT TO FINAL.

UM, THE THINGS THAT YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THEY DID NOT HAPPEN.

OR IT'S EXONERATED TO SAY, OKAY, THE OFFICER DID THIS THING, BUT THIS ISN'T A VIOLATION OF POLICY, THEN IT SHOULD BE REMOVED OUT OF THE PROCESS OF NEEDING TO GO TO AN INTAKE.

SO THEY'RE JUST COMPLETELY BACKLOG BACKLOGGED, BUT BASICALLY BY THEIR OWN DOING.

UM, WE, WE TALKED ABOUT BACKLOG, WE TALKED ABOUT TOLLING.

WE'RE NOT GONNA GET INTO THAT NOW, BUT WHAT MECHANISM IS IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT THE POLICE ARE NOT SIMPLY DRAGGING THEIR FEET, ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO COMMUNITY COMPLAINTS? I MEAN, ESPECIALLY IF WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE BUILDING TRUST IN THE COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, AND WE'RE ONLY MEETING ONCE AND OH, WE'RE UNDERSTAFFED AND OH, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE JUST COULDN'T GET TO THAT REALLY STICKY UGLY CASE UNTIL MONTH 11, DAY 21.

AND OH MY GOODNESS, WE'VE NOW RUN OUT OF TIME.

IS IS THERE ANY ACCOUNTABILITY? WHAT WHAT IS IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT THEY ARE IN FACT DOING INVESTIGATIONS IN A TIMELY MANNER? OUR OFFICE, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION.

UM, SO WE'RE CALLING IT OUT.

I KNOW THAT THEY'RE BASICALLY TRYING TO MAKE, I MEAN ALTERNATIVE CASES.

UM, MOVING IT ALONG IS NEW.

SINCE WE'VE GOTTEN HERE, IT WAS IMPLEMENTED.

I DON'T THINK THAT WE MADE IT COME ABOUT 'CAUSE I'M SURE THEY HAD BEEN HAVING THAT CONVERSATION.

BUT THE ACCOUNTABILITY IS OVERSIGHT.

THE PROBLEM IS EVEN IF THE CASE TOOK SIX MONTHS OR WHATEVER ELSE, THERE'S A WAY TO DO IT, TO DEAL WITH THE COMMUNITY AND HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE COMMUNITY SO THAT THEY FEEL LIKE THEY TRUST THE PROCESS.

IF I WERE TO COME AND MAKE A COMPLAINT AND I DIDN'T HEAR FROM ANYBODY FOR ALMOST 10 MONTHS, THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE THE LAST TIME I EVER MAKE A COMPLAINT TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

SO EVEN WHEN DATA SAYS, WELL, COMPLAINTS ARE DOWN, PROBABLY 'CAUSE PEOPLE AREN'T UTILIZING THE SYSTEM AND IT DOESN'T HELP CORRECT ACTION AND BAD BEHAVIOR OF OFFICERS, WHETHER IT'S INTENTIONAL OR UNINTENTIONAL, YOU DON'T WANNA WAIT A YEAR TO ADJUST SOMETHING WHERE AN OFFICER IS DOING SOMETHING, UM, NOT APPROPRIATE ACCORDING TO THE POLICY.

AND SO MY FOLLOW UP THEN, WHEN YOU SAY THE OFFICE OF POLICE OVERSIGHT, IS THAT MECHANISM, HOW EFFECTIVE CAN YOU BE IF YOU'RE DEALING WITH CASES AGAIN FROM 2023? IF THE AUDIT IN FACT SHOWS YEP, THEY DROPPED THE BALL, THEY ARE DRAGGING THEIR FEET, BUT OOPS, IT'S TOO LATE.

THE, THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS HAS PASSED.

OR, YOU KNOW, AS, AS A COMMUNITY WE'RE JUST STUCK WITH THAT.

I IS THAT WHERE WE'RE AT THUS FAR? I THINK THAT BASED ON WHAT WE'RE SAYING, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS OPEN TO MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO THE PROCESS.

THIS IS WHAT THEY'VE ALWAYS DONE.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I KNOW THEY WANT TO ADDRESS AND DEAL WITH.

UM, SO IT DOESN'T HELP.

IT, IT'S NOT ONLY A DISSERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY, IT'S ALSO A DISSERVICE TO THE OFFICERS AS WELL, BECAUSE IF THEY ARE MAKING MISTAKES, THEY DON'T WANT TO REPEAT MISTAKES AND THEN HAVE 'EM ALL LUMPED TOGETHER AND BE LIKE, WELL, NOBODY EVER TOLD ME I WASN'T SUPPOSED TO BE DOING THIS.

SO IT'S NOT WORKING FOR EITHER SIDE, UM, IN A POSITIVE WAY.

[00:40:01]

AND I DON'T KNOW IF MAYBE THEY DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO GET OUT FROM UNDER IT.

SO HAVING AN EXTERNAL OFFICE THAT YEAH, THIS IS NOT WORKING EITHER.

GIVES THEM A WAY TO REALLY MAKE SOME, SOME MOVEMENT, I THINK.

SO I ALSO HAVE A QUESTION.

UM, YOU'RE USING THE TERM MAKE MISTAKES, BUT THERE ARE MISTAKES AND THEN THERE ARE REALLY SERIOUS MISTAKE, I WOULDN'T EVEN CALL THEM MISTAKES.

I WOULD CALL THEM VIOLATIONS OR SOMETHING ELSE.

SO AT WHAT POINT IS THERE ANY, I MEAN, I CAN SEE BEING, I DON'T LIKE EIGHT TO 10 MONTHS BEFORE AN EMAIL IS ACTUALLY ACKNOWLEDGED WHERE THE CONTENT OF THE EMAIL, I'M SURE THEY GET AN EMAIL RIGHT BACK SAYING WE'VE RECEIVED IT, BUT I WANT SOME ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE CONTENT BEFORE EIGHT MONTHS THAT, THAT ASIDE, SOME OF THE EMAILS WILL BE MORE ABOUT MORE SERIOUS ISSUES THAN OTHERS.

IS THERE ANY WAY WE CAN, OR THE OFFICE CAN LOOK INTO WHETHER MORE SERIOUS, UM, OFFENSES OR POLICE OFFENSES ARE PRIORITIZED? SO THEY DO PRIORITIZE MORE SERIOUS INVESTIGATIONS.

THEY ALSO, UH, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT IS CRIMINAL, WOULD SEND IT TO THE DA'S OFFICE TO REVIEW.

WHEN THOSE POTENTIAL, UH, ISSUES HAPPEN.

QUITE OFTEN OFFICERS ARE REMOVED FROM THEIR ASSIGNMENT.

SO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT CAN EXPEDITE THE PROCESS, IF YOU WILL, REGARDING THE INVESTIGATION.

IF THERE IS CRIMINAL CHARGES PENDING, UH, THAT IS ONE OF THE EXCEPTIONS TO, TO THE, THE TIMEFRAME.

SO THE TIMEFRAME STOPS FOR THE 364 DAYS TO IMPOSE DISCIPLINE WHILE THAT OFFICER IS WITHIN A, UM, CRIMINAL CASE.

AND UNTIL ADJUDICATION IS DONE, THAT'S WHEN THE CLOCK PICKS BACK UP.

BUT THEY WILL REMOVE OFFICERS FROM WHATEVER POSITION THEY'RE IN IF THEY FEEL LIKE THE BEHAVIOR IS BAD ENOUGH TO REMOVE THEM FROM THE STREETS OR WHATEVER THE ASSIGNMENT IS.

SO ARE THERE DATA ON THAT? UH, YES.

ON HOW MANY, YEAH, I MEAN THAT'S, I'M A DATA PERSON.

SO, UM, ARE THERE DATA ON, ON HOW MANY OF THESE HIGH PRIOR OR POLICE OFFICERS ARE REMOVED OR PRIORITY CASES? HOW MANY PRIORITY CASES VERSUS NON-PRIORITY CASES? I MEAN, THEY'RE, THEY'RE ALL PRIORITY.

JUST SOME HAVE DIFFERENT DEGREES OF ALLEGATIONS, IF YOU WILL, THAN OTHERS.

SO IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LIKE WHEN IT COMES TO THE OFFICE, WE REVIEW EVERY SINGLE USE OF FORCE COMPLAINT.

UM, WHEN WE COME BACK WITH OUR DATA WITH THE NUMBERS, WE ARE GONNA PARSE OUT USE OF FORCE BECAUSE SPECIFICALLY WE WANNA POINT OUT THE TIMEFRAMES ON THAT COMPARED TO OTHER THINGS.

DEPENDING ON HOW, UM, MANY OFFICES ARE INVOLVED, HOW MANY COMPLAINANTS THERE ARE, HOW MANY ALLEGATIONS THERE ARE CASES CAN TAKE LONGER BECAUSE THEY'RE A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED.

UM, BUT IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE DEPARTMENT DEEMS, I GUESS YOU WOULD SAY, LIKE IMMEDIATELY NEEDING ADJUSTMENT, THEY CAN MAKE PRELIMINARY ADJUSTMENTS TO THE OFFICER THROUGH A DOCUMENTED RETRAINING TO ADDRESS IT IMMEDIATELY.

BUT THEY CANNOT GO INTO THE SPECIFICS OF THE CASE ITSELF.

THEY HAVE TO MAKE IT KIND OF HIGH LEVEL BECAUSE THEY, THEY DON'T WANNA VIOLATE P-P-L-B-R AND OFFICERS ARE ALLOWED CERTAIN RIGHTS REPRESENTATION SO THEY CAN SAY, HEY, WE WANNA MAKE SURE WHEN YOU'RE HANDCUFFING THAT YOU DO BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BUT THEY CAN'T SAY WHEN YOU HANDCUFF THIS PERSON, YOU DIDN'T DO X, Y, Z.

YEAH.

IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

SO THEY DO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO SHIFT TO ADDRESS THINGS FASTER.

UM, BUT STILL WHEN IT COMES TO COMMUNITY INTERACTION, THE PROCESS ITSELF DOES NOT WORK WELL TO BUILD TRANSPARENCY, TRUST, UM, AND COMMUNICATION.

IS THERE A WAY TO SEE THE DIFFERENCE IN VOLUME FROM COMMUNITY COMPLAINTS AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINTS TO SEE? YES.

BUT IF THERE'S ONLY, AND WE DO IT BY MONTH.

WE PARSE THOSE OUT.

AND DO WE HAVE AN IDEA NOW OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE PERCENTAGE WISE? UH, THERE'S A LOT LESS ADMINISTRATIVE TO COMMUNITY.

UM, WHEN WE DO OUR POLLS FOR RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE, UH, OUR STAFF IS GROWING, I'LL INTRODUCE YOU TO THE OTHER TWO.

BUT WHEN WE STARTED GETTING THE CASES AND DOING THE REVIEWS, WE HAVE, WE BASICALLY HAVE THREE INVESTIGATORS, BUT WE'RE ALSO TRAINING UP OUR ANALYSTS AS WELL TO DO INVESTIGATIONS.

WE WERE DOING 30% OF THE CASES.

UM, BUT IF FOR SOME REASON, AND WE DO LIKE A BLIND DRAW IF YOU WILL, SO WE GET A RANDOM SAMPLING.

[00:45:01]

SO IF THERE'S ONLY IN THE MONTH OF APRIL TWO CASES THAT WERE ADMINISTRATIVE IN ANOTHER EIGHT THAT WERE COMMUNITY, WE WOULD DEFINITELY PULL THE TWO OF ADMINISTRATIVE.

UM, AND THEN DO THE 30% WHAT'S LEFT FROM THE COMMUNITY.

BUT EVERY SINGLE USE OF FORCE CASE WE REVIEW NO MATTER WHAT.

UM, GIVEN A NUMBER COMMUNITY TO ADMINISTRATION, I DON'T KNOW OFFHAND.

I MEAN, I'D BE GUESSING IF I TOLD YOU.

UM, BUT THE TIMEFRAMES ARE ABOUT, ABOUT THE SAME WITH THE OUTLIERS ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE ONE, TAKE IT MUCH LONGER.

BUT USUALLY BECAUSE THEY'RE TOLD THAT, WHICH MEANS LIKE THEY PUT IT IN SUSPENSE FOR SOME REASON, THERE MIGHT BE A CRIMINAL ELEMENT TO IT OR SOMETHING ELSE.

SO THEY'LL PAUSE THE TIMEFRAME.

THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION AND COVERED A LOT OF MY, MY QUESTIONS.

SO I JUST HAD A FEW CLARIFYING QUESTIONS.

UM, SOME OF IT I KIND OF KNOW THE ANSWERS TO.

I WANNA GET A LITTLE DISCOURSE FOR THE COMMUNITY AND FOR THE REST OF THE, THE COMMISSION.

UM, THE DISCIPLINARY PROCESS YOU'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, YOU TALKED ABOUT THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS THAT DOESN'T PRECLUDE OTHER REMEDIES THAT ARE OUT THERE IN THE WORLD, RIGHT? CIVIL, CRIMINAL PROSECUTION AND POST DE-CERTIFICATION, THINGS LIKE THAT.

CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.

AND, AND, AND ALSO WITH THAT, WE TALKED ABOUT SOME MORE OF THE HIGH LEVEL, UM, INVESTIGATIONS.

OFTENTIMES THERE'S A PARALLEL CIVIL OR CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION THAT THAT'S TOLLING THAT STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS WHERE THAT STOP THAT THAT CLOCK IS STOPPED, CORRECT? NOT WITH THE CIVIL, UM, I DON'T THINK THAT THEY, THEY TOLL FOR CIVIL TYPICALLY ONLY FOR A CRIMINAL.

SO INTERNAL, THEY'VE MADE A DECISION INTERNALLY THEY'RE NOT GONNA TOLL FOR, I HAVE NOT SEEN YET WHERE THEY'RE TOLLING FOR CIVIL.

OH, OKAY.

SO THEY'RE STILL PUSHING FORWARD.

YES.

I THINK DOES POPE BAR ALLOWS THEM TO IT ALLOWS FOR IT TO, THEY WANTED TO, YEAH.

THAT'S INTERESTING.

UM, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ON THE WORD OF THE, THE WORD INTAKE.

YES.

THAT DOES NOT MEAN WHEN THE COMPLAINT IS RECEIVED, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT THEY CALL WHERE THEY SIT AROUND THE TABLE.

I THE TAKE IS WHEN YOU RECEIVE THE FIRST COMPLAINT.

NO.

AND SO JUST TO, TO MAKE, SO I'M CLEAR, THEY'RE MAKE IA OR WHOEVER, UM, SOMEONE, A LIEUTENANT OVER IN INTERNAL AFFAIRS OR PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS BUREAU, WHATEVER IT'S CALLED IN LONG BEACH, IS IS MAKING A DECISION ON SOME OF THOSE CASES AT THAT INITIAL POINT, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY KNOW IT'S NOT GONNA BE DISCIPLINARY, THEY CAN GO AHEAD AND SEND IT OFF A DIFFERENT ROUTE AND RESOLVE IT.

IS THAT LIKE THROUGH AN INFORMAL PROCESS? YES, BUT VERY FEW.

UM, AND THEY'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE LABOR OF REVIEWING IT.

SO INSTEAD OF THEM JUST BEING DONE WITH IT AND HAVING THE CONVERSATION DIRECTLY WITH THE COMMUNITY MEMBER OR WHATEVER, THEY SEND IT TO SOMEBODY ELSE TO COME UP WITH BASICALLY THE SAME CONCLUSION.

GOT YOU.

UM, AND PART OF THAT IS WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT BECAUSE THERE ISN'T A FORMALIZED PROCESS TO KIND OF EXPEDITE OR SHORT FORM THESE TYPES OF LOW LIKE, OR KIND OF EASIER CASES DO AIR QUOTES.

'CAUSE I JUST WANT, BECAUSE IT'S ALL WITHIN THE SPECTRUM OF, OF INVESTIGATIONS, THEY'RE ALL IMPORTANT.

BUT THERE'S SOME OF THAT STUFF THAT I'LL JUST, FOR EXAMPLE, COMPLETELY, COMPLETELY FRIVOLOUS.

LIKE YOU WOULD KNOW IT ABSOLUTELY DID NOT HAPPEN BASED ON WHAT EVEN WAS STATED.

RIGHT.

LIKE, COULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED.

RIGHT.

I GET IT.

UM, GIVEN THEY'RE GIVEN THE SAME PROCESS, THEY'RE GIVEN THE SAME PROCESS AS EVERYTHING ELSE.

AND THAT'S GOOD THAT YOU'RE FLAGGING THAT 'CAUSE THAT NEEDS TO CHANGE.

MATTER OF FACT, IT'S, THE TIMING IS INTERESTING.

I LITERALLY JUST SENT OVER A POLICY RECOMMENDATION TO SONOMA TO TO, YOU KNOW, I'M WORKING WITH IA OVER THERE TO CHANGE THIS VERY ISSUE.

UM, 'CAUSE IT, THERE'S A BACKLOG THAT'S VERY SIMILAR TO LONG BEACHES UP THERE.

UM, SO ALONG THAT, ALONG THOSE SAME LINES IS, SO IF LET'S SAY IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S SO FRIVOLOUS, IT'S NOT VEXATIOUS OR WHATEVER IT'S, BUT THERE'S, IT'S A, IT'S A, IT'S A VERY LIMITED COMPLAINT.

ABOUT AN INTERACTION, SINGLE ALLEGATION.

AND THE ENTIRE INTERACTION IS FIVE MINUTES.

IT'S ALL CAUGHT ON BODY-WORN VIDEO.

THERE'S NO FORMAL WAY TO EXPEDITE THOSE KIND OF CASES WHICH COULD BE HANDLED.

THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT MAY GET SENT DOWN TO THE WATCH, THEY CALL IT TO THE WATCH COMMANDER.

BASICALLY FOR THEM TO REVIEW 'EM.

UM, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY THEY CHOOSE.

KEEP IT IN MIND, THIS HAS ONLY BEEN IMPLEMENTED WITHIN THE LAST MAYBE FIVE TO SIX MONTHS THAT THEY DID THIS ALTERNATIVE.

BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT 20, 23 CASES.

GOT YOU.

SO THEY SEND US MONTH, THEY SEND US NUMBERS MONTHLY.

UM, AND I DON'T REALLY, BECAUSE THEY'RE STILL CATCHING UP.

SO THEY'RE BRINGING CASES FORWARD RIGHT NOW THAT HAPPENED 10 MONTHS AGO.

WELL, LET ME, LET ME ASK YOU THIS BEFORE I FORGET THIS.

WHAT'S THE STAFFING LIKE IN WITH, WITH, UH, INTERNAL AFFAIRS? WHAT'S, HOW MANY INTERNAL, HOW MANY INVESTIGATING OFFICERS THEY HAVE? THINK THEY HAVE, I THINK THEY HAVE SIX, UH, SERGEANTS.

I BELIEVE THAT ARE ASSIGNED JUST TO DO INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS.

AND TWO ADMINISTRATORS, THEY'RE NOT DOING PATROL ALSO.

YEAH.

EITHER

[00:50:01]

FIVE OR SIX.

ONE LIEUTENANT, UM, AND THEN ONE COMMANDER.

AND THEY'RE DOING THE LION SHARES OF THE INVESTIGATION.

SOME ARE GETTING SENT DOWN TO THE DIVISIONS OR WHATEVER, BUT MOST OF 'EM, THEY'RE DOING MOST OF THE MOST OF IT INVESTIGATIONS.

YES.

AND WELL I GUESS THIS IS GOING FORWARD AND THIS IS SOMETHING I'M SURE YOU'RE GONNA HIGHLIGHT, BUT THIS TIES IN THE FACT THAT YOU'RE REVIEWING OLDER CASES THAT MIGHT NOT BE RELEVANT, ESPECIALLY 'CAUSE THEY'VE HAD SOME NEW POLICIES INITIATED THIS LAST SIX MONTHS.

IT MAY BE IRRELEVANT BY THE TIME WE GET TO GET ALL THAT DATA COMPILED.

UM, SO THIS IS JUST BRINGS UP A LONGER CONVERSATION ABOUT, UM, I THINK A BATTLE.

I'M SURE YOU'RE, YOU'RE TRYING TO A DISCUSSION YOU'RE HAVING WITH THE DEPARTMENT TO HAVE MORE REAL TIME ACCESS TO INFORMATION.

THAT'S PART OF IT.

BUT PART OF THE OPLS, UH, CHARGE AS WELL IS TO HAVE, UH, AUDITING CAPACITY.

SO ALTHOUGH THEY MAY BE MAKING INCREMENTAL CHANGES WITH POLICY OR PROCEDURES, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE OVERALL, UM, PROCESS THAT THE DEPARTMENT AND THE OFFICERS HAVE WHEN THEY'RE ENGAGING IN THE PUBLIC.

SO WE'RE SEEING THINGS THAT NO MATTER HOW OLD THE CASE IS, IT'S LIKE, OKAY, THIS IS HOW OFFICERS ARE TRAINED.

WE'RE SEEING A CONSISTENCY WITH SOME OF THE THINGS THEY'RE DOING.

UM, AND WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT DID THAT START AT THE ACADEMY? WAS THAT SOMETHING THAT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD DURING THE TRAINING PHASE OR IS THIS A CULTURAL ISSUE WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT THAT THE THINGS THAT WERE RED FLAGGING.

GOTCHA.

BECAUSE WE HAVE AN EXPECTATION TO BRING THOSE UP, UM, AND ADDRESS THOSE AS WELL.

WE MAY HAVE TO ADDRESS 'EM THROUGH AN AUDIT OR IT MAY JUST BE THAT IT COMES THROUGH A RECOMMENDATION 'CAUSE WE'VE SEEN ENOUGH OF THEM AND YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE AN EXPECTATION OR A REQUEST, IF YOU WILL, THAT THEY BE ADDRESSED FURTHER DOVE INTO, OR WE MAY AUDIT ON THOSE THINGS.

SO THERE ARE STILL SOME THINGS THAT ARE POSITIVE ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE'RE REVIEWING THESE CASES NO MATTER HOW OLD THEY ARE BECAUSE IT REALLY SETS THE TONE TO THE DEPARTMENT ITSELF.

GOT YOU.

AND I DIDN'T, SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO SAY THERE'S NO VALUE TO THIS.

I DIDN'T TAKE IT THAT WAY.

THERE'S A LOT OF VALUE, BUT I WAS JUST CLARIFYING , THANK YOU.

I THERE'S A LOT OF VALUE TO, TO SEEING, UM, A LOT OF, TO MAKING SURE THAT THE DEPARTMENT IS, IS ADHERING TO, YOU KNOW, MACRO BEST PRACTICES.

'CAUSE A LOT OF DEPARTMENTS THINK THEY ALL HAVE, THEY'RE DOING THE BEST PRACTICES AND I DON'T KNOW HOW ANY OF 'EM ARE DOING BEST PRACTICES.

THEY ALL THINK THEY'RE DOING BEST PRACTICES.

SO IT'S, IT'S NICE THAT YOU'RE, IT'S IT'S IMPORTANT THAT YOU'RE TAKING THIS, THIS, THIS VIEW OF A, OF A LARGE CHUNK OF INFORMATION.

UM, ONE OF THEIR QUESTION I HAD WAS, UM, LET'S SEE, IT WAS, UM, GOING BACK JUST, JUST TO THE MORE CRITICAL INCIDENTS THAT WAS, THAT WAS BROUGHT UP AND, AND, AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT, THAT'S A KIND OF A SEPARATE ISSUE, BUT, YOU KNOW, IN CUSTODY DEATHS, OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTINGS, OTHER HIGH PROFILE, UM, CASES.

UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS YOU STILL, YOU THERE'S, YOU DON'T HAVE REAL-TIME ACCESS OR YOU CAN'T DO A REAL-TIME AUDIT OF THOSE OR, OR PARTICIPATION IN THOSE INVESTIGATIONS.

IS THAT, IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING? WE, WE SHOW UP TO THE SCENES AND WE MONITOR THE ACTUAL INVESTIGATION.

IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A PARALLEL INVESTIGATION, THAT HAS TO COME AT THE REQUEST OF THE CITY MANAGER.

SO WE HAVE REAL TIME ACCESS TO THE INCIDENT, BUT WE DO NOT RECEIVE THE ENTIRE CASE UNTIL IT'S DONE.

THERE IS A VEHICLE FOR YOU TO DO THAT WITH THE GRANTING OF THAT ACCESS FROM THE MANAGER? YES.

THEY NEED TO GATHER THE EVIDENCE AND THEN JUST PRESENT IT.

I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY QUE LAST QUESTION I HAVE.

SO YOU MENTIONED, UM, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE POINTS THAT'S AT ISSUE OR OF A CONCERN IS THAT THE INTAKE COMMITTEE IS ONLY MEETING ONCE A WEEK.

UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE GETTING 13 PEOPLE SCHEDULED.

SO WHO ARE THOSE PEOPLE OTHER THO THAN THOSE SERGEANTS? WHO ELSE IS ON THIS BODY THAT'S MAKING THE INVESTIGATIVE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT THESE COMPLAINTS ARE FOUNDED UNFOUNDED, WHATEVER THE DISPOSITION IS.

AND IS THERE A REASON THAT THE OFFICE OF POLICE OVERSIGHT CAN'T HAVE A SEAT AT THE TABLE DURING THESE DECISIONS? UM, EVEN IF IT'S ONLY IN THE ROLE OF OBSERVER, LIKE A BOARD OBSERVER.

SO THE SERGEANTS ARE NOT AT THE TABLE FROM INTERNAL AFFAIRS.

TYPICALLY THE LIEUTENANT IS THE PERSON THAT DOES THE PRESENTATION.

THE SERGEANTS WILL GATHER IT, THEY PUT AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TOGETHER FOR THE LIEUTENANT TO THEN GO AND DO THE PRESENTATION.

NOR DO THEY HAVE A VOTE.

SO INTERNAL AFFAIRS IS ONLY THE, THE EVIDENCE GATHERING BODY.

IT'S TO TRY AND REMOVE BIAS, IF YOU WILL.

THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF IT.

IT'S TO TRY AND REMOVE BIAS WHERE

[00:55:01]

YOU CAN'T COMPLETELY REMOVE BIAS BECAUSE HOW YOU PRESENT EVIDENCE CAN ALSO BE BIASED.

UM, BUT WHO'S TYPICALLY AT THE TABLE IS THE DEPUTY CHIEFS.

THE CHIEF IS NOT THERE.

IT'S THE DEPUTY CHIEFS, UM, THE SUPERVISOR OF THE, THE BUREAU THAT THE OFFICER IS IN.

SO YOU COULD BE FROM INVESTIGATION.

SO THAT'D BE A SPECIALTY BUREAU, UH, LIEUTENANT OR COMMANDER.

UM, THEY HAVE BUREAU CHIEFS.

SO YOU HAVE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE OFFICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL POLICING THAT IS TYPICALLY THERE.

YOU WOULD HAVE HR THERE.

UM, YOU MIGHT HAVE, I DON'T HAVE THE WHOLE LIST, BUT THERE ARE TIMES WHERE THERE MIGHT BE ABSENCES.

SO THEY WON'T CANCEL A MEETING JUST 'CAUSE SOME PEOPLE CAN'T COME.

UM, THEY MAY HAVE A STAND IN OR IT JUST MIGHT BE ABSENT.

LIKE IT MIGHT BE NOT THERE.

UM, SO THAT'S USUALLY THE GROUP REGARDING US BEING AT THE TABLE.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WILL BE HELPFUL AT THIS POINT.

THIS BODY WAS NOT SET UP TO DO THAT JUST YET.

WE NEED THEM TO CORRECT THE PROCESS.

IT DOESN'T REALLY HELP AND ALSO CORRECT BEHAVIOR IF WE'RE IN REAL TIME ON SOME OF THESE THINGS.

SOME THINGS CAN HAVE LITTLE PATCHWORKS OF CHANGES, BUT IT'S A BIGGER PICTURE AND A BIGGER ISSUE THAT NEEDS ADJUSTING.

SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS SAYING ABOUT US GETTING SOME OF THESE CASES WHEN THEY'RE CLOSED, IT REALLY PLAYS INTO THE SYSTEMIC ISSUES OF THE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE WE'RE SEEING IT FROM MULTIPLE OFFICERS AND IT'S NOT ALWAYS WHAT THE INVESTIGATION OR THE COMPLAINT IS BRINGING FORWARD.

IT'S OTHER ISSUES THAT WE'RE SEEING THAT WE'RE SAYING, OKAY, WE'RE SEEING A TREND HERE OF PROBLEMS. AND THIS IS MUCH MORE, UM, FOCUSED TOWARDS THE COMMUNITY ASPECT.

WE WENT THROUGH THE WHOLE FLOW CHART.

LET'S SAY THAT FINE, THE COMPLAINT IS FOUNDED, THERE NEEDS TO BE DISCIPLINE.

SOMETHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO THIS OFFICER.

UM, WHAT IF AT, AT WHAT, AT ANY POINT OR IF, UM, IS THIS INFORMATION MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC OR AT LEAST MADE AVAILABLE TO THE COMPLAINANT? UM, BECAUSE SURE.

I KNOW AS AN ATTORNEY AND COMMISSIONER SOTO, WE KNOW THAT YES, THERE ARE OTHER REMEDIES AVAILABLE, BUT THE PUBLIC DOES NOT NECESSARILY KNOW THAT THEY'RE WAITING TO HEAR BACK FROM THEIR COMPLAINT AND PERHAPS THEY MISSED THEIR WINDOW TO MOVE FORWARD WITH SOME TYPE OF CIVIL COMPLAINT, ET CETERA.

SO WHEN ARE THEY NOTIFIED OR IS THE PUBLIC EVER NOTIFIED? SO THEY DO SEND A LETTER.

UM, THE LETTER BASICALLY STATES YOU MADE A COMPLAINT ON X, Y, Z DATE ALLEGING THAT A MEMBER OF THE LONG BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT VIOLATED POLICY.

UM, WE REVIEWED THE CASE, IT WAS INVESTIGATED AND IT WAS DETERMINED TO BE UNFOUNDED.

IT DOESN'T GIVE A DEFINITION OF WHAT UNFOUNDED MEANS OR ANYTHING ELSE.

THAT'S ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'RE MAKING THAT THERE HAS TO BE SOME TYPE OF DEFINITION TO WHAT IT IS.

AND THEN THERE'S A WHOLE NOTHER PARAGRAPH ABOUT HOW IT'S NOT BINDING OR SOMETHING ELSE.

I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT SAYS, BUT, UM, IT USUALLY YOU, THE DEPARTMENT PER THE PENAL CODE HAS 30 DAYS TO NOTIFY THE COMPLAINANT OF THE FINDINGS.

SO WE TRACK THAT DATE AS WELL.

BY THE TIME THAT THEY DETERMINE WHAT THE DISPOSITION OF THAT CASE IS, HOW SOON ARE THEY NOTIFYING THE COMPLAINANT? SO WHAT WE DO IS WE HAVE, WE HAVE DATES THROUGHOUT OUR INVESTIGATION PROCESS.

WE TALK ABOUT THE DAY THAT THE INCIDENT HAPPENED, THE DAY THAT THE COMPLAINT CAME FORWARD, THE DAY THAT THE INVESTIGATOR WAS ASSIGNED THE COMPLAINT FROM THAT DATE, WHAT DAY DID HE ACTUALLY START WORKING ON IT.

AND WHEN WE SAY WORK ON IT, WE MEAN NONSTOP.

TYPICALLY IT MIGHT BE THREE, SIX TO EIGHT MONTHS.

SO WERE, THEY'RE ACTUALLY WORKING THE CASE.

AND THEN WE TAKE THE DATE THAT IT GOES TO INTAKE FROM THE DATE OF THE ACTUAL COMPLAINT.

HOW LONG IS THAT? IT'S USUALLY EIGHT MONTHS, 8, 9, 10 MONTHS.

SO THESE ARE ALL THE DATES THAT WE'RE TRACKING TO SEE IS IT TIMELY? HOW LONG DID IT TAKE BEFORE THE OFFICER WAS ACTUALLY INTERVIEWED FROM THE DATE THAT THE INCIDENT HAPPENED? 10 MONTHS.

UM, AND THIS, THIS PLAYS IN AS WELL.

IF FOR SOME REASON THEY DO HAVE TO CALL THE COMMUNITY MEMBER TO ASK THEM QUESTIONS AND THEY CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED 'CAUSE IT WAS SO LONG AGO.

NOW IT CALLS INTO CREDIBILITY WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE BEING HONEST AND LIKE, WELL THAT'S NOT THE STORY.

SO THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID.

BUT MORE THAN NOT, IF A COMMUNITY MEMBER HAS A FEELING THAT THEY WERE WRONGED IN SOME

[01:00:01]

WAY, THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED IMMEDIATELY SO THAT THEY CAN GET RESOLUTION.

AND IF IN FACT IT WAS NOT A VIOLATION OF POLICY, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THEM TO KNOW.

LIKE, OKAY, WELL HOW CAN I AVOID THIS SAME SITUATION HAPPENING AGAIN? I, I'M, I'M A LITTLE, A LITTLE WORRIED ABOUT THE ISSUE OF VIOLATION OF POLICY.

IF I THINK OF MYSELF AS A CITIZEN WITH A COMPLAINT, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT POLICY IS.

I JUST KNOW THIS DIDN'T WORK.

RIGHT.

F IN MY LIFE MM-HMM .

AND SO AT WHAT POINT DOES THE COMPLAINANT, UM, IS IT OPEN TO THE COM? ARE THE POLICE OPEN TO THE COMPLAINANT ABOUT WHAT POLICIES ARE INVOLVED OR NOT? I MEAN, I HEAR, I MEAN, I'LL DO THIS IN ONE WAY.

I HEAR YOU SAYING, I'LL USE YOUR ALLEGATION THAT THE GUY SAID, WHAT, WHAT YOU DO IN WILLIS.

UM, I'M JUST USING YOURS.

AND THAT AS, AS A COMPLAINANT, I WOULD NOT KNOW THAT THAT WAS A VIOLATION OF A SPECIFIC POLICY.

I WOULD JUST KNOW IT JUST DIDN'T SEEM RIGHT TO ME.

AND SO AT WHAT POINT DOES, IS IT, IS IT, UM, COMMUNICATED WHAT THE POLICY IS? NO, IT'S NOT, NOT REALLY.

THAT'S A PROBLEM.

I KNOW IS THAT JUST TO SAY, OKAY, I HAVE A QUESTION BY WHICH MEANS ARE THE COMPLAINANT'S CONTACTED? IS IT BY LETTER, PHONE CALL? BOTH EMAIL ACROSS THE, ACROSS THE GAMUT.

WE DO TRACK THAT AS WELL IF THEY'RE IN PERSON.

UM, SO I WILL SEND OUT, WHEN WE DO THE REPORT, WE'LL WE'LL ADD TO YOU WITH IT A LIST OF HOW EVERYTHING WE TRACK, WE TRACK IF IT WAS BY EMAIL, IN PERSON, UH, REGULAR MAIL, UM, OR BY PHONE.

UM, WE ALSO TRACK WAS THE COMPLAINANT INTERVIEWED.

WE ALSO TRACK DID THEY RECEIVE AN OPENING LETTER, DID THEY RECEIVE A CLOSING LETTER? HOW LONG DID IT TAKE TO RECEIVE THOSE THINGS? UM, AND WHEN WE SAY INTERVIEW, WE DON'T MEAN IN THE FIELD BECAUSE SOMETIMES IF THERE'S AN ARREST ASSOCIATED, THEY CAN SAY, I WANNA MAKE A COMPLAINT.

THE SERGEANTS ARE REQUIRED TO GO OUT AND TAKE A COMPLAINT.

THEY'LL TALK TO THE COMPLAINANT, THEY'LL HAVE THIS CONVERSATION THAT'S NOT FOR ME, AN INTERVIEW.

SO THE SERGEANTS WILL TAKE THAT, SEND IT TO INTERNAL AFFAIRS, AND THEN INTERNAL AFFAIRS WILL WORK THEIR CASE.

BUT THERE'S TYPICALLY NOT A SECONDARY CONVERSATION UNLESS THERE'S A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION, WHICH USUALLY HAPPENS EIGHT MONTHS LATER.

SO, UM, PART OF WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON AS AN OFFICE IS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION.

THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WORKS FOR THE COMMUNITY.

THE COMMUNITY HAS AN EXPECTATION OF HOW THEY WANT TO INTERACT WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

SO FROM MY EXPERIENCE AND WHAT I'VE DEALT WITH YOU, IF YOU HAVE A CONCERN THAT IS SERIOUS ENOUGH FOR YOU TO BRING IT FORWARD TO SOMEONE, YOU HOPE THAT IT WOULD BE ADDRESS ADDRESSED IN A TIMELY MANNER.

IT'S NOT A MATTER OF WE HAVE A HUNDRED, YOU KNOW, 365 DAYS TO BASICALLY GET THIS DONE.

YOU JUST WANNA HAVE A CONVERSATION.

YOU WANNA TELL YOUR SIDE.

UM, AND IT'S NOT ALWAYS JUST SENDING AN EMAIL OR A LETTER IS ENOUGH.

YOU STILL WANNA HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD BASICALLY.

AND THEY'RE NOT GIVEN THAT YOU SEND YOUR LETTER IN, YOU MAKE YOUR COMPLAINT TO THE SERGEANT, THE NEXT TIME YOU MIGHT HEAR FROM ANYBODY IS A LETTER YOU'LL GET IN RESPONSE TO WHAT THE DISPOSITION WAS.

I THINK, UH, IF I MAY, UH, TO FOLLOW ON CHAIR T'S THOUGHT PROCESS.

WHAT KIND OF VEHICLE EXISTS IF A COMMUNITY MEMBER FEELS WRONG BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THEN IT'S FOUND, UH, TO BE, UM, YOU KNOW, NOT SUSTAINED.

IS THERE A VEHICLE FOR THAT COM, UH, COMMUNITY MEMBER TO THEN SUBMIT SOME SORT OF POLICY CHANGE THAT, THAT WOULD ADDRESS THAT SPECIFIC COMPLAINT? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I MEAN, I, IF A COMMUNITY MEMBER HAD DECIDED TO WRITE INTO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, I'M SURE THEY WOULD ENTERTAIN WHATEVER CAME IN.

BUT IF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS ALREADY DONE AN INVESTIGATION AND DETERMINED THAT THERE IS NO WRONGDOING, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH INPUT THEY'RE GONNA RECEIVE ON SOMETHING THEY'VE ALREADY MADE A DETERMINATION ON, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

YEAH.

SO JUST FOLLOWING THIS, THIS, UM, IF IN FACT IT'S NOT A VIOLATION OF POLICY

[01:05:01]

BECAUSE THERE'S NO POLICY ON THAT MATTER, BUT IT'S NOT A GOOD THING.

I'M THINKING ABOUT THE FLASH BANG, FRANKLY, UM, THAT THERE ARE POLICIES AROUND IT, BUT USING IT, WE, WELL, WE KNOW WHEN IT'S, WHEN IT'S GONE WRONG.

UM, WHAT IS, IS THERE ANY MECHANISM FOR ANYONE TO SAY THAT POLICY DOESN'T WORK OR WE NEED A NEW POLICY AROUND THESE ISSUES? I DON'T KNOW, UM, WHAT THE TIMETABLE IS.

IT'S NOT BLANKET LIKE REGARDING REVIEWING POLICIES.

THEY DO REVIEW POLICIES PERIODICALLY, UM, WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, DEPENDING ON IF THE POLICY CHANGE COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE AN IMPACT ON MEMBERSHIP, WHETHER IT BE DUTIES OR ANYTHING ELSE, THEY HAVE TO MEET AND CONFER.

SO THEY HAVE THE REPRESENTATIVE OR THE EXECUTIVE, WHICH WOULD BE THE CHIEF AND WHOEVER HE DESIGNATES TO MAKE THESE POLICY CHANGES, WOULD THEN HAVE TO MEET WITH THE UNION TO HAVE A CONVERSATION.

SOMETIMES IT COULD TAKE YEARS TO CHANGE POLICIES, UM, BECAUSE IT GOES THROUGH A LEGALLY REQUIRED PROCESS OF MEETING AND CONFERRING.

UM, SO JUST BECAUSE SOME POLICIES ARE NOT CHANGING IMMEDIATELY, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY'RE NOT IN THE PROCESS OF BEING CHANGED.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.

THAT WAS ABOUT EVERYTHING I HAD FOR THAT.

SO IF YOU DO HAVE QUESTIONS WHEN THE REPORT COMES OUT, WE'RE THINKING IT'LL BE IN A FEW WEEKS.

AND THE REASON WHY WE HAD PLANNED TO HAVE THE REPORT READY FOR YOU, BUT FOR THIS MEETING, THERE ARE SO MANY THINGS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED SEPARATELY, INDEPENDENTLY, AND WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, BEING THAT THIS IS OUR FIRST REPORT ON, UM, THE REVIEW, IT'S NOT REALLY AN AUDIT, IT'S A REVIEW OF THE CASES.

WE WANT THE REPORT TO BE AS ROBUST AS POSSIBLE, UH, WITHIN THE LAW.

SO WE'RE JUST FIGURING OUT A SYSTEM TO PUT IT ALL IN.

BUT I DIDN'T WANNA GIVE YOU A TON OF DATA AND THEN YOU GUYS WOULD BE LOOKING AT ME LIKE, WHAT IS THIS? AND WHY? BECAUSE IT, IT, IT IS HARD TO MAKE SENSE OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY REVIEWING IT.

UM, SO I WOULD ONLY IMAGINE THAT WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT SOMETHING BECAUSE IT WILL BE PUBLICLY POSTED AS WELL TO THE COMMUNITY.

WE'LL HAVE A LINK TO THIS IF IT HELPS, UM, TO EXPLAIN WHAT WE EXPLAIN NOW AS IT GOES ONTO OUR WEBPAGE, JUST TO REALLY TRY AND BE SUPER TRANSPARENT WITH WHAT WE HAVE AND WHAT WE'RE PUTTING OUT THERE, UM, SO THAT WE COULD JUST MOVE FORWARD WITH SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGES.

ALRIGHT, UH, THANK YOU DIRECTOR CARRIAGE AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS AS WELL.

UM, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, MADAM CLERK, UH, CAN WE DO A ROLL CALL, VOTE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM? I, COMMISSIONER ATCH, VICE CHAIR T SCHNITT, ARE YOU ABLE TO VOTE ON THE TABLET? THANK YOU.

MOTION CARRIES.

ALRIGHT, UH, MADAM CLERK, UH, COULD YOU PLEASE READ THE NEXT ITEM, ITEM THREE, RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE POLICE OVERSIGHT DIRECTOR'S REPORT.

ALRIGHT, I'LL HAND IT OVER AGAIN TO DIRECTOR CARRIAGE.

I THINK I GAVE EVERYTHING I HAD IN THE LAST ONE.

I JUST WANTED TO TAKE A MINUTE TO INTRODUCE, UH, SOME NEW STAFF

[3. 25-55750 Recommendation to receive and file Police Oversight Director’s Report. Suggested Action: Approve recommendation. ]

IN THE OFFICE.

YOU GUYS KNOW, WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO STAFF UP.

WE'RE SUPER EXCITED TO ALMOST BE THERE.

UM, WE HAVE A NEW ANALYST, UH, MITCHELL MOLINA.

HE IS A LONG-TERM RESIDENT OF LONG BEACH.

HE BRINGS 10 YEARS OF MILITARY AND FEDERAL EXPERIENCE TO THE LPL.

HE EARNED HIS BACHELOR'S DEGREE, UM, IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION FROM UNIVERSITY OF REDLANDS.

AND HE'S ALSO COMING FROM THE FEDERAL HEALTHCARE AND HOUSING SECTOR.

UM, HE HAS A LOT OF KNOWLEDGE, NEW EYES TO THINGS, FIGURING OUT HOW WE CAN DO CHARTS, GRAPHS, MITCHELL'S, ALSO BEING CROSS-TRAINED ON INVESTIGATIONS AS WELL.

SO THAT'S MITCHELL, LINDA MIDDLE.

UM, WE ALSO HAVE ERIC SCHREIBER.

ERIC IS OUR AUDITING MANAGER.

HE HAS, UH, 30 YEARS EXPERIENCE WITH AUDIT, FINANCE AND COMPLIANCE MOSTLY IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

HE HAS A, A BS IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION FROM CAL STATE UNIVERSITY OF LONG BEACH.

AND HE IS ALSO A LONG BEACH RESIDENT AS WELL.

SO WE ARE SUPER EXCITED TO HAVE THEM

[01:10:01]

BOTH.

UM, WE HAVE ONE MORE POSITION THAT IS OPEN FOR AN AUDITOR INVESTIGATOR.

UH, WE'RE GONNA HOLD THAT WE WILL SUPPORT ERIC IN HIS AUDITING EFFORTS AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

UH, JUST TO KIND OF HELP OUT WITH THE BUDGET DEFICIT, WE'RE GONNA HOLD THAT POSITION VACANT FOR A LITTLE WHILE, UH, WHILE THE CITY SORTS THROUGH SOME OF THE FINANCIAL ISSUES THAT MOST, UH, CITIES IN THE NATION ARE FACING.

SO WE'RE EXCITED TO HAVE THEM, UM, AS A PART OF OUR TEAM AND WE WELCOME THEM.

THE NEXT UPDATE IS GOING TO BE ABOUT THE, UH, OIR GROUP.

I KNOW THAT WE HAD STARTED AN AUDIT A FEW MONTHS BACK OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THEIR PROCESS, THE GROUP IS MOVING FORWARD.

UM, MITCHELL, ERIC AND JOSE, UH, WILL BE KIND OF INTIMATELY INVOLVED WITH GETTING THEM WHAT THEY NEED REGARDING REVIEWING THE CASES.

AND WE'VE ALREADY SPOKEN TO THE CHIEF OF POLICE WHO HAS AGREED TO ALLOW, UH, MITCHELL, UH, ERIC AND THE OI GROUP TO SHADOW SOME OF THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS INVESTIGATORS TO JUST FIND OUT WHAT THEY'RE HAVING REGARDING, UM, BACKLOG AND SOME ROADBLOCKS TO THEIR PROCESS SO THAT WE CAN TRY AND PUT TOGETHER A BETTER SYSTEM OR A PLAN FOR A SYSTEM FOR THEM TO MOVE IT FORWARD AND THEN WORK ON SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT AT, ON THE PREVIOUS ITEM.

UM, AND LASTLY, I JUST WANTED TO REPORT THAT THE, UH, ANNUAL REPORT, AS YOU KNOW, WENT OUT IN APRIL AND WE HAD SIX RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WAS HANDED OVER TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS RESPONDED, UM, THAT THEY ACCEPT ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

ONE WAS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE HEALTH, UH, DEPARTMENT, BUT IT INVOLVES THE POLICE INDIRECTLY.

UM, SO THAT ONE HAS BEEN SENT OVER TO HEALTH.

I HAVE ALREADY STARTED HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH THE DIRECTOR THERE AS WELL, UM, REGARDING GETTING COUNSELING TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE VIEWED CRITICAL INCIDENTS.

UM, BUT WE WILL WAIT TO HEAR BACK AND FIGURE OUT A TIMEFRAME FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO RESPOND, UM, WITH WHAT THEY PLAN TO IMPLEMENT.

BUT THEY HAVE ACCEPTED ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, THAT WERE APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.

DIRECTOR CARE.

IS THERE ANY, UH, PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, UH, COMMISSIONERS ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? I'M JUST GONNA SAY WHAT I SAY A LOT THAT IT IS THE IMPLEMENTATION QUESTION THAT IS THE MOST ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS IS ONE THING.

IMPLEMENTING THEM IN A TIMELINE WITH A TIMELINE, WITH A METRIC, WITH ANYTHING THAT CAN BE ACCOUNTABILITY IS IMPORTANT.

AND I THINK WE JUST HAVE TO, I'M GONNA KEEP SAYING IT JUST SO THAT THEY KEEP HEARING IT.

YEAH, LIKE JUST, I'D LIKE TO JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THE HARD WORK.

IT WAS THE STAFF UP YOUR OFFICE.

UM, I KNOW THAT WAS NOT AN EASY TASK GIVEN THE BUDGET YOU WERE HANDED.

UM, WHICH BRINGS, UH, ANOTHER COMMENT I'D MAKE, UH, REGARDING ALL OF THIS IS THAT IT WOULD, I KNOW THIS IS THE WORST TIME TO ASK FOR MONEY, BUT SOMEWHERE DOWN THE ROAD IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE YOUR OFFICE HAVE A, HAVE A FLOOR OF LIKE 1%, WHICH IS KIND OF A GOING RATE IN THIS INDUSTRY, UM, THAT'S TIED DIRECTLY TO THE DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET, UM, TO, TO ALLOW YOU TO THRIVE IN PERPETUITY.

SO, UM, I'M GLAD YOU'RE ABLE TO, TO, UM, MAKE LEMONADE WITH, WITH YOUR BUDGET AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING YOUR GUYS' WORK PRODUCT LEMON DROPS.

I WANNA JUST MAKE A QUICK COMMENT, UM, REGARDING THE, THE REPORT.

I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT WAS PUT INTO IT AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE EXCELLENT.

UH, ONE CONCERN I DID HAVE IS JUST SECONDING WHAT, UH, CHAIR USH HAD SAID IS THE, THE USE OF FLASH BANG GRENADES.

UM, PARTICULARLY AN INCIDENT BACK IN NOVEMBER, UH, 2024 THAT JUST SEEMED, UH, SO, SO OUT OF POCKET THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW HOW CAN WE, UH, AFFECT CHANGE AS A, YOU KNOW, A COMMUNITY TO LOOK AT THEIR POLICY.

AND WHEN YOU HAVE INPATIENT OFFICERS, UM, IN MY VIEW, EXERCISING, YOU KNOW, THOSE, WHAT, WHAT THEY DID, I THINK IS JUST IT.

IF IT'S INDICATIVE, IT REALLY NEEDS TO BE A PO POLICY CHANGE.

AND, UM, SO HOWEVER YOU CAN HELP US IN DIRECTING US TO PARTICIPATE IN SPEAKING OUT ABOUT THE, THE, THE POLICY.

I KNOW THERE'S LEGISLATIVE REMEDIES AND SO FORTH THAT PROBABLY HAVE TO GO SIMULTANEOUSLY, BUT THAT'S A BIG CONCERN 'CAUSE IT'S LIKE CATCHING THE BODIES DOWN THE RIVER, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE, WE'RE FIXING, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HELPING PEOPLE WHO SURVIVE, BUT MAYBE WE COULD'VE SAVED THE PEOPLE WHO, WHO DIED.

[01:15:01]

UH, MADAM CLERK, COULD WE DO A ROLL CALL VOTE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM? MOTION CARRIES.

ALRIGHT, UH, MADAM CLERK, PLEASE READ THE NEXT ITEM.

THAT IS ALL THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, BUT WE DO HAVE NON-AG AGENDA, PUBLIC COMMENT.

IF ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON A TOPIC THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA, PLEASE LINE UP AT THE PODIUM.

NOW

[PUBLIC COMMENT Opportunity to address the Police Oversight Commission on non-agenda items. Each speaker is limited to three minutes to make their comments unless extended by the Chair.]

YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.

GOOD EVENING EVERYONE.

MOST OF YOU KNOW I AM TIERRA BOYD, BRANDON BOYD'S ELDEST SISTER, AND UNFORTUNATELY A VICTIM, UM, OF THE LONG BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY I, EVERY DAY, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, I CARRY ALL OF THIS AND I DO, I I READ THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND I READ THAT THEY'D AGREED, UM, I READ THE MENTAL HEALTH, HOW HE BROUGHT IT, I AN IMPLEMENTATION, UM, TOO IS JUST REALLY EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.

I WANNA THANK YOU FOR ACKNOWLEDGING, UM, THE IMPORTANCE OF THE USE OF FLASH BANGS AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT NOW THAT THE QUOTE UNQUOTE DUST HAS SETTLED, RIGHT? WE CAN KIND OF LOOK BACK AND SEE, LIKE YOU SAID, HOW WE COULD HAVE CHANGED THINGS.

I ALSO JUST WANNA TAKE A MOMENT TO SAY THAT I'VE LISTENED TO ALL OF THIS AND UNFORTUNATELY I'M LIVING, I'M LIVING, UM, I HAVE PTSD EXTREMELY BAD.

UM, THE 4TH OF JULY WAS MISERABLE.

IT WAS HORRIBLE FOR MY FAMILY AND FOR MYSELF IN PARTICULAR.

I HAD TO HIDE.

LITERALLY, I HAD TO LEAVE AND HIDE.

I COULD.

I, IT'S NOT WHAT I CAME TO SHARE.

I WANT TO, TO LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT IT IS HARD FOR US TO EVEN ASK FOR JUSTICE FOR MY BROTHER AND GO ABOUT HOW ASKING THESE THINGS.

'CAUSE WHEN WE COME IN PUBLIC AND WE SPEAK TO YOU ALL AND, AND WE USE OUR VOICE, THINGS HAPPEN BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.

AND I WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE COUNSELING.

UM, WE ALL ASK THAT THE CHARGES BE DISMISSED AGAINST MY FAMILY.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE CHARGES WERE NOT DISMISSED.

NOT ONLY WERE THEY NOT DISMISSED, THEY KIND OF, UM, TRIED TO STICK THE BOOK AT US.

UM, THEY BROUGHT COMPLAINTS, THEY MADE LIES AND ALLEGATIONS AGAINST US THAT WE UNFORTUNATELY HAD TO WATCH.

I HAD TO WATCH MYSELF ON VIDEO THROUGH THE EYES OF THE OFFICER AND SEE MYSELF OUTSIDE OF MY BODY THAT NIGHT AND SEE THAT THE ALLEGATIONS THAT THEY MADE AGAINST ME WERE FALSE AND WERE LIES.

NOT ONLY DID THEY NOT DROP THE CHARGES, THEY MADE MORE LIES AND ALLEGATIONS AGAINST ME TO DISCREDIT MY CHARACTER AS A PERSON.

THEY USED MY CHARACTER AND MY GOOD CHARACTER AGAINST ME AND ASKED THAT THE JUDGE SET A PRESIDENT WITH ME, SET A PRESIDENT WITH ME, AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HOLD ME TO THE HIGHEST EXTENT OF THE LAW.

FORTUNATELY, THE JUDGE DECIDED TO ORDER ME TO GO TO THERAPY.

THE COPS DIDN'T OFFER IT, STILL HAVEN'T HEARD FROM ANYONE.

NO ONE IN THE CITY.

THE JUDGE WITH WHOM THEY ASKED TO PENALIZE ME DECIDED TO ORDER ME TO GO TO THERAPY.

AND I THANKED HER AND I TOLD HER IN ITS OWN WAY, I DON'T FEEL PENALIZED.

I FELT THAT SHE WAS TRYING TO HELP MY FAMILY BEGIN THE PATH OF HEALING SOMETHING WE HAVE YET TO BEGIN ALMOST EIGHT MONTHS LATER.

I HAVEN'T EVEN BEGUN THAT PATH.

I JUST WANNA THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR EFFORTS.

I KNOW IT IS COLLECTIVE AND I UNDERSTAND YOU MIGHT NOT EVEN GOTTEN TO BRANDON'S CASE YET, BUT THE PEOPLE BEFORE BRANDON, AND HOPEFULLY THERE WON'T BE MANY MORE AFTER BRANDON, ARE ALSO IMPORTANT.

SO I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU ALL KNOW.

GOOD EARLY EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

YOUR TIME IS CONCLUDED, WHAT GOES ON? THANK YOU AGAIN.

MY NAME IS AINA REDMOND.

I'M A LONGTIME RESIDENT OF LONG BEACH AND I'VE BEEN, UM, IN COMMUNITY, IN SUPPORTING THE BOYD FAMILY SINCE THAT AWFUL NIGHT OF NOVEMBER 19TH, 2024.

I'VE HAD THE, I I WOULD SAY THE DISPLEASURE OF BEING AT COURT WITH THEM EVERY DAY EXCEPT FOR ONE, FOR THE THREE OF THEM WHEN THEY'VE BEEN IN COURT.

I'VE SEEN THE MALTREATMENT, UH, BY ASSIGNED ATTORNEYS TO SOME EXTENT.

[01:20:01]

I'VE SEEN THE LONG PROCESS, UH, THAT THIS HAS BEEN, AND I'VE HEARD WITH MY OWN EARS SOME OF THE ACCUSATIONS THAT WERE MADE THAT WERE NOT REFLECTED AT ALL IN THAT VIDEO.

SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT THIS BODY CAN DO ABOUT THE LYING ABOUT THE LYING AND THE GASLIGHTING THAT COMES FROM PEOPLE WHO WITNESSED THEIR LOVED ONES DIE.

AND NOT JUST PEOPLE WHO ARE RELATED BY BLOOD, BUT PEOPLE WHO ARE RELATED BY COMMUNITY.

THE BOYD FAMILY IS DEEP IN THAT COMMUNITY.

THEIR MOTHER GREW UP IN THAT COMMUNITY.

THEY GREW UP IN THAT COMMUNITY.

THEY KNOW PEOPLE EVERYWHERE IN THAT COMMUNITY.

MANY PEOPLE OUT THERE WERE TRAUMATIZED THAT NIGHT AND MANY PEOPLE OUT THERE WILL REFUTE AND HAVE REFUTED WHAT THESE SISTERS WERE ACCUSED OF DOING THAT NIGHT.

SO WHY, WHY LIE? WHAT'S THE POINT IN LYING? IS IT IT TO, IS IT TO MAKE SURE YOU GET THAT TIME OFF BECAUSE SUPPOSEDLY YOUR SHOULDER IS INJURED, THEY ARE STILL HAVING TO LIVE THIS AWFUL NIGHTMARE AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THEY ARE HAVING TO REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED AS A MATTER OF SHODDY COORDINATION BETWEEN THE LONG BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT AND SWAT.

WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT THAT? I KNOW THAT YOU ALL DEAL MOSTLY WITH THINGS SORT OF AFTER THE FACT, ALTHOUGH YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE UH, UH, MAYBE CAN BE APPLIED IN THE FOR RUN.

UH, BUT, BUT WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT THE LYING THAT COMES AFTERWARDS? WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT CITY PROSECUTORS DON'T COME BEFORE THE COURT AND ABUSE PEOPLE AND EE EXHIBIT ABSOLUTE CALLOUSNESS TOWARD FOLKS SITTING IN THE ROOM AND WATCHING WHAT THE VIDEO SAYS BE OUT OF COORDINATION WITH WHAT COMES OUT OF HER MOUTH.

WHAT CAN WE DO THERE? I KNOW YOU ALL ARE THE POLICE OVERSIGHT COMMISSION, BUT THE PROSECUTOR WORKS CLOSELY WITH THEM.

AND TO COMMISSIONER TUT'S POINT, I'M WONDERING, YES, THE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE GREAT.

WE WERE REALLY HAPPY TO SEE THAT, REALLY PROUD OF YOU ALL FOR THAT WORK.

BUT THE QUESTION IS, THEY MAY HAVE ACCEPTED THEM, BUT HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THEY FOLLOW THEM? THANK YOU.

WHAT IS THE ACCOUNTABILITY? WHAT IS WHAT IT ELIMINATES? I HEARD YOU WHAT ELIMINATES THE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY ASPECTS OF WHAT THE POLICE HAVE, WHAT MAKES SURE THAT THEY DON'T DO WHAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING FOR YEARS? THAT'S THE QUESTION WE HAVE.

HELLO.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.

UM, AND YEAH, THANKS EVERYONE FOR YOUR EFFORTS HERE TONIGHT.

UH, MY NAME IS TED GRISWOLD AND I AM JUST A CONCERN, UH, COMMUNITY MEMBER WHO HAS SEEN THE, ABOUT THE, THE BOYD, UH, FAMILY, THEIR CASE IN, IN THE LONG BEACH POST AND ON SOCIAL MEDIA.

AND I'M JUST OUTRAGED BY WITH, BY WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM AND BY HOW THE CITY HAS TREATED THEM THAT NIGHT AND SINCE THEN.

UM, AND I JUST WANNA ECHO EVERYTHING THEY'VE SAID, SUPPORT EVERYTHING THEY'VE SAID AND APPRECIATE.

UM, EVERYONE HERE'S EFFORTS TO HAVE SOME SORT OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND OVERSIGHT.

UM, I'M NOT SOMEONE WHO TYPICALLY HAS A LOT OF FAITH IN THE CONCEPT OF OVERSIGHT OF POLICE OFFICERS, BUT, UM, IT WOULD BE NICE IF LIKE, LIKE ADRINA SAID, IF IF, UM, THESE TYPES OF REFORMS CAN BE MADE WITH SOME SORT OF ACCOUNTABILITY, IT WOULD GIVE PEOPLE MORE FAITH AND TRUST, UM, IN THE, IN THE DEPARTMENT HERE IN LONG BEACH.

UM, AND THAT WOULD BE MUCH APPRECIATED.

THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT.

ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, DID YOU HAVE ANY UH, UH, DISCUSSION OR COMMENTS FOR, FOR THE PUBLIC AT ALL, OR? OH, JUST GENERAL COMMENT.

SORRY.

[ANNOUNCEMENTS]

OH, YEAH.