►
From YouTube: March 31, 2021 Special Common Council Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Thank
you
and
welcome
everyone
to
a
special
common
council
meeting
of
march
31st
2021
to
consider
the
reimagining
public
safety
report
and
I'll
say
just
very
few
remarks,
because
over
the
last
six
weeks,
I've
said
more
than
than
anybody
has
been
interested
in
hearing.
A
But
just
to
remind
us
all
why
we're
here,
which
is
that
about
a
year
ago,
the
death
of
george
floyd
sparked
the
largest
uprising
civil
uprisings
in
american
history,
and
it
was
about,
of
course,
his
death
at
the
hands
of
the
police
officer
who
was
on
trial
as
we
speak.
But
it
was
about
more
than
that.
A
And
I
just
want
to
name
if
I
could
that
the
very
best
thing
I
in
my
opinion
that
we've
done
in
this
process
is
rely
on
shelly,
michelle
nunn,
to
be
the
city
liaison
to
that
work
and
to
decide
to
partner
with
tompkins
county
whose
professionalism
and
excellence,
particularly
the
anna
carruthers,
dominic,
jason
molino,
has
just
been
unparalleled
and
their
commitment
to
getting
the
most
robust
possible
public
feedback
to
move
beyond
just
one
or
two
or
two
hundreds
town
halls.
A
Just
feels
like
it's
been
about
200
town
halls,
but
to
dig
deep
into
qualitative
surveys
and
focus
groups
helped
inform
what
I
think
is
the
clearest
picture
of
the
current
scene
of
law
enforcement
in
our
community
and
a
really
impressive
and
inspiring
roadmap
to
fix
the
problems.
And
the
problem
is
not
just
about
george
floyd,
I
mean
we
should
be
honest
about
what
we
saw
in
this
survey
feedback.
A
It
is
a
desire
to
prevent
police
violence
and
to
prevent
violence
against
police
officers.
It
was
a
desire
to
rebuild
the
trust
that
meant
that
so
many
crimes
go
unreported
right
now,
because
people
didn't
feel
safe.
Calling
the
police
department
is
to
fix
the
pr
the
fact
that
so
many
existing
crimes
that
do
go
reported
go
unsolved,
because
there
is
a
lack
of
communication
and
a
lack
of
trust
between
the
community
and
the
police
department.
A
And
what
we
heard
over
and
over
again
was
that
a
desire
to
to
bridge
those
barriers
to
build
a
new
form
of
public
safety
that
respects
and
includes
and
incorporates
all
of
the
existing
officers
and
creates
a
new
culture
with
unarmed,
alternative
response.
Better
and
different
training.
De-Escalation,
training,
new
types
of
screening
that
involve
the
community
when
it
comes
to
hiring
and
promotion,
a
more
robust
community
police
board
and
repurposing
of
the
swat
vehicle
to
make
it
less
intimidating,
less
terroristic
and
more
useful
to
the
broader
community.
A
I
respect
that
report.
I
saw
all
the
hard
work
and
deep
thinking
that
went
into
that
report.
A
I've
come
to
believe
in
every
recommendation
and
those
recommendations
have,
of
course
changed
over
the
last
six
weeks
and
I
expect
that
they
will
continue
to
change
regardless
of
how
council
votes
tonight
that
this
plan,
necessarily
no
part
of
this
becomes
law
after
tonight's
vote.
And
so
therefore,
every
part
of
this
discussion
will
have
to
continue,
and
I
think
that's
a
good
thing,
because
we
obviously
need
more
time.
We
need
more
study,
we
need
more
research
and
we
need
a
way
to
keep
bringing
people
into
this
process,
and
that
does
include
the
pbi.
A
A
E
A
A
couple
members
of
council
have
pointed
out
that
the
naming
conventions
for
the
new
proposed
department
are
frankly
a
mouthful
and
seem
unwieldy,
seeking
to
avoid
the
need
to
come
up
with
a
name
tonight
or
this
month.
I've
changed
all
the
names
to
be
tentative
and
pending
further
study.
A
In
that
same
vein,
you'll
see
an
added
part
of
the
resolution,
which
creates
a
task
force
that
will
study
how
best
to
design
and
implement
the
new
department
and
ask
that
task
force
to
submit
its
recommendations
to
this
body
by
september
1st
september
1st
chosen
so
that
it
would,
we
would
have
time
to
incorporate
those
recommendations
into
the
2022
budget
process
and
then
finally,
two
resolves
at
the
request
of
the
police
association,
the
police,
benevolent
association
of
ithaca
that
says
firmly
and
clearly
that
the
current
members
of
the
department
will
have
their
careers
and
their
jobs
protected,
that
they
will
maintain
all
the
protections
they
currently
enjoy
through
both
new
york
state
civil
service
and
their
their
union
affiliation.
A
That
is
the
high
level
changes
to
this
resolution
from
march
10th
and
with
that
to
kick
off
the
discussion
I'll
ask
if
anybody
would
like
to
move
this
resolution
moved
by
ducks
in
second
by
steve,
and
I
should
thank,
I
meant
to
thank
ducks
and
who
served
as
this
bodies
liaison
to
the
reimagining
collaborative
which
required,
on
top
of
all
of
his
other
responsibilities,
many
many
dozens
of
hours
over
the
last
nine
months.
So
we
appreciate
it
discussion.
A
E
Thank
you,
mr
mayor.
I
greatly
appreciate
your
comments.
I
greatly
appreciate
all
of
the
work
and
the
effort
that
so
many
people
city
county
community
members
have
devoted
to
reimagining
public
safety
in
our
community.
E
Assuring
public
safety
is
something
that
all
of
us
care
very
deeply
about.
We
may
approach
it
from
different
angles:
different
perspectives,
different
life
experience.
E
You
know,
I
sit
here,
white
woman
and
I
have
to
acknowledge
that
that
is
my
experience.
Although
I've
been
very
impressed
throughout
this
process
it
it
has
felt
to
me
like
a
long
process
that
has
happened
in
a
short
amount
of
time
and
that's
quite
an
accomplishment
I
I
must
say
for
everyone
who
has
devoted
so
much
energy
to
this.
E
E
This
resolution
touches
upon,
but
doesn't
dive
deep
at
all
into
implementation,
and
I
especially
appreciated
mr
mayor
when
you
said
that
what
has
been
important
in
this
process
is,
for
me
I'll,
say:
listening
learning,
listening
to
various
viewpoints
and
understanding
that
we
need
more
information,
we
need
more
data,
so
I
in
particular
greatly
appreciate
that
there
will
be
a
task
force
that
has
more
time
to
delve
into
some
of
the
remaining
questions
and
specifically
the
implementation.
E
E
These
are
multi-year
processes,
so
I
I
acknowledge
that
as
well,
so
I
do
have
a
couple
of
specific
recommendations,
some
of
which
are
really
non-substantive,
but
I
heard
last
night
at
the
county
request
to
add
the
names
of
the
we.
We
named
the
sheriff
osborne,
rename
chief
nair,
and
would
it
be
helpful
to
also
in
the
resolution
name
the
district
attorney
and
the
director
of
assigned
counsel.
So
that
seems
a
fairly
certainly
non-substantial.
E
I
also
found
that,
as
I
was
looking
at
the
resolution
and
having
conversations
with
others,
we
were
all
counting
up
the
the
number
we
were
numbering
them
ourselves
of
the
recommendations
and
I
realized
actually
in
the
county
meeting
last
night,
that
it
was
very
helpful
to
have
the
recommendations
numbered
made
for
for
some
ease
easier
reference.
E
I
have
two
specific
recommendations
to
our
second
resolved
and
the
first
is
to
I'm
moving
that
we
delete
recommendation
10
in
the
second
result.
As
part
of
the
joint
recommendations,
this
recommendation
is
to
develop
a
joint
community
task
force,
review
the
use
of
truck
99.
E
The
county
asked
that
that
not
be
included
in
their
resolution
in
their
recommendation.
I
should
say
they
added
a
separate
resolution.
I
think
it
is
important
to
retain
conduct
a
review
of
swat
call
outs
to
determine
appropriate
use
of
service
and
equipment,
including
truck
99.
That's
number
11
on
the
recommendation
so
I'll
make
that
motion.
A
Thank
you.
Can
I
ask
as
a
favor,
could
you
make
the
other
recommendations
first,
because
we
before
we
lose
sight
of
them,
which
was
to
add
the
d.a
and
the
head
of
assigned
counsel
to
the,
whereas
that
recognizes
the
chief
and
the
sheriff
and
then
was
there
one
other.
E
A
Got
it
so
dachshund
and
steve
I'd
actually
asked
if
that
we
may
need
a
second,
but
I'll
actually
ask
would
you
consider
those
friendly
amendments?
Yes,
thank
you.
So
the
mover
and
the
second
are
considered
those
friendly,
so
they'll.
It
will
be
moved
as
such
and
no
need
to
make
an
amendment
so
which
goes
now
to
your
amendment,
which
is
to
remove
bullet
point
10,
which
is
develop.
A
joint
community
and
ipd
tsl
tcso
task
force
to
review
the
use
of
truck
99
and
explore
alternatives.
A
A
G
Yeah,
so
thanks
laura
thanks,
mr
mayor,
so
could
you
just
clarify
it?
So
you
said:
leave
number
11,
which
is
just
to
conduct
a
review
of
the
swap
call
outs.
Is
that
correct?
So
I
mean
I'm
trying
to
get
a
sense
of
what
you're
kind
of
if
you
take
out
number
10,
what
are
we
going
to
be
doing
with
the
mobile
command
unit
or
whatever
we
want
to
call
it
in
terms
of
studying
it
or
you
know
the
future
of
it.
E
The
intent
of
my
motion
was
to
retain
it
in
the
city
of
ithaca.
G
But
if
I
could
just
follow
up,
I'm
not
sure
when
there
isn't
a
proposal
to
transfer
to
the
county
at
the
current
time.
Is
that
correct.
A
G
Sorry,
my
sense
is
that
this
resolution
supersedes
that
by
having
this
joint
task
force
with
the
county,
ipd
and
the
sheriff's
office,
I
guess
is
that
is
that,
what's
that's,
that's
my
interpretation
of
that
laura.
A
Yeah-
and
that
was
that
was
my
intention.
I
I
think
that
the
question
before
council
now
is
whether
so
the
county
has
no
interest
in
taking
over
the
vehicle
to
move
to
do
it,
so
the
vehicle
will
remain
with
us.
I
think
what
the
council's
got
to
decide
now
is:
should
we
leave
the
truck
as
is,
or
should
we
repurpose
it
in
some
way?
A
The
decision
is
to
repurpose
it
in
some
way.
How
best
to
go
about
that
repurposing.
I
was
trying
to
aim
at
the
middle
of
where
I
thought
the
counselor
was
with
this
bullet
point.
With
this
suggestion.
A
E
The
the
next
bullet
point
in
the
resolution
that
we
received
last
night
is
to
conduct
a
review
of
swat
call
outs
to
determine
appropriate
use
of
service
and
equipment,
including
truck
99,
so
does
that
get
to
a
review
of
service
or
adding
service
and
purpose
of
the
equipment?
I'm
just
wondering
what
is
the
distinction
now
between
recommendation
number
10
and
number
11.
right.
A
How
counsel
is
viewing
it
reading
it,
it's
possible
that
this
reads
is
duplicative,
in
which
case
you
say,
there's
no
need,
or
you
could
say
it's
what
I'm
suggesting
in
the
reason
I
inserted
this
bullet
point
is
that
the
truck
has
been
a
source
of
outsized
attention
controversy
and
was
perhaps
the
most
commented
on
single
tactic
or
piece
of
equipment
that
in
this
process-
and
so
I
thought
it
was
worth
talking
specifically
about
what
the
city
intends
to
do
into
the
future,
which
is
to
have
you
know,
continue
the
conversation
continue
the
study
of
how
best
to
use
it,
and
you
might
you
know
again,
it
sounds
like
laura.
A
A
But
I
also
I
mean
I
will
also
say:
if
we
take
the
bullet
point
out,
I
think
we
will
still
necessarily
continue
studying
the
truck
and
how
to
repurpose
it.
Lieutenant
young
has
put
together
as
a
proposed
package
of
reforms
to
how
the
truck
works
and
how
to
turn
it
into
a
true
mobile
command
center.
So
I
think
that
work
will
continue,
no
matter
what
is
in
this
resolution,
so
I'm
not
sure
it.
You
know
not
as
much
either
way,
but
I
have.
I
have
cynthia
then
ducks
and
then
george.
A
H
Okay,
I
I
support
dropping
this
bullet
point.
At
the
same
time,
I
agree
with
the
mayor
that
we
need
to
get
busy
studying
this
and
to
answer
graham's
point:
why
drop
the
bullet
point?
H
H
Plans
to
redesign
and
repaint
the
graphics
the
recommendations
that
lieutenant
yong
has
put
forward,
I
think,
are-
are
good
and
and
worth
considering.
H
So
I
guess
I
don't
want
to
take
too
much
time
getting
started
on
this,
and
this
is
an
opportunity
for
ipd
to
prove
that
they
really
get
the
fact
that
we
want
to
repurpose
this
vehicle
and
and
that's
why
I
want
to
drop
the
this
short
paragraph.
I
Thank
you.
I'm
re-reading
recommendation
number
14,
which
is
what
that
bullet
point.
11
refers
to,
which
says
review
the
past
three
years
of
swat
call
outs
should
be
conducted
to
determine
frequency
of
use
and
assess
the
process
for
call
outs.
The
review
should
involve
community,
a
committee
made
up
of
the
sheriff's
department,
dispatch,
ipd
city
and
county
administration
and
members
of
the
community
area.
Villages
and
higher
education
institutions
so
also
be
engaged.
I
So
if
there
is
a
decision
to
keep
bullet
point
10,
perhaps
it
should
be
a
separate
resolved,
something
that
we
would
recommend
or
or
another
revision.
I
would
like
to
think
that
just
because
I
would
like
to
think
that
in
the
process
we
will
review
both
the
swat
call
out
process,
as
well
as
the
use
of
the
truck
and
appropriate
uses
of
it
and
perhaps
have
it
be
implied.
But
I'm
in
support
of
deleting
bullet
point
10.
A
D
J
My
comments
were
very
similar
to
what
cynthia
just
said.
You
know,
I
think,
as
much
as
possible.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
this
lines
up
with
what
the
county
has
already
voted
on.
I
will
say,
though,
that
the
one
part
of
bullet
point
10,
that
I
kind
of
like
is
the
idea
of
a
task
force
that
involves
both
I
ipd
and
the
sheriff,
taking
a
look
at
this
or
the
city
and
the
county.
J
Taking
a
look
at
this
because
it
is
a
shared
service,
I
mean
I
don't
know
if
that
needs
to
be
specifically
named,
but
I
think
there
is
a
lot
of
use
in
that
and
having
that
sort
of
combined
city
county,
look
at
look
at
the
truck
and
expanded
functions
or
alternative
uses
of
it.
But
I
guess
I
would
support
deleting
it
with
just
that
caveat
that
there'd
be
an
effort
going
forward
to
sort
of
work
with
the
county
to
really
explore
the
future
of
this
truck.
F
That's
actually
why
I
think
we
should
retain
this.
This
bullet
point
I
think
samantha
is
right.
It's
heavily
commented
on.
We
should
acknowledge
that
and
I
I
fully
expect
that
the
county
will
want
to
because
it's
a
shared
resource
they
want
to
participate
in
any
such
efforts.
So
I
support
keeping
it,
as
is.
K
Yeah
sorry,
so
I
clearly
understand
the
the
both
sides
of
this
in,
in
the
sense
that
it
does
help
to
put
some
context
around
what
the
intent
of
bullet
point
number
10
is.
K
However,
if
I
think
I
think,
if
we
look
closely
at
all
the
other
bullet
points,
we
don't
get
into
that
level
of
detail
on
all
the
others.
I
think
there's
an
assumption
that
there
there
is
other
other
information
in
other
parts
of
the
report
that
we
can
lean
on
and
the
bodies
that
are
going
to
go
forward
in
implementation,
we'll
be
able
to
dig
into
that
some
more.
D
A
C
I
A
I
Just
for
a
matter
of
consistency's
sake,
so
that
the
language
is
consistent
with
the
city
and
the
county,
laura
indicated,
adding,
including
truck
99
to
the
end
of
bullet
point
11.
I
A
So
forgive
me
cynthia.
Are
you
suggesting
this
as
an
amendment
to
the
amendment.
I
A
Got
it
so
look
if
laura
is
that
friendly
or
would
you
like
to
have
that?
Is
that
a
friendly
amendment
to
your
amendment.
E
Yes,
I
guess
we
can
consider
the
truck
to
be
equipment,
certainly
as
a
mobile
communications
center
it.
It
serves
as
some
highly
technical
equipment
so
sure.
L
So
I
think,
having
something
similar
to
what
the
county
past.
I
definitely
see
the
merit
there,
I'm
not
wedded
to
it,
because
I
think
we
can.
We
can
still
navigate
through
this
in
a
way
that
I
don't
think
it
will
create.
L
It'll
show
too
much
confusion
to
have
something
largely
similar,
but
has
a
couple
extra
points
dan
in
the
chat
suggested
that
we
could
also
move
it
down
to
the
city's
specific
recommendations
which
I
would
also
be
in
favor
of,
if
only
because
I
think
I
agree
with
doc-
and
I
agree
with
cevante
that
there's
special
symbolism
attached
to
this
in
the
public's
eye
that
I
think
warrants
it
necessarily
being
called
out.
And
while
the
version
of
this
is
an
important
is
an
important
consideration.
L
So
I
would
I
would
I
don't
know
if
now
is
the
appropriate
time
to
move
or
to
make
the
case
against
removing
it
or
to
maybe
amend
that
we,
instead
of
remove
it,
move
it
down
into
the
city
specific
region.
Is
that.
A
I
guess
yes,
you
could
move
to
do
any
one
of
those
things.
A
Second
advice:
okay,
discussion
on
emotion
to
amend
the
amendment
by
moving
it
to
the
city's
specific
recommendations.
M
I
think
it
might
be
cleaner
if
we
just
voted
to
remove
it
from
this
section
and
then
looking
back
at
the
language
from
the
county.
It
also
says
they
added
a
resolve
that
says
further
in
the
event
that
the
city
determines
not
to
maintain
the
swat
sent
vehicles,
the
city
asset,
we
could
add
a
resolved
or
we
could
add
something
to
city,
only
recommendations
that
indicated
that
we
were
interested
in
retaining
it
analyzing
it
or
whatever.
M
Do
we
want
to
do
we
want
to
indicate
that
the
city
is
retaining
the
vehicle
and
we're
going
to
do
all
of
those
things,
and
that
was
suggested
by
officer
young?
We
had
a
lot
of
other
suggestions,
and
so
we
intend
to
study
it
and
repurpose
it
do
we
need
to
kind
of
respond
to
the
resolve
that
was
in
the
county,
or
do
we
want
to?
B
Okay,
is
it
okay
to
have
a
city-specific
resolution
that
calls
for
a
joint
committee,
police
and
sheriff
task
force.
A
B
So
I
don't
understand
why
now
what's
the
rationale
for
moving
it
to
the
city-specific
area,.
A
So
part
of
the
it
seems
like
part
of
the
problem
of
where
it
was,
is
that
it's
it
is
a
joint
city
county
recommendation
that
no
longer
was
that
was
not
passed
by
the
county
last
night.
So
this
would
make
it
a
city-only
recommendation.
D
H
Thanks
fonte,
I
I
kind
of
like
deb's
way
of
approaching
this
deleting
what
we
have
and
then,
if,
if
we
want
to
add
something
in
the
the
only
part,
we
do
that.
I
A
So
it
is
moved
as
a
result
that
it
is
moved
from
its
current
location
to
being
a
city-only
recommendation
that
also
removes
reference
to
deciding
who
owns
it.
Yeah.
That's
it.
I
And
it
would
read,
develop
a
joint
community
and
ipd
sheriff's
task
force
that
will
review
the
use
of
the
truck
99
and
explore
alternative
or
expanded
functions
period.
I
A
H
C
C
A
A
B
E
C
A
Great
okay,
are
we
all
those
in
favor.
G
A
second
so
so
just
be
clear,
so
the
wording
is
the
same,
but
that
the
understanding
is
that
that
review
of
swat
call
outs,
that's
a
joint
review
with
the
county
right,
that's
the
assumption,
even
though
it's.
G
A
Those
in
favor
that
carries
unanimously
so
the
resolution
stands
amended
any
further
discussion
or
amendments.
B
Yeah,
I
have
so
many
versions
of
what
I
wanted
to
say.
I
gotta
find
the
right
one
here.
It
is
okay,
this
is
resolution.
The
third
resolution,
I'm
sorry,
the
third
resolved
that
lists
the
city
specific
recommendations.
B
B
That
is
because
I
think
the
phrase
to
create
a
department
implies
that
we
would
eliminate
the
current
department
and
I
don't
think,
that's
the
implication
we
want
to
make
and
I'd
also
like
to
in
the
second
sub
bullet
point
just
as
a
matter
of
cleaning
it
up.
I
just
like
to
say
minimum
minimize
risks
that
could
arise
if
violence
occurred
and
I'd
like
to
add
the
sub
bullet
point.
B
The
task
force
may
explore
changing
the
name
of
the
department.
I,
since
there's
several
sentences
changed
in
my
recommended
amendment.
I'd
be
happy
to
send
something
to
somebody
who
has
the
capacity
to
share
the
screen.
If
that
would
make
things
easier.
A
M
B
B
Okay,
the
first
is
to
delete
the
first
bullet
point,
which
says:
create
a
department
tentatively
name:
the
department
of
community
solutions
and
public
safety
led
by
a
superintendent
who
may
be
a
civilian
employee
to
oversee
various
public
safety
functions
in
the
city
and,
again,
my
reason
for
wanting
to
delete.
That
is
because
I
think
you
know
when
we
use
the
phrase
to
create
a
department.
M
A
A
I
As
including
a
sub
bullet
point
under
bullet
point,
two
that
includes
the
task
force
may
explore
changing
the
name
of
the
department.
I
think
she
had
also
indicated
having
the
task
force
explore
a
structure
under
under
which
the
chief
of
police
is
overseen
by
a
department
head
with
relevant
relevant
emergency
response
and
administrative
experience.
I
I
Included
under
a
a
longer
review,
I
think
that
there's
a
lot
of
implications
with
regards.
I
Be
subject
to
permissive
referendum,
there's
a
lot
of
implications
to
this
that
are
not
fully
understood.
As
recently
as
just
a
couple
days
ago,
we
had
council
members
who
didn't
understand
or
or
comprehend
what
that
might
be.
I
I
fully
recognize
that
this
act
in
and
of
itself
will
not
spur
the
the
referendum
or
charter
change
that
will
only
come
when
we
actually
lay
the
law
on
the
table.
However,
this
vote
will
definitely
get
those
gears
rolling,
and
I
think
it's
premature
to
do
so
without
fully
understanding
its
implications.
So
moving
that
bullet
point
as
a
sub
bullet
point
under
the
purview
of
the
task
force
will
give
us
the
time
to
fully
understand.
I
C
A
Thank
you,
so
you
know
hands
I'll,
just
call
on
myself
real
quickly
to
say
that
I've
I've
spoken
at
length
about
the
benefits
I
see,
of
the
opportunity
to
create
a
new
department
to
build
a
culture
policies.
Tactics
that
all
correspond
to
our
present
day
needs
to
build
a
21st
century
department
that
responds
to
our
21st
century
needs
and
the
opportunity
to
have
a
reset,
a
reset
in
law
enforcement
and
community
relations.
A
I
think,
is
all
really
important,
as
well
as
the
opportunity
to
hire
a
director
or
superintendent
with
a
law
enforcement
background,
or
without
that
could
be
an
excellent
leader
and
all
of
those
remain
true.
I
just
want
to
add
a
point
about
process,
which
is
that
I
think
the
next
five
months
or
the
next
year
or
two
years
of
process
will
be
made
exponentially
harder.
A
If
council
does
not
decide
on
a
direction
and
for
me
it's
like
a
road
trip
in
which
the
family
hops
in
the
car
and
has
not
yet
settled
if
they're
headed
to
eugene,
oregon
or
austin
texas,
if
you
have
not
yet
decided
which
way
you're
going,
then
all
of
the
folks
in
the
back
seat
of
the
car
will
keep
arguing
about.
No,
we
should
be
going
to
eugene.
No,
we
should
be
going
to
austin.
A
If
you
decide,
we
are
headed
to
eugene,
it
makes
it
easier
than
for
everybody
in
the
car
to
say.
Actually,
I
think
the
best
way
to
get
there
is
the
scenic
route.
Let's
make
sure
we
stop
and
see
this
location,
let's
make
sure
we
stop
and
see
that
one,
and
I
think
the
task
force
will
have
a
much
easier
time
if
the
direction
from
council
is
clear,
we
want
to
create
a
new
department.
A
These
are
the
broad
strokes
of
what
we
wanted
to
look
like.
Please
do
study
and
design
the
best
way
to
retain
all
of
the
current
officers
we
have
and
to
reset
the
relations
with
the
community
while
expanding
our
ability
to
do
unarmed
response.
I
think
it's
important
for
council
to
decide.
We
are
headed
this
direction
and
then
allow
the
task
force
to
do
the
work
of
figuring
out
the
best
way
to
get
there
yes
ducks
in
and
then
steve.
Then
george.
F
I
agree
with
everything
the
mayor
just
said.
I
think
we
should
set
a
clear
direction,
but
I've
thought
about
this
a
long
time
spoken
to
a
lot
of
people,
including
former
council
members,
who
are
quite
familiar
with
city
hall
and
I've
come
to
the
conclusion
that
this
is
the.
F
This
is
a
mechanism
through
which
we
can
achieve
the
cultural
and
accountability
changes
that
we
are
looking
for,
and
it's
all
right.
You
know
the
implications.
Cynthia
brought
up
are
actually
implications
that
I
want.
I
want
to
set
a
direction.
I
want
this
to
go
to
referendum.
Actually
I
think
it's
one
of
the
best
ways
to
get
complete
public
engagement.
I
look
forward
to
the
conversations
that
setting
a
clear
direction
will
engender.
L
Yeah
and
I'll
I'll
just
add
to
that
the
the
folks
I've
I've
talked
to
in
my
network,
the
black
and
brown
folks.
I've
reached
out
to
the
language
we're
using
here
is
really
really
important
for
number
one
and
proposal
number
one
especially,
is
really
important,
because
there
there's
a
hunger
for
a
very
obvious
reset
on
what
the
structure
of
public
safety
looks
like
in
ithaca
and
I've
had
conversations
explored
other
other
wording.
L
L
H
H
Ipd
would
would
that
alleviate
some
of
the
distrust
of
people
who
think
we're
getting
rid
of
the
police.
N
A
N
B
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
I
had
had
I
continued
with
my
list
of
changes.
I
would
have
suggested
that
the
next
bullet
point
I
mean
the
leading
bullet
point
would
be
to
create
a
task
force
to
study
the
structure
of
ipd
and
develop
a
data
driven
plan
to
reorganize
ipd
in
a
way
that
will
best
serve
the
public
safety
needs
of
the
city.
So
I
had
intended
to
make
clear
that
what
our
goal
is
in
this
task
force.
I
understand
what
the
mayor
and
steven
have
said.
B
I
still
hesitate
to
use
the
word,
create
a
department,
but
I'm
thinking
about
it,
but
I
do
want
to
I.
I
had
wanted
to
stress
using
creating
a
data
driven
plan
and
that
the
department
would
would
best
serve.
We
want
a
department
that
will
best
serve
the
public
safety
needs
of
the
city.
M
Oh,
so
I
think
I
don't
want
to
create
a
bunch
of
conflicting
amendments,
so
I'll
just
put
some
thoughts
out
there,
and
then
we
can
decide
what
might
work
the
best
to
me.
We
need
to
figure
out
how
to
retain
the
spirit
and
the
intent
of
recommendation
number
one,
but
make
sure
that
we're,
including
all
of
the
perspectives
of
the
people
that
will
have
to
be
involved
in
in
actually,
you
know
designing
and
implementing
recommendation
number
one.
So
I
don't
have
an
issue
with
create
a
department.
M
Maybe
perhaps
I
mean
one
of
the
things
that
I've
been
talking
about,
talk
to
some
extremely
wonderful,
dedicated
and
committed
police
officers.
That
have
also
said
that
what
is
current,
what
currently
exists
is
not
working
for
them
either.
It's
not
working
for
them.
It's
not
working
for
the
community,
so
we
have
said
repeatedly.
M
We
want
to
have
all
the
right
people
at
the
table
to
identify
what
isn't
working
and
figure
out
what
needs
to
be
changed.
We
need
more
tools
in
the
toolbox.
We
need
collaborative
people
that
have
different
roles
that
have
good
communication
and
good
communi.
You
know
good
collaboration
among
them
and
the
police
are
asking
for
that
as
well.
They
they
want
to
have
more
opportunities
to
interact
with
the
public,
more
ways
to
deal
with
the
different
needs.
You
know
that
that
emerge
so
when
we
say
create
a
department
to
me
that
implies.
M
M
Maybe
we
don't
need
to
define
it
as
much?
Maybe
we
don't
need
to
even
have
a
tentative
name
in
it.
Maybe
that's
what
is
let
the
group
that
is
going
to
do
the
hard
work
of
making
recommendations
for
what
this
new
way
moving
forward
is.
Let
them
come
up
with
a
name.
Let
them
see
which
way
see
which
way
they
go
and
have
them
make
some
recommendations
back
to
council.
So
so
you
could
leave
create
a
department
take
out
tentatively
named.
M
I
do
think
it's
important
to
set
a
direction
that
we
think
a
superintendent
that
has
oversight
over
all
of
these
various
functions
that
are
going
to
need
to
collaboratively
work
together.
I
think
retaining
that
as
a
direction
is
important.
I
think
we
do
need
to
set
that
sort
of
road
map
out
for
this
group,
but
I
would
be
comfortable
if
we
took
out
the
the
name
and
some
of
those
other
things
and
let
the
group
come
forward
with
what
they
think
is
the.
J
So
the
way
I
see
it,
it's
between
the
first
bullet
point
in
the
second
bullet
point:
we're
really
trying
to
accomplish
three
different
things.
One
is
the
first
is
creating
a
task
force,
that's
going
to
oversee
and
implement
the
change,
we're
creating
or
designing
a
new
department,
whatever
you
want
to
call
it,
and
we
want
the
option
for
a
civilian
director,
what
we're
not
committing
to
necessarily
is
the
name,
and
so
I
I
kind
of
agree
with
deb.
I
don't.
I
don't
think
that
we
necessarily
need
to
lock
ourselves
into
that.
J
In
the
bullet
points
I
mean
I
just
took
a
stab
at
trying
to
create
some
new
language,
so
that
maybe
says
all
this
a
little
more
concisely
and
what
I'm
proposing
is
the
language
create
a
task
force
to
design
a
new
department
which
may
be
led
by
a
civilian
director
to
manage
various
public
safety
functions
in
the
city,
and
I
think
that
gets
at
the
spirit
of
both
bullet
point.
One
and
bullet
point
two.
J
A
Thank
you.
So
I
would
you
could
make
an
amendment
now,
but
you'd
be
amending
donna's
amendment.
So
after
our
experience
of
20
minutes
ago
I
would,
I
would
suggest,
maybe
we
let
donna's
amendment
play
out
and
then
you
can
propose
yours.
Okay,
I
mean
you
can,
of
course
you
can
make
a
proposal
to
amend
donald's
amendment
now,
if
you'd
want.
B
Yeah
you're,
that's
kind
of
what
I
was
getting
at
when
I
had
wanted
to
delete
the
first
split
point
and
then
have
us.
The
new
lead
bullet
point
would
have
been
to
have
this
task
force
that
studies
and
develops
a
plan
to
reorganize
ipd.
So
what
is
your.
B
J
Designing
a
new
department
is
important
because
I
think
we
we
need
to
be
functional
and
clear
that
what
we're
talking
about
is
something
completely
new
right.
It's
a
it's
a
change
and
then
the
rest
of
it
was
create
a
task
force
to
design
a
new
department
which
may
be
led
by
a
civilian
director
to
manage
various
public
safety
functions
in
the
city.
B
Yeah,
that's
so
funny!
That's
what
that's
very
close
to
one
of
my
earlier
iterations
so
yeah.
I
I
would
accept
that,
but
you're
deleting
that
first
bullet
point
or
you're
combining
the
first
one.
B
A
A
A
I
think
it
will
cost
us
quite
a
lot
in
terms
of
community
buying
and
engagement,
because
the
message
it
sends
will
be:
what
did
the
council
decide
to?
Do
they
decided
to
create
a
task
force
to
study
the
idea
to
which
people
say
I've
been
down
that
road?
Before
I
mean
that's
the
number
one
piece
of
feedback
we
got,
it
wasn't
even
about
law
enforcement.
The
number
one
piece
of
feedback
we
got
is
they're
going
to
create
a
committee
they're
going
to
shelf
this.
A
It's
a
create
understanding.
Thank
you
so
much
department.
Thank
you,
never
had
to
mute
anybody
before
seth
and
and
and
and
I'm
not
gonna
reach
now
I'm
kidding
but.
A
I
had
my
gavel,
the
and
I
agree
I
think,
embedded
in
your
resolution
and
your
amendment
is
a
decision
that
says
to
create
a
new
department,
but
I
do
think
again.
The
next
five
months
of
study
and
design
will
be
made
all
the
easier
if
there's
a
way
to
reference.
The
council
resolution
that
says
council
wants
us
to
create
this
new
department,
they've
created
it
and
they
want
us
to
design
it.
A
I
think
so
I
think
there's
a
benefit
of
that
and
I
don't
think
there
is,
and
I
think
there
is
a
downside
to
writing
it.
The
way
that
you've
written
it,
which
is
it
might
send
a
counter
signal
to
members
of
the
public.
A
I
have
george,
then
laura.
Graham
then
steve.
H
Well,
I
want
to
say
that
deb
deb's
argument,
just
to
keep
create
as
opposed
to
restructure
is,
is
a
winning
argument.
I
think-
and
so
I
would
say,
let's
not
use
restructure,
I'm
not
going
to
get
in
between
about
the
current
language
and
seth's
language.
I
think
they're
they're,
both
fine,
I
I
will
say-
and
it's
okay-
that
this
can
be
kicked
down
the
road
a
little
bit,
but
I
will
say
that
department
of
public
safety
makes
a
lot
more
sense
than
department
of
community
solutions
and
public
safety.
E
E
That
being
said,
I
appreciate
seth's
language.
I
understand
the
point
being
made
that
there
has
to
be
a
clear
message
sent
to
the
public
to
ipd
that
there
is
real
change
and
I
I
one
of
the
things
I
appreciate
very
much
is
the
bullet
point
about
the
task
force.
The
task
force
will
submit
its
recommendations,
including
budget
estimates
naming
conventions
and
a
timetable
for
public
review
and
comment
to
common
council
by
september
1st
2021.
E
I
know
I've
been
involved
in
other
reimagining
efforts
during
my
career
at
cornell.
E
That
did
not
result
in
real
change
and
I
believe
that
we
are
all
committed
to
real
change
and
I
think,
having
that
a
deadline
for
a
re
report
from
a
task
force
by
september
1
is
very
helpful.
It
sends
a
clear
message
and
it
gives
us
forward
motion
thanks.
G
Thanks
cevante,
I
mean
I'm,
I'm
torn.
I
I
like
this
idea
about
combining
these
so
seth.
I
appreciate
your
wording
there
I
mean
the
task
force
we've
I
feel
like
we've,
given
it
direction
by
saying:
what's
the
task
force
for
it's
for
creating
this
new
department,
I
mean
that's
a
pretty
clear
statement.
I
understand.
G
Coming
up
front
and
saying
we're
creating
a
new
department,
but
we've
we've
said
that
by
combining
those,
I
think
with
all
these
kind
of
guidelines
in
terms
of
what
that,
what
that
task
force
will
consist
of,
and
also
when
it's
going
to
give
us
its
report
and
recommendation
for
what
we
can
do
in
terms
of
what
this
new
department
will
look
like.
So
we
we're
going
to
have
a
new
department.
The
question
is
what
it's
going
to
look
like,
and
I
think
many
of
us
have
we've.
G
Often
we've
spent
a
lot
of
time
recently
talking
with
people,
and
I
don't
know
what
the
best
path
forward
is.
But
I
certainly
would
look
for
something
that
has
the
best
chance
of
success,
especially
if
it
goes
to
referendum,
and
I
think,
the
more
people
we
can
include
in
the
shape
of
this
new
department
and
how
it's
structured.
I
think
it
will
be
more
convincing
in
a
referendum
that
we've
got
as
broader
support
as
we
can
possibly
achieve,
while
at
the
same
time
making
a
clear
sign
that
we
expect
significant
change.
G
So
I
do
like
the
idea
of
combining
this,
but
I
also
I'm
still
not
sure
that
that's
the
best
way
to
go
forward.
I
think
that
message
is
strong
enough
from
what
is
being
said
in
the
wording,
and
I
certainly
appreciate
the
input
that
we've
received
from
the
police
department
in
in
recent
meetings,
and
I
certainly
want
to
try
and
make
sure
that
we
get
as
much
input
from
people
to
shape
this
new
department
as
possible.
L
Yeah
I
wanted
to
majority,
have
said
about
debs
around
create.
I
think
this
committee,
that
comes
together
really
should
feel
like
they're
helping
create
something
new,
and
I
appreciate
steph's
idea
to
combine
the
first
two
bullet
points
and
I
do
think
it
sends
a
a
strong
sense
of
direction.
L
But
I
do
feel
pretty
strongly
that
we
need
to,
in
this
meeting
right
now,
plan
a
flag
and
determine
and
send
a
clear
message
to
the
public
that
we're
creating
something
new,
that
this
is
where
council
intends
to
go,
that.
The
expectation
is
that
the
task
force
will
meet
us
there
with
with
the
data
and
with
the
information
on
how
we're
going
to
structure
it.
L
I
think
that's
because
we
need
to
send
that
that
clear
message
to
the
community
and
we
need
to
we
need
to
make
sure
that
there's
no
misinterpretation,
that
we've
created
a
task
force.
We've
outsourced
that
work,
but
it's
also
because
by
planning
the
flag
today
and
misbeating
and
sending
that
message
to
the
public
today.
If
the
task
force
comes
together-
and
you
know
the
winds
change
and
we
decide
that
you
know
a
future
council
decides
that
the
task
force's
recommendation
that
they
don't
want
to
go
that
route
anymore.
L
I
think
they
should
have
to
vote
to
remove
the
department
from
the
city
in
the
future.
I
think
we
need
to
establish
it
now
so
that
the
stakes
are
so
the
stakes
are
are
still
high
in
the
future
when
we're
determining
whether
or
not
to
use
the
task
force's
model
to
to
structure
the
department.
I
think
that
should
be
on
the
on
a
council
in
the
future
that
they
have
to
remove
that
department
from
the
city.
L
J
I
mean
I
hear
what
people
are
saying
about
a
strong
signal
that
we're
creating
something
new
and
I
I'll
say
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
the
word
create
a
department.
I
think
that
I
think
that's
very
clear.
I
think
that's
what
we're
trying
to
do.
I
think
there's
also
enough
protections
elsewhere
in
this
resolution
to
assure
current
ipd
officers
that
their
jobs
are
not
threatened,
that
they
will
be
able
to
continue
if
they
want
to.
J
J
J
Yeah,
I
mean
really
all
the
the
only
change
that
really
all
we're
doing
here
is
leaving
open
the
flexibility
to
for
the
task
force
to
choose
a
name
for
the
new
department
and
also
the
title
of
the
director
of
the
new
department
right,
I'm
not
sure
it
should
necessarily
be
superintendent.
I'm
not
wedded
to
that.
I
think
you
know
having
some
flexibility
with
that
is.
Yeah
is
important.
A
I
like
that,
so
donna
I'm
going
to
ask
you,
because
this
is
still
technically
your
motion.
That
friend
really
amended
and
I
saw
your
hand
just
shoot
up.
B
Yeah,
I
do
not
consider
that
a
friendly
amendment
I
see
that
the
role
of
the
task
force
is
to
design
the
department,
the
job
of
the
chief
and,
if
there's
an
uber
chief,
that
person
and
of
the
mayor
is
to
implement
it's,
not
the
raw.
It's
not
the
job
of
the
task
force
to
implement
it's
a
job
as
a
task
force
to
design.
So
I
don't.
I
don't
accept
that
as
friendly
okay,.
A
All
right
seth:
could
you
hold
on
to
that
language,
then
in
case
it
becomes
useful
after
the
discussion
on
this
amendment
ends.
K
Yeah,
so
this
is
all
getting
a
little
muddier,
but
let
me
just
start
by
saying
I
I
do
want
to
make
sure
that
we
hold
on
to
the
idea
of
setting
a
pretty
strong
tone
in
the
creation
of
a
new
department.
K
I
do
think
that
what
seth
just
reproposed
has
merit-
and
perhaps
just
in
not
using
the
word,
implement
and
keeping
over
design,
yes
and-
and
so,
but
I
do
also
have
a
question
about.
Is
there?
Was
there
any
special
intent
in
using
the
label
superintendent
for
the
the
person
who
would
lead
this
new
designed
department,
newly
designed
department.
A
A
I
think
it
might
have
actually
flowed
from
some
of
our
discussions
that
we
had
with
the
pda
in
an
analogous
department,
which
is
the
department
of
public
works,
where
there
are
so
many
different
from
water
to
sewer
to
streets,
to
facilities
to
engineering.
It
is
impossible
to
find
one
superintendent.
That
is
a
subject
matter
expert
in
all
of
those
things.
Typically,
we
are
somebody
who's,
a
subject
matter
expert.
One
of
those
things
with
management
and
leadership
abilities
across
the
other
subdivisions
of
the
department
seemed
like
a
similar
model.
E
Thank
you.
The
point
that
rob
made
to
use
the
term
design
rather
than
implement
was
something
I
was
going
to
suggest
to.
I
wanted
to
come
back
to
one
of
deb's
points.
We
may
not
want
to
be
all
that
prescriptive
in
this
resolution.
E
A
Okay,
so
further
discussion
on
yes,
george.
H
I
can't
remember
the
language
that
seth
initially
proposed.
That's
part
of
the
resolution
that
we're
good
so.
J
A
A
B
I,
but
I
don't
understand
why,
and
I
think
now
we're
no
longer
having
a
substantive
debate
right
now.
I
don't
think,
but
I
don't
why
not
just
have
the
one
bullet
point
that
you
originally
suggested
create
a
task
force
to
design
a
new
department.
N
A
J
I
I
agree
with
that.
You
know
what
solante
and
steve
the
point
that
they
were
getting
at,
which
is
that
there's
there's
a
risk
that
this
will
be
perceived
as
watering
down
this
whole
effort.
Right
that
you
know
there
have
been
all
kinds
of
efforts
to
do:
police
reform
in
the
past
and
they
haven't
been
successful
and
there's
a
lot
of
people
looking
at
this,
and
they
want
to
know
that
we
are
serious
that
are
intentional
about
changing
the
department
and
I
think,
beginning
that
first
bullet
point
with
that:
stronger
language
create
a
new
department.
A
Intentions,
yes,
I
think
it's
graham
I
I
have
laura
written
down
here.
Lord
did
you
go
and
I
missed
it.
A
Okay,
graham.
G
Yeah
I'll
just
quickly
say
that
I
do
see
the
distinction
between
those
two
and,
if
I
can
summarize
it,
if
the
first
words
are
create
a
task
force,
a
lot
of
people
will
stop
reading
at
that
point,
and
so
I
think
that's,
there
is
an
important
distinction
and
I
said
I
see
the
point
and
I
really
support
the
separation
of
those
two.
G
Having
looked
through
that,
can
I
just
clarify
that
the
sub
bullets
in
the
task
force
description,
those
are
still
being
included
right,
I
mean
well,
the
intent
is
to
include
those.
A
A
Okay,
so
we
currently
have
an
amendment
on
the
floor,
stops
amendment
possibly
waiting
in
the
wings,
but
an
amendment
on
the
floor
right
now.
That
would
delete
the
first
bullet
point
and
and
lean
on
the
task
force.
B
A
Well,
I
won't
speak
for
other
people,
but
I'll
speak
for
myself
that
no
there's
no
way
of
knowing
everything
that
it
entails
and
even
after
you
could
create
the
best
task
force
in
the
world
and
give
them
20
years
to
design
it,
and
they
won't
be
able
to
design
a
department
that
fits
and
suits
every
need.
They
won't
be
able
to
predict
every
curveball
that
gets
thrown
and
the
implementation
the
administration
will
change
once
once
it's
enacted.
A
I
think
what
we've
got
to
decide
here
is:
do
we
want
to
move
in
this
direction
and
I
have
enough
information
I
do
to
make
that
decision
can.
A
I
have
in
the
the
100
pages
12
dependencies
that
made
up
the
report
of
the
reimagining
public
safety
recommendations
that
the
50
people
and
thousands
of
folks
contributed
to.
I
trust
that
work.
I
trust
that
process
and
I
believe
that
this
could
set
us
on
a
better
course.
I
think
there
is.
There
are
barriers
and
opportunities
on
both
sides
of
this.
I
think
if
we
do
not
create
a
new
department,
we
are
signing
up
for
a
lot
of
hardship.
B
B
I
don't
think
it's
fair
to
say
that
we're
asking
for
every
last
detail
it
might
take
20
years.
I
think
we
all
have
very
good
intentions,
and
I
think
we've
all
taken
this
very
carefully
so
thought
about
this
very
carefully
and
I
I
yeah,
I
think,
we're
using
different
words,
or
maybe
some
of
us
like
more
clarity
than
others.
A
And
I
would
never
imply
otherwise.
I
I've
seen
donna
the
way
you
work
on
these
questions
and
the
way
you
have
over
the
last
six
weeks
has
been
full
of
empathy
in
your
your
you
are
searching
for
a
solution
that
works
for
everybody.
I
know
that
and
I
know
you
care
about
everybody
in
this
community,
so
if
I
implied
otherwise
in
my
response,
I
I
regret
that
and
don't
mean
to-
and
I
think
it's
it.
I
I
The
way
we
normally
do
whenever
we
have
a
planning
process
and
we
go
through
public
input,
have
a
good
idea
of
the
direction
we
we
get
feedback.
We
fully
understand
the
overall
goals
of
what
we're
trying
to
achieve
before
we
accomplish
them
more
so
than
just
you
know.
Five
bullet
points
laid
out
to
us,
so
I
think
it's
entirely
reasonable
to
ask
for
a
a
a
task
force
to
work
within
the
public
realm
to
put
forward.
I
I
I
think
that
is
basically
an
open
and
transparent
and
accountable
process.
We
need
to
be
deliberate
here
and,
and
if
the,
if
the
worry
is,
is
well,
you
can
have
a
task
force
and
it
could
never
complete
its
work.
That's
a
management
issue,
that's
that's!
Not
because
the
the
design
of
a
task
force
itself
is
flawed,
it
takes
motivation
and-
and
it
takes
deliberate
action
to
say
we
want
this
task
force
to
meet
it.
It
works.
I
Its
work
needs
to
be
done
by
this
time,
and
this
is
what
we
expect
them
to
do.
So
I
think
it
is
entirely
reasonable
for
donna's
request
and
and
like
donna,
I
I
don't
like
the
illusion
or
the
indication
that
we're
not
taking
this
seriously,
and
we
don't
support
this
effort
because
we're
asking
for
a
task
force.
A
I
F
I
want
to
just
reiterate
a
few
reasons
why
I
think
this
structure
can
be
beneficial,
some
of
which
celebrate
his
has
reiterated
already,
some
of
which
I've
taken
from,
like
I
said,
the
multitude
of
people,
I've
spoken
to
the
past
few
weeks,
one.
B
F
The
signaling
that
it
does
to
the
community
that
a
changing
relationship
between
public
safety
people
and
the
community
is
coming
and
will
happen.
Another
is
recruitment
not
just
for
the
armed
and
unarmed
workers
and
we're,
I
think
we
all
want
a
more
diverse
and-
and
you
know
much
more
representative
body,
but
also
for
the
the
director
or
superintendent
or
leader
themselves,
who
I've
gotten
a
lot
of
inspiration
from
our
hiring
of
the
sustainability
director.
F
Who,
I
think,
is
a
is
an
amazing
hire,
and
it
I
assume
I
haven't
spoke
to
him
directly
about
this.
He
was
amazing
in
the
last
minute.
I
was
in
with
him
by
the
way,
just
because
of
his
his
breath
of
knowledge,
but
I
assumed
that
he
was
attracted
to
the
immense
challenge
that
his
position
you
know
entails,
and
people
are
attracted
to
these
high-profile
opportunities
to
make
a
real
difference
in
your
community,
which
I
gets
too.
F
Another
reason
why
I
support
this
is
that
the
culture
and
accountability
issues
that
we're
faced
with
are
management
issues
more
than
they
are
issues
of
a
specific
subject
matter
and
that
recruiting
form
management
skills,
certainly
informed
by
the
types
of
managing
that
they
will
do,
but
focus
much
more
on
the
management
side
of
things.
F
F
C
E
E
E
I
took
issue
with
using
the
word,
replace
the
department,
and
I
I
voiced
that
that
concern
I'm
really
listening
very
closely
to
what
each
of
my
colleagues
are
saying
tonight
and
I'm
more
than
willing
plenty
of
times
to
reconsider
my
own
position
on
various
matters
and
what
I'm
thinking
now
is
that
create
does
give
us
direction
kind
of
the
road
map
image
that
you
were
presenting.
Cevante
design
speaks
to
implementation
and,
as
I
said
an
hour
or
so
ago,
we're
not
necessarily
dealing
with
implementation
issues.
E
Tonight
implementation
is
going
to
take
much
more
work
going
into
the
future.
E
We
don't
know
information
about
budget,
we
don't
know
position,
descriptions,
we
don't
know
who
will
head
a
department,
but
I
I
certainly
understand
that
there's
a
different
message
perceived
by
the
public-
and
you
know
duckson's
point
another
group
that
needs
clarity
on
this
is
the
police
department.
We
are
right
now
losing
some
of
our
police
officers.
Now
there
may
be
some
in
the
public
who
are
pleased
by
that.
E
I'm
not
necessarily
pleased
by
that,
and
so
I
think
clarity,
clear
direction
will
be
helpful
to
our
community
as
a
whole,
and
that
includes
members
of
the
community
who
participated
in
the
interviews.
A
I'm
sensing
we're
nearing
a
vote
on
the
amendment
on
the
floor.
Donna's
amendment.
Are
we
ready
to
vote.
D
H
I
C
I
B
A
Those
opposed
that
amendment
fails
six
to
four
I'll
now
ask
seth
your
proposed
amendment
that
you
just
emailed
if
you'd
like
to
move
that
now
this
would
be
a
good
time
and
then
yeah
we'll
see
if
there's
a
second.
This.
J
A
Is
there
a
second
seconded
by
rob
discussion.
A
A
I
put
the
tentative
name
in
the
resolution
because
when
I
wrote
it
without
the
resolution,
it
just
said
the
department
create
a
department
and
then
that
seemed
ominous
and
mysterious
and
seemed
unwieldy
to
use
for
six
months
as
this
task
force
is
doing
their
work.
So
I
think
it's
okay
stuff
what
you
proposed
and
removing
the
name,
I
think,
is
okay.
I
think
we
may
just
ask
the
task
force
right
away
to
pick
a
tentative
name
so
that
we
know
what
they're
talking
about
when.
D
A
Say
you
know
is
george's
suggestion
was
department
of
public
safety
to
make
it
clearer,
but
I
I
support
this
amendment.
That's
what
I'm
trying
to
say.
Dachshund.
F
I
don't
support
this,
and
I
know
this
sounds
nick
picky,
but
again
it
it
creates
unnecessary
vegas
I
mean
the
name
can
always
be
changed.
I
actually.
I
I
like
george's
public
department,
public
safety.
I
propose
that
down
the
line
if
he
doesn't
himself
but
keeping
these
titles
in
place,
which
can
always
change,
because
we
will
need
to
refine
this
money
by
the
time
it
makes
it
to
when
it
hits
the
ballot
as
a
referendum.
F
H
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Laura.
E
J
K
A
So
just
the
first
bullet
point:
not
the
sub
bullet
points
are
on
the
on
the
table.
Right
now,.
A
And
that
carries
unanimously.
Thank
you
so
further
amendments.
H
Everybody
knows
this
is
coming
in
the
bullet
point
that
says
currently
dc
sps
will
retain
a
unit
of
armed
uniformed,
first
responders,
who
shall
qualify,
etc,
etc.
I
will
move
that
we
change
that
to
department
of
public
safety
will
retain
a
unit
of
armed
uniformed
police
officers.
H
I
can't
read
it
so,
no
just
the
part
that
says
first
responders
who
qualify.
I
just
soon
call
a
duck
a
duck
and
I
will
say
that.
No,
so
then
it
continues
on
as
written
I'd
say.
H
I
will
say
that
our
police
officers
feel
pretty
strongly
about
this.
This
is
their
profession.
They
spent
a
lot
of
time.
A
A
The
the
sheriffs
are
called
sheriffs,
the
troopers
are
called
troopers,
the
police
are
called
police
and
whatever
a
local
jurisdiction
decides
to
call
the
folks
who
carry
out
these
services.
A
So
yes,
it
was
second
by
graham,
so
we
were
into
discussion
any
further
discussion.
K
Yeah
just
clarification
so
you'd
you'd
be
I'm
sorry,
george,
it
was
just
removing
the
reference
to
armed
uniformed
first
responders
and
replacing
it
with
police.
Sorry
clarify
that
for
me.
K
Rest
read,
it
says:
well,
it
says
uniformed
first
responders
who
shall
qualify
in
all
respects
under
new
york
state
law
as
police
officers
with
said
unit,
therefore
led
by
someone
who
shall
qualify.
H
I
I
Donna
had
men
language
that
I
thought
was
that
read
nicely.
The
department
shall
retain
a
unit
whose
members
shall
qualify
in
all
respects
under
new
york.
State
law,
as
police
officers
with
said
unit,
therefore
led
by
someone
who
shall
qualify
in
all
respects
under
new
york.
State
law
as
a
chief
of
police.
I
A
Yeah,
I
think,
that's
a,
I
think,
that's
a
fine
amendment.
Any
further
discussion.
A
Those
opposed,
and
that
carries
nine
to
one
further.
I
meant
yes,
cynthia.
I
Before
we
continue,
I
realize
that
we
had
a
conversation
online
that
reflects
on
a
previous
vote.
We
just
took.
I
had
asked
ari
if
any
change
to
the
department
name
in
terms
of
police
officers
would
have
any
negative
impact
on
the
existing
agreement
or
representation
of
the
pba,
and
I
was
wondering
if
you
could
answer
that
question.
D
I
So
the
agreement
will
stand
all
rights
and
obligations
under
the
agreement
will
continue.
Even
if
the
the
name
of
the
department
changes.
I
J
So
I
made
this
comment
in
previous
meetings,
but
I
do
have
some
concerns
with
the
unarmed
portion
of
the
response
being
housed
within
the
new
department.
I
mean
I
I'm
not
totally
against
it,
but
I
you
know,
I
think
it
would
be
nice
to
have
the
flexibility
to
explore
other
models,
and
so
I
was
a
little
bit
uncomfortable
with
the
department
will
include
a
unit
of
unarmed
first
responders
and
I'm
not
really
sure
I
don't
have
any
language
at
the
top.
J
J
A
Yeah
yeah,
I
think
it's
a
fair
point.
I
mean
the
the
joint
recommendation
for
the
alternative
response,
which
is
for
the
county
to
create
an
alternative
response
that
would
also
help
out
in
the
city
is
one
I
think
to
keep
an
eye
on.
I
don't
know
if,
if,
if
you
I
mean
without
the
language
tonight,
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
craft
something
to
add
in
this
result
to
make
clear
that
there
is
a
benefit
to
having
an
outside
agency.
That
does
this
response.
A
I
think
it's.
Okay,
though
I
would
offer
that
I
think
it's
okay
as
it's
written,
because
the
county
recommendation
to
pursue
alternative
response
should
have
us
covered
and
in
the
implementation
and
working
with
the
task
force.
We
can
suss
that
out
more,
but,
of
course,
if
you
want
to
make
up
an
amendment.
A
E
Well,
I
have
two
comments.
First,
in
response
to
seth,
I've
had
those
same
questions,
and
that
is
one
of
the
reasons.
I'm
really
pleased
that
there
will
be
a
task
force
looking
at
this,
because
when
I
first
read
unarmed
unit,
I
didn't
know
if
we
should
be
interpreting
that
as
more
community
outreach
workers,
which
I
think
many
of
us
would
like
to
see
more.
E
But
that
is
a
service
provided
through
the
county
or
if
it
refers
to
community
service
officers
such
as
the
people
who
are
giving
parking
tickets
who
are
helping
on
the
commons
so
yeah.
I
think
further
definition
of
that
and
who
you
know,
is
it
a
non-profit
working
with
the
unarmed
officers,
I'm
really
eager
to
get
some
clarification
on
that.
So
I
just
I
wanted
to
respond
to
to
seth.
On
that
point,
I
did
want
to
make
one
more
amendment
if
that's
okay
under
the
second
resolved.
E
E
Our
police
department
has
expressed
interest
in
more
community
outreach.
It
is
in
the
county
resolution.
E
I
don't
know
if
people
would
have
interest
in
adding
it
to
one
of
as
one
of
the
joint
recommendations
that
we
partner
with
the
county
on
or
adding
it
as
a
city,
specific
recommendation
or
people
aren't
interested
in
it
at
all.
So
I'm
putting
it
out
there
for
comment.
A
C
K
Yeah,
I
guess
I'll
I'll
echo
that
I
think
it's
important
to
to
highlight
that
I
I
guess
it's
just
a
question
of
clarity.
Around
earlier
we
were
suffering
some
angst
over
doing
something
that
looked
different
from
the
county's
resolution,
so
this
would
this
would
so
I
don't
know
if
it's
best
to
just
add
it
as
a
county
joint
recommendation
that
wouldn't
align
with
theirs
or
if
we
handle
it
like
they
did
with
an
additional
resolve.
E
Well,
I
was
intending
it
to
be
included
as
one
of
the
joint
recommendations,
but
I
take
rob's
point
so
if
it
is
cleaner
or
more
appropriate
to
list
it
as
a
city
recommendation
that
mirrors
what
the
county's
recommendation
is,
then
I
think
that's
fine.
I
Well,
I'm
sorry
so
in
the
county
resolution
it
is
under
a
it
does,
it
does
say
county
only,
but
it
is
under
the
city
county
undertaking.
A
That
sounds
right,
jason
and
deanna
are
here,
do
you
yeah
jason?
Could
you
help
us
get
clear.
N
Sure
I'd
be
happy
to
add.
The
legislature
talked
about
this
in
a
similar
context,
not
being
able
to
commit
the
city
to
something
that
wasn't
proposed.
So
I
would
say
that
if
you
adopted
it
as
a
city
only
recommendation
or
a
city
and
county
one,
it
would
be
consistent
and
would
be
viewed
as
a
collaborative
initiative.
N
I
think
because
this
because
the
legislature
voted
first,
they
didn't
have
the
ability
to
commit
the
city
since
you're
now
reacting
to
that,
if
you
adopt
it
with
both
or
just
the
city,
it's
the
same.
It
would
be
the
same.
So
I
think
I
think
it
would
be
accepted
as
a
collaborative
initiative.
I
Yeah,
thank
you.
So
sorry,.
I
Rob's
point
listing
it
under
the
second
resolved,
I
think,
would
be
fine
as
a
bullet
point.
There.
E
E
I
E
I
I
A
A
All
those
in
favor
those
opposed
that
carries
seven
two
three
further
discussion
or.
C
I
have
just
some
housekeeping
amendments
also
to
be
consistent
with
the
county
legislature.
They
added
in
the
first,
whereas.
I
Whereas
on
june
12
2020
new
york
state
governor
andrew
cuomo,
so
they
added
the
date
of
the
executive
order,
as
well
as
the
name
of
the
governor
in
case
that
might
change.
Okay,.
I
They
also
changed
one
two
three
four.
Well,
I
don't
really
care
about
that.
One
personally,
the
the
one
I
would
recommend,
which
is
something
that
I
had
added
previously,
is
that
when
we
refer
to
the
draft
report,
we
add
the
date
of
the
draft
report
so
that
the
full
name
be
used.
I
Public
safety,
reimagined
recommendations
report
following
a
collaborative
effort
between
the
city
of
ithaca
and
tompkins
county
new
york,
dated
february
18
2021,
and
the
reason
that
I
think
this
is
important
is
because
we
have
been
told
repeatedly
that
this
is
going
to
be
a
living
document.
This
document
will
go
through
various
revisions,
and
so
since
we
are
accepting
the
document
and
basing
our
recommendations
on
this
document
being
clear
about
what
version
of
the
document
I
think
is
going
to
be
important,
which
is
why
I
would
add
the
name
february,
18
2021.,.
A
Thank
you
they're.
Second,
to
those
amendments.
It's
largely
clerical
in
nature,
centered
by
dachshund,
any
discussion,
all
those
in
favor.
D
D
G
So
I
wanted
to
come
back
to
the
point
that
seth
raised
about
the
concerns
about
unarmed
first
responders.
In
the
unit
I
mean,
I
think,
that
the
wording
there
is
general
enough
that
it
would.
You
know
it
wouldn't
necessarily
refer
to
community
outreach
workers.
It
could
be
the
the
csos,
and
I
know
in
discussions
I've
had
with
current
serving
ipd
officers
and
the
pba.
G
They
certainly
see
a
benefit
to
having
different
branches
within
this
department,
and
I
I
look
to
the
task
force
to
I
mean
I
do
see
some
benefits
in
having
these
within
the
same
department
under
some
director.
That
really
has
an
appreciation
of
the
different
branches
and
the
importance
of
the
different
branches
for
public
safety,
and
I
think
there
are
benefits
to
that.
G
How
that
works
in
practice,
of
course,
is
something
that's
going
to
not
only
be
challenging,
but
take
a
lot
lot
of
time
to
implement,
but
I
do
see
it
as
a
way
of
really
starting
to
achieve
the
goal
of
changing
the
culture
within
the
police,
department
and
public
safety
in
general
and
to
have
these
different
branches
really
working
closely
together.
A
Thank
you
rob.
K
Yeah,
I
tend
to
agree
with
with
graham
I
I
and
you
know
I
understand
the
concern,
because
I
think
there
have
been
several
of
us
tonight
who
have
expressed
an
interest
in
making
sure
that
we
retain.
K
We
have
that
we
we're
creating
a
structure
that
really
accommodates
some
innovative
thinking
around
this
and
where
these,
these
different
activities
come
from,
may
not
be
seen
in
the
same
way
as
a
standard
unit
of
people
who
are
inside
one
department,
so
whether
it's
leveraging
a
non-profit
organization
as
partners
or
a
county
in
some
other
way.
I
think
it's
really
important
to
have
that
flexibility.
K
So
I'm
not
I'm
not
overwhelmingly
troubled
by
the
language
but
to
seth's
point.
If,
if
there's
some
way
to
soften
this,
I
don't
know
how
important
it
is
to
continue
to
use
the
word
unit
as
a
way
or
the
word
include
so
that
if
it
said
something
like
you
know,
the
department
would
incorporate
unarmed
first
responders.
K
J
I
was
just
going
to
say
I
mean
yeah,
I'm
just
you
know,
hearing
graham
and
rob
I
mean
I
guess
I'm
not
that
troubled
either,
just
as
long
as
we
understand
that,
there's
enough
flexibility
that
we
can
come
up
with
several
different
possible
models
out
of
this
recommendation,
that's
really
what
I'm
getting
at,
and
I
guess
you
know
if
looking
at
it
include,
can
mean
a
lot
of
different
things.
Yeah.
M
M
D
A
A
So
yeah
any
other
amendments.
Cynthia.
I
In
the
second
to
last
bullet
point
for
consistency
with
seth's
language,
I
would
like
to
change.
The
department
may
be
overseen
by
a
civilian
director
with
relevant
emergency
response
and
administrative
experience
who
can
lead
the
department
toward
the
goals
of
reimagining
of
the
reimagining
public
safety
plan.
A
Second
background:
any
discussion.
B
I
I
don't
know
if
this
is.
I
don't
like
the
word
civilian,
because
to
me
the
word
civilian:
is
anybody
who's
not
in
the
military?
I
think
police
officers
use
it
differently.
B
So
I
think
what
we're
saying
is
that
somebody
who's
not
currently
an
active
police
officer
right,
could
be
the
chief
there's,
the
uber
chief.
A
C
A
It
is
a
considered,
a
civilian
director,
they
might
be
law
enforcement
officers,
but
they
may
not
be
so
that's
why
you'll
see
other
places
yeah
led
by
a
director
who
need
not
be
a
police
officer.
N
I
Well
and
if
it
helps
in
in
the
actual
new
york
state
opinion,
it
actually
says
with
regards
to
police
chiefs,
it
says
legislation
enables
individuals
skilled
as
administrators
to
serve
as
civilian
heads
and
supervisors
of
police
departments.
So
the
attorney
general's
office
also
refers
to
them,
as
civilians.
H
Yeah
as
as
donna's
fellow
service
brat,
I
agree
that
if,
if
we're
trying
to
demilitarize
the
image
of
of
the
police
a
military
term,
so
if
we
can
do
it
without
that
word,
I
would
prefer
that.
A
Yeah
I'll
just
point
out
that
it's
embedded
in
more
than
just
this
resolution,
I
mean
it's
embedded
into
the
culture
of
policing
in
which
there's
police
and
then
there's
civilians.
So
it's
part
it
would
be
part
of
the
broader
project
to
accomplish
that
the
demilitarization
shift
say
dance
suggested
non-uniform.
I
will
just
say:
I'm
fine.
If
this
was
this
resolution
seems
fine
either
way.
I
will
just
repeat
that
I
think
whatever
names
are
decided
by
council
tonight
or
all
fungible
and
can
be
set
and
reset
by
the
task
force
and
counseling
in
the
future.
I
Well,
we've
we've
already
changed
the
previous
bullet
above
so
this
would
be
consistent.
H
A
And
that
carries
sorry.
This
post.
D
So
just
wanted
to
make
sure
when
the
department
name
an
hour
or
so
ago
would
change
the
department
of
public
safety.
I
I
know
that
donna
said
and
we'll
change
all
the
other
references
throughout
the
resolution,
and
then
I
thought
there
was
a
decision
not
to
actually
vote
on
that
so
later
in
the
meeting
they'll
maybe
get
misunderstood.
A
L
Yeah
all
references
to
dcps
dc
sps
to
dps.
J
J
I
realized
it
was
a
really
long
process
and
there
was
multiple
different
stakeholders
that
came
together,
and
I
also
wanted
to
give
a
shout
out-
and
I
you
know
the
me
of
six
months
ago-
would
have
been
very
surprised
that
I'm
saying
this,
but
I
want
to
give
a
shout
out
to
the
pba,
because
especially
the
current
pba
leadership,
because
I
think
that
they've
really
struck
a
great
tone
throughout
this
process
and
interacting
with
council,
and
I
think
I've
shown
a
lot
of
leadership
and
really
listening
to
to
our
concerns.
J
You
know
I.
I
know
that
conversations
I've
had
with
the
current
leaders
of
the
pba,
I'm
really
getting
the
sense
honestly,
maybe
for
the
first
time
that
there
are
police
officers
in
this
community
that
are
really
listening.
That
aren't
immediately
jumping
to
defensiveness.
H
A
second
what
chef
said
it:
it
hasn't
been
easy
for
anybody,
including
the
police,
and
we
know
how
much
spoken
to
us
genuinely
about
real
change
and
I'd
also
like
to,
in
addition
to
all
the
people
that
worked
on
these
recommendations.
I'd
like
to
thank
the
members
of
council
and
the
mayor
for
we've
been
doing.
We've
been
working
really
hard
too.
So
I
would
like
to
point
that
out.
A
Thank
you
yes,
cynthia
and
graham.
I
I
also
want
to
echo
seth's
comments,
as
well
as
express
my
gratitude
to
all
the
people
who
were
involved
in
this
process
from
those
who
are
who
were
on
leading
the
charge,
coordinating
the
effort
working
on
working
groups
participating
in
in
the
community
outreach
and
and
focus
group
process.
I
This
is
a
tremendous
undertaking
and
and
a
wonderful
effort
and
a
much
needed
effort,
and
I'm
very
grateful
like
seth.
I
I
was
very.
I
was
very
skeptical
and
and
definitely
was
very
reluctant
in
terms
of
engaging
with
many
officers
because
of
my
history
with
them
and-
and
this
has
been
in
a
really
healthy
process
and
I've
definitely
come
to.
I
Recognize
that
that
we
as
a
community,
need
to
go
through
this
process
of
reconciliation
of
of
listening
to
each
other.
The
members
of
the
pba
have
been
part
and
parcel
committed
to
working
with
all
members
of
council
to
to
navigate
through
this,
and,
and
I
appreciate
that
participation,
I
want
to
clarify
the
the
record
to
a
certain
extent.
I
They
were
reluctant
to
do
so.
I
don't
think
that
they
would
have
done
it
without
my
explicit
request
and
and
pretty
much
demand
to
see
that
commitment
from
them.
So
for
those
who
have
come
forward
and
said,
look
the
pba
is
trying
to
steer
this
process
they've
put
forward
a
draft
resolution.
I
A
Thank
you
graham
and
then.
G
Thank
you,
servant
and
I'll
echo
my
appreciation
in
conversations.
I've
had
with
the
pba
and
police
officers
we're
taking
a
pause
here.
The
work
really
just
starts.
I
mean
this
is
a
major
step
in
this
process,
but
obviously
we've
got
to
stay
engaged
and
I
know
I
just
want
to
appreciate
conversations
I've
had
with
my
colleagues
on
council.
This
has
been
one
of
the
most
substantive
issues
we've
had
to
face
and
it
has
a
long-term
implication.
G
I'm
hoping
that
the
various
groups
that
have
come
together
to
give
us
this
input
will
continue
to
stay
engaged
because
I
think
it
really
is
the
start
of
a
longer
term
project,
and
I
also
want
to
also
give
a
shout
out
to
the
members
of
the
public
that
wrote
specific
individual
letters
to
us.
Some
of
those
were
incredibly
thoughtful
from
people,
not
just
in
ithaca,
but
people
that
work
in
ithaca
people
that
have
connections
here.
We
read
all
of
the
ones
that
were
individually
addressed
to
us
and
written
it's.
G
I
speak
for
myself,
but
I
think
my
colleagues
did
as
well
and
it
was
really
helpful
to
have
those
thoughtful
comments
in
discussing
this
and
the
implications
and
trying
to
come
up
with
a
path
that
we
think
will
have
the
best
chance
of
success.
I
know
we'll
probably
disappoint
many
people,
but
we'll
also,
I
think
my
sense
is
that
we've
come
up
with
a
really
good
approach
to
move.
B
G
Critical
piece
of
legislation
and
and
plan
forward,
so
I
want
to
thank
my
colleagues
and
the
public
for
the
input
they've
provided.
Thank
you.
B
I've
learned
a
lot
through
this
experience
and
it's
all
been
really
valuable.
I
met
people
I
hadn't
known
before
had
the
opportunity
to
talk
with
lots
of
ipd
officers
learned
so
much
by
reading
the
report
that
was
researched
and
prepared
thoughtfully
by
so
many
volunteers.
B
I
think
we
have,
and
we've
we've
discussed
this,
I
think
very
thoughtfully.
Many
much
of
this
discussion
has
to
be
nuanced
and
I
think
it's
going
to
be
a
difficult
for.
B
Members
of
the
public
to
read
the
97-page
report
and
probably
even
to
read
this
resolution,
and
I
think
we
all
have
to
resist
the
urge
to
play
to
sound
bites,
and
I
think
we
all
have
to
push
the
message
that
this
is
nuanced
and
complicated
and
requires
persistent,
careful
thinking.
B
There's
any
been
any
number
of
newspaper
articles
magazine,
articles
and
radio
reports
that
say
things
about
us
that
are
not
true,
namely
that
we're
abolishing
the
police.
B
I
think
we
all
bear
a
responsibility
to
be
to
to
promote
to
the
public
that
this
is
that's,
that's
not
what
we're
doing
and
that
our
intentions
likely
cannot
be
summarized
too
much
in
two
sentences.
So
I
hope
that
we're
all
very
careful
about
what
we
say
regarding
our
plan.
D
K
Yeah
thanks
I'll,
also
echo
the
sentiments
of
my
colleagues
and
thank
everyone
for
all
this
really
hard
work,
and
especially
thanks
to
those
who
did
some
real
heavy
lifting
in
here.
So
you
know
who
you
are
and
thank
you
for
that,
and
also
because
it
really
opened
up
and
and
allowed
us
to
have
many
great
dialogues,
both
within
council
with
others,
and
I
hope
that
that
all
can
continue.
K
Those
dialogues
are
going
to
be
really
important.
I
want
to
I
want
to
put
an
extra
spotlight
and
highlight
the
collaboration
that
happened
here.
We
don't
see
this
very
often,
but
the
city
and
the
county
coming
together
and
working
really
hard
on
this.
I
hope,
becomes
a
model
for
many
other
initiatives
in
the
future,
and
I-
and
I
also
want
to
highlight
the
fact
that
it
wasn't
just
the
city
and
the
county,
but
also
members
of
the
public
who
really
stepped
up.
K
A
K
L
I
don't
want
to
repeat
a
lot
of
what's
what's
been
said
so
far,
but
I
I
absolutely
feel
a
lot
of
the
same
sentiment
and
what
I
do
want
to
add
is
just
that
in
the
survey
results
and
in
the
conversations
a
lot
of
us
have
had
and
a
lot
of
what
we've
heard
from
from
police
has
been
reflected
in
a
lot
of
what
we've
heard
from
police
about
the
eagerness
to
build
relationships
and
build
trust
with
the
community
and
and
have
a
conversation
about
how
to
how
to
coexist
together
and
how
to
work
together
to
build
a
a
great
community.
L
Like
that's
requited,
on
the
other
side,
they're
consistently
in
conversations,
I've
heard,
there's
been
empathy
and
there's
been
a
desire
to
to
have
that
connection
with
police
and
and
be
partners
in
this
community,
and
I
hope
I
go
back
to
deb's
language
around
create.
I
hope
that
this
is
an
opportunity
to
really
create
a
structure
where
that
trust
can
be
built
and
that
conversation
towards
a
better
society
can
can
continue.
L
But
I
do,
I
do
think
it's
important
the
next
steps.
The
next
conversations
this
task
force
that
it's
used
as
an
opportunity
to
really
bridge
that
trust
and
that
the
police
that
members
of
the
community
are
full
participants,
really
throwing
their
weight
behind
this
thing
to
to
make
it
everything
we
hope
it
can
be.
It's
gonna,
take
it's
gonna,
take
a
lot
of
faith
and
it's
gonna
take
an
act
of
faith
on
on
all
parts
to
make
sure
that
happens.
M
Also
echo
what
others
have
said,
but
I
think
I
I
have
to
say
something
else.
That's
a
little
bit
different.
M
Any
of
you
that
watched
any
bit
of
any
news
today
saw
some
pretty
new,
some
new
footage,
if
you
already
traumatized
by
that,
before
what
we
saw
today,
it's
just
gonna
deepen
that
trauma
for
people
that
see
that
we
need
to
remember
the
impetus
for
why
we're
having
this
discussion.
Why
we're
having
these
conversations
and
why
the
governor
pushed
our
municipalities
to
do
the
hard
work
of
addressing
this
issue
and
moving
the
needle
on
this
issue?
M
We
have
to
change
the
narrative
around
this,
and
I
have
also
heard
our
police
officers
say
we
have
to
change
the
narrative
around
this.
They
have
expressed
a
a
genuine
concern
for
moving
forward
through
healing.
I
I
think
we
do
have
an
opportunity
here
this.
This
is
an
investment
in
public
safety.
In
all
regards
the
the
purpose
that
we're
doing
this
is
to
build
a
better
community,
but
not
only
build
a
better
community
but
make
sure
that
people
who
expressed.
M
Sentiments
that
they
didn't
feel
like
human
beings,
that
what
we
do
is
gonna
actually
do
something
to
impact
that.
So
this
is
a
baby
step
and
it's
a
first
step
and
it's
a
step
in
the
good
direction,
and
it
does
give
me
hope
that
we
we
have
people
that
are
willing
to
come
to
the
table
and
do
the
hard
work
and
build
this
together.
M
But
the
purpose
of
this
was
to
make
sure
that
the
people
who
don't
normally
have
a
seat
at
the
table
have
a
seat
at
the
table
now.
So
thank
you.
A
Yeah,
I
want
to
second
that
the
an
unbelievable
amount
of
courage
it
takes
for
the
most
formal
people
in
a
society
to
share
their
experience
to
their
elected
officials
to
come
forward
and
to
volunteer
not
only
their
their
experiences,
but
what
they
think
can
make
it
better,
and
they
did
that,
and
this
was
scary.
I
mean
I'll
love
you
with
all
of
you
here
on
council.
I
haven't
talked
to
you
about
it,
but
the
largest
police
associations
in
the
country
have
been
sharing
my
image
on
social
media.
A
Targeting
me
specifically
a
scary
thing
for
somebody
who
signed
up
for
that.
It
terrified
them
for
the
50
plus
members
of
the
committee
and
the
hundreds
of
italians
in
extremely
vulnerable
places,
who
have
never
signed
up
for
such
a
thing
and
were
very
reluctant
to
come
forward
and
very
reluctant
to
talk
about
their
ways
in
which
they
could
see
us
actually
improving
public
safety.
Here.
I
think
that
this
is
a
step
in
the
right
direction,
but
it's
only
one
step.
A
But
I
I
don't
want
to-
I
don't
want
to
lose
sight
of
all
of
those
those
people,
because
I
do
the
last
month
and
a
half
they.
They
certainly
have
been
overwhelmed
by
the
the
serious
and
swift
and
large
amount
of
blowback
brought
to
bear
by
the
police
associations
and
they're
I'm
hearing
from
folks
who
are
very
hesitant
to
continue
working
in
this
process.
So
I
hope
that
we
can
lift
them
up
too.
A
Thank
you,
dominic
deanna
jason.
The
county
has
been
just
an
invaluable
partner
in
this
experience,
working
together.
Let's,
let's
do
it
again,
sometime
like
starting
tomorrow
tomorrow,
yes,
sean
and
belisa.
Thank
you
so
much.
A
A
I
there
are
no
words
one
day
when
they
write
the
book
of
of
how
this
happened.
It'll
be
clear,
shelley
how
ready
you
were
to
this
effort
and
dc
julie
and
chief
mayor
really
appreciate
all
of
your
input,
this
this
entire
way
and
your
service
and
all
of
the
working
groups
that
helped
design
this.
We
have
earned
ourselves
the
right
to
more
work,
which
starts
right
now.