►
Description
Minneapolis Public Safety, Civil Rights & Emergency Management Committee Meeting
A
My
name
is
Wang
Yang
I'm,
the
chair
of
this
committee
with
me
today,
our
council
members
Palmisano
Gordon
Quincy
in
Council
President
Johnson.
We
are
a
quorum
of
this
committee
and
we
can
conduct
this
meeting.
This
committee
is
a
business
I
believe
council,
member
Reich
will
be
joining
us
shortly,
although
I'm
not
quite
sure
today
is
September
27th
and
today
we
have
six
items
on
our
agenda.
The
first
five
items
are
consent
items,
and
the
sixth
item
is
a
discussion
item
item
number.
A
One
consent
is
that
2018
contract
amendments
with
him
and
county
to
provide
detox
van
services
item
number
two:
is
the
contract
amendment
with
Minnesota
Crisis,
Intervention,
Team,
Officers
Association
item
number:
three:
is
a
2017
emergency
management
performance
grant,
providing
federal
funds
to
States
to
assist
in
preparing
for
all
hazard
incidents?
Item
number:
four:
is
a
2017
urban
area
security
initiative
grant
to
address
the
unique
risks
Riven
and
capabilities
based
planning
in
needs
of
high
threat,
high-density
urban
areas
in
item
number?
A
Anyone
wouldn't
pull
anything
off
for
discussion
right,
seeing
none
all
those
in
approval
of
all
five
items,
please
say
aye
aye,
any
opposed.
Okay
motion
carries
all
right.
The
the
sixth
item
is
a
discussion
item
and
it's
probably
when
all
the
cameras
here
for
its
the
Minneapolis
Police
Department
mobile,
embody
worn
video
recording
equipment,
programs
audits,
and
this
is
an
issue
that
came
up
you
know
several
months
ago,
but
you
know
this
is
kind
of
in
line
with
what
this
company's
supposed
to
be
doing
anyway.
A
Just
with
regards
to
reviewing
what's
been
happening
with
the
body,
1
cameras
and
so
with
us
today
is
our
city
auditor,
and
this
is
a
sandy
enforce
it
iha
turbid
Carol.
Please
come
on
up
and
introduce
yourself
and
don't
let
me
butcher
your
name
and
you're
standing
in
for
a
bullet
at
Seoul,
yep,
yep
yeah.
A
B
The
objectives
of
the
audit
were
to
determine
whether
the
cameras
and
the
programs
were
being
used
and
executed
in
accordance
with
state
statutes
and
with
department
policies.
We
also
looked
at
the
adequacy
of
how
things
are
designed,
administered
and
monitored.
The
scope
of
the
audit
was
the
Minnesota
State
statute,
legislative
requirements.
We
reviewed
80
general
controls
and
we
of
course
reviewed
general
usage
and
the
body
worn
camera
policy.
B
We're
covering
the
material
in
five
pieces.
The
first
is
ms-dos
state
statutes.
Then
a
few
comments
on
equipment
and
software
policy
training,
the
usage
of
this
equipment
and
opposite
so
for
Minnesota
state
statutes.
The
Minnesota
statute
was
broken
down
to
56,
specific
components
that
were
testable
of
those
16
were
noted,
as
non-compliant
mostly
included
items
that
the
state
statute
says
a
body.
One
camera
policy
must
include
that
our
policy
did
not.
This
doesn't
mean
we
weren't
doing
these
things.
B
B
B
We
looked
at
how
the
equipment
was
designed
selected
and
the
software
in
general.
The
equipment
is
adequate
for
a
typical
ten-hour
shift
and
does
a
good
job
protecting
the
integrity
of
the
data
that
is
on
it.
The
software
is
cjs
compliant,
it's
a
cloud
environment,
so
maintaining
data
is
very
effectively
the
software,
which
is
evidence,
calm,.
D
C
C
B
Every
single
piece
of
equipment
we're
able
to
go
in
and
see
in
review.
There
were
some
observations
mainly
focused
around
how
MPD
was
implementing
the
software
and
that
relates
to
ensuring
proper
access,
documenting
the
access
procedures
and
approvals
for
access
and
for
ensuring
data
categorization.
These
are
very
closely
linked
to
the
state
statute
items
from
the
last
slide
for
policy
and
training.
B
We
had
a
few
observations
on
policy
focused
on
policy
non-compliance,
mainly
around
cameras
not
being
used
in
line
with
policy
as
best
we
could
tell
from
data,
and
also
not
labeling
and
categorizing
videos
in
line
with
policy,
the
policy
completeness
and
clarity.
There
were
some
observations
around
areas
in
policy
that
were
maybe
not
crystal
clear.
That
could
be
improved
by
better
examples
or
more
verbage
as
to
what
a
policy,
what
the
policy
element
means
and
then
the
first
bullet
under
policy
completeness
and
clarity.
B
There
is
the
policy
really
focused
on
how
the
police
department
used
cameras
and
used
the
software,
and
it
didn't
quite
align
with
the
Minnesota
State
statute
requirements,
which
really
talked
more
about
a
body
camera
program
which
encompasses
more
than
just
using
the
camera
and
the
software.
So
we
saw
some
opportunities
to
have
the
policy
be
more
complete
in
terms
of
that
for
training,
we
reviewed
the
training
materials
and
they
were
pretty
well
aligned
with
the
policy
as
it
was
written.
B
B
Moving
on
to
usage
the
usage
period
that
we
reviewed
did
cover
prior
to
and
after
the
new
policy
change,
which
happened
in
at
the
end
of
July.
We
looked
at
about
three
and
a
half
weeks
of
data
after
the
policy
change
and
we
grouped
our
observations
into
one
of
the
elements
of
how
body
cameras
are
getting
used.
So
we
would
have
some
startup
activation
use,
deactivation
and
then
uploading
characters,
categorization
comments.
B
B
When
we
were
went
to
try
and
find
those
corresponding
videos
in
the
software,
we
were
not
always
able
to
do
so,
and
those
were
primarily
used
to
force
videos
where
activation
is
required
before
or
immediately
after
an
incident,
and
we
also
looked
at
dispatch
records
to
try
and
figure
out
under
which
circumstances
did
an
officer
respond
and
arrive
at
the
scene
with
an
issued
camera,
and
were
we
able
to
find
footage
of
that?
It's
in
the
evidence-
and
you
can
see
here
the
on
the
left
side,
the
CAD
dispatch
based
videos.
B
We
were
unable
to
find
35%
under
the
old
policy
and
29%
a
lower
incidence
under
the
new
policy.
We
also
noted
that
for
activation
cameras
were
not
always
capturing
the
beginning
of
events
and
the
those
are
the
datasets
in
the
middle,
and
we
see
that
they
generally
are
improved
under
the
new
policy.
And
finally,
the
cameras
have
a
30
second
buffering
feature
where,
if
your
camera
is
on
it
always
records
30
seconds,
and
when
you
push
the
record
button,
it
goes
back
in
time,
those
30
seconds
it
text
access
to
the
beginning
of
the
video.
B
So
you
have
a
little
bit
of
leeway
before
something
occurs
that
you're
still
capturing
on
video.
That
only
works
at
the
cameras
on,
and
we
noted
a
number
of
instances
where
that
30
seconds
wasn't
captured
in
full,
meaning
that
officers
were
keeping
their
cameras
fully
powered
off
until
they
decided
that
it
was
time
to
activate
them.
B
B
Not
really
covered
in
the
policy
as
to
when
you
need
to
have
your
camera
physically
switched
on
versus,
not
so
once
the
camera
has
been
activated.
The
purpose
is
to
capture
the
incident
and
see.
What's
going
on,
we
when
we
reviewed
videos,
we
tried
to
see
whether
it
was
clearly
tapped.
The
cameras
were
clearly
capturing
what
was
occurring.
The
lowest
rate
of
capture
was
for
use
of
force
incidents,
and
that
is
likely
because
needs
for
citizens
there's
a
lot
more
activity,
there's
also
a
very
precise
moment
at
which
use
of
force
generally
occurs.
B
So
it's
much
easier
to
miss
that
specific
moment
in
a
camera
footage
that,
as
you're
walking
around
in
doing
any
kind
of
activity.
We
also
noted
that
in
a
number
of
use
of
force,
videos,
the
full
chain
of
events
that
led
up
to
the
use
of
force
wasn't
captured.
So
maybe
it
captured
a
takedown,
but
the
initial
confrontation
with
an
individual
wasn't
always
getting
captured,
for
example,
and
in
an
after
policy
change,
we
did
see
a
slight
decrease
in
number
of
instances
where
we
weren't
actually
capturing.
B
If
the
event,
if
the
deactivation
occurs
before
the
event
concludes,
is
required,
that
the
reason
for
deactivation
is
narrated
by
the
officer,
so
we
noted
a
variety
of
numbers
in
terms
of
how
often
the
activation
happened
before
the
incident
it
ranged
from
you
know:
32%
of
use-of-force
videos
under
the
old
policy
to
4%
of
dispatch
based
elections
under
the
new
policy
were
deactivated
prior
to
the
full
conclusion
of
an
event.
We
also
of
those
events
that
were
of
those
instances
where
footage
was
turned
off
early.
B
B
We
also
noted,
with
the
activation
we
weren't
able
to
look
for
this
systemically,
but
we
noted,
after
the
fact
that,
when
transporting
individuals
to
jail
body
cameras
were
frequently
turned
off
prior
to
handing
over
custody
of
the
individual
to
jail,
and
so
we
we
did
extract
that
data
from
the
different
sets
and
presented
it
here,
because
that
was
a
policy.
The
transport
needs
to
be
recorded
and,
if
you're
not
turning
off,
if
you're
not
leaving
the
camera
on
until
after
transferring
custody.
That
appears
to
be
out
of
line
with
current
policy.
B
So
once
the
video
has
been
captured,
they
need
to
be
uploaded
into
the
system
by
the
officer
at
the
end
of
their
shift.
Policy
requires
to
do
so
at
the
end
of
the
shift.
We
looked
at
the
average
time
to
upload.
A
video
shifts
are
usually
about
10
hours
long,
so
we'd
expect
about
a
5
hour
average
time
to
upload
the
video
after
it's
been
taken,
but
we
generally
saw
longer
times
to
get
that
upload
to
happen
with
18
hours
under
the
old
policy
10
half
hours
under
the
new
policy.
B
So
after
the
videos
are
uploaded,
officers
are
required
to
categorize
the
videos
and
add
in
a
case
or
a
dispatch
number
related
to
that
occurrence.
If
applicable,
we
saw
11%
of
all.
All
videos
were
not
categorized
with
anything
under
the
old
policy
which
dropped
to
5%
under
the
new
policy.
So
indefinitely
noted
videos
that
were
not
categorized.
We
did
also
see
some
instances
of
a
case
number
that
should
have
been
included
with
the
video,
but
that
wasn't.
B
We
did
also
look
at
as
we
were
looking
at
different
categories
of
videos,
whether
or
not
the
video
had
the
correct,
categorization
and
noted
that
not
always
the
right
categorization
was
used.
We
got
these
numbers
a
few
different
ways
with
use
of
force.
We
looked
at
reported
uses
of
force,
found
that
video
and
noted
that
in
14
and
then
31
percent
of
cases
under
the
new
policy,
the
video
wasn't
flagged
with
use
of
force.
It
might
have
been
flagged
with
the
rest
or
a
citation
or
something
else
for
non
evidence.
B
We
looked
at
videos
that
were
tagged
with
a
case
number,
but
were
listed
as
non
evidence
as
tried
to
target
ones
that
maybe
should
have
been
flagged
as
evidentiary
or
arrests
or
citations
for
dispatch
based.
That's
pretty
straightforward,
look
for
dispatch
records
and
look
to
see
whether
those
types
of
videos
were
categorized
properly,
whether
it
was
use
of
force
or
evidence
for
non
evidence.
I
wanted
to
know
training,
training
videos
are
kept
for
only
90
days.
B
So
we
didn't
see
a
systemic
pattern
of
somebody
trying
to
hide
footage
under
trainings
to
get
deleted
early
and
then
the
last
item
on
here
is
the
can
be
tagged
with
multiple
categories,
but
that
was
never
really
addressed
and
we
saw
different
uses
of
that
affecting
our
results.
For
example,
a
use-of-force
video
was
flagged
with
only
an
arrest
which
is
accurate.
B
It
was
also
use
of
force,
and
that
seems
to
be
the
most
more
important
category
that
wasn't
being
used,
possibly
because
of
confusion.
We
also
saw
some
results
where
video
is
flagged,
with
both
evidence
and
non
evidence,
tags
which
didn't
really
make
sense,
so
clarification
on
that
aspect
would
be
helpful.
B
Some
overall
usage
numbers
we
definitely
saw
an
increasing
usage
under
the
new
policy
versus
the
old
policy.
We
did
see
a
wide
variation
of
use
between
individual
officers
when
we
looked
at
averages
per
individual.
In
particular,
we
saw
a
fairly
large
number
of
folks
having
less
than
one
minute
of
video
per
hour
of
active
in
the
field,
policing
that
did
decrease
from
17
percent
or
the
old
policy
to
just
seven
percent
under
the
new
policy-
and
we
have
a
few
charts
in
here
to
illustrate
that.
So
this
is
the
number
of
hours
worked.
B
This
is
basically
says
what
percentage
of
my
time
in
the
field
is
getting
recorded
on
body
cameras
and
we're
seeing
it
was
lingering
around
5%
at
dipping
below
and
then
spiking
up
towards
the
end
when
the
new
policy
came
in
place
to
between
10
and
sometimes
20
percent,
on
average
across
the
police
department.
And
then
this
represents
a
per
user
perspective
on
what
percentage
of
time
is
getting
recorded.
So
we're
seeing
that
that
5
percent
mark
is
about
3
minutes
of
footage
per
hour
worked,
so
we
saw
door.
B
The
old
policy
and
majority
of
officers
were
having
less
than
3
minutes
of
footage
and
under
the
new
policy
we
definitely
see
a
huge
increase,
including
a
few
officers
that
are
recording,
40
percent
or
more
of
their
time
in
the
field.
But
we're
still
seeing
a
tail
end
of
individuals
that
have
less
than
3
minutes
or
1
minute
up
to
their
field.
Time
record.
It
can.
A
B
C
B
And
then
our
last
Chevron
up
here
is
relates
to
oversight
when
looking
at
the
program,
we
did
have
oversight
and
monitoring
and
how
it
was
being
handled.
Part
of
our
audit
scope
and
objectives
and
the
goals
of
the
program
are
to
enhance
accountability
in
public
trust
and
to
provide
the
Police
Department
procedures
on
how
to
use
and
manage
the
equipment
and
resulting
data.
B
We
didn't
really
see
anything
in
the
policy
or
the
program
as
to
who's
in
charge
of
making
sure
everything
is
running
smoothly
that
the
video
is
being
captured
and
the
cameras
are
being
used
in
line
with
policy.
We
do
want
to
acknowledge
that
the
btu
did
their
job.
They
did
the
pilot
program,
they
rolled
out
all
the
equipment
and
the
technology
and
trained
everyone
and
developed
the
training,
but
in
the
end,
they're
not
responsible
for
ensuring
that
an
officer
turns
their
camera
on.
B
They
can
train
someone
how
to
push
the
button,
but
they
can't
enforce
that
and
after
that
implementation
phase,
we
didn't
really
see
anybody
getting
into
the
oversight
of
the
management.
We
did
see
that
June
of
this
year,
about
a
year
after
the
first
cameras
were
being
issued,
there
was
being
there
was
training,
developed
and
pushed
out
to
supervisors
on
how
to
conduct
reviews
of
their
reports
in
evidence
comm
to
make
sure
that
they're
taking
videos.
But
it
wasn't
a
systematic
rollout
and
it
wasn't
in
place
when
we
were
doing
our
review.
A
A
Kent's
been
recording,
I'm,
gonna
call
on
councilmember
Palmisano
first,
and
you
know
I'm
doing
that,
just
because
we
get
the
privilege
of
having
the
audit
chair
be
a
member
of
our
committee
as
well,
and
so
this
came
through
to
me
first
and
you
know
any
observations,
any
questions
you
might
have
openness.
That
would
be
great.
F
F
F
So
I
want
to
appreciate
that,
and
thank
you
for
that
and
know
that
we've
been
sitting
with
these
findings
now
for
a
little
bit
more
than
a
week
out
in
the
public
sphere.
A
couple
specific
questions
that
I
had
in
in
terms
of
your
data
in
your
slides
as
one
was
the
upload
of
videos,
I'm
curious.
Why
you
tested
that
like
what
was
about
that
from
an
audit
perspective?
Was
it
a
concern
about
loss
of
data
like
if
all
of
a
sudden,
a
body
camera
were
to
disappear?
I.
C
F
B
B
It's
important,
because
if
events
are
unfolding
quickly
and
cameras
are
not
being
docked
and
uploaded
in
a
timely
fashion,
and
we
might
not
have
footage
available
aside
from
that,
there
was
no
real
concern
about
data
integrity
or
the
ability
of
anybody
to
hack
the
camera
and
try
to
get
the
footage
out.
That's
that's
not
likely
the
the
most
damage
somebody
could
do
would
be
lose
a
camera
or
physically
destroyed,
at
which
point
that
would
be
pretty
apparent
that
that's
occurred.
So
it's
not
really
a
data
integrity
issue.
F
Thank
you
I
reserved
my
other
questions
for
police
on
coding
and
how
we
can
maybe
get
officers
to
code
their
recordings
correctly.
But
to
that
end,
I
have
a
question
and
it
might
be
more
appropriate
for
the
city
attorney
all
use
of
force.
Videos
are
public
data
by
law
in
Minnesota,
so
Mis
categorization
is
also
a
problem
here
is:
is
that
your
understanding
that
all
use
of
force
videos
are
open
data
able
and
public
data.
D
The
state
law
is
that
all
data,
including
it
would
be
including
camera
data,
would
be
public
unless
it,
unless
there's
parts
of
it
that
are
classified
otherwise
or
for
various
reasons.
I
haven't
I,
haven't
reviewed
the
specific
designation
for
can't
camera
data
recently,
but
I
can
take
a
look
at
that.
If,
if
you
would
like
me
to
I'm.
F
G
Thank
you
very
much
I,
just
I
guess:
I
have
a
not
too
much
questions
about
the
data
and
the
information
that
was
revealed.
It's
very
interesting
and
valuable
to
think
about,
but
just
about
the
process
did
we
follow
the
standard
process
of
doing
the
audit.
With
this
or
was
our
fast-tracking?
Did
we
miss
some
steps
or
not
get
everything
done
as
well
as
we
should.
B
Journeying
councilmember
Gordon
are
fast-tracking,
resulted
in
us
providing
the
report
without
having
a
full
implementation
plan
discussion
and
a
formal
response
from
the
oddity,
in
this
case
the
police
department.
By
the
time
we
had
the
report
available
to
us
in
assessment,
we
completed
form
when
we
were
discussing
it
with
the
police
department.
It
didn't
seem
reasonable
to
give
them.
You
know
a
very
short
turnaround
time
from
an
implementation
plan.
B
We
were
directed
by
the
ID
committee
to
work
with
MPD
on
implementation
as
part
of
our
presentation.
So
while
we
don't
have
that
component
of
it
in
place,
which
we
typically
do
prior
to
issuing
a
report,
we're
still
going
to
do
that,
we
just
didn't
have
time
to
do
it
based
on
the
turnaround
times,
did.
B
C
G
G
An
audit
done
here
their
identity
and
I
think
I'm
using
the
right
term.
Maybe
clients
the
wrong
term,
but
the
partner
that
we're
doing
it
with
I
got
to
participate
in
one
with
neighborhood
community
relations
a
little
bit
because
there
was
a
autumn
on
their
work
and
I
was
I,
know.
I
was
part
of
an
entrance
process
and
also
participated
in
and
I
think
it
I
think
it
was
called
a
exit
conference.
Also
so
did
we
was
there
an
exit
conference
that
was
held
before
the
final
draft
was
was
written.
B
A
F
The
audit
committee
is
a
regularly
scheduled
meeting,
but
it
doesn't
happen
very
frequently,
so
the
Audit
Committee
date
was
kind
of
driving
the
results
of
this
audit.
We
had
tried
to
set
up
with
the
police
department
they're
full
exit
interview
the
week
prior
to
the
audit
committee
meeting.
It
ended
up
getting
pushed
to
the
day
before
the
audit
committee
meeting
and
at
the
last
minute,
deputy
chief
Halverson
made
it,
but
chief
Arredondo
chose
not
to
make
that
meeting
that
day.
F
So
deputy
chief
Halverson
had
the
results
of
the
audit
before
the
audit
committee
meeting,
as
did
the
city
attorney
the
members
of
the
audit
committee,
others
around
the
city,
the
actual
engagement
letter,
it
was,
if
you
recall
it,
was
actually
initiated
first
from
Public
Safety
Committee.
This
audit,
instead
of,
as
is
typical,
where
it
gets
initiated
at
audit
committee,
so
that
engagement
letter
had
a
number
of
people
on
it
within
the
East
apartment.
It
was
a
pretty
standard
engagement
letter.
G
Suppose
we
could
have
gotten
the
report
before
and
it
could
have
gone
to
the
next
Audit
Committee
meeting.
It
looks
like
you're
supposed
to
actually
do
the
exit
conference
before
the
draft
is
written
when
you
just
have
the
final
work
paper
reviews
ready
and
then
you
have
your
exit
conference
and
then
you
draft
the
audit
report
and
then
the
report
that
goes
is
is
delivered
one
within
one
week
of
that
exit
conference.
But
it
sounds
like
this
report
was
written
before
the
exit
conference.
B
G
Mean
it
probably
wasn't
I
guess
this
dark
thing
that
I
noticed
immediately
when
I
picked
up
this
and
was
looking
at
this,
and
I
probably
should
have
done
it
before
the
council
meeting
I
was
looking
at
some
reason
about
it
and
didn't
get
to
it
until,
but
but
I
decided,
I'm
gonna
review
before
this
committee.
Is
that
all
the
other
audits
that
I've
ever
seen
it
does
finding
field
work,
response,
finding
field
work
response?
And
here
we
have
field
work
and
then
a
finding
in
a
box?
G
G
If
you
don't
want
to,
it
might
be
good
to
hear
from
the
department
when
they
come
back,
but
I
am
also
curious,
because
I
know
that
back
in
July
I
believe
we
directed
the
audit
department,
or
we
asked
the
audit
department
and
we
directed
civil
rights
to
participate
and
be
involved
in
this
process.
I
think
we
had
an
interest
in
the
police.
Gonna
go
oversight,
function
to
be
involved
in
that,
and
how
did
we
make
sure
that
civil
rights
was
involved
in
mr.
far
wants
answer
about
her
role?
That
would
be
fine
too.
B
Chairman
yang
councilmember,
Gordon
I
think
nobody
had
enough
time
to
complete
the
full
steps
of
the
process.
We
definitely
did
our
work
as
and
ensured
that
we
were
reporting
based
on
factual
observations.
We
recognize
that
by
the
time
we
were
able
to
have
a
report
in
time
for
the
Audit
Committee
and
to
be
able
to
come
back
to
this
committee
in
line
with
the
timeline
established.
When
we
were
directed
to
do
this
report,
we
didn't
have
time
to
get
the
full
response
from
the
police
department.
B
This
is
also
slightly
a
typical
of
our
audits
because,
normally
our
audits,
we
report
here's
the
finding
in
here
we
did
report
here's
all
of
our
observations
and
not
just
the
findings.
So
we
had
information
around
state
statutes
that
we
were
compliant
with.
We
had
some
usage
statistics
that
we
didn't
have
a
finding
on.
They
were
just
information
that
we
presented,
so
the
format
of
the
report
was
a
little
different
because
we
were
trying
to
capture
things
in
a.
B
Again,
the
high
committee
did
direct
us
to
work
with
the
police
department
on
their
response,
and
we
fully
intend
to
do
that
as
as
much
as
they
are
willing
to
work
with
us.
As
to
the
question
on
participation
from
OPC,
are
we
did
our
planning
work
together
and
they
were
an
invaluable
help
in
a
number
of
policy
issues
and
interviewing
a
number
of
videos
where
the
call
of
is
this
evidence
or
non
evidence,
is
something
that
I
don't
have
experience
doing
for
certain
nuances.
C
But
then
the
director
world
Tetzel
came
and
presented
to
the
police
conduct
oversight
Commission
at
their
last
public
meeting,
and
they
asked
quite
a
bit
of
questions
about
the
report
itself
and
ideas
related
to
their
own
observations
from
2015,
which
I
think
we're
all
aware
of,
but
they
received
the
report
on
the
same
day.
Actually
that
the
audit
committee
received
the
report
in
the
evening
was
there
public
meeting.
C
Not
and
my
staff
did
not
so
essentially
when
the
report
was
the
writing
process
started
as
kind
of
when
our
involvement
ended.
I
think,
as
I
mentioned,
when
we
first
presented
council,
because
my
office
participates
in
an
investigative
function
myself
and
the
investigative
wing
actually
firewalled
ourselves
off
from
participation,
so
that
there
would
be
no
conflict
of
interest.
As
you
know,
I
regularly
view
body
camera
and
so
do
my
investigators
in
working
on
cases.
So
I
actually
didn't
see
the
audit
report
until
the
day
it
was
released
to
the
audit
committee.
A
G
H
B
Chairman
yang
council
member
Johnson,
as
far
as
I
know,
it
was
the
circumstances
involved
in
shooting
and
the
fifth
precinct
that
brought
to
great
attention
the
non-usage
of
body
cameras
and
that
specific
incident
we
had
generally
been
planning
to
do.
A
readiness
review
with
state
statutes
through
our
IT
function
and
OPC
I
was
planning
to
later
this
year.
Do
some
sort
of
evaluation
around
usage
and
we,
as
we
were
discussing
the
events
and
potentially
expanding
our
IT
audit
to
cover
some
additional
aspects
that
were
prominent
and
important
to
the
city.
B
We
established
an
aggressive
timeline
for
ourselves
because
we
felt
like
we
had
the
resources
and
the
time
to
do
the
assessment
that
we
needed
to
do,
especially
with
additional
input
from
OPC
our,
and
it
was
that
approach
combined
with
some
potential
policy
changes
that
had
occurred.
That
made
it
seem
worthwhile
to
get
information
and
present
it
out
to
decision-makers
so
that
they
could
be
informed
as
to
what
they
were
doing
and
the
whatever.
The
response
is
to
the
audit.
Our
information
is
based
on
our
observations
and
a
response,
wouldn't
change
our
observations
and.
A
H
Chair
so
I
guess
I
mean
it
seems
like
one
of
the
outcomes
of
that
is
that
we
have
an
audit.
That
is
not
our
typical
standard
process,
so
I
I
would
hope
that
we
have
a
product
at
the
end
of
the
back
and
forth.
That
would
mirror
our
standard
process
for
looking
at
one
of
our
departments
and
analyzing.
H
You
know
whether
they're
doing
their
their
job
correctly
and
following
policy,
and
all
that
sort
of
thing
and
not
be
jumping
ahead
as
to
you
know
what,
where
the
responsibility
is,
where
the
problems
are,
all
that
sort
of
thing
ahead
of
again
our
standard
process,
so
I
just
feel
like
the
the
volume
publicly
around.
This
issue
wasn't
really
very
helpful
in
trying
to
take
new
technology
and
analyze.
H
Analyze
it
in
this
in
the
way
that
we
would,
with
any
other
investment
and
I,
don't
think
that
you
know
having
I
think
it's
I
mean
I.
Think
it's
a
challenge
when
we
have
perhaps
an
incident
that
pushes
something
forward
and
then
gives
us
an
incomplete
product.
So
I
want
us
to
be
really
careful
about
making
sure
that
when
we
have
a
have
a
completed
project
here,
it's
a
completed
project,
just
like
any
other
department
in
the
city
would
would
have
with
input
and
recommendations.
H
F
You
mr.
chair
turn
to
response
some
of
the
comments
by
my
committee
members.
First,
the
idea
that
this
state
audit
wasn't
helpful
I
think
it
was
extremely
helpful.
First
of
all,
we
didn't
need
to
actually
do
this
audit
for
two
years
and
doing
an
audit
early
and
the
reason
it
was
on
the
2017
audit
committees.
Work
plan
was
to
make
sure
that
we
were
going
to
be
compliant
with
an
audit
from
the
state
by
state
statute
within
two
years.
So
this
was
an
interim
mark
that
had
been
on
our
agenda
since
the
beginning
of
2017.
F
Before
making
such
a
big
investment
in
body
cameras.
I
think
that
that
piece
of
this,
the
part,
the
small
part
that
first
Chevron
it's
about
Minnesota
Statutes
that
goes
to
the
state,
is
complete
and
it
is
I
think
a
story
that,
as
we
talked
about
it
more
with
both
former
police
leadership
and
current
police
leadership,
that
it
kind
of
shows
that
this
is
the
beginning
of
a
body.
Camera
program,
the
stuff
that
is
about
the
Minnesota
statute.
Stuff,
is
not
bad.
It's
the
sign
of
a
beginning
of
a
program.
F
The
the
rest
of
this
I
think
is
what
council,
member
yang
and
I
are
interested
in
doing
and
going
forward
that
this.
This
project
is
absolutely
not
complete
and
it
demands
the
attention.
These
findings
demand
the
attention
of
our
police
department
to
look
to
how
they
will
address
them,
and
it
is.
It
is
up
to
our
police
department
to
figure
out
how
to
address
these
findings,
and
we
want
to
work
with
the
police
department
to
do
better,
because
we
want
to
do
this
job
right.
So.
D
B
Not
the
end
of
the
audit,
the
audit
ends
once
those
recommendations
are
implemented
and
we
have
verified
that
they're
in
place,
and
that
can
take
a
variety
of
time
from
few
weeks
to
sometimes
years
as
to
how
long
it
would
take
to
provide
a
response.
Our
standard
process
includes
providing
a
report
to
the
oddity
and
giving
them
approximately
two
weeks
to
provide
a
response
to
the
initial
findings
and
recommendations,
and
the
initial
response
generally
includes
a
statement
of
agreement
with
the
findings,
a
separate
statement
of
agreement
with
the
recommendations.
E
B
Any
additional
commentary
that
they
wish
to
include
generally,
that
includes
some
statements
about
we
plan
to
take.
You
know
these
kinds
of
steps,
so
I
would
expect
on
a
typical
audit.
Once
we
have
a
report
in
a
completed
state,
it
would
take
approximately
two
weeks
for
respondent
to
provide
a
complete
report.
In
a
particularly
complex
case,
we
have
been
flexible
and
provided
more
time
to
accommodate
departments
that
need
more
time
to
figure
out
complex
issues.
A
G
G
A
Important
I'm
gonna
ask
you
to
look
at
the
motion
before
you
buy
a
councilmember
Palmisano
myself
with
regards
to
that
it's
probably
a
little
bit
more
general
than
what
you'd
expect
from
what
you
just
made
in
terms
of
emotion.
It's
a
short
one
actually
and
I
think
that
there
is.
That
gives
a
bit
more
time
than
you
know
what
was
presented
to
us
and
I
think
it
allows
us
to
have
in
that
time
created
from
between
now
and
I.
A
G
G
Now,
apparently,
it's
already
been
approved
and
sent
on
so
I'm,
not
sure
what
that
what
to
do
about
that,
but
it
seems
like
we
could
take
your
motion
and
say
it's
almost
what
I'm
saying,
but
really
what
I
want
to
say
is
actually
work
together.
So
we
can
complete
the
full
audit
report
and
then
get
a
completed
version
back
to
us.
Okay,.
A
F
So
I
guess
first,
let's
take
on
the
piece
about
the
minnesota
statutes
in
the
state
law.
Mr.
Vasilyev,
can
you
can
you
help
this
committee
understand
exactly
and
only
what
gets
submitted
to
the
state
and
this
audit
is
a
very
small
portion
of
this
report.
Trimming.
B
A
minor
Palmisano
I'm
testing
my
memory
here,
but
if
I
remember
the
state
statute,
it
requires
a
summary
of
the
results
of
the
audit
to
be
provided,
and
the
audit
component
that
is
required
by
the
state
is
compliance
with
the
audit
statutes.
So
that
would
be
the
statement
of
we
reviewed
compliance
with
these
elements
of
the
state
statute.
These
were
compliant.
B
F
So,
if
just
to
summarize,
a
lot
of
the
things
that
are
required
by
state
statute
are
more
technical
in
nature,
councilmember,
Gordon
they're,
not
all
of
the
different
elements
of
this
body.
Camera
study,
I,
think
that
if
I
hear
my
colleague
I
think
that
if
I
understand
your
concerns
specifically,
it
would
be
about
actually
getting
the
findings,
the
response
back
from
the
police
department
and
sooner
rather
than
later,
on
the
findings
from
the
audit
right.
F
So
what
you
are
looking
for
is
the
police
departments
opportunity
to
respond,
and
some
of
this
has
been
a
very
a
change
in
leadership
over
these
past.
During
these
last
four
weeks
of
the
audit
to
where
you
know,
communication
was
taking
place
with
some
police
leaders,
former
police
leadership,
and
now
it
needs
to
be
taking
place
with
new
police
leadership,
but
to
give
new
police
leadership
and
opportunity
to
address
each
and
every
one
of
these
findings
is
something
that
you
would
like
sooner
than
later.
Is
that
my
understanding.
G
Mr.
chair,
yes,
I
I
would
so
yeah.
The
idea,
maybe
is
that
we
could
get
back
to
our
committee
even
by
the
end
of
November,
so
I
think
November
29th
would
be
a
committee
date.
The
completed
version
of
the
audit
that
would
also
would
have
the
response
from
the
police
department
and
I
think
one
of
the
ideas
about
getting
it
back
earlier,
especially
before
budget
approval
might
because
there
might
be
some
kind
of
considerations
or
something
we'd
want
to
know
about
I'm,
not
sure
of
it.
G
That
might
be
one
of
the
police
response
might
say.
Oh,
we
could
do
better
with
this
or
with
that
if
we
had
some
some
funding,
but
that
would
but
I'm
also
fine
with
other
outstanding
issues.
The
rest
of
the
motion
here
talks
about
not
to
report
back
to
the
end
of
February
2018.
We
could
keep
working
on
it
that
long
too,
but
so.
F
So
the
intent
of
this
motion
was
actually
to
report
back
on
progress
made
on
findings.
So
when
I
hear
customer
Gordon,
when
I
hear
your
concern,
I
appreciate
it
and
I
think
that
we
should
have
the
police
response
to
findings
back,
though
audit
is
done,
it's
been
accepted
by
the
committee
approved
by
the
council.
The
audit
is
complete,
but
the
police
departments
response
to
all
the
findings,
and
this
audit
is
what
is
I
think
necessary,
and
you
appreciate
is
necessary
to
move
forward.
G
F
G
A
All
I
can't
customer
borne
I
mean
my
my
sense
of
it
and
I
will
ask
the
city
attorney
to
help
us
out
on
this,
but
my
sense
of
it
is
that
you
know
if
you
want
to
revise
this.
If
you
know,
let's
say
at
the
end
of
the
day,
please
get
a
response
and
they
give
a
response
to
this.
We
can
move
a
revised
version
at
some
later
date
and
that
would
be
fine.
Thank
you.
Okay,
so
you
know
I
mean
if
we
can
do
that.
F
All
due
respect,
cheering
I
just
want
to
point
out
that,
as
mr.
vassilli
of
points
out
that
the
role
of
audit
on
findings
is
to
help
departments
continue
to
work
on
findings,
so
I'm
not
interested
in
going
and
revising
every
single
audit.
Every
audit
committee
meeting
with
the
new
responses
and
the
updated
progress
on
on
audits,
but
rather,
as
mr.
Vasily
have
said,
this
audit
is
complete.
F
These
observations
don't
change,
but
certainly
we
should
and
more
specifically
from
this
committee
from
public
safety
track
and
work
with
our
Police
Department
on
some
of
these
significant
audit
findings.
That
came
out
of
this
audit
and
we
should
continue
to
work
on
that
I
believe
through
this
committee
of
council,
because
our
audit
committee
directs
our
internal
auditor,
not
the
police
department.
G
Appreciate
that
I
still
would
would
somehow
like
to
get
the
police
responses
formally
entered
into
the
record
somehow
within
a
reasonable
amount
of
time.
So
we
don't
necessarily
have
to
call
it
with
a
revised
version
of
the
audit
report,
but
maybe
but
I
am
interested
in
getting
them
sooner
than
February
2018.
Like
sure.
A
F
Don't
mean
to
speak
out
of
turn,
but
no
could
it
could
it
could
an
option
here
that
includes
councilmember
Gordon's
concerns
be
to
receive
the
police
department's
response
to
audit
findings
here
when
at
the
November
29th
Public,
Safety
Committee
meeting
or
if
that
isn't
soon
enough,
the
one
prior
to
it.
It
almost
seems
like
it's,
maybe
better
as
its
own
separate
motion
that
adds
receiving
the
police
departments
opportunity
to
respond
to
the
findings
at
a
at
a
future
meeting
of
Public
Safety.
G
A
Well
so,
let's,
let's
figure
this
out
Ken's
number
one
sign,
or
can
you
make
that
first
motion
of
that
shorts
piece
and
then
we'll
get
on
to
the
next
one?
And
after
we
take
care
of
all
the
audit
stuff,
we
will
go
into
the
meat
of
the
audit
so
that
you
know
this
isn't
chief
can
answer
some
questions.
F
G
A
F
Then
mr.
chair,
if
I
may
and
in
working
with
councilmember
Gordon
I'd
like
to
put
the
second
motion
before
you
from
chair
yang
and
myself,
the
first
part
of
this
motion
is
to
have
quarterly
reports
to
public
safety
committee.
Regarding
the
operation
of
body,
worn
cameras,
the
reports
from
the
police
department
on
a
quarterly
basis
will
include
how
often
both
total
number
and
percentage
our
body
cameras
not
being
turned
on
when
dispatch
data
indicates
that
they
should
it's
about.
F
Considering
and
talking
about
any
changes
made
to
body
camera
policy
during
that
time
and
seeing
if
there
are
changes
being
considered,
also
making
sure
we
have
somebody
in
charge
of
the
ongoing
effectiveness
of
the
body
camera
program
and
discussing
the
emerging
themes
of
reviewed
data.
So
what
issues
are
being
identified
and
how
our
training
and
discipline
being
handled
that
would
be
on
a
quarterly
basis,
and
that
would
start
the
first
quarter
of
2018.
F
The
second
staff
direction
here,
and
this
is
the
one
that
I
think
we
amande
based
on
councilmember
Gordon's
input
is
for
the
November
29th
public
safety
meeting.
We
ask
that
the
police
department
report
on
supervisor
reviews
of
officers,
body
camera,
worn
footage.
One
of
the
things
that
came
out
of
this
report
was
that
supervisors
were
just
then
being
trained
on
doing
reviews
of
of
the
body,
worn
cameras,
and
so
this
speaks
to
aspects
for
aspects
of
that
just
making
sure
that
they
are
following
through
and
that
that's
going
smoothly.
G
Think
that
sounds
close
enough.
I,
don't
know
how
many
adjectives
we
have
to
have
about
their
response,
but
yeah.
It
should
be
response
to
the
findings
of
the
audit
report.
I
guess
what
I'm
looking
for
is
a
revised
and
complete
audit
report.
I,
don't
think
we
can
necessarily
tell
the
auditor
in
the
audit
committee
what
to
do
either
from
our
position
but
I
consider
the
report.
This
is
me:
editorializing
I,
don't
go
along
with
that
motion
and
probably
support
it
and
I.
Consider
that
report
incomplete
the
way
it
is
now.
Okay,.
H
Have
a
question
mr.
chair
on
item
4
here:
how
is
training
and
discipline
handled
as
new
issues
emerge?
I
think
that
is,
you
know
one
of
the
sort
of
deep
dive
questions
is:
what
is
how
will
we
develop
policy
as
far
as
what
is
discipline
for
officers
that
don't
use
a
body
camera
or
don't
or
don't
do
it
following
the
policy,
but
I
mean
I?
Don't
think
we
have
the
answer
to
that.
Yet
I
guess.
H
H
H
And
if
we're
getting
a
quarterly
report,
maybe
we
can
then
ask
for
it.
You
know,
after
our
first
quarterly
report,
you
know
what
is
the
status
of
policies
being
proposed
and
implemented
around
non
use
or
misuse
of
the
of
the
body?
Cameras
I
just
think
we're
stepping
ahead
of
ourselves
by
saying
that
so,
ok.
B
B
If
you
destroy
a
body
camera,
that's
definitely
specific
element:
I,
don't
know
that
there's
a
tie-in
with
any
kind
of
supervisory
reviews
that
may
or
may
not
be
ongoing,
and
that's
probably
the
important
piece,
but
we're
not
going
to
tell
the
police
department
what
to
do
we're
reporting
on
what's
going
on,
and
it's
definitely
up
to
them
to
decide
how
best
to
implement
that
so
long
as
it
addresses
the
findings.
I
think
that
circle
council.
F
You
mr.
chair
I
think
the
council
president
brings
up
a
good
point.
M
I
would
be
happy
to
retract
with
your
agreement.
This
second
question
in
item
number
four
up
top,
which
would
be
you
know
in
discussion
of
emerging
themes
of
reviewed
data
and
what
issues
are
being
identified.
You
know
discipline
might
become
an
issue,
but
we
don't
know
that
for
sure
at
this
point,
so
I'd
be
happy
to
remove
that
and
then
just
to
be
clear,
because
you're
right
I
did
use
a
lot
of
adjectives
there.
F
A
A
F
Think
my
questions
are
more
appropriately
addressed
to
to
the
police.
Mr.
vasilia,
thank
you
for
your
your
help
in
in
conducting
this
audit
last
week
in
audit
committee,
there
were
some
questions
from
audit
committee
members
that
I
just
didn't
feel
it
was.
You
know,
appropriate
to
lop
right
on
to
you
at
the
time,
but
I
did
say,
we'd
be
asking
them
later
and
we'd
be
asking
them
at
the
Public
Safety
Committee
meeting.
So
so,
if
I
may
assistant
Chief
Jose
here
are
see
the
paper
here
here
are
a
couple
of
them.
F
E
E
Again,
I'm
assistant
Chief
Mike
Jose
happy
to
be
here
like
to
thank
the
auditor,
the
internal
audit
group
for
doing
this.
I
know
it
was
a
difficult
process
to
go
through
and
the
police
department.
We
are
happy
to
be
involved
at
this
point
and
be
able
to
give
some
input
into
the
findings
and
and
maybe
clarify
some
of
the
questions
that
come
out
of
the
observations
that
they've
noted.
So
implementation
training
was
done
by
precinct,
so
one
precinct
at
a
time.
C
E
D
E
So
that
there
was
a
fairly
lengthy,
implement,
eight
or
installation
process
that
took
place
over
many
months
in
each
precinct
and
then
once
a
precinct
became
ready
to
be
fully
operational,
then
one
precinct
at
a
time
was
identified
for
a
several
day,
instalay
or
instruction
and
then
hands-on,
use
and
then
lieutenant
Reinhardt
from
our
business
technology
units
and
a
couple
of
his
officers
that
he
works
with
a
sergeant.
An
officer
would
go
to
that
precinct
and
schedule.
F
C
E
Yes,
most
of
the
pilot
program
people,
so
we
had
done
a
pilot
the
year
before
were
very
helpful
to
us,
not
just
with
new
officers
coming
in,
but
also
kind
of
assisting
with
media
that
demonstrate
how
the
equipment
worked
on
in
a
real-time
basis
and
and
those
officers
that
did
the
pilot
were
more
than
happy
to
come
and
express
how
they
used
the
equipment
and
the
value
they
saw
in
it.
I
just.
F
F
E
Well,
currently,
our
policy
is
that
if
you're
issued
a
body
camera,
you
have
to
follow
the
same
policy
rules,
whether
you're
working
your
regular
job
or
you're,
working
at
a
part-time
job,
same
rules
and
the
issue
with
that
is
that
not
all
our
officers
have
body
cameras.
So
when
officers
are
working
part
time
jobs,
it
can
be
very
confusing
to
whether
a
supervisor
gets
involved.
E
It
is
a
very
complex
issue.
The
whole,
you
know
part
time
is
one
aspect,
but
there's
also
a
lot
of
different
types
of
work
that
take
place
within
the
police
department
and
the
body.
Camera
issue
or
policy
was
really
written
for
a
uniformed
officer,
responding
as
a
uniformed
one
responder
to
calls-
and
you
know
the
more
that
we
dig
into
this
policy-
the
more
we're
finding
flaws
in
if
you're
a
uniformed
officer
part
of
the
time
but
you're,
maybe
a
plainclothes
officer,
an
undercover
officer.
E
E
The
more
that
we
dig
into
this,
that
it's
very
complex
issue,
I,
think
our
policy
of
somewhere
close
to
11
pages
deep
already-
and
we
haven't
even
touched
on
some
of
the
audit
issues
that
we
were
self-imposing
leading
up
to
this
teaching
sergeants
how
to
do
audits,
but
we
don't
have
it
built
into
the
policy.
So
that
way
they
know
what
the
process
is.
So
one
of
the
good
things
about
this
whole
process.
E
That's
taking
place
right
now
is
it's
allowing
us
to
see
spots
that
were
missed
or
just
not
thought
of
moving
forward,
and
so
we
really
need
to
look
at
the
total
package,
and
it
is
good
for
us
to
at
least
at
this
point
to
be
brought
into
this
process,
so
that
I
know
that
during
the
last
committee
hearing
there
were
several
questions
that
the
answer
was
well.
That
answer
would
be
better
answered
by
the
police
department
and
which
we
feel
we
would
offer
some
value
into
some
of
the
audit
findings.
E
If
we
could,
you
know,
give
some
experience
into
situations
as
to
why
maybe
there
wasn't
a
body
camera
turned
on
here
or
or
why
it
was
turned
off
or,
or
you
know
what
would
be
a
reason
for
turning
it
on
or
turning
it
off
and
carry
over
from
one
call
to
another
call.
The
police,
the
job
of
being
a
police
officer,
is
a
very
fluid
roll
that
you
roll
from
one
incident
to
another
and
back
and
forth,
and
very
fluidly
and
currently
within
this
audit
process.
E
If,
if
I
had
my
body,
camera
on
and
I
went
from,
one
call
to
the
next
call
and
I
didn't
deactivate
it
and
then
restart
it
for
the
next
one,
there
would
be
no
body
camera
assigned
to
the
next
call.
So
I
was
monitoring.
Some
calls
this
morning
and
I
I
was
listening
to
officers
when
they're
just
there,
where
everybody
was
tied
up
and
the
dispatcher
aired
a
couple
of
calls.
E
I
hope
that
you're,
okay
with
me
expounding
a
little
and
dispatch
said
I
need
two
squads
to
clear
and
take
these
two
priority
calls
and
an
officer
cleared
over
the
air.
I'll
clear
put
my
report,
column
pending
and
I'll.
Go
take
that
call
and
then
another
squad
cleared
and
said.
No,
that's
my
call,
that's
my
area,
how
clear
put
my
column
pending
I'll
take
that
call
and
and
then
the
dispatcher
sends
the
officer
on
the
other
call,
and
so
right
now
at
this
point
you
got
two
squads.
E
If
there's
two
cops
and
those
quadrants
are
standard,
that's
four
calls
being
dealt
with
and
if
they
had
the
body
camera
on
from
the
first
call,
there
wouldn't
be
a
body
camera
recorded
for
the
second
call
it
unless
they
shut
it
off
and
right
about
that
time.
The
dispatcher
said
well
now,
transit
needs
a
squad
to
back
them
up.
So
one
of
those
squads
and
said
we'll
put
those
two
calls
in
pending
and
I'll.
E
E
At
this
point,
we'd
be
up
to
there
were
four
recordings,
but
awed,
it
would
say
there
should
have
been
ten,
and
so
you
know
it's
a
complex
issue
when
you
start
looking
at
every
single
call
and
how
they
roll
into
each
other,
and
we
really
don't
want
our
officers
turning
their
body
camera
off
just
so.
They
can
turn
it
on
to
say
that
I'm
off
of
this
column
on
this
call,
because
that
just
adds
more
downtime
later
to
have
to
go
back
and
label.
E
And
but
if
those
are
things
we
have
to
work
out,
we
have
to
figure
out
how
to
get
to
that
point,
that
we
can
roll
from
one
to
the
next
and-
and
you
know,
because
any
downtime
reduces
our
ability
to
provide
service.
And
you
know,
ultimately,
our
job
is
to
be
out
there
providing
service
to
the
public.
And
you
know
we
don't
want
this
to
actually
cause
some
sort
of
delay
in
service
to
the
public.
Thank.
F
B
F
Frame
time
frame,
I'm
curious
if
I
could
ask
mr.
Vasilyev
as
a
follow-up
question,
how
would
something
like
that
work
that
an
officer
would
go
to
multiple
cowls,
because
I
understand
that
this
was
a
it
was
metadata.
I
understand
the
process
as
to
how
we
knew
if
body
camera
was
on
it.
A
call
that
the
later
report
showed
that
it
should
have
been
on
so
could.
Could
you
speak
to
it
assistant
chief
just
mentioned
in
terms
of.
F
B
Palmisano
the
way
we
looked
at
our
data
and
I
think
sitting
down
and
going
through
some
of
the
details.
We're
working
on
implementation
would
really
help
clear
that
out
when
reviewing
dispatch
data,
we
eliminated
all
officers
that
don't
have
an
arrival
time
at
the
scene.
So
we
try
to
eliminate
those
individuals
that
got
dispatched
to
three
things
at
the
same
time,
and
then
we
went
to
one
and
I
believe
every
time
we
look
for
a
video,
we
looked
by
the
enter
case
ID
if
the
case
ID
was
not
entered
or
there
wasn't
a
match.
B
We
looked
by
officer
name
time
of
the
dispatch
to
line
up
with
the
rival
time
to
hopefully
flag
a
video
that
might
cover
two
back-to-back
cases.
We
try
to.
We
try
to
accommodate
for
differences
in
data,
as
we
were
doing.
Our
assessments,
I
think
there's
definitely
opportunities
for
on
a
more
targeted
level
by
a
supervisor
review
to
be
able
to
see
and
know
much
more
about
each
individual
call
as
folks
are
responding
to
them
and
have
a
more
precise
metric
than
what
we
tried
to
do,
which
was
try
to
look
at
all.
F
I
appreciate
that
I
think
that's
kind
of
a
difference
of
the
way
that
maybe
like
last
week,
the
police
department
looked
at
data
and
just
saw
the
great
number
of
additional
videos
right
that
what
you
just
mentioned,
wouldn't
have
captured
versus
like
a
more
detailed
look,
and
how
do
we
set
that
up
to
be
monitored
over
time
and
I?
Think
that's
something
that
our
audit
team
can
help
work
with
a
commander
Granger
to
help
to
really
help
set
up.
F
Another
question
I
had
was
about
coding,
Assistant
Chief,
Joseph
heard
lots
of
things
from
the
community
about
why
footage
would
be
trained
would
be
coded
as
training
so
much,
but
one
of
the
questions
was
well.
Is
that
just
the
default
and
actually
I
don't
think
it
is
I
think
that
Uncategorized
is
the
default,
in
which
case
this
footage
gets
kept
forever.
But
can
you
can
you
comment
on?
What
do
you
think
could
be
done
to
get
officers
to
code
their
recordings
correctly,
and
how
important
is
that?
Yes,.
E
And
you
know,
one
of
this
brings
up
a
whole
deeper
discussion
about
what's
the
data
behind
the
audit
findings,
because
it
would
be
very
helpful
to
us
be
able
you
know
when
in
any
area,
including
the
training
closure
coding,
to
have
the
data
that
that
that
manifested
that
finding
that
so
that
we
could
look
at,
is
there
a
pattern?
Is
it
is
it
actually
people
that
are
doing
training?
You
know?
Is
it
somebody?
That's
a
recruits
like
we
train
our
recruits
on
the
same
equipment?
E
It
are
they
entry,
so
I
really
don't
have
a
good
answer
as
to
why
anything
would
be
trained
tagged
as
training
unless
it's
actually
from
training,
but
we
would
want
to
just
take
the
data
and
glanced
at
it
there.
You
know,
examine
it
and
say:
are
these
people
in
training?
You
know
it's
before
I
can
answer
that
I'd
have
to
look
at
who
are
the
personnel
and
is
there
a
pattern
that
we
can
examine?
Is
it
the
same
people?
E
You
know
in
a
way
that
it's
all
going
into
the
same
system,
but
I
would
really
need
to
look
at
more
data,
and
you
know
it
will
be
good
for
us
to
sit
down
and
actually
look
at
some
data.
You
know
with
about
this
whole
audit.
One
example
being
you
know,
audit
findings
that
that
we're
not
in
compliance
with
a
state
statute
or
something
like
that.
E
E
But
you
know
he's
I
asked
him
today
he's
having
to
read
statutes
and
dig
through
statutes
and
read
policy,
and
if
they
just
tell
us
what
ones
were
not
compliant,
so
they
would
actually
speed
up
the
process
so
that
we
could,
you
know,
maybe
come
with
some
answers
quicker
and
actually
we
want
to
make
fixes
as
soon
as
possible.
We
don't
want
to
wait,
for
you
know
some
date
in
November
to
come
back
and
and
implement
changes.
We
want
to
do
them
on
the
fly,
but
without
too
many
total
changes
of
the
policy.
F
I
appreciate
that
I
also
think
that
that's,
that
is
a
value
of
this
audit
is
there,
are
recommendations
on
and
how
to
make
quick
action
on
some
of
those
things,
and
perhaps
some
of
the
ones
that
are
deemed
most
critical
versus
ones
that
are
maybe
technical
in
nature,
but
but
less
important.
Mr.
chair
I
don't
mean
to
take
everybody's
time,
but
my
last
two
questions,
one
is
about
discipline
and
the
other
is
about
the
budget.
Is
there
still
time
for
that?
Yes,.
A
H
F
You
assistant
chief,
chose
it
just
to
be
a
little
bit
more
clear
about
the
supervisory
role
and
discipline
that
was
talked
a
lot
about
last
week
is
not
following
this
policy
considered
like
insubordination,
I,
don't
think
so,
and
I'm
just
unclear
as
to
where
the
supervisory
role
of
wearing
of
having
your
body
camera
on
sits
in
our
it's
not
really
in
our
policy.
It's
not.
Can
you
comment
on
that.
E
Yes,
we're
still
in
the
early
stages
of
what
the
actual
supervisor
audit
process
is.
We
did
some
trainings
that
they
were
fully
aware
of
how
to
do
it
and
you
know
to
least
give
them
the
tools,
so
they
would
know
how
to
look
at
their
employees
and
see
if
they're
following
policy
and
then
to
give
them
coaching
and
instruction
and
mentorship
to
get
them
up
and
running.
E
But
the
actual
policy
itself
does
not
have
governance
in
there
as
to
what
that
supervisor
is
required
to
do,
even
though
it
was
given
to
them
in
in
class
and
instruction
and-
and
that
is
something
the
Union
has
brought
to
us
as
well-
that
they
would
like
to
see
the
direction
two
little
supervisors.
We
do
have
levels
of
discipline
built
into
the
policy
for
violations.
E
It's
a
matrix
system
and
chief
Arredondo
is
looking
at
that
now
at
this
point
and
to
really
make
sure
that
it
there's
full
clear
policy
from
beginning
to
end
as
to
what
is
a
violation.
What
is
the
discipline
that
would
come
with
a
violation
and
then
also
repeated
violations
in
you
know
escalating
discipline
to
meet
whatever
the
situation
is.
F
Thank
you.
I
also
know
that
the
police
is
in
process
of
doing
some
things
to
automatically
turn
these
cameras
on
and
off,
so
that
could
remove
some
of
the
human
factor
errors
and
just
going
about
day
to
day
work,
I,
guess
I'm
more
concerned
with
routine
dis
use
of
a
body
camera
and
how
that
how
we
can
improve
that
figure.
Something
that
was
mentioned
last
week
by
the
police
union
chief
was
about
a
concern
about
battery
life
and
in
something
that
I
thought
was
really
important.
F
They
came
out
of
the
audit
that
wasn't
one
of
the
specifics
we
spoke
about
today,
but
I
do
want
to
mention
that
all
of
the
footage
that
was
sampled
shows
exactly
how
much
battery
life
is
is
left
and
I.
That
was
never
a
problem
through
the
audit
that
the
body
cameras
that
were
carefully
chosen
by
the
police
department
do
not
have
a
battery
life
difficulty.
F
It
might
impact,
then
that
upload
again,
and
especially
when
cameras
are
used
or
not
off
duty
and
off-duty
work
that
would
come
into
play.
I
understand
that
the
technology
unit
issued
Chargers
to
all
officers
so
that
they
could
actually
continue
to
charge
even
in
a
vehicle
or
at
home,
to
recharge
a
body,
worn
camera.
But
that
is
another
concern
that
I
just
wanted
to
outline.
F
The
question
about
the
budget
really
came
to
light
last
week
when
it
was
understood
that
SWAT
team
officers
didn't
currently
have
body
cameras
and
weren't
issued
of
body
cameras
within
our
program,
we're
going
through
our
budget
process
right
now,
as
the
city
is
I'm,
curious
and
I.
Think
maybe
this
is
a
question
more
for
later,
when
you
come
back
with
findings,
but
is
there
anything
we
need
to
fund
in
order
to
make
this
program
work?
Better
I
mean
I
really
have
to
say.
E
F
It
successful
so
as
we
go
about
that
finding
we
are
curious
and
part
of
I
think
the
advantage
of
this
coming
back
yet
this
year,
thanks
to
council
member
Gordon,
is,
is
to
make
sure
that
we
can.
We
can
assess
that
and
I
think
we
are
very
committed.
We
are
almost
eight
million
dollars
into
this
program
in
terms
of
the
city
having
allocated
that
over
the
first
five
years
of
this
program
and
if
there.
F
That
is
going
to
help
us
make
this
successful
or
not.
We
always
said,
and
I
remember
back
in
February
saying
that
in
order
to
build
the
goals
of
this
program
in
two
of
transparency
and
accountability
into
a
body
camera
program
in
the
state
of
Minnesota
based
on
state
law,
that
it
would
be
a
labor-intensive
process,
it
wouldn't
be
a
simple
change.
It
would
be
a
labor-intensive
process
and
I'm
just
really
curious.
What
kinds
of
changes
will
come
from
the
police
to
help
us
make
this
successful
I
know
we.
F
E
A
long
question
appreciate
it
councilman
or
Palmisano.
Well,
obviously,
the
equipment
there
are
some
equipment
expenses
just
to
get
everybody
issued
a
body
camera
and
that
you
know
and
I
don't
have
the
figure
in
front
of
me,
but
there's
a
fair
amount
of
expense
to
that,
but
really
in
a
an
expense.
It
would
would
help
us
greatly.
E
Is
personnel
and
I'm
talking,
not
officers,
but
the
chief
and
I
have
had
great
discussion
about
having
a
couple
of
civilians
assigned
specifically
to
do
internal
audit
within
our
organization
of
the
body
cameras,
but
that
would
be
a
newly
created
position.
That's
a
full-time
spot
and
leading
up
to
this
commander.
G
E
Had
implemented
a
process
of
having
shift,
supervisors
do
auditing
for
the
for
them
and
we
can
call
it
auditing
but
renewal
of
the
and
you
know
from
our
perspective,
we
would
like
to
have
shift
supervisors
out
supervising
their
people
on
the
street
and
not
sitting
at
a
computer.
You
know
looking
through
audit
reports
and
video
to
see
if
you
know
everything
was
done.
I
come
from
the
technology
background.
E
So
we
want
to
come
up
with
a
process
that
we
do
daily
auditing,
a
video
with
some
civilian
staff
that
can
assist
supervisors
with
here's
some
issues
you
need
to
address,
with
these
particular
people
and
immediately
and
and
the
proactive
about
catching
mistakes
or
problems
or
this
errors,
whatever
it
is,
whether
it's
labeling
our
activation
and
deactivation
times
so
that
we're
in
front
of
it.
We
don't
want
to
wait
for
it
to
become
a
discipline
issue.
E
We
want
to
be
in
front
of
it
so
that
we're
in
compliance-
and
we
also
need
to
make
sure
our
policy
makes
sense.
You
know
that
the
current
policy
has
an
awful
lot
of
recording
time
of
just
downtime
it's
a
driving
time,
and
it
seems
that
that
isn't
really.
What
is
the
value
of
this
product?
Isn't
two
officers
sitting
in
a
traffic
jam
waiting
to
get
to
a
call.
C
E
I
had
one
officer
just
this
week
telling
me
about
two
calls
back-to-back
and
they
recorded
86
minutes
of
downtime
in
the
car
in
one
minute
of
active
interaction
at
a
call
where
the
car
was
DOA
or
whatever
it
was,
and
it
was
and
a
lot
in
it.
I.
Don't
think
that
was
a
spirit
of
putting
body
cameras
in
in
in
place.
E
It
was
just
a
record
to
us
are
sitting
in
a
squad
car
talking
to
each
other
stuck
in
traffic,
and
so
that's
something
where
we're
gonna
have
to
come
up
with
a
policy
that
makes
more
sense
to
actually
get
the
value
at
the
out
on
the
scenes
and
not
just
travel
time
and
there's
there's
lots
of
ways
to
do
that.
You
mentioned
the
automated
system
in
the
car.
E
The
one
we're
implementing
right
now
is
simply,
if
you
turn
on
your
lights,
it
turns
on
your
body,
camera.
That's
that's
one.
One
reason
I
mean
what
percentage
of
our
calls
dxi
have
your
lights
on.
If
it's
report
calls-
and
things
like
that,
so
that
that's
only
a
tiny
piece
of
capturing
the
total
package,
but
really
that
so
expense
wiesen
is,
we
need
to
add
a
couple
of
civilian
staffers
that
are
computer
savvy.
E
So
that
would
be
one
area
that
what
we
plan
to
do
in
the
interim
till
we
can
get
those
job
positions
created,
is
to
redirect
a
current
employee
from
a
current
position
that
we
know
that
the
individual
is
somewhat
tech
savvy
and
we
can
say:
okay,
you
know
how
to
do
the
this
type
of
work.
We
need
you
to
switch
over
from
policy
writing
or
whatever
it
is,
and
have
you
do
this
and
so
we're
starting
to
have
that
discussion
now?
A
Members,
any
other
questions
or
comments,
I've
seen
them
I'm,
just
gonna
close
it
out
by
not
asking
that
many
questions,
but
inspector
Joe
see.
If
you
can
step
up,
you
know
I
I
know
you
saw
all
this
motion
practice
about.
You
know
just
the
audit
issues
that
impede
II,
not
getting
a
response,
we're
not
getting
a
chance
to
respond
and
all
that
stuff.
We
talked
about
all
these
different
things.
You
know
at
the
unless
they
do
I
mean
like
I
I
do
want
to
say:
I
mean
this
audit
that
we
have
right
now.
A
A
We
shouldn't
be,
you
know,
having
holes
here
and
there
you
know
Councilmember
Palmisano
I
mentioned
you
know
a
bit
about
swats,
not
having
body
cams,
and
you
know
that
wasn't
my
understanding
when
we
rolled
it
out
what
Oscars
they
have
cameras.
The
issue
was,
then,
who
was
gonna
turn
it
on?
You
know
at
the
scene
of
an
incident
instead
of
just
the
SWAT
officers,
not
turning
any
on
and
not
having
a
mic.
A
Those
things
cannot
confuse
me
and
you
know
I
think
if
it
confuses
folks
who
are
on
the
council,
I
mean
I,
think
it's
gonna
confuse
the
public
as
well
and
I.
Think
people
have
these
expectations
that
you
know
our
body
cam
program
is
you
know
solid,
that
the
whole
thing
works
out
well
and
I.
Think
you
know
having
this
audits.
You
know
you
know
other
than
the
damage
just
want
to
say
like
we're,
we're
all
a
team.
You
know
the
problem
that
we
will
have
is
not
that
this
audit
came
out
and
it's
public.
A
The
problem
we
will
have
is
that
we,
if
we
don't
fix
the
problems
that
will
be
a
problem
in
the
public
and
I,
think
that
this
is
a
prime
opportunity
for
us.
So
look
at
all
these
problems
and
fix
these
problems
so
that
the
public
doesn't
see
us
not
doing
anything.
Basically,
because
you
know
I
mean
you
look
at
the
summary
of
just
the
whole
report.
You
know
non-compliance
with
state
laws.
Well,
you
know
we
kind
of
have
to
fix
that
I
mean
that's.
That's
critical
and
you
know
I
think
I
mean
this.
A
This
process
of
you
know
MPD,
giving
a
response
to
the
audit.
We
will
get
that
done.
I'm
hopeful,
but
not
only
that
I
mean
non-compliance
with
our
own
body.
Cam
policy
I
mean
we
need
to
get
into
compliance,
I
mean
that's,
that's
not
cost.
You
know
as
a
city,
it
also
has
been
PD
now.
The
third
thing
is
mean
we
have
some
issues
related
to
training
that
we
need
to
fix,
and
you
know
I
think
I
mean
one
of
the
biggest
problems
that
I
saw
in
this
was
is
understanding
who's
in
charge,
I
mean?
A
A
This
committee,
that
is
overseeing
some
of
these
things
or
is
it
the
mayor's
office
I
mean
we
gotta
figure
that
out,
and
we
have
to
figure
that
out
quick
because
it's
it's
not
acceptable
that,
like
we
have
this,
it's
great
toy,
eight
million
dollar
toy,
that's
out
there
and
we
don't
know
who's
in
charge
and
so
I
think
we
need
to
figure
that
those
things
out
and
those
are
kind
of
critical
to
how
this
program
is
successful
and
I.
Think
at
the
end
of
the
day,
I
mean
you
know.
A
We
appreciate
your
approach
to
this
and
I
hope.
You
know
its
approach
to
the
police
department
that
gotta
fix
everything.
So
this
thing
is
as
perfect
as
possible.
I
understand
there
are
humans,
you
know
involved
in
so
it's
not
going
to
be
completely
perfect,
but
to
be
as
perfect
as
possible
so
that
you
know
the
public
can
have
faith
in
this
process,
public
and
trust
that
this
process
or
this
program
is
working
because
you
know
all
I
see
when
I
see
these
problems
are
millions
of
dollars
of
liabilities
that
we
may
get
sued.
A
You
know
on
some
case
in
which
we
didn't
do
we
didn't
follow
policies
and
those
sorts
of
things,
and
that's
you
know,
as
a
council
member,
that's
my
biggest
fear,
and
so
you
know
I.
Thank
you
for
being
here.
You
know.
Hopefully
you
know
it
wasn't
a
bad
process
in
the
sense
that
you
know,
MPD
hasn't
had
a
chance
to
respond.
I
think
the
process
continuing
until
we
get
a
final
report
is
that
MPD
is
going
to
get
a
chance
to
respond
to
this
audit.
A
And
hopefully
you
know
it's
not
a
defensive
response,
but
more
such
as
a
responsive.
You
know
we're
going
to
fix
all
these
things
and
make
it
work,
and
so
you
know
I'm
closing
with
that
I
don't
know
if
any
other
council
members
have
anything
to
add,
but
thank
you
so
much
for
being
here.
Thank
you
to
the
internal
audit
department
for
being
here.
Thank
you
to
everybody
here
and
with
no
further
business
before
this
committee.
I
will
turn
this
meeting.
Oh
wait!
Let
me
let
me
take
that
back.