►
From YouTube: Committee on Government Operations on December 1, 2020
Description
Docket #0885 - Ordinance establishing a Civilian Review Board within the City of Boston
Docket #1094, ordinance establishing the Office of Police Accountability and Transparency
B
C
Good
afternoon
everyone
city,
council,
lydia
edwards,
show
the
committee
on
government
operations.
It
is
tuesday
december
1st
2020,
and
we
are
here
today
for
a
virtual
working
session
on
docket
zero.
Eight
eight
five
ordinance
establishing
a
civilian
review
board
within
the
city
of
boston
and
docket
zero.
One
excuse
me
one:
zero,
nine,
four
ordinance
establishing
the
office
of
the
police,
accountability
and
docket.
Eight
eight
five
was
sponsored
by
councillors,
andrea
campbell
ricardo
arroyo
and
julia
mejia.
It
was
referred
to
the
committee
on
january
or
july,
29
2020..
C
The
committee
held
a
public
hearing
on
that
docket
on
september.
8Th
docket1094
is
sponsored
by
the
mayor
and
was
referred
to
the
committee
on
november
18
2020.,
in
accordance
with
governor
baker's
executive
order
modifying
certain
requirements
of
the
open
meetings
law.
We
are
conducting
this
work
in
session
virtually
via
zoom.
C
There's
a
quick
review,
docket
zero.
Eight
eight
five
would
establish
a
civilian
review
board
in
the
city
of
boston,
which
would
review
investigate
complaints
of
police
misconduct
and
internal
affairs
investigations
and
recommend
disciplinary
actions
and
changes
to
the
boston,
police,
department's
policies,
procedures
and
practices.
The
ordinance
lays
out
board
structure
and
member
appointment,
the
establishment
of
a
budgeted
office
force
up
or
support
staff
required,
trainings
powers
and
duties,
processes
and
procedures
for
review
of
complaints,
investigations
and
public
access
and
reporting
requirements.
C
I
heard
from
the
past
president
of
the
national
association
for
civilian
oversight
of
law
enforcement
and
also
heard
from
former
member
of
the
boston,
co-op,
larry,
mays,
also
state
representatives,
russell
holmes,
lawyers
committee
for
civil
rights,
aclu
massachusetts
and
also
the
director.
Excuse
me
the
president
of
mam,
leo
eddie,
crispin,
david
hernandez
of
the
latino
law
enforcement
group
as
well.
Diego
and
bps
student
darwin.
C
There
were
some
also
suggestions
that
included
increasing
the
number
of
monthly
public
meetings,
adding
specific
language
about
data
collection
and
analyzation
for
racial
disparities,
with
the
goal
of
reducing
disparities,
developing
a
common
community
nominating
process
and
possibly
including
a
youth
member
on
the
board,
or
at
least
including
mechanisms
for
better
interactions
between
the
youth
and
police
concerns,
raised
included,
impartiality
of
the
crb
appointments.
How
much
funding
the
crb
will
require
and
where
the
budget
will
come
from.
C
Docket
1094,
introduced
by
the
mayor
would
establish
an
office
of
police,
accountability
and
transparency,
which
would
support
the
internal
affairs
oversight
panel
and
civilian
review
board.
The
two
versions
of
the
I
guess
I
would
call
it
the
iop
internal
affairs
oversight
panel
and
the
civilian
review
board
referred
to
in
the
mayor's
docket-
are
not
in
reference
to
councillor
campbell's
originally
filed
crb,
but
instead
were
created
by
executive
orders
on
november
12th.
C
At
the
point
of
clarification
again
just
to
make
clear,
while
the
november
12th
executive
orders
are
relevant
to
considerations
of
docket
1094,
the
executive
orders
themselves
are
not
before
this
body.
What
we
are
discussing
are
the
two
ordinances,
which
is
one
zero:
nine,
four
and
zero.
Eight
eight
five,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over.
I'm
gonna
introduce
my
colleagues,
I'm
going
to
then
explain
the
procedure
for
which
this
working
session
will
go,
go,
go
through
and
also
explain
why
we're
doing
it
this
way
so
again,
just
for
public
purposes.
C
I
have
who
are,
as
my
colleagues
attending
this
counselor
braden
counselor,
ba
counselor
flynn,
counselor
sabe,
george
council
campbell,
councillor
mejia
and
councillor
janie.
Are
there
any
city
councilors
that
joined
and
my
counselor
royo
is
also
here,
and
I
think
that's
all
that
I
can
see
right
now.
C
So
that
being
said,
I
want
to
be
clear
about
what
we're
doing
and
why
we're
doing
it
in
this
way.
Normally
an
ordinance
is
introduced.
It
comes
to
this
committee
and
I
have
a
hearing
about
that.
That's
the
procedure
I
took
with
the
original
civilian
review
board
ordinance
introduced
by
council
campbell
council
royal
councilmember,
the
mayor's
recent
ordinance
came
in
in
november
and,
as
a
result
I
wanted
to.
C
C
C
C
C
We
will
then
have
counselor
campbell
will
lead
the
over
over
an
overview,
slash
review
of
her
of
the
ordinance
she
proposed,
because
that
was
part
of
this
working
session
anyway,
and
there
could
be
a
back
and
forth
about
how
those
two
marry
how
they
can
come
together,
what
we
can
do
together
and
what
we,
what
we,
what
are
not
what
we're
not
willing
to
do.
I
want
everyone
to
be
completely
transparent,
though
I
don't
really
have
the
time
to
dance
around
or
be
peppered
with
a
bunch
of
questions.
C
C
D
To
get
us
to
this
point
for
years.
Activists
have
pushed
this
to
happen.
I,
along
with
other
counselors,
including
my
predecessor,
counselor
yancey,
have
pushed
the
administration
to
work
with
us
to
strengthen
civilian
oversight
of
our
police
department.
I
filed
three
hearing
orders
on
this
issue
over
the
last
few
years.
Opportunities
for
us
to
have
public
community
informed
conversations
about
why
this
is
so
important.
All
of
three,
all
three
of
which
were
ignored
by
the
administration.
D
My
priority
has
always
been
to
pass
the
strongest
possible
legislation
to
create
a
civilian
review
board
and
to
do
this
requires
the
council
and
the
mayor
to
work
in
partnership
on
establishing
an
ordinance
that
would
establish
a
board
its
authority,
its
responsibilities
and
employment
structure,
appointment
structure.
We
have
one
ordinance
that
actually
does
that,
which
my
co-sponsors
and
I
of
course
filed
back
in
july,
and
we
asked
the
administration
to
weigh
in
directly
on
that
to
even
send
us
constructive
feedback
or
suggestions.
D
We
never
received
that.
Instead,
they
chose
to
author
their
own
and
to
file
that
vr
executive
order.
I
want
to
say
I'm
extremely
grateful
and
remain
grateful
to
members
of
the
task
force,
who
stepped
up
to
do
the
hard
work
and
have
for
a
really
long
time,
and
especially
for
making
the
civilian
review
board
a
top
priority
in
the
recommendations.
D
But
I
will
say
the
mayor's
approach
to
doing
this
by
executive
order
is
disappointing,
because
I
think
it
falls
short
of
having
a
lasting,
independent
civilian
oversight.
An
executive
order
is
not
permanent.
If
we
are
committed
to
this
being
a
lasting
impactful
reform,
then
we
need
it
to
be
an
ordinance
and
we
must
pass
an
ordinance
that
codifies
the
civilian
review
board,
so
I
think
it's
enforceable
and,
of
course,
will
last
beyond
the
current
administration.
D
I
also
believe
the
council's
language
in
the
ordinance
is
stronger
in
that
it
provides
a
structure
that
I
think
is
most
accountable
and
most
accessible
to
the
public
national
best
practices
for
civilian
oversight.
Boards
call
for
community
members
to
have
a
seat
on
board
reviewing
all
cases,
both
citizen
complaints
and
internal
affairs
investigations
alongside
legal
experts,
which
is
what
our
ordinance
proposes,
whereas
the
administration
proposes
two
separate
oversight
boards
with
different
authorities
in
different
members,
excluding
the
average
resident
from
the
internal
affairs
oversight
panel
and,
I
think,
creating
unnecessary
additional
bureaucracy.
D
I
absolutely
do
think
these
are
all
these
are
all
things
that
we
can
actually
reconcile.
We
can
reconcile
the
differences
between
the
executive
orders
and
ordinances
and,
of
course,
create
the
most
effective
structure
for
police,
accountability
and
transparency,
and
do
it
do
so
in
partnership.
So
thank
you,
madam
chair.
Again,
thank
you
to
my
co-sponsors.
Counselor
mejia
and
council
royal
as
well.
C
E
All
righty,
then
let
the
games
begin.
Thank
you
to
the
chair
and
to
my
colleagues
for
sponsoring
one
of
the
two
dockets
that
we're
here
to
discuss.
Today.
We
have
been
at
this
conversation
for
over
a
hundred
years.
A
civilian
reward
is
an
incredible
low
bar
for
the
city
to
an
act,
but
it
is
a
bar.
Let
me
turn
this
thing
off
here,
but
it
is
a
bar
that
we
seem
to
keep
tripping
over
time
and
time
again,
but
here
we
are
with
only
a
little
of
over
two
weeks
left
in
the
legislative
year.
E
We
have
not
one
but
two
civilian
rewards
on
the
agenda
to
discuss.
This
is
an
issue
of
voice
and
power
and
who
has
it
and
who
does
not.
In
our
plan,
we
put
the
power
into
the
hands
of
the
people,
because
it's
not
because
if
we're
not
at
the
table,
you
know
what
happens,
we're
always
ending
up
on
the
menu
we
have
been
getting
in
and
we've
been
getting
enough
alive.
Here
we
fought
for
a
youth
voice
to
sit
on
this
board.
E
We
can't
let
this
one
token
form
of
justice
where
we
let
the
people
think
quote:
unquote,
they
have
the
power
in
our
ordinance.
The
people
have
the
power
and
that's
what
we
need
to
be
fighting
for,
and
I
will
say
this
just
really
quick
is
that
counselor
edwards,
I'm
all
in
on
the
whole
idea.
This
is
not
an
opportunity
for
us
to
see
who's,
bigger
and
better
and
better.
I'm
not
here
for
those
politics,
I'm
here
to
get
to
a
place
where
we're
going
to
decide.
E
I've
been
very
clear
about
that
piece
of
the
ordinance
in
terms
of
what
I
see
is
important,
and
I
need
to
for
my
own
little
sake
here,
because
if
I
can't
understand
something,
I
know
that
the
people
that
I
serve
clearly
won't
be
able
to
understand
it
either,
and
so
we
need
to
make
sure
that
whatever
it
is
that
we're
going
to
adopt,
it
needs
to
be
digestible
and
easy
to
understand
and
live
by.
So
I'm
here
for
wherever
we
land,
but
we
got
to
land
somewhere
and
it
can't
be
who's
better.
B
F
F
F
I
think
we
certainly
can
do
it
before
the
end
of
this
year,
and
so
I
look
forward
to
hearing
from
folks
in
some
cases
in
in
this
setting
for
the
first
time,
not
in
the
work
that
they've
done.
Some
folks
here
have
been
working
on
this
for
decades,
and
so
I
appreciate
that
work.
I
appreciate
the
folks
who've
been
on
the
task
force,
because
I
think
we
all
share
the
same
goal
of
putting
something
strong
together
with
real
power,
and
so
I
think
that's
why
we
can.
C
Turn
it
now
over
to
the
administration.
For
my
colleagues,
you
would
have
received
an
email
from
michelle
with
comparison
of
the
documents.
I
believe
it
includes
the
and
the
executive
orders
themselves,
so
you
would
have
both
ordinances.
Both
executive
orders
minutes
from
the
prior
hearing
on
zero.
Eight
eight
five,
the
administration's
comparison
chart
counselor
campbell's
comparison
chart
as
well.
C
So
I
want
to
be
clear
that
that's
all
before
us,
we
get
to
work
in
the
working
sessions
I
host,
so
you
got
your
tools
so
we're
going
to
turn
it
now
over
to
the
administration,
I'm
really
hoping
we
can
get
that
to
like
the
15-minute
kind
of
summary.
We
really
appreciate
you
being
here.
I
want
to
be
clear
to
everybody
when
I
spoke
with
the
administration
just
yesterday,
there
was
a
full-on
commitment
to
get
to
work
in
that
conversation,
so
I
I
just
wanted
that
to
be
very
clear.
C
A
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
I
thank
you
to
all
the
counselors
for
having
us
here
today.
I'm
joined
today
by
tanisha
sullivan,
who
is
the
president
of
the
naacp
boston
branch,
allison
cartwright,
who
is
the
attorney
in
charge
for
the
roxbury
defender's
office
and
jamal
crawford,
who
has
been
a
community
activist
working
on
police
issues
for
many
many
many
years
here
in
the
city
of
boston?
A
We
wanted
to
come
here
today
to
talk
about
the
office
of
police,
accountability
and
transparency,
and
we're
going
to
leave
our
comments
to
that
in
discussions
about
the
counselor's
crb.
I
guess
we'll
leave
for
the
working
session,
where
we
can
make
comparisons
to
the
current
existing
civilian
review
board
that
the
mayor
created
two
weeks
ago
so
for
the
the
purpose
of
the
opat
is
what
we
refer
to
as
office
of
police.
Accountability
and
transparency
is
a
single
point
of
entry.
A
So
we
want
the
public
to
understand
that,
while
others
continue
to
say
that
there
have
been
multiple
points
of
entry
and
it's
confusing.
It's
not
technically
confusing.
Madam
chair,
it's
a
single
point
of
entry
of
one
department
which
would
be
the
office
of
public
accountability
and
transparency
of
commission
residents
would
go
to
that.
One
place
one
portal
of
entry:
they
will
get
a
caseworker
work
with
individuals
and
then
based
on
what
the
topic
of
their
case
is,
and
what
they're
actually
asking
the
office
of
op
to
do.
A
There's
two
different
boards,
one
that
is
just
purely
the
oversight
of
the
internal
affairs
for
pre-existing
cases.
They
can
now
look
at
all
cases
since
the
mayor
assigned
that
executive
order
and
then
a
civilian
review
board,
which
is
much
more
robust,
allowing
us
to
look
at
a
whole
host
of
other
different
opportunities
and
ideas,
and
so
I
it
for
us.
The
importance
is,
is
to
having
this
independent
commission
that
has
an
executive
director
that
has
the
investigators
that
has
the
legal
staff
the
statisticians.
A
That
is
what
we're
looking
for
to
have
that
one-stop
shop
and
we
are
looking
and
the
framework
is
important,
because
that
allows
the
two
other
boards
of
residents
to
purely
look
at
the
cases
that
are
bringing
before
them
look
into
other
issues
charge
the
staff.
You
can
think
of
the
opat
office
as
kind
of
the
administrative
arm
of
this
whole
three-legged
stool,
and
so
we
we
here
today.
A
We
think
that
while
we
have
discussions
about
the
boards
and
how
the
boards
are
going
to
interact
the
real
importance
for
the
administration
for
us
to
administrate,
this
justice
is
to
have
a
sole
office
and
commission
that
has
this
ability,
the
powers
and
the
authority,
and
also
investment
through
a
city
through
the
city
budget
of
this
resources
that
they
need
and
so
we're.
Looking
forward
to.
G
Thank
you
jerome.
I
do
want
to,
and
of
course
thank
you
to
the
council
for
providing
us
with
this
time.
I
want
to
just
make
sure
that
we
are
clear
for
the
record
about
this
task
force,
which
was
established
by
the
mayor
in
july,
following
the
racial
reckoning
that
we've
seen
across
this
country,
but
that
surely
hit
the
city
of
boston.
G
As
jerome
mentioned,
I
served
on
that
subcommittee
representing
the
naacp
boston
branch.
I
was
joined
by
joseph
feaster,
who
is
the
chair
of
the
urban
league
of
eastern
massachusetts
and
also
allison
cartwright,
the
attorney
in
charge
for
roxbury
defenders
through
cpcs,
of
course,
as
we
know,
the
body
that
represents
that
provides
legal
support
and
counsel
and
representation
to
those
in
our
community
who
cannot
afford
it
and
jamal
crawford.
Who,
as
jerome
mentioned,
is
a
long-standing
community
advocate
and
activist
in
this
space.
G
But
I
I
would
argue,
I'm
certainly
one
of
the
thought
leaders
when
it
comes
to
issues
of
policing,
reform,
widely
recognized
as
such,
and
someone
who
has
been
in
this
space
really
leading
and
and
trying
to
push
all
of
us
to
do
more
and
to
do
better.
With
that,
I
will
say,
as
we
begin
our
review
of
the
co-op
formerly
known
as
the
co-op
now
internal
affairs
oversight
panel.
G
All
of
that
to
say,
we
quickly
realized
that
what
currently
existed
as
the
co-op
was
not
adequate
and
was
failing
in
so
many
respects
it
had
been,
as
had
been
well
documented
for
years
and,
quite
frankly,
several
of
us,
through
our
organizations
as
well
as
individuals,
have
actively
advocated
with
this
body.
You
know
some
of
you
were
not
there,
but
some
of
you
have
been
there,
as
we
have
actively
advocated
with
this
body
to
take
action
as
it
relates
to
policing,
reform
and
policing
accountability.
G
We
also
were
closer
to
home
here
in
cambridge
and
also
also,
of
course,
research.
What
the
national
best
practices
are
in
this
space.
Most
importantly,
we
went
directly
to
the
people
and
held
multiple
hearings
with
community
listening
sessions.
I
should
say
with
community
to
hear
what
their,
what
their
concerns
are
and
what
their
hopes
were
for
addressing
policing,
accountability
and
transparency.
G
And
then,
of
course,
once
we
came
up
with
developed
the
structure
that
we
thought
was
responsive
to
everything
that
we
had
heard.
We
went
back
to
community
and
again
made
sure
that
we
were
at
every
step
of
this
process
in
lockstep
with
the
people,
and
so
I
really
do
appreciate
counselor
mahia's
comments
about
the
importance
of
of
the
people
being
centered
to
this
work,
always
that
said,
we
ultimately
landed
on
a
structure
that
does
provide
for
more
supports
for
this
work.
G
Independence
for
this
work
teeth
in
this
work,
the
office
of
policing,
accountability
and
transparency
serves
really
as
the
house
for
both
internal
affairs
review
and
also
for
civilian
review.
The
internal
affairs
review.
Of
course,
we
have
been
we
recommended
and
we
were
pleased.
It
was
accepted
for
expanded
scope
and
authority
of
that
body,
and
also
for
that
body
to
have
access
to
investigators
to
help
support
their
work.
Coupled
with
the
subpoena
power
that
would
be
held
within
the
office
of
policing,
accountability
and
transparency.
G
But
we
felt
again
that
was
critically
important,
again
being
responsive
to
not
only
the
best
practices
that
we've
seen
across
the
country,
but
also
being
responsive
to
what
we
specifically
heard
from
the
residents
of
the
city
of
boston
through
the
multiple
community
listening
sessions
that
that
we
were
able
to
host
the
civilian
review
board.
Composition
is
one
that
was
heavily
debated.
G
We
did
feel
strongly
that
there
should
be
a
voice
for
the
city
council
and
that
the
city
council
should
have
the
opportunity
to
participate
in
the
appointment
process.
We
also
you
know
it
certainly
explored.
You
know
whether
there
should
be
additional
criteria
or
expertise
required
for
civilians
to
serve
on
this
board.
G
So
as
we
talk
about
in
our
work
oftentimes,
you
know
we
want
to
know
what's
going
on
with,
and
I
know
this
is
a
matter
before
the
council
now
police
overtime,
for
example.
I
know
council
arroyo
is
championing
that
issue.
The
the
opat
would
be
a
body
that
could
be
responsible
for
issuing
white
papers
policy
positions
as
well
as,
of
course,
making
sure
that
data
is
released
to
the
public,
transparently,
timely
and
in
a
way
that
it
can
be
digested.
G
G
C
H
No,
I
think
it
was
just
a
mute
it
was.
I
was
just
muted,
I'm
sorry
yep.
So,
at
the
end
of
the
day
you
know
I'm
gonna
try
to
be
really
quick
and
really
brief
and
cover
some
some
main
things.
Thank
you
all
for
being
here.
Thank
you
all
for
your
commitment
to
seeing
police
reform
and
some
manifestation
as
we
move
forward
my
sister
tanisha.
You
know,
I
you
know
it's
hard
to
follow
that
you
know
she
really
summed
up
everything.
H
H
But
the
very
rep
first
report
from
the
co-op
spoke
about
the
the
lack
of
their
powers.
You
know
the
the
ineffectiveness
of
the
process
and
so
on
and
so
forth,
and
so,
when
looking
at
all
those
reports,
the
latest
with
the
the
group
of
you
know
regina
quinlan,
natasha,
tidwell,
larry,
mays
right,
and
we
remember
when
the
mayor
tried
to
bump
it
up
from
three
members
to
five
and
from
ten
percent
to
ten
percent
sampling
of
these
cases
to
twenty
percent.
There's
a
lot
of
nuances
in
here.
H
People
originally
thought
that
the
co-op
was
civilian
review.
This
is
where
the
difference
comes
in.
The
co-op
was
only
meant
to
look
at
cases
that
came
through
internal
affairs.
What
we
did
is
we
strengthened
and
we
took
away
all
the
complaints
that
people
had
always
had.
Well,
they
don't
have
any
subpoena
power
well
now,
under
this
they
would
under
a
direct
umbrella.
H
They
didn't
have
the
power
of
independent
investigation.
Well
now
they
do
the
mayor
bumped
it
up
from
you
know,
10
to
20
sampling.
Now
the
fetters
are
off.
They
could
look
at
whatever
they
want
as
much
as
capacity
goes.
The
need
for
each
thing
is
because
what
the
people
who
would
provide
oversight
over
internal
affairs
is
very
specific
and
civilian
review
is
also
very
specific.
H
I
don't
understand
the
problem
with
more
eyeballs
on
it
and
if
we
look
at
the
very
body
of
the
city
council,
how
many
committees
are
on
city
council?
All
of
you
are
experts
in
a
variety
of
fields,
but
there's
an
education
committee.
There's
a
public
safety
committee
because
various
people
and
it's
not
to
say
that
someone,
it's
not
on
one
committee-
doesn't
have
something
to
add
on
or
what
have
you.
H
But
I
want
people
to
really
understand
the
nuance
and
and
the
difference
between
having
oversight
specifically
over
the
internal
affairs
process
and
then
also
having
a
broader
vision
of
civilian
review
and
that
they
both
are
able
to
impact
policy
and
neither
discounts
civilian
participation
or
you
know,
in
fact.
I
believe
that
what
we
created,
we
have
a
youth
voice.
We
have
you
know
community
organizations
and
civic
organizations
providing
their
their
nominations.
H
How
do
we
now
come
together
like
what's
wrong
with
what
we
proposed
to
the
best
of
my
knowledge?
This
is
the
best
of
the
best
of
anything
that's
been
proposed
in
my
30
years
of
activism,
and
I
just
I
really
would
love
to
hear
arguments
against
whatever's
proposed,
so
we
can
get
into
the
nitty-gritty
and
and
get
to
it.
C
C
We
as
the
city
council,
we
pass
ordinances,
and
so
the
question
is
what
ordinance
and
how
of
the
two
that
are
on
the
table
in
front
of
us.
The
executive
orders
are
not
in
front
of
us.
We
have
no
impact
or
influence
on
an
executive
order.
The
mayor
did
that
without
the
city
council,
that's
not
before
us
to
make
the
civilian
review
board
permanent
and
legally
within
our
ordinances.
C
It
has
to
pass
through
so
whether
what
it's
codified
is
really
the
question
before
us
not
what's
wrong
with
anything,
but
what
gets
codified
and
so
again
I
want
to
we
are.
We
have
several
components
to
this
and
I'm
trying
my
best
to
make
sure
that
we're
organized
in
our
discussion
of
each
of
these
components,
and
so
again
to
my
colleagues,
you
have
many
documents
in
front
of
you.
I
would
recommend
looking
at
the
administration
comparison
chart,
as
well
as
the
comparison
chart
from
counselor
campbell.
C
C
I
C
I
B
J
Sorry,
counselor
edwards,
I'm
just
having
an
issue
with
my
connectivity
yeah.
I
guess
here
I'll
jump.
Sorry,
I
figured
it
out.
Thank
you
so
much.
I
won't
go
to
an
opening
statement,
I'll
just
jump
right
into
just
asking
the
administration,
so
I
think
to
to
me
to
counselor
edward's
point
about
codification.
J
There's
an
initial
question
about
why
the
administration
didn't
opt
to
codify
the
civilian
review
board.
Because-
and
I
mean
I
know
why
we
need
op
codified,
but
it
just
seems
to
me
like
we're
now
stuck
with
a
sort
of
two-level
conversation
which
is
about
putting
the
crb
into
law
at
all
and
then
also
the
ways
in
which
the
proposed
crb
for
my
colleagues
and
the
one
from
the
task
force
are
different
and
I'm
just
sort
of
wondering.
J
I
understand
the
speed
aspect
of
an
executive
order,
but
there's
then
the
question
of
I
I
think
our
council
default
would
be
to
follow
that
up
with
putting
it
into
law
so
that
it
so
that
it
lasts
regardless
of
administration
and
just
would
love
to
hear
a
little
bit
from
the
administration
about
why
you
haven't
gone.
That
route.
A
Counselor,
thank
you
for
the
question.
When
the
mayor
accepted
the
task
force
reports,
I
think
on
multiple
press
conferences,
and
it's
been
stated
in
the
news
that
the
mayor
was
going
to
use
every
tool
available
to
him
to
move
the
task
force
recommendations
forward.
The
mayor
also
said
that
he
was
going
to
fully
accept
the
task
force
his
recommendations.
He
did
not
weigh
in.
He
did
not
change
them.
He
brought
them
forward
and
he
said
he
was
going
to
use
every
tool
to
do
that
and
he
did
just
that.
A
A
J
Would
the
administration
be
in
favor?
Obviously
you
don't
think
it's
necessary
under
this
current
mayor,
because
you've
you've
done
an
executive
order,
but
would
the
administration
be
if
in
favor
or
would
it
be
opposed
or
indifferent
to
the
to
the
question
of
putting
exactly
what
the
task
force
proposed
into
law
through
city
ordinance.
A
Yeah,
so
I
think
to
follow
up
to
your
question
counselor
and
if
some
of
the
task
force
members
might
chime
in
if
I
speak
out
of
turn,
but
it
is
the
mayor's
desire
to
move
this
issue
forward.
He
believes
this
work
is
important.
Now
he
believes
that
he
chose
a
path
for
which,
which
is
to
happen,
but
as
with
everything
in
the
legislative
body,
there
are
things
that
have
to
change.
Do
we
feel
as
an
administration
that
we
would
be
opposed
to
codifying
a
crb?
A
I
don't
believe
that
we
would,
but
I
do
believe
that
the
administration
is
going
to
stand
firm
in
its
belief
that
the
office
of
police,
accountability
and
transparency
commission
needs
to
be
created,
and
so,
as
we
worked
with
the
working
sessions
as
we
expressed
to
the
chairwoman
yesterday,
we
are
willing
to
sit
down
in
this
working
session
and
actually
get
to
work.
She
said
a
very
short
timeline
about
what
she
wants
to
complete
this
work.
A
I
think
the
administration
wants
to
meet
that
timeline
that
she
has
laid
out
for
the
work,
but
we
are
we're
going
to
be
very
clear
that
the
opac
structure
is
something
that
is
very
important
to
the
administration.
We
have
a
civilian
review
board.
Currently
that
was
passed.
We
understand
that
the
council
wants
to
codify
that
more
and
make
it
firm,
because
the
new
mayor
can
come
in
and
say
I
don't
want
to
have
a
crb.
I
want
to
do
something
different
and
the
council
is
concerned
about.
G
Yeah,
I
would
just
add
to
that,
and
I
I
want
to
be
clear
and
not
to
leave
the
administration
out
there
on
this
point,
and
that
is
we
and,
and
certainly
the
naacp
weighed
in
on
on
this
particular
issue.
It
was
critically
important
to
us
that,
as
it
relates
to
this
issue
of
policing
accountability,
that
we
got
done,
what
needed
to
get
done
as
quickly
as
possible,
because
this
has
been
years
years
of
advocacy.
G
J
Great,
thank
you.
I'm
sure
I've
used
my
time
I'll
just
say
that
I
I
start
here
with
a
preference
both
for
us
to
codify
the
office
and
do
that
expeditiously,
as
you
say,
and
also
to
codify
the
civilian
review
board
and
and
to
your
point,
tanisha.
I
definitely
think
that
we
we
don't
want
to.
Let
we
don't
want
to
let
doing
the
latter
be
an
enemy
of
doing
the
former,
but
I
think
that
it
would
be.
J
B
K
L
Thank
you,
madam
chair
again,
thank
you
for
everyone
who
is
here
and
for
the
dedication
and
commitment
to
this
work.
That's
before
us,
both
from
the
administration
and
the
task
force
and
colleagues
on
the
council.
I
have
not
had
an
opportunity
to
read
those
comparisons,
so
I've
been
digging
through
them
in
my
inbox
here
on
and
off
screen,
so
we'll
perhaps
have
questions
in
the
second
round,
as
I
read
them.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Thank
you.
Councillor,
campbell.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
I
will
say,
there's
always
been
an
appetite,
at
least
on
the
council
side,
this
this
particular
term,
to
pass
an
ordinance
to
establish
a
civilian
review
board
and
to
codify
it.
What
the
lead
sponsors
wanted
to
hear
from
the
administration-
and
we
had
been
in
conversations
with
them
as
well-
was
a
commitment
from
them
which
goes
back
to
concert
box
question
of
codifying
this
and
not
doing
it
via
executive
order.
That's
how
we
left
it
in
our
last
conversation
and
then
we
didn't
hear
anything.
D
D
So
that
is
very
important
and
I
think
just
putting
my
lawyer
hat
on
an
executive
order
is
not
as
strong
legally
as
an
ordinance,
so
I
think
it's
critically
important
to
be
done
via
ordinance
and,
if
there's
a
commitment
to
that
wonderful.
My
second
point
is
in
response
to
the
the
two
layers,
so
you
have
the
board
that
is
reviewing
the
internal
affairs
cases
and
then
a
separate
board,
of
course,
reviewing
citizen
complaints.
D
D
Is,
I
don't
see
the
need
to
have
the
separation
and
that
there
have
been
others
who
talked
about
the
value
of
having
a
lay
citizen,
be
a
part
of
reviewing
those
cases
that
we
also
see
internally
within
the
police
department.
So
that's
my
other
point
that
I
think
I
would
love
to
hear
more
from
the
administration
about,
because
we
heard
the
exact
opposite
when
we
were
talking
with
folks
in
our
hearing
with
respect
to
civilian
review
board,
and
I
think
the
other
pieces
can
be
worked
out
the
office
itself.
Everyone
agrees.
D
D
A
Control,
I'm
gonna.
Let
me
answer
the
administration's
part
and
I'll.
Let
you
go
to
the
other
part.
This
administration
doesn't
need
the
council
to
call
on
it
to
do
it
to
do
anything
when
it
comes
to
police
reform.
The
mayor
has
already
passed
to
executive
orders
that
the
public
has
asked
for
regarding
a
cr
being
an
iop
so
calling
on
the
mayor
to
do
something
is
just,
I
think,
it's
just
more
politics
than
anything
else.
The
we
have
a
before
you
a
department
that
is
supposed
to
look
at
the
work.
A
A
This
time
we've
been
working
this
for
years,
who
wrote
this
report
that
we
are
carrying
forward,
so
the
mayor
doesn't
need
to
answer
any
sort
of
calling
now,
through
this
working
session,
should
we
be
able
to
come
together
with
something
in
a
document
that
codifies
everything
I
think
the
mayor
as
long
as
we
agree
to
the
language
which
is
going
to
take
some
time
for
us
to
trade,
language
back
and
forth,
which
your
office
was.
We
said
this
very
clearly
your
chief
of
staff
yesterday,
that
would
love
to
change
language
with
you
counselor.
A
So
we
are
on
the
record
with
you
already
talking
about
that
stuff,
as
we
said
it
to
the
chair.
So
I
hope
that
counselor
edwards,
that
we
can
move
forward
into
the
working
session
actually
start
getting
into
the
details,
but
I'm
going
to
let
the
task
respond
to
the
difference
between
the
two
boards
doing
the
reviewing.
D
Well,
I
I
just
quickly
my
chief
of
staff,
yes
talked
to
you
yesterday,
jerome,
so
that
we
could
be
on
the
same
page
for
the
working
session
and
be
crystal
clear
as
to
where
the
divide
was,
but
taking
it
a
step
back
before
the
signing
of
the
executive
order.
Counselor
roy
on
council
mejia
and
I
met
with
the
mayor
and
administration
to
have
a
conversation
about
how
we
could
get
this
done
and
we
asked
for
specific,
write-ups
and
and
suggested
edits
to
the
language
so
that
we
could
have
this
working
session
and
move
it
forward.
D
D
We
have
been
waiting
for
that
write-up
or
the
suggested
edits,
and
so
we
haven't
gotten
that
yet,
but
instead,
of
course
we
got
the
executive
order,
which
is
fine,
you're
exactly
right.
The
mayor
has
the
authority
and
has
for
a
long
time
to
be
able
to
execute
on
this
and
get
it
done.
The
question
now,
as
we
ask
the
question
around
executive
order
versus
ordinance
is
yes,
the
council
is
what
clearly
has
been
ready
to
do
the
ordinance
piece?
D
C
B
C
We
go
back
on
that
point.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
I'm
summarizing
and
moving
this
forward
so
that
this
is
not
a
volley.
What
the
administration
I
understood
said
specifically
is
that
there
is
a
commitment
to
get
it
done
and
that
they're
here
to
possibly
codify
something
with
us.
That's
what
I
heard
so
with
that
issue
aside.
The
specific
concerns
that
councilor
campbell
brought
up
was
about
the
the
bifurcation.
C
H
I
was
going
to,
but
you
know
what
I
let
me
just
put
this
on
the
record,
because
I'm
glad
that
counselor
campbell
reminded
that
this
is
all
on
the
record
and
all
being
reported.
So
let
me
just
for
the
record
set.
I
don't
like
the
tone
of
this
conversation,
so
I'm
gonna
opt
out
for
the
rest
of
it
before
I
get
myself
and
others
in
trouble,
because
there's
a
lot
of
things
being
said
here
that
I
don't
think
hold
up
to
the
further.
H
G
Yeah,
I
I
I
can-
and
you
know-
and
I
think
it
is-
this
is
a
question
that
we
wrestled
with.
As
a
subcommittee,
I
mean,
admittedly,
when
we
first
started
this
process,
I
did
not
really
understand
why
we
needed
to
or
why.
I
will
say
this
why
two
was
the
best
option,
having
both
the
internal
affairs
oversight,
as
well
as
the
civilian
review
board.
G
It
is
through
the
process
that
I
personally
came
to
the
position
that
this
was
the
best
path,
and
that
is
because,
when
thinking
about
part
of
our
work
is
you
know,
certainly
we
we
were
all
entering
this
space
focused
on
policing
reform
that
was
designed
to
strengthen
public
safety,
of
course,
increase
transparency
and
accountability,
but
also
trust
and
the
trust
goes
both
ways
right.
So
there
what
there
was
through
this
process.
G
G
Trust
in
the
process
also
again
kind
of
the
level
of
rigor
in
the
process
that
that
we
thought
would
be
important
again
for
a
very
targeted,
narrow
scope,
reviewing
essentially
cases
that
were
managed
by
internal
affairs,
very
narrow
in
scope
right.
One
piece
of
this
oversight
that
we
felt
again
taking
into
consideration
all
stakeholders
that
we
felt
would
be
appropriate
to
pull
out
to
to
keep
out.
G
I
should
say
civilian
review
board
and
I
want
to
say-
and
there
are
lay
people
civilians
on
each
of
these-
each
of
these
bodies.
These
are
all
residents.
You
know
the
current
co-op
has
lawyers
on
it
and
also
has
non-lawyers
on
it.
So
they're,
not
even
all
members
of
the
legal
community,
but
they
are
individuals
who
have
experience
within
and
with
law
enforcement.
Okay,
the
civilian
review
board.
G
Again
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
there
was
again
an
opportunity
for
as
much
particip
participation
as
possible
by
members
of
the
community,
regardless
of
you
know,
regardless
of
what
neighborhood
they
live
in,
regardless
of
what
their
background
is
regarding
the
list
of
their
exposure.
These
are
you
know.
These
are
just
whoever
lives
in
the
city,
who's
passionate
about
this
work,
who
wants
to
give
their
time
in
this
way?
G
Necessarily,
it's
not
necessarily
an
investigation
or
there
should
be
an
inquiry
into
it.
So
again,
it
was
a
process
for
off,
not
for
all
of
us
for
me
personally,
but
at
the
end
of
that
process,
really
coming
to
the
conclusion
that
two
was
appropriate,
recognizing
specifically
kind
of
the
unique
elements
of
internal
affairs
oversight.
G
C
E
Yes,
so
I
first
want
to
just
acknowledge
that
you
know
jamal.
Oh
I
I
know
I
have
three
minutes
and
I'm
gonna,
I'm
gonna
use
my
three
minutes.
However,
I
want
okay,
so
I
just
wanna
just
make
note
to
jamal
like
I
really
do
appreciate
your
voice,
and
this
is
not
you
know,
I'm
I'm
hoping
that
you
recognize
how
much
of
a
value
you
are
to
this
conversation,
and
so
don't
let
all
of
this
politician,
you
know,
get
you
worked
up
so
lean
into
it
anyways.
E
I
personally
also
have
to
say
that
all
of
this
is
leaving
a
really
bad
taste
in
my
own
mouth,
because
I
feel,
like
everybody,
got
a
skin
in
this
game
and
it
seems
like
everybody
at
this
point
and
I'm
going
to
be
honest.
It
just
seems
like
about
who
is
going
to
get
the
credit
for
passing
this
civilian
review
board
right
and
it
doesn't
seem
like
it's
about
the
people.
E
It
just
feels
to
me
like
it's
all
about
the
politics
and
we
need
to
stop,
and
I
don't
want
to
feel
like
anybody's
pawned
in
this
big
game
of
chess
right.
So,
let's
just
kind
of
like
name
it,
because
that
is
the
elephant
in
the
room
and
it
seems
like
everybody,
is
like
doing
all
this
out
of
the
other.
Let's
just
get
real
about
what's
happening
here
for
me,
I
I
don't.
E
I
don't
believe
that
the
argument
about
passing
something
quickly,
because
we
need
to
pass
something
that
is
going
to
ensure
that
the
work
of
police
justice
is
being
done
period
right.
We
didn't
get
this
far
to
then
just
try
to
get
to
the
finish
line
and
see
who
got
there
first,
so
let's
be
really
thoughtful
about
how
we
get
there
and
making
sure
that
we're
thorough
in
that
process.
E
E
A
Matt,
madam
chair
three
back
to
the
counselor
counselor.
Those
are
all
great
points.
I
want
to
point
out
that
the
administration
is
in
agreement
with
you.
I
think
that,
both
in
our
presentation
and
in
the
current
executive
order,
and
in
also
your
council
ordinance,
we
have
both
designated
that
some
a
nominee
be
selected
from
a
youth
organization.
So
I
do
think
that
we
support
you
in
that
mission
of
allowing
young
people
to
be
more
at
the
table
and
to
be
involved
in
this
process.
A
A
I
think
it
just
requires
us
to
do
a
comparison
side
by
side
to
see
where
we're
both
at,
but
I
think
we
both
agree
with
you
there
on
the
need
for
comprehensive
training
and
repeated
training
so
that
it
doesn't
you
get
trained
and
then,
like
four
years
later,
it
kind
of
goes
out
of
your
brain.
It
should
be
something
that
happens
regularly
annually,
as
you
said,
so.
I
think
we're
in
agreement
there
and
I
apologize.
I
forgot
the
third
one.
What
was
the
third
one
you
asked
about.
A
Okay,
unfortunately,
through
due
to
police
contracting,
none
of
these
boards
can
discipline
police
officers
all
in
the
contract.
All
discipline
is
through
the
police,
commissioner,
and
so
what
these
boards
can
do
is
refer
discipline
to
the
commissioner,
but
ultimately,
at
the
end,
the
authority
for
disciplining
officers
lies
solely
with
the
police.
Commissioner,.
G
G
That
said,
I
do
want
to
counsel
mejia
just
pick
up
on
something
else
that
you
mentioned,
and
I
want
to
be
clear
and
I
apologize
if,
in
the
process
of
my
trying
to
be
brief,
if
it
has
been
misconstrued
in
any
way.
I
want
to
be
clear
that
this
work,
the
recommendations
that
were
made
to
the
mayor
and
also
shared
with
community,
were
not
made
in
haste.
G
G
What
we
know
from
an
advocacy
standpoint
from
an
activist
standpoint
is
that
our
window
is
only
open
for
so
long
and
so
to
the
extent
we
were
able
to
again
after
well.
Documented
research
and
diligence
come
up
with
recommendations
on
this
particular
issue.
That
we
knew
could
be
implemented,
or
at
least
start
the
implementation
sooner
rather
than
later.
That
was,
and
will
continue
to
be
what
we
press
for
on
behalf
of
our
communities.
E
E
So
that
is
for
me
is
what
feels
a
little
bit
rushed,
and
I
think
that,
if
we're
going
to
make
a
commitment
to
something,
then
we
need
to
be
able
to
unpack
it
and
and
do
our
dual
diligence
to
making
sure
that
whatever
it
is
that
we
sign
up
to
doesn't
feel
rushed.
This
to
me
feels
rushed
right
now,
but
I
do
appreciate
chief
your
point
in
terms
of
youth
organization.
That
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
we'll
have.
E
I
just
want
it
to
be
really
explicit,
that
that
we
want
a
a
young
person
there
and
that
we
have
some
some
com.
You
know
conversation
on
what
that
will
look
like,
and
then
I
don't
see
anything
in
the
ordinance
specifically
naming
anti-racist
training.
So
I
think
that
that
could
be
just
something
that
we
can
just
tweak
a
little
bit
just
to
make
sure
that
we're
very
explicit
about
what
it
is
that
we're
asking
for
and
whatever
ordinance
makes
it
to
the
finish
line.
E
A
A
I
think
the
mayor
is
in
agreement
that
there
should
be
some
appointments
that
are
solicited
from
the
council,
so
we
can
figure
out,
I
think,
through
the
working
session
and
trading
of
language,
how
we
make
you
more
comfortable
with
the
youth
language,
and
I
think
the
administration
is
open
to
having
some
trading
language
dialogue
so
that
we
can
get
narrowed
down
to
your
concern
to
ensure
that
someone
from
the
young
young
population
has
a
seat
at
the
table.
So
we're
open
to
the
exchanging
language
on
that.
M
Be
very
quick:
I
have
a
two
o'clock
and
won't
be
able
to
stay
on
the
call
long
just
some
questions.
I
I
want
to
thank,
certainly
the
makers
of
both
ordinances
and
thank
you.
Many
thanks
to
tanisha,
sullivan
and
jamal
crawford,
who
I
hope
to
hear
from
later.
I
know
he
said
he
wanted
to
say
less,
but
I
think
it's
important
that
we
hear
from
him.
In
particular,
I
had
a
couple
of
questions
one.
M
I
want
to
state
right
off
the
bat
that
I
think
it
is
incredibly
important
that
we
get
the
crb
codified
into
lie.
It
is
not
enough
to
leave
it
to
executive
order,
so
I
want
to
say
that
right
off
the
bat,
we
need
to
make
sure
that
whatever
we
pass,
that
we
are
passing
something
that
codifies
the
crb,
I
the
questions,
I'm
curious.
I
support
the
youth
nominees.
M
I
think
that's
all
important,
I'm
curious
around
other
nominees
who,
on
the
council
nominates
is
it
committee
chair
is
a
president
and
then
how
are
all
nominees,
whether
council
or
mayor,
confirmed
training
around.
I
support,
obviously
the
anti-racist
training
and,
I
would
say
I'd,
go
a
step
further
and
say
anti-black.
M
You
know
racist
training
that
we
need
to
get.
I
saw
in
the
chart,
though,
that
there
was
training
being
offered
by
the
boston
police
department
and
I'm
just
wondering
about
where
we
how
we
draw
upon
the
expertise
from
the
boston
police
department,
but
not
overstep
and
recreate
many
of
the
problems
that
we're
trying
to
avoid.
By
having
you
know
the
police
department
do
the
training.
M
I
have
a
question
about
the
office
of
police,
accountability
and
transparency
and
how
that
relates
to
internal
affairs.
I'm
just
what
the
structure,
the
relationship
is
there
and
I'll
leave
it
there,
I'm
not
sure
I'll,
be
able
to
join
for
a
second
round,
because
I
have
the
other
commitment
but
very
interested
in
this
issue.
It's
very
important
and
I
feel,
like
it's
been
a
long
time
coming,
that
it
isn't
rushed.
A
A
The
council
would
have
to
talk
amongst
the
council
about
how
they
would
funnel
appointments
up
to
the
president's
office,
and
then
the
president
representing
the
body
would
then
say.
Mr
mayor
here
are
the
council's
appointments
to
said
board.
I
think
that
that
is
how
we're
viewing
it
both
through
the
way
the
mayor
is
currently
envisioning
a
crb
and
I'm
I'm
not
quite
sure
of
the
process
that
the
council
ordinance
currently
lays
out.
But
I
think
that
is
our
vision.
It's
not.
It
is
the
whatever
we
decide
as
topics.
A
M
K
C
K
M
J
M
M
M
A
We
have
four
seats
that
are
council
seats.
Here
are
eight
names.
Mayor
pick
four,
I
think
we're
opening
that
conversation.
If
you
just
want
to
say
we
have
four
seats.
Here's
our
four
seats.
I
think
we
are
open.
In
that
conversation,
I
don't
think
we
are
trying
to
dictate
how
the
council
selects
their
appointments
again.
I
think
that
that's
something
that
the
body
itself
could
figure
out.
You
guys
make
appointments
all
the
time
to
various
things.
So
I
think
it
would
just
be
a
conversation.
A
You
must
about
how
you
would
want
to
choose
yours,
but
ultimately
their
appointments
of
the
mayor,
but
we
would
receive
your
appointments
similar
to
how
we
got
names
from
you.
Madam
president,
for
the
marijuana,
the
cannabis
control
board,
you
nominated
a
bunch
of
people.
We
selected
some
names
from
that
list
that
you
gave
us
so
there's
different
ways
that
we
could
do
this
and
we
would
look
to
work
with
the
council
on
what
they
think
is
best
to
govern
themselves.
G
M
M
So,
okay,
it's
the
third
box
down
and
it
just
talks
on
the
mayor's
side.
It
says
broadly
encompassing
to
be
signed
by
opat
on
collaboration
with
the
equity
office
and
the
bpd,
and
so
I'm
just
wondering
what
that
was
in
the
the
other
ordinance
that
says
specified
in
the
ordinance
which
I'd
have
to
kind
of
dig
deep
into
yeah.
G
So
look-
and
I
think
this
also
came
up
in
council
mejia's
comments
as
well.
When
it
comes
to
training
absolutely,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
whoever's
participating
in
not
just
in
this
process.
You
know,
arguably,
everybody
within
who's,
touching
city
government
is
going
through
rigorous
training.
I
I
don't
think
that,
for
our
part,
one
of
the
things
that
we
did
not
we
were
intentional
about
not
doing,
was
to
be
too
prescriptive
right
in.
G
That
said,
I
don't
think
that
there
would
be
any
pushback
if,
if
it
were
the
will
of
of
this
body
and
of
the
administration
to
be
explicit
about
the
type
of
training
I
mean
I'm
a
racial
justice
advocate.
If
you
want
to
put
anti-racism
anti-racist
training
or
president
jenny,
as
you
said,
anti-you
know
what
did
you
say,
black
training
in
it?
You
know
that's
what
we
do
so
so,
certainly
supportive
of
it
and
encourage
that
that
is
the
way
that
you're
thinking
about
this.
G
With
respect
to
internal
affairs,
it's
important
to
know
that
the
opat,
the
office
of
police,
accountability
and
transparency
that
that
would
house
the
internal
affairs
oversight
panel
is
completely
separate
from
the
bpd
okay
and
in
in
being
separate
from
the
bpd,
it's
separate
from
internal
affairs.
It
is
truly
designed
you
know,
and
if
this
is
not
clear,
let's
make
it
more
clear.
It
is
truly
designed
to
be
an
in
separate,
independent
oversight
body,
and
I
think
that's
why
it's
also
important
to
have
this
separate
office,
because
we
don't
even
want
the
budget.
G
We
don't
even
want
the
same
people,
you
know
having
you
know
budgetary
responsibility
for
or
the
same
person
having
budgetary
responsibility
for
both
entities
right
so
separate
by
envision
and
separate
in
design.
The
role
of
the
internal
affairs
oversight
panel
is
is
truly
oversight.
It's
review
of
what's
happening
in
internal
affairs
with
this
new
design
of
internal
affairs
oversight
it.
G
Actually,
it
expands
the
scope
of
their
purview
of
that
that
panel's
purview
and
really
gives
them
the
opportunity
when
we
think
about
the
sean
ellis
case
right
literally,
the
iaop
today
could
reach
into
internal
affairs
and
pull
those
records
and
say
we
want
to
review
those
today.
They
can
do
that
a
month
ago.
They
could
not.
A
A
C
L
Other
it
wasn't
my
three
minutes,
but
it
was
just
a
clarifying
question
on
council
janie's
question
regarding
the
council
appointments.
Would
we
be
required
or
should
be,
should
we
be
required
to
make
sure
there's
language
included
in
any
which
ordinance
that
specifies
how
the
council
would
decide
those
appointments?
I
think
that's
important
when
we
think
about
council
appointments
just
where
it
was
so
directly
related
to
her
questions.
That's
why
I
raised
my
hand.
Thank
you.
Man,
counselor
arroyo,.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
I
would
just
agree
with
the
point
just
raised
by
councillor
asabi
george,
in
originally
raised
by
councillor
president
janie
regarding
the
appointment
structure
and
what
that
nomination
is
and
having
that
clearly
delineated
in
whatever
we
finalized.
You
know,
I'm
gonna
ask
specific
questions
about
how
this
office
is
gonna
operate,
because
I
think
we've
spent
a
lot
of
time
talking
about
just
a
bunch
of
different
things
and
for
me,
I'm
less
interested
in
the
credit
and
the
who
and
the
what
I
don't
I
actually
do.
F
F
The
first
one
is
caseloads
right
when
we're
talking
about
two
separate
boards.
Looking
at
two
separate
amount
of
work,
two
separate
different
things
right:
one's
internal
affairs,
the
other
one
has
this
other,
these
other
tasks
that
they're
tasked
with
investigating
and
doing
work
on.
What
does
that
workload
look
like?
Do?
We
have
some
idea
based
on
what
co-op
was
you
know
what
we
believe
co-op
would
have
been
looking
at.
F
I
know
this
isn't
co-op,
it's
a
it's
a
recreation
of
that,
but
do
we
have
some
idea
as
to
how
many
cases
we're
putting
in
front
of
each
respective
board?
Are
we
gonna
have
one
overworked
overburden
board
and
one
that
doesn't
have
that?
Are
we
gonna
have
two
equally
burdened
boards?
Do
we
know
what
that
looks
like?
So
that's
one
question,
the
other
one
that
I
just
did
from
a
practicality
standpoint.
F
It
strikes
me
that
we
could
have
an
officer
who's
under
investigation
on
an
internal
affairs
situation
on
one
side
and
that
same
officer
can
be
under
investigation
on
the
other
side,
and
I'm
not
aware
how
that
communication
would
be
happening
in
the
current
construct
so
that
one
board
is
aware.
Oh,
we
might
have
a
separate
issue
over
here
that
we
should
be
looking
at
as
well.
F
What
happens
in
that
situation,
because
I
haven't
seen
that
there
was
a
question
about
subpoenas
in
subpoena
power,
which
is
obviously
incredibly
important,
and
there
was
a
check
system
that
I
believe
was
introduced.
I
don't
know
if
it's
in
the
final
here,
and
so
I'm
interested
just
seeing
where
we
landed
on
this,
where
basically
two
out
of
the
three
entities
would
have
to
agree
on
a
subpoena.
F
In
other
words,
if
the
civilian
review
board
wanted
a
subpoena,
they
would
have
to
convince
at
least
one
of
the
co-op
or
op
right,
which
is
not
co-op.
It's
iop
or
whatever
it
is,
but
they
would
have
to
convince
one
of
those
two
individuals,
whoever
that
individual
is
for
the
other
board,
to
agree
to
a
subpoena
and
vice
versa.
If
they
wanted
one,
they
would
have
to
go
and
convince
the
civilian
review
board
and
and
or
the
central
executive
director.
F
And
so
those
are
the
questions
that
I
have
that
are
that
are
more
practical
to
the
administration
aspect
of
that,
because,
to
be
perfectly
frank,
when
we
talk
about
subpoena
power
and
one
side
or
the
other
side,
both
ordinances
give
that
power.
When
we
talk
about,
you
know
what
you're
looking
into,
I
don't
think,
there's
anything
that
our
ordinance
isn't
looking
into,
that
this
ordinance
wouldn't
be
looking
into,
and
these
two
executive
orders
wouldn't
be
looking
into.
F
The
question
is
just
in
the
administrative
makeup
of
that,
how
that's
taking
place,
and
so
for
me
those
are
the
practical
questions.
I'm
happy
to
ask
them
again
if
you
didn't
take
notes,
but
those
are
the
kind
of
the
questions
that
I
have
about
how
those
bodies
would
interact
with
this
central
office.
A
We
do
not
believe
by
the
amount
of
case,
though,
currently
coming
into
the
co-op
understanding
that
they
were
restricted
only
what
20
of
the
cases
right
of
random
cases.
Now
it's
open
up
to
all.
So
we
do.
We
do
intend
to
see
both
boards
getting
a
number
of
work
right,
and
so
there
will
be
an
increase
in
the
eye
of
you
are
correct
to
call
that,
but
we
do
not
believe
that
it's
going
to
be
the
iop
side
will
be
that
as
of
significant
number.
A
So
I
will
commit
to
you
today
that
I
make
sure
that
I
get
you
that
number
so
that
you
have
a
good
understanding
understanding
about
how
much
iop
is
going
to
get,
because
it's
not
even
even
though
there's
going
to
be
a
growth,
I
do
not
foresee
it
being
kind
of
a
burdensome
growth
right
and
plus
we
expanded.
I
up
to
go
to
have
a
couple
more
members,
so
they
could
get
more
caseload.
But
it's
not.
A
We
truly
feel
as
though
the
civilian
review
board,
whatever
structure
it
comes
out,
is
going
to
be
the
bulk
of
the
work,
and
so
that
is
why
I
think
it
was
important
that
we
have
an
executive
director,
sit
down
and
start
building
out
the
staff,
and
these
and
the
task
force
is
very
clear.
This
is
not
going
to
be
what
we've
seen
in
city
government,
where
we
make
sign
of
one
poor
executive
director
and
then
give
them
two
staff,
people
and
then
say:
go
off
and
go
save
the
world
right.
A
This
is
actually
has
to
be
a
robust
commission
kind
of
like
we
have
with
like
you
know,
I
wouldn't
say
isd
level
because
that's
like
mega
right,
but
it's
to
have
to
be
kind
of
like
our
licensing
board,
where
they
have
15
to
20
people
who
do
all
the
work.
But
when
you
think
about
what
the
task
force
required,
we
need
to
have
investigators.
We
need
to
have
case
workers.
We
need
to
have
stations
who
are
building
up
a
database
that
works
with
bpd
to
put
all
the
data
based
on
the
public.
A
So
I
I
think
you
are
asking
the
right
questions
about
caseload.
So
let
me
get
actual
real
data
to
you
and
I'll
commit
to
getting
that
to
you
in
the
next
couple
of
days.
So
they
answer
that
question
and
on
the
other
ones,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
tanisha
and
to
the
rest
of
the
task
force.
So
they
can
talk
about
the
inner
workings,
because
I
think
I
muddled
it
on
you
last
time.
So
let
them
be
more
clear
for
you.
Thank
you.
N
Well,
extremely
briefly,
about
counselor
arroyo
the
question
you
have
regarding
the
workload-
I
I
think,
probably,
as
you
know,
as
a
former
public
defender
as
I
am,
we
won't
know
until
people
really
start
taking
advantage
of
this
office.
That's
why
we
wanted
to
make
it
accessible
to
the
public
in
my
almost
30
years
as
a
criminal
defense
attorney
and
a
public
defender,
the
the
majority
of
complaints
that
I
get
that
we
see
from
our
clients
aren't
necessarily
regarding
to
the
fact
that
they
were
arrested.
N
It's
how
they
were
treated,
it's
how
they
were
abused
by
police,
most
people
most
clients
do
not
go
and
file
complaints.
They
only
think
that
will
exacerbate
their
problems.
So,
with
the
way
we
have
this
structured,
we
are
hopeful
that
people
will
take
advantage.
They
will
come
in
if
they
have
a
complaint,
they
will
file
it
if
they
need
to
do
an
internal
affairs
complaint,
those
always
take
longer.
N
If
the
community
is
coming
in
is
filing
more
complaints,
then
that's
why
we
give
this
agency
the
power
if
you
need
to
have
more
employees,
so
be
it
if
you
don't.
Oh
that's
okay,
too,
but
we
do
want
to
see
people
taking
advantage
of
this.
We
want
to
have
a
better
police
department.
We
want
to
have
better
community
policing
to
the
extent
that
we
can
and
that's
what
we're
we're
hopeful
in
doing
with
the
way
we
have
set
this
up.
N
F
Yeah,
so
I
think
so
just
to
make
it
clear.
I
had
two
questions.
One
was
on
the
subpoena
issue.
I
know
that
we
had
talked
about
sort
of
the
check
of
one
group
would
have
to
get
one
of
the
other
two
to
agree,
and
I
just
want
to
know
how
that
would
work.
How
much
of
the
case
of
what
what
case
would
have
to
be
made
by
one
person
on
one
side
to
this
group?
Do
they
have
to
give
them
access
to
files
they've,
never
seen?
G
Right
again,
you
know
you
are
the
the
technical,
the
technocrat
on
this
one
and,
and
we
know
how
close
it
is
to
to
your
profession.
So
I
appreciate
the
questions
with
respect
to
the
subpoena
power.
That,
too,
is
something
that
we
heavily
debated
as
a
body
in
terms
of
how
that
should
work,
what
you
know
and
just
to
be
very
frank
about
it.
You
know
we
we
took.
G
We
take
that
very
seriously
and
we
did
not
want
to
create
a
structure
whereby
you
had
subpoenas
flying
all
over
the
place,
and
so
in
order
to
try
to
have
as
again
kind
of
respect
the
integrity
of
the
process
engender
trust
in
that
process.
So
you
know
people
don't
feel
like
it's
a
gotcha
and
other
people
aren't
feeling
like
it
has
no
teeth.
G
G
You
know,
documentation
of
the
requests
that
have
gone
to
the
bpd
for
information.
It
would
include
you
know,
kind
of
you
know
the
the
the
time
parameter,
the
time
that
has
lapsed.
It
would
include
all
the
documentation
to
demonstrate
that
every
you
know,
attempt
has
been
made
to
give
bpd
the
time
it
needed
to
respond
and
that
bpa
bpd
has
been
non-responsive
it.
G
It
could
presumably
work
very
similar
to
the
subpoena
power
that
the
council
holds
right
in
terms
of
what
you
know,
those
things
that
you
look
for
as
a
body
when
it
comes
to
issuing
a
subpoena
but
net
net.
What
we
wanted
to
make
sure
was
most
important
to
us
was
that
we
created
a
structure
whereby
there
is
you
know
some
control
over
the
issuance
of
subpoenas
and
that
that,
when
they
are
issued,
it
will
be
after
thoughtful
deliberation
that
was
very
important
to
the
majority
of
the
task
force.
G
G
The
office
of
police,
accountability
and
transparency
supporting
what
is
essentially
akin
to
two
departments
is
efficient,
and
it
does
bear
in
mind
again
from
a
budgetary
standpoint
again
getting
kind
of
the
the
greatest
return.
It
is
again
kind
of
by
design.
I
also
want
to
know
you
asked
you
mentioned
about
the
ed
under
the
umbrella
of
the
opat
and
kind
of
reporting
to
the
executive.
G
Director
will
be
like
your
mediation
folks,
because
we
need
that
in
our
communities
right,
it
would
be
the
researchers,
the
the
the
information
specialists,
that
kind
of
that
staffing
line
will
again.
There
will
be
specialists
providing
support
to
both
of
the
wings
if
you
will,
but
they
will
also
be
if
the
vision
becomes
reality
right.
They
will
also
be
responsible
for
producing
reports
for
public
consumption
right.
G
They
will
also
be
the
ones
who
are
pulling
data
from
the
bpd
on
police
stops,
fios
they'll
all
they'll,
be
in
in
publicly
releasing
the
data
with
routinely
not
like
every
three
years.
You
know
they
will
be
the
ones
producing
the
the
reports
as
it
relates
to
pres.
You
know
presume
it
could
be
overtime.
It
could
be
anything
that
as
a
community,
we
believe-
and
that's
all
of
us-
we
believe
we
should
know
about
and
that
we
want
to
have
insight
on.
G
F
No,
and
I
think
all
of
that's
really
important-
I
know
I've
probably
hit
my
three
minutes.
The
one
question
I
didn't
get
an
answer
to
that
I
would
love
and
answer
at
some
point
is:
what
happens
when
an
officer
is
being
investigated
simultaneously?
How
patient
are
the
two
boards
allowed
to
have
with
one
another
in
the
event
that
that
occurs,
I
would
hate
to
have
one
investigation
stall
out
while
there's
relevant
information
in
another
group,
yeah.
G
I
think
that's
something
that
I
would
say
it
would
have
to
depend
right
and,
and
I'm
and
I'm
and
I'm
just
throwing
that
out
there.
When
I
put
on
my
lawyer
hat,
you
know
I
can
think
of
you
know
it
would
probably
be
more
likely
that
ia
would
know
something.
The
ia
panel
knows
that
something's
going
on
with
civilian
review,
then
then
civilian
review,
knowing
what's
going
on
in
ia,
because,
depending
upon
the
nature
of
the
ia
investigation
or
review
there
might
be
privacy
concerns.
A
C
Sorry,
I
have
there's
been
one
counselor
who
has
been
waiting
to
actually
ask
some
questions.
Counselor
clarity,
I
think
he's
still
so
I'd
like
to
get
him
in
and
then
I
have
also
questions
too
before
we
go
deeper
into
this
and
though
I
think
this
is
excellent,
this
is
exactly
where
you
want
to
be
in
a
working
session,
but
still
wanted
to
allow
him
counselor.
Flaherty.
Are
you
still
here
yeah.
O
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
absolutely
good
afternoon.
Everybody
in
the
service
has
been
very
productive
and
helpful
conversation.
Let
me
first
start
off
by
thanking
the
people.
Who've
been
doing
the
work
and
have
done
the
work.
The
representatives
obviously
they're
in
front
of
us,
but
also
you
know
their
allies
out
in
the
community
that
for
years,
have
have
been.
You
know
very
active
and
and
helpful
in
this
space
and
a
shout
out
specifically
to
allison
cartwright.
O
O
I
would
like
to
know
the
proposed
budget
for,
for
both
of
them,
I'd
like
to
get
an
understanding
of
the
the
monies
available
on
the
investigative
side
of
the
house,
and
also
I
want
to
just
talk
about,
obviously,
the
the
body
camera
issue
and
it's
my
understanding
that
the
the
film
footage
expires
after
30
days,
and
you
know
I
I
always
like
to
even
in
boston.
You
like
to
have
a
defined
start
and
a
defined
finish
to
things.
O
You
know
whether
it's
a
development
project
or
it's
something
with
our
schools.
You
just
want
to
have
a
degree
of
predictability.
You
don't
want
it
falling
into
the
abyss
and
I
know
investigations.
They
take
a
significantly
long
time
and
arguably
too
long-
and
I
really
think
that
we
have
an
opportunity
here
to
you-
know-
have
sort
of
put
a
defined
start
in
the
defined
finish
too.
Obviously,
the
complaint
being
lodged
within
a
specific
period
of
time
and
then
an
investigation
ensues
and
then
within
a
relatively
short
period
of
time.
O
There's
this
clarity
or
there's
a
there's,
a
decision
or
a
judgment
made,
and
then
you
know
it's.
It
is
what
it
is.
The
indoor
we
move
forward
and
too
often
that
doesn't
happen.
You
know
the
ieb
in
particular
things
things,
people,
complaints
of
languish,
it's
a
huge
disservice
to
to
to
everything
in
and
really
speaks
to
the
credibility
of
the
process.
So
I'd
like
to
speak,
maybe
to
that
in
you
know,
will
there
be
a
defined
process?
O
You
know
a
start
date
and
a
finish
date
for
all
investigations,
so
that
there
is
a
level
a
degree
and
a
level
of
predictability
to
the
process
and
there'll
be
a
there'll,
be
a
result
in
a
relatively
expedited
fashion.
Clearly,
obviously,
things
get
complicated.
Investigations
may
take
a
while,
but
best
efforts
need
to
be
made
to
to
make
this
process
move
as
quickly
as
possible.
O
From
my
perspective,
so
those
are
some
of
the
questions
that
I
have
and
and
and
I
I
had
very
similar
questions
to
accounts
previously
speaker,
counselor
arroyo
and
that
I
think
tanisha
did
a
great
job
in
answering
in
terms
of
you
know
the
both
of
the
organizations
and
you
know
what
are
they
going
to
know
from
each
other
and
and
you
know,
should
they
know,
should
they
not
know?
What
are
they
going
to
share?
What
are
they
don't
get
to
share?
A
Council
flaherty
the
madam
chair,
through
you
to
back
to
the
counselor,
I
think
that's
a
great
question
as
far
as
budget,
I
would
have
to
say
that
we
aren't
there
yet
what
we
wanted.
What
we
wanted
to
do
in
our
thinking
again
and
now
we're
open
to
this.
This
large
discussion
with
your
body
is
that
we
wanted.
We
can
appoint
an
executive
director
now
right
we
could.
We
could
hire
an
individual,
but
we
wanted
that
person
in
place
before
we
built
the
department.
A
You
need
to
look
at
this
for
a
regulation.
You
look
at
that.
So,
there's
a
very
clear
thing
about
timings
of
cases.
The
task
force,
even
even
the
council,
which
I
think
is
great
put
timelines
about
when
cases
should
be
done.
We
should
also
look
at
what
the
task
force
is.
I
think
the
task
force
actually
gave
us
shorter
timelines
and
they
and
they
schedule
those
out,
and
so
those
will
all
be
coming
the
regulations
so
for
the
budget.
A
The
council
will
be
able
to
see
what
we
anticipate
a
budget
and
then
having
that
discussion
and
then
I'll
turn
over
to
my
colleagues
if
they
have
an
answer
to
some
of
the
other
questions
that
you
laid
out.
But
those
are
the
things,
oh
and
sorry,
one
thing
before
they
jump
in
the
council.
Royals
thing:
I'm
sorry,
council
always
jumping
really
quickly.
A
C
C
I
just
wanted
to
to
note
that
there
is
not
agreement
on
the
overall
ability
to
create
these
offices
for
these,
these
processes
through
executive
order,
so
that
that
that's
that,
but
that
existed
way
before
this
conversation
that
existed
long
time
ago
and
dealing
with
the
whether
the
mayor
can
create
an
office
and
reorganize
government
without
the
council
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
So
there
is
not
an
actual
agreement
there.
C
C
But
if
we
take
no
action
on
this
as
a
council,
the
the
mayor
may
be
able
to
have
this.
I
think
done
automatically
within
60
days
anyway.
So
that
the
council
needs
to
make
a
decision
on
the
mayor's
ordinance
up
down,
amend
or
something,
but
but
something
needs
to
happen.
It
can't
not
just
be
left
out
into
either.
So
I
want
to
be
clear
about
the
role
that
the
council
has
to
do
in
the
next
three
weeks
to
my
colleague
and
then
I
want
to
go
into
these
specifics
of
the
opat.
C
So
there's
some
things
I
mean
I
do,
and
it
was
a
great
breakdown
from
tanisha
of
the
the
two
offices
and
how
they
work
together,
the
scope,
the
narrow,
the
narrow.
I
thought
it
was
much
more
broad
for
the
eternal
affairs,
but
the
narrow
scope
is
review
of
review.
It's
almost
a
watchdog
of
how
they
watch
themselves,
and
I
think
that
is
necessary.
I
do
think
that
that
is
necessary
for
people
to
trust
in
that
process.
C
So
while
there
may
not
be
a
disciplinary
directive
due
to
union
issues,
there
might
be
a
recommendation
now
that
can
come
from
this
independent
office
or
the
civilian
review
board,
I
would
like
to
figure
out
which
one
it
is
who
we
recommend
to
the
state
to
decertify,
because
it
looks
like
we're
going
to
have
a
certification
process
right
at
the
state
level
or
police
officer.
So
so
how
does
this
pla?
I
want
this
ordinance
to
play
into
that
process.
C
We
that,
ultimately,
I
don't
know
if
it's
the
commission
overall
or
if
it's
one
of
the
independent,
the
civilian
review
board
or
the
the
iop.
I
know
I'm
mispronouncing.
It
makes
that
certification
or
makes
that
recommendation.
So
that's
one
thing
I
want
to
see
in
whatever
gets
passed.
I
want
to
also
make
sure
that
we're
clear
on
the
I
want
to
say
I
was
reading
it
section.
C
This
is
under
investigatory
powers
of
the
ordinance
section,
12
16.7
receipt,
investigation
and
review
of
complaints,
specifically
section
f
that
talks
about
the
limitations
of
the
investigatory
power
of
opac,
and
it
says
no
opat
investigation
shall
interview,
interfere
with
any
criminal
investigation
or
civil
proceeding
by
any
authority
with
jurisdiction.
Here's
my
concern,
as
I
think
you
can
see
me
saying
this
right.
We
go
to
get
someone
before
the
civilian
review
board
and
there's
a
civil
lawsuit
filed
against
somebody,
a
police
officer
or
so
on
and
so
forth.
C
What
I'm,
what
I'm
seeing
with
this
language
is
that
that
whatever
action
and
accountability
that
could
be
done
at
this
level
could
easily
be
stopped
by
an
outside
lawsuit
civil
or
what,
as
darrell,
mentioned
the
d.a.
So
I
I
am,
I
could
check
I'd
love
to
check,
but
I
don't
know
why
we
can't
have
congruent
investigatory
powers.
C
I
don't
know
why,
and
so,
if
we,
if
we
could
have
him
at
the
same
time,
I'd
like
to
have
that
is
essentially
what
I'm
saying.
I
don't
I
understand,
with
the
da
there's
certain
certain
certain
investigatory
or
invested
investigations
where
you
may
not
want
that,
but
by
putting
in
civil
proceedings,
that's
mcad,
that's
a
lot
of
whole
nlrb
union.
I
mean
let's
narrow,
that
scope
so
that
we
can
have
congruent
investigatory
powers.
I'd
like
to
almost
what
is
the
exception
to
this
rule,
to
our
investigatory
powers.
A
Do
you
mind
if
I
comment
on
that
real
quick
just
give
more
background
where
that
came
from
just
so
as
you're
as
you're
digging
into
it.
So
when,
when
the
task
force
first
came
out
their
recommendations,
madam
chair,
the
mayor
received
a
number
of
phone
calls
from
da's
and
other
organizations
who
have
investigative
authority,
and
they
were
concerned
about
that
interference
of
the
on
the
local
level
and
so
that
he
informed
the
task
force
and
tanisha
sullivan
and
all
them
thought
about
this.
A
I
mean
they
spent
a
whole
meeting
discussing
this,
and
I
think
that
language
that
they
kind
of
landed
on
to
handle
that
kind
of
protection
that
there
wouldn't
be
interference,
and
so
that's
just
where
it's
coming
from.
I
think
we
can
have
a
conversation,
but
I
just
want
you
to
know
that.
That's
where
that
came
from.
C
I
want
just
the
same
kind
of
expediency
right,
so
I
think
what
I'm
hoping
is
there's
a
way
to
narrow
the
scope
of
this,
so
that
we
don't
step
on
the
toes
we
don't
want
to,
but
at
the
same
time
that
if
you
get
sued
an
mcad-
and
this
happens
to
have
substantial
relationship
to
this,
I
don't
want
that
to
be
the
reason
why
I
don't
go
for
the
civilian
review
board
or
ipad
or
the
commission
can
subpoena
you
just
so.
So
I
bet
between
the
legal
folk,
I'm
thinking
we're
in
agreement.
G
So
just
I
I
do
want
to
weigh
in
here,
and
I
appreciate
the
pickup
and
I
just
pulled
up
our
last
set
of
recommendations
so
on
the
criminal
piece
and
allison
can
weigh
in
here
on
this
as
well
and
the
criminal
piece.
I
you
know,
I'm
not
sure
that
there's
much
leeway
that
we
have
there
and
and
so
on
that
one,
I
would
probably
say
no
because
of
the
the
criminal
investigations
and
what's
at
stake
in
terms
of
liberty
with
respect
to
civil.
G
C
N
So
the
others
where
I
don't.
I
don't
see
where
there
would
be
an
issue
if
there
was
an
mcad
complaint
or
something
other
than
that
in
the
civil
realm.
It's
not
as
serious
as
it
is
more
in
the
criminal
realm,
and
that's
what
you
sort
of
put
that
language
in.
If
there
is
an
issue
where
there's
a
another
body
that
has
sold
jurisdiction
over
the
basis
of
the
complaint,
then
you
have
to
do
a
you
just
stand
back.
It
doesn't
mean
that
you
can't
later
go
in
and
do
your
investigation.
C
Okay,
all
right
so
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that
was
that
was
flagged
as
something
I'd
like
to
deal
with
and
then
in
terms
of
the
nomination.
So,
for
me
to
be
really
sold
on
the
the
trifecta
positioning,
you
know
with
the
overall
opac
with
the
two
I
as
a
counselor
need
to
need
to
see
more
of
us
in
part
of
the
nomination
process
and
and
of
those
folks,
including
the
commissioners,
including
the
I
see
that
we
do
have
some
in
the
civilian
review
board,
but
on
the
internal
affairs
we
have
none.
C
So
I
I
I
would
like
to
see
that
I
also
see
the
mayor
has,
I
believe,
veto
power
on
our
nominations,
and
so
I
I
want
a
better
balance
of
power
and
nomination
of
the
leadership
and
the
roles
for
those
who,
I
think,
are
very
important,
informed
positions.
And
so
that's
that's
what
I
think
for
for
me
to
really
be
to
to
be
in
that
we're
going
to
open
this
up,
but
with
a
little
bit
more
of
our
our
impact.
C
G
So
you
well
you
so
the
commissioners,
the
three
commissioners
come
from
again,
that's
the
e.d
right,
so
that
is
a
higher
out
of
right.
The
administration,
the
iaop,
so
whoever
ends
up
being
the
chair
of
the
iop
and
yes,
currently
iaop
similar
to
co-op
is
is
straight
mayoral
appointment,
civilian
review
board
is
is
where
the
hybrid
comes
into
place.
So
so
it
is
possible
that
the
council
would
could
have
a
voice
there.
C
K
A
C
C
That
I'm
talking
about
those
three
I
want.
I
want
the
city
council
to
be
part
of
that
conversation.
I
want
the
city
council,
as
we
already
agreed,
is
part
of
the
civilian
review
board
nomination
conversation
on
both
drafts.
We
are,
but
we
are
then
not
part
of
the
the
former
co-op
today
iop
nomination
process.
G
C
D
C
Who
say
that
this
trifecta
should
exist,
and
this
is
something
to
to
put
forward
and
to
stay
to
be
done?
I
think,
as
a
counselor
I
want
to
be
part
of
that
conversation
of
who
is
part
of
that
leadership,
and
so
and
yes,
we
will
be
part
of
the
conversation
because
we
will
to
a
certain
extent,
have
budgetary
review
right
as
it's
going
to
be
up
in
the
budget,
but
I
also
want
to
add
in
like
what
we
do
with
the
boston
residency
job
policy.
C
We
have
bi-annual
hearings
set
up
where
we
have
to
have
conversations
with
the
the
boston
job.
You
know
with
the
directive
and
the
executive
director
and
those
I
see
that
there
are
bi-annual
reports,
pushed
out
summarizing
the
work
done,
but
I
think
that
there's
I
want
to
oversight
not
even
so
much
an
oversight,
but
a
regular
check-in
that
is
mandated
within
this
ordinance
that
the
the
commissioners
come
before
the
city
council.
C
I
also
think
just
real
real,
quick
jerome,
the
the
I
don't
understand
why
there
needs
to
be
unanimous
support
for
subpoena
power,
and
why,
because
I
do
recall
you
know
one
one
of
the
speakers
noted
that
this
is
kind
of
similar
to
the
subpoena
power
the
council
has,
and
that
is
you
know
for
me.
If
I
want
to
subpoena
something
I
can
write
the
letter
and
present
it
to
the
council
and
with
with
with
just
a
simple
majority
the
subpoenas
issued.
C
C
So
I'd
like
I'd
like
that,
the
the
majority
the
unanimous
is
is,
I
don't
think
that
that's
necessary
and
then,
let's
see
so
marrying
with
the
state
new
process,
and
so
that's
something
that
we
should.
We
should
just
all
sit
down
and
figure
out,
because
we
didn't
know
what
the
state
was
going
to
do
until
what
was
it
yesterday
today.
So
let's
begin,
I'm
not
saying
that
that's
anyone's
fault,
we
did
not
know.
C
We
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
again
for
me
as
a
counselor,
how
that
nomination
process
is
more
inclusive
of
us,
biannual
check-ins
to
the
council
from
the
commissioners,
making
sure
that
we
marry
the
language
of
the
not
marry
the
language
review,
the
language
of
the
simultaneous
investigations
and
just
making
sure
also
I
mean
I'm
assuming
that
doesn't
assume
two
simultaneous
investigations
within
opet
too
right,
because
we
just
talked
about
how
you
could
have
both
right,
okay
and
then.
Finally,.
B
C
A
On
behalf
of
the
administration
counselor,
I
think
that
just
like
the
council
did,
I
think
that
the
administration
started
with
a
starting
point
on
nominations,
and
I
think
that
we
are
open
to
having
discussions
about
that
about
the
nominations
right,
and
so
I
think
that
you,
I
think,
as
we're
in
the
coming
days
as
the
council
is
continuing
to
do
its
work,
I
think
the
administration
will
be
interested
in
having
conversations
with
you
about
those
specifics
regarding
subpoena.
I
think
that
we
can
throw
that
also
into
the
conversation
that
you
just
mentioned.
A
Regarding
meetings,
we
had
always
envisioned.
We
left
it
up
the
executive
director
because
again,
as
tanisha
said
at
first,
we
got
really
prescriptive
and
then
we
realized
that
we
were
being
too
prescriptive
and
we
pulled
back.
We
envision
that
these
boards
are
going
to
be
meeting
in
the
public
on
a
regular
basis,
because
right
now,
even
the
current,
the
old
co-op
new
iop,
they
don't
meet
regularly.
A
A
It
would
have
probably
changed
some
of
the
task
force
recommendations
and
it
probably
would
have
changed
some
of
councillor
campbell
arroyo
and
mejia's
ordinance
if
we
actually
knew
what
the
state
was
doing
ahead
of
time,
and
so
I
think,
let's
get
that
interpretation
and
let's
see
what
language
we
can
get
in
there
to
tie
us
to
the
state.
So
I
think
we're
open
to
that
with
you
as
well.
C
So
I
just
want
to
be
clear
to
everyone
they're
so
wildly
similar
by
the
way
I
mean
there's
more
more
similar
than
not,
and
the
difference
is
the
difference
is,
are
like
you
know
how
many
members
versus
how
many
you
know
there's
it.
It
is
not
we're
not
talking
about
like
two
different
planets
here,
but
I
did
want
to
make
sure
that
if
people
had
concerns
or
had
specifics
about
that,
councillor
bach
already
talked
about.
C
You
know
the
ordinance
and
the
way
in
which
it
was
filed,
but
specifically
getting
down
into
the
ordinance.
The
power
is
the
difference.
Other
big
difference
is
there.
Is
an
office
referred
to
for
the
civilian
review
board
in
council,
campbell's
ordinance
versus
it
looks
like
the
administration
creates
an
overarching
office
and
structure
bigger
than
that
of
which
the
civilian
report
review
board
is
part
of.
So,
if
you
want
for
my
colleagues
just
to
make
it
easier,
I
would
suggest
you
look
at
the
comparison
chart.
C
There's
two
between
the
administration
has
one
as
well
as
counselor
campbell
and
I'd
like
to
direct
in
the
time
that
I
have
left,
counselor,
campbell,
mejia
and
arroyo.
I
saw
your
face
counsel
me
here.
Sorry,
all
three
have
in
that.
If
you
could
look
at
the
comparison
charts,
so
we
can
get
into
now.
The
crb
civilian
review
board
comparisons.
I
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
This
has
been
a
really
helpful
discussion
for
me
to
get
my
head
around
the
different
moving
parts
to
this,
I'm
very,
very
excited
that
we
are
getting
to
close
to
the
cro.
The
finishing
line
on
on
this.
I,
like
the
idea
of
the
office
of
political
police,
accountability
and
transparency,
has
been
the
umbrella
organized
organizing
unit
to
cover
internal
affairs
and
civilian
review
board.
A
So
I
think
initially
it's
it's
similar
to
the
way
it
is
now
there
will.
They
will
have.
There
can
be
anonymous
right
now.
You
can
make
anonymous
tips
into
the
police
department
you,
and
we
would
assume
that
you
would
be
able
to
make
those
same
anonymous
tips
into
the
body,
this
new
body
to
do
an
investigation.
A
How
we're
going
to
put
the
data
right,
because
a
lot
of
this
department
is
going
to
do-
is
post
a
lot
of
data
onto
a
website
for
individuals
to
click
on
you're,
going
to
be
able
to
click
on
and
see
where
cases
are
see
what's
in
cases.
But
then
we
flagged
well.
If
you
clicking
on
the
cases,
are
you
identifying
who
the
accusers
are
and
the
senate
identifying
information?
I
J
Thank
you
councillor
bach.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
A
couple
of
questions,
and
a
few
of
these
sorry
are
related
to
the
opat
at
large.
But
it's
where
the
place
is
being
inserted.
In
the
municipal
code,
it's
chapter
11
right,
which
is
public
services,
which
is
where
we
have
police
fire,
a
bunch
of
things
and
then
it
says
11,
11
2-16.
J
I,
when
I'm
looking
at
that
it's
putting
us
into
sort
of
security
system,
so
I
must
be
in
the
wrong
place.
But
can
you
guys
discuss
about
the
location
in
the
code
and
really
what
I'm
thinking
of
is?
You
know,
there's
a
question
of
size
of
budget
and
leaving
that
to
a
conversation
with
the
ed
jerome,
but
there's
also
a
question
of
whose
budget
like
we're
talking
about
an
independent
office.
J
A
So
we
had
a
lot
of
conversations
around
that
about
where
to
be
housed
and
we
are
trying
to
make
it
as
independent
as
possible
by
not
staffing
it
underneath
a
cabinet
and
having
it
currently
directed
off
of
the
mayor's
office
task
force
was
very
adamant
that
this
have
no
correlation
to
the
boston
police
department
have
no
reliance
on
boston,
police,
department,
funding
or
budgeting.
It
will
be
solely
separate
commission
separately,
funded
without
any
connection
to
the
boston
police
department.
A
So
that
is
the
current
iterations
that
it
is
technically
going
to
be
because
we're
not
housing.
It
there's
conversations
about
putting
it
under
my
cabinet,
putting
it
under
carolyn,
crockett's
cabinet
and
at
the
end,
what
was
decided
that
we
would
put
it
off
as
a
free,
freestanding
commission
that
has
the
dotted
line
to
the
mayor's
office,
and
I
don't
and-
and
I'm
sorry
I'll
have
to
get
you
the
answer
back
about
the
code.
J
A
J
Yeah,
if
you
could
just
exactly
where
it's
going
in
the
code
and
sort
of
how
that
decision
was
reached,
would
be
great
and
then
to
counselor
edwards's
point
about
the
the
crb
I
I
just
I
I
unders.
So
I
understand
that,
like
looking
at
this,
it
looks
like
your
three
commissioners
over
opat
are
sort
of
constituted
by
I
mean
one's
the
executive
director
and
then
the
other
two
are
the
chairs
of
these
boards
right.
J
So,
but
I
do
think
that
so
in
that
sense,
I
think
the
council
role
does
end
up
being
around
how
those
two
boards
are
are
appointed
and
what
counselor
jane
you
refer
to
right
with
I
mean
I
think,
it's
very
confusing
for
us
to
have
that
language
all
be
codified
in
an
executive
order.
I
think
that's
another
reason
to
move
it
into
ordinance
and
I'll
also
just
say
that
I
think
my
concern
about
the
ordinance
as
it
stands.
J
Right
now
is
that
it
makes
a
lot
of
reference
to
executive
orders,
there's
extensive
use
of
the
the
right,
the
iop
and
the
crb
terms,
which
are
then
defined
by
the
executive
order,
issue
and
state.
But
of
course,
if
the
executive
order
went
away,
we
would
have
a
weird
dead
letter
law
on
our
hand
right.
It
would
be
referencing
something
that
doesn't
have
standing.
J
I
also
worry
about
you
know
whether
civil
proceedings
related
to
labor
disputes
could
end
up
getting
read
as
a
reason
why
the
board
can't
look
end
into
anything,
and
I
think
that's
another
major
concern
as
folks
know
from
yesterday,
I'm
very
concerned
about
the
ways
in
which
the
contract
constrains
the
effectiveness
of
any
civilian
review
board.
Because
of
what
you
referenced
about
the
fact
that
fundamentally,
this
civilian
review
board
is
making
a
recommendation.
The
police,
commissioner
and
the
police
commissioner,
is
going
to
make
an
action.
J
Oh
that's,
not
the
right
kind
of
civil
thing
or
it's
not
like
it
could
just
be
a
real
distraction
and
a
delay
tactic
so
definitely
second
councilor
edwards
on
that
yeah
and
then
I
think
on
the
on
the
budget
stuff.
It's
really
I
to
me
part
of
establishing
an
office
in
law
by
the
council,
in
partnership
with
the
administration,
should
be
about
saying
where
that
office
sits,
and
so
it's
fine
if,
where
that
office
sits,
is
like
I'm
very
open
to
the
conversation
about
being
an
independent
commission.
J
J
So
those
are
some
comments
from
me
and
I
think
I
won't
kind
of
issue
questions
further,
because
I
think
the
subpoena
power
and
the
appointments
and
the
civil
suit
language
is
all
stuff
that
we're
gonna
go
back
and
forth
on,
but
I
just
would
really
urge
the
administration
to
spin
up
the
executive
orders
into
language
that
can
be
directly
compared
from
an
ordinance
perspective
on
the
crb
and
iop
side.
So
thank
you,
madam
chair.
B
A
You
so
much
if
you
may
have
30
seconds.
I
just
wanted
to
respond
that
counselor
bach.
I
think
that
I've
heard
loud
and
clear
now
from
the
chair
and
from
yourself
and
if
it
is
the
chair's
desire
for
the
administration
to
come
back
with
some
form
of
document
and
ordinance
form
as
we
as
a
way
of
trading
language
I'll
bring
that
back
as
a
request
from
the
council.
I'm
look
again,
I
don't
want
it.
A
I
don't
understand
you
guys,
have
a
process
and
you
have
multiple
things
that
you're
doing,
but
if
that
is
the
desire
of
the
chair
and
the
council
for
us
to
present
you
with
something
to
chew.
On
that
way,
I
will
bring
that
back.
I've
heard
loud
and
clear,
I
think
from
all
of
you
today
that
that
is
something
that
you
desire.
So
there
are
some
like
colleagues
who
are
watching
this
right
now,
and
so
I
think
that
we
will
huddle
back.
If
that
is
the
case,
and
so.
C
The
most
sense
just
just
to
quickly
extensive
it
does
make
the
most
sense.
As
counselor
bach
noted,
the
ordinance
before
us
refers
to
executive
orders.
It
would
be
so
much
easier
if
it
referred
to
ordinances.
That
way
we
were
dealing
with
the
same
conversation,
the
same
process
and
the
same
legal
authority
all
in
one.
J
J
Does
the
task
force
need
to
re-litigate
for
us
every
conversation
that
it
had
internally,
because
I
actually
do
think
that
a
number
of
people
on
the
task
force
have
put
a
ton
of
time
not
just
on
the
task
force,
but
in
their
entire
careers
into
thinking
about
this,
and-
and
I
don't
presume
to
be
as
expert
as
they
are
and
also
I
think
there
was
a
real
consultative
process,
but
it's
frustrating
to
not
have
not
have
that
before
us
formally
like
as
we're
having
this
conversation.
So
that's
that's
now.
C
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I'll,
be
brief.
I
think
a
lot
of
folks
covered
many
of
the
questions
I
had
specifically
around
the
budget
and
other
specifics,
but
what's
clear
is
we
can
clearly
work
out
the
differences
to
actually
get
to
a
place
where
we're
establishing
or
passing,
I
should
say
an
ordinance
to
set
this
up
appreciate
all
of
the
task
member
task
force
members
who
participated
today.
D
I
have
not
nothing
else
to
add
only
that
I
look
forward
to
some
of
the
suggested
changes
coming
back
to
us
in
some
type
of
ordinance
form
that
we
can
finalize
all
the
details
and
then
the
last
thing
I
will
say
is.
I
also
appreciated
the
response
to
why
a
two:
why
civilian
review
board
and
the
carving
out
of
another
board
to
address
the
internal
affairs
cases
tanisha
brought
up
some
of
that
thought
process.
There
appreciated
that
level
of
detail.
So
thank
you,
I'm
not
locked
into
that.
D
If
anything
I
just
had
concerns
around.
If
we
do
keep
that
model,
how
do
we
have
that
balance
of
power?
How
do
we
allow
the
council
to
have
more
input
there
to
create
more
of
a
checks
and
balance,
which
is,
I
think,
what
your
line
of
questioning
got
to,
and
so
I
appreciate
the
responses
to
that
too.
So,
looking
forward
to
finalizing
the
language,
and,
of
course
thank
you
to
my
council
colleagues
as
well
for
their
their
feedback
and
input
too.
So.
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
looking
forward
to
finalizing
us
wonderful,
wonderful.
E
So
I
I
have
to
say
counselor
edwards,
madam
chair.
I
think
that
our
entire
public
should
be
incredibly
grateful
to
you
and
how
easy
you
are
able
to
make.
I
mean
until
you
started
speaking
I'm
like
okay,
you
just
do
such
a
great
job
at
helping
people
understand
the
nuts
and
bolts
of
what
it
is
that
we're
discussing.
So
I
really
do
appreciate
some
of
the
points
that
you
brought
into
the
conversation,
and
I
echo
those
concerns
specifically.
E
I
don't
want
this
to
be
another
appointed
school
board
situation
where
we're
always
fighting,
because
we
don't
have
a
voice,
so
I
don't
think
having
the
mayor
appoint
all
the
powers
that
be
will
sit
well
with
me,
so
I
am
going
to
second
and
third,
all
of
those
recommendations
to
making
sure
that
we
have
a
formal
voice
in
choice
in
terms
of
who
sits
in
any
of
these
spaces.
So
thank
you
so
much
for
elevating
that,
because
we
already
know
what
we're
dealing
with
with
another
with
the
school
board
situation.
E
E
We
don't
have
police
officers
on
the
board
and
what
I
worry
about
is
because
there
already
is
a
lot
of
distrust
within
the
system
that
we're
gonna
have
to
really
iron
out
that
piece
of
the
conversation
just
something
to
just
flag
us,
something
that
we
need
to
kind
of
figure
out
and
that
we
I'd
love
to
be
able
to
recommend
whichever
ordinance
or
however,
this
gets
filed.
Is
that
I'd
like
to
see
accountability,
a
dashboard?
E
I
I
do
know
that
we're
going
to
be
meeting
on
a
regular
basis,
but
I
just
think
that
it's
important
for
in
terms
of
the
transparency
piece
for
us
to
have
information
in
real
time
in
terms
of
the
status
from
the
moment
something
gets
filed
to
when
something
gets
resolved.
I'd
like
to
be
able
to
see
some
sort
of
tracking
of
put
in
place
for
accountability
in
that
space,
and
then
I'm
gonna
end
with
my
little
youth
on
board
situation.
E
M
Thank
you
so
much
and,
as
you
can
see,
I'm
rejoining
I
had
to
step
away
for
two
o'clock,
so
I've
missed
the
last
hour.
It
sounds
like
I'm
stepping
into
a
conversation
where
things
are
in
a
good
place,
so
I
look
forward
to
catching
up
on
what
I've
missed
and
participating
in
next
steps.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I'm
gonna
echo
a
lot
of
what
we've
already
heard
right.
I
think
for
me
overriding
everything
has
been
how
this
operates
internally:
the
board
itself,
right
and
and
for
me,
the
civilian
review
board
that
was
put
forward
by
myself
and
counselor
campbell
and
counselor
mejia
was
just
one
board
with
one
ed
with
one
staff
and
that's
much
more
streamlined
almost
by
definition,
because
it's
one
one
one.
When
you
create
the
two
separate
boards
going
directly
to
one
executive
board,
that's
not
necessarily
bad
or
worse.
F
We
don't
have
issues
with
you
know.
One
board
is
investigating
something.
The
other
board
should
be
privy
to
it
or
would
like
to
have
that
information,
but
they're,
not
because
the
two
boards
don't
communicate.
And
then
you
have
an
executive
director
stuck
in
between
the
two
of
them
making
decisions
about
what
to
share
and
what
not
to
share
with
no
real
oversight
from
any
other
body
as
to
what
decisions
that
executive
director
is
allowed
to
make
one
way
or
the
other,
and
I
think
a
lot
of
the
answers
that
I've
gotten
for
these
questions.
F
I
deeply
appreciate.
I
know
that
I've
had
conversations
both
here
and
and
off
of
this
with
task
force
members
about
the
decision
to
get
to
two
instead
of
one,
and
I
think
there
was
a
lot
of
nuance
and
thought
nobody
did
it
just
to
do
it,
and
I
think
the
question
is
making
sure
that
we
work
together
effectively
that,
whether
or
not
it's
one,
whether
or
not
it's
two,
the
result
that
we're
all
seeking
is
accountability.
F
The
ability
to
have
real
power
and
teeth
as
far
as
that's
allowed,
and
that's
really
what
I
think
unites
this-
I
think
we're
much
closer
than
we
are
apart.
I
think
the
one
major
difference
is
the
two
board,
as
opposed
to
the
one
streamlined
one,
and
I
can
go
either
way
on
that.
If,
I'm
being
perfectly
honest,
either
way
works
for
me,
provided
we
answer
a
lot
of
these
little
nitty-gritty
questions
about
workload.
How
do
we
do
communication
within
those
groups,
and
so
I'm
happy
with
the
way
in
which
this
is
gone?
F
I
know
jerome
you're
gonna
get
some
more
information
on
that.
I
think
separate
in
the
part.
I
would
just
echo
what
everybody
else
has
echoed
on
appointments,
that's
separate
and
apart
to
the
functionality
of
the
board,
now
we're
talking
about
who
makes
up
these
boards.
But
you
know,
I
think,
from
the
functionality
standpoint
we're
so
close
to
just
making
this
work
that
I
just
would
love
to
dive
into
those
little
things,
because
once
those
get
cleared
up
for
me,
I
don't
really
have
an
issue
with
with
the
makeup
of
the
board
right.
F
F
I
appreciate
everybody
coming
here
with
the
attitude
of
being
willing
to
work
and
being
willing
to
kind
of
look
past.
You
know
who's
who's,
getting
credit
for
what
what
what
what's
you
know?
Why
am
I
married
to
an
idea?
I
like
that
folks
are
able
to
talk
right
now
about
just
effectiveness
as
opposed
to
you
know.
This
was
something
that
I
came
up
with,
so
it's
really
important
to
me
that
we
keep
it
more.
So
this
is
why
I
think
it's
important
and
that's
that's
really
where
I
want
the
conversation
to
stay.
F
C
I
think
we
should
see
it
in
that
positive
light
and
thank
you.
The
sponsors
counselor
janie
councilmember
councillor,
excuse
me
councillor
campbell
councillor
mejia
councillor
arroyo
for
your
doing
this.
Thank
you
the
task
force.
Thank
you
jerome.
I
think
you're
gonna,
you're
gonna
end
your
your
career
here
on
a
high
note.
A
M
A
Admit,
as
I
did
you
yesterday
probably
should
have
happened
earlier
as
far
as
a
timeline
just
gonna.
Let
you
all
know
that
I
love
you
each
dearly,
but
friday
is
my
last
day
as
a
public
servant,
and
I
am
going
to.
I
am
going
to
work
as
hard
as
I
can
with
each
and
every
one
of
you
until
friday,
and
then
the
administration
will
present
you
another
individual.
Should
this
go
past
friday,
but
I
thought
today
was
a
very
good
conversation.
A
So
I
think
this
was
a
great
conversation
and
I
do
appreciate
the
thoughtfulness
of
the
questions
and,
and
we
are
getting
you,
the
information
that
you
requested
and
I
just
texted
a
couple
of
the
law
department,
folks
to
kind
of
start
drafting
something
for
you,
madam
chair,
to
share
with
your
members.
But
again
I
just
wanted
to
thank
you
guys.
All
and
also
I
want
to
take
a
personal
liberty.
I
know
the
council's
getting
out
of
me,
but
I
want
to
thank
each
of
you.
A
It
was
fun
to
work
with
you
guys
for
the
past
six
and
a
half
years,
I've
been
a
public
servant
for
20
years.
I
was
a
council
staffer
when
mike
ross
was
the
counselor.
I
was
chief
of
staff,
so
I
know
how
hard
it
is
to
be
a
city
councilor
to
fight
for
your
residence
and
to
always
be
at
it
and
so
on
a
personal
note,
separate
administration
as
jerome
smith.
I
just
want
to
thank
you
guys.