►
From YouTube: May 11, 2021 Police Conduct Oversight Commission
Description
View Marked Agenda
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/Board/MarkedAgenda/PCOC/2452
Additional information at
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
B
Good
evening
my
name
is
malaysia
abbey
and
I'm
the
vice
chair
of
the
police,
conduct
oversight,
commission
and
I
want
to
call
this
meeting
for
may
11
2021
to
order.
As
you
begin,
I
will
note
for
the
record
that
this
is
a
meeting.
This
meeting
has
remote
participation
by
commissioners
and
city
staff
as
authorized
under
minnesota
statute,
section
13d
.021
due
to
the
declared
local
public
health
emergency.
B
The
city
will
be
recording
and
posting
this
meeting
to
the
city's
website
and
youtube
channel
as
a
means
of
increasing
public
access
and
transparency.
This
meeting
is
public
and
subject
to
minnesota
open
meeting
laws,
and
I
would
like
to
note
that
chair
jackson
is
unable
to
join
us
tonight
due
to
a
personal
matter.
At
this
time.
I
will
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
rules,
so
we
can
verify
a
quorum
for
this
meeting.
D
C
B
E
H
H
B
F
G
B
B
B
Okay,
thank
you.
So
I
will
now
open
the
floor
to
invite
comments
from
the
community.
We
will
limit
public
comment
period
to
no
more
than
two
minutes
per
speaker
with
that.
Are
there
any
community
members
online
who
would
like
to
address
the
commission
and
remember
to
please
press
star
6
to
unmute
yourself.
D
Hello,
this
is
dave
bicking.
If
I
may
proceed,
I
I'd
like
to
commend
the
audit
committee
and
the
policy
committee
for
their
work.
They
have
truly
hit
the
ground
running.
I
hope
the
full
commission
will
follow
up
on
the
excellent
presentation
on
no
knock
warrants
at
the
audit
committee.
Communities.
United
against
police
brutality
is
starting
a
new
focus
on
that
topic,
search
and
arrest
warrants
and
the
results,
the
raids
that
follow
those,
including
the
process
of
applying
for
warrants
and
the
court
approval.
D
D
I
also
hope
the
full
commission
will
act
on
the
recommendations
from
the
policy
committee
on
pretext
stops.
I
hope
that
they
will
return
to
the
topic
also
of
positional
asphyxia
after
the
city
attorney's
office
blocked
them
from
meeting
in
march.
So
I
think
that's
a
very
important
thing
to
take
back
up.
D
I
hope
the
audit
committee
will
return
to
its
work
on
police
response
to
public
protests,
which
I
believe
was
also
blocked
for
a
while-
and
incidentally,
I
want
to
thank
the
clerk
for
fixing
the
links
in
that
audit
committee
agenda,
because
those
are
very
important
resources
for
the
commission
and
the
public
in
your
work
on
coaching
you'll
be
addressing
today.
Please
pay
close
attention
to
the
letter
from
the
legal
rights
center,
which
has
also
been
endorsed
by
the
naacp,
the
national
lawyers
guild,
voices
for
racial
justice
and
cuapb.
D
I'm
disappointed
at
your
last
meeting
at
the
suggestion
of
commissioner
pino,
you
sent
a
letter
to
the
chief
and
I'm
disappointed
that
the
chief
has
apparently
not
responded
to
your
letter,
and
I
don't
see
anything
on
the
agenda
about
him
appearing
at
your
meeting,
don't
feel
too
bad.
He
did
not
respond
to
a
similar
request
from
the
city
council.
D
Finally,
you
may
have
heard
that
just
this
morning,
amani
jafar
was
appointed
interim
director
of
the
civil
rights
department.
I
hope
there
will
be
some
information
at
this
meeting.
Regarding
the
transition
at
the
opcr,
frankly,
I
hope
you
will
be
working
with
someone
less
obstructive
and
more
helpful,
and
I
hope
that
the
civil
rights
department
gets
a
good
leader
sometime
soon.
In
the
meeting
this
morning,
the
mayor
said
that
they
will
soon
be
starting
a
search.
D
E
Madam
vice
chair,
commissioners,
my
name
is
chuck
turchick.
I
live
in
ward,
6.,
sorry
about
all
the
recent
emails.
You
can
probably
tell
the
day,
if
not
the
hour,
that
my
classes
end
for
the
semester
just
by
looking
at
when
my
flood
of
email
starts.
Unfortunately,
this
bureaucratic
comment
is
going
to
take
up
my
entire
time.
So
the
comment
I
would
have
made
I
submitted
through
limbs
and
smartsheet
forms,
maybe
from
what
I
just
heard.
This
comment
might
be
answered
later
in
the
meeting.
E
All
nine
of
you
are
essentially
new
to
how
the
case
selection
process
for
the
3k
summaries
you
review
each
month
has
taken
place
in
the
past,
so
so
many
monthly
meetings
in
2020
were
not
held
due
to
covid
and
the
lack
of
a
quorum
that
even
commissioners,
sarah
and
pino
are
probably
not
familiar
with
that
past
practice
and
casey
carl
is
new
to
this
process
too.
So
this
isn't
your
fault
at
all.
Nor
am
I
saying
you're
new
and
you
have
no
right
to
change
the
process.
E
There
is
a
silver
lining,
though,
if
the
opcr
is
not
going
to
give
you
the
case
summaries
for
the
three
cases
you
actually
select,
then
there
might
not
be
any
open
meeting
law
violation
since
the
out-of-meeting
decision
will
have
been
irrelevant.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
thank
you
for
hearing
this
comment.
B
Okay,
well,
I
would
like
to
thank
everyone
who
spoke
for
public
comment
tonight,
since
we
have
a
number
of
special
guests
for
our
coaching
presentation.
I'd
like
to
take
the
matter
up
next,
as
you'll
recall,
clinching,
was
originally
intended
to
be
discussed
at
our
april
meeting
and
was
postponed
at
the
meeting
to
to
the
main
meeting.
J
We
hope
that
this
is
a
great
opportunity
for
everyone
in
attendance
here
to
kind
of
just
learn
more
about
the
topic
of
coaching
and
just
get
a
little
bit
more
of
an
overview
and
go
into
some
nuance
about
the
topic
as
well.
I
would
ask
the
clerk's
office
if
you
could
go
ahead
and
start
projecting
the
presentation,
if
that's
possible,.
K
The
city
of
minneapolis
has
over
4
000
employees,
we
are
92
union
and
we
have
22
departments.
We
have
an
hr
team
who
works
to
support
the
city
enterprise
workforce
and
we
have
four
different
divisions.
One
is
learning
development,
the
other
one
is
total
compensation,
labor
relations
and
hr
business
partners.
K
So
with
that
in
mind,
I
want
to
say
that
I'm
going
to
come
from
the
city
of
minneapolis
enterprise
perspective
with
regard
to
coaching
the
topic
of
coaching
and
the
way
coaching
is
done-
is
a
generally
accepted
process
that
is
used
not
only
in
the
for-profit
sector
in
the
nonprofit
sector.
It
is
also
in
the
public
sector
and
it
is
used
as
a
way
to
really
work
and
provide
just-in-time,
one-on-one
feedback,
with
a
developmental
focus
with
regard
to
employee
performance
and
employee
behaviors.
K
I'd
like
to
just
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
that.
First
of
all,
it
is
a
one-on-one
developmental
process.
It
provides
immediate
feedback
and
direction.
It
is
a
tool
to
really
help
employees
get
better
and
improve
on
their
job,
and
it's
an
opportunity
for
both
the
supervisor
and
the
manager.
Excuse
me,
the
manager
and
the
employee
to
really
come
and
work
together
to
provide
and
support
and
to
help
the
department
meet
his
goals
and
objectives.
K
K
How
that
what
that
means
from
a
performance
management
perspective
is
there
are
components
of
performance
management.
One
is
around
establishing
performance
standards.
The
next
one
is
communicating
those
standards
and
then
also
providing
one-on-one
guidance
and
support
against
those
standards,
and
that's
how
coaching
is
used.
It
is
a
tool
that
is
developmental
in
focus.
K
K
Another
way
that
non-disciplinary
corrective
actions
to
coaching
can
be
used
is
providing
some
direct
counseling
to
the
employee.
Listening
to
what
the
employee
has
to
say,
helping
and
working
with
that
employer
to
see
what
some
other
options
could
be
in
some
instances,
it
may
require
additional
training
it
may
provide.
J
Perfect,
thank
you
so
much
patience.
I
really
appreciate.
We
all
really
appreciate
your
input
from
the
hr
side
and
now,
if
we
want
to
go
ahead
and
move
to
the
next
slide,
we'll
go
ahead
and
hand
it
off
to
chief
ardando
and
deputy
chief
huffman
to
kind
of
give
an
overview
of
how
coaching
is
applied
specifically
within
the
epd.
L
Good
evening
vice
chair
abdi
and
commissioners,
thank
you
for
having
me
this
evening,
along
with
deputy
chief
huffman,
so
in
the
context
of
the
minneapolis
police
department.
We
do
not
view
coaching
as
discipline.
It's
it's
really
designed
as
an
employee
performance
tool
within
the
mpd,
and
I've
certainly
laid
this
out
in
my
vision,
statement
and
I've
said
this
publicly
on
the
record.
Probably
the
most
influential
position
within
the
minneapolis
police
department
is
that
of
a
sergeant
or
a
supervisor.
L
L
We
know
that
our
society
is
not
perfect,
and
I
know
that
I'm
not
inheriting
perfect
individuals
within
the
workforce.
That
being
said,
we
want
to
continue
to
improve
upon
their
skills,
improve
upon
their
performance
so
that
we
have
the
best
peace
officers
that
we
have
in
within
the
department
and
that
our
communities
can
expect
for
that.
Some
of
the
day-to-day
examples,
and
I'll
certainly
have
deputy
chief
huffman
talk
about
it.
Her
most
recent
position
as
a
precinct
inspector,
but
coaching,
can
can
be
about
helping
an
officer
to
improve
their
report.
Writing
skills.
L
Coaching
can
also
be
to
address
an
officer's
attitude
as
well
as
help
with
training.
We
are
a
city
enterprise
department
that
has
a
lot
that
is
asked
upon
our
employees
in
terms
of
state
mandated
required
training
post
board
training.
We
have
a
lot
of
internal
in-service
training
that
is
required
of
all
of
our
employees.
Year-To-Date.
We
have
a,
and
certainly
director
ferguson,
knows
about
this.
L
We
have
a
very
fluid
and
dynamic
work
force
in
a
generational
workforce
technology,
for
example,
when
I
joined
the
department,
we
did
not
have
the
technology
tools
that
we
do
today.
We
need
to
make
sure
that
our
employees
are
all
versed
on
that
honing
their
skills.
That
being
said,
we
also
want
to
make
sure
that
our
employees
are
not
just
relying
solely
upon
the
technology
but
they're
having
those
those
face-to-face
interactions
with
our
community
as
well.
Some
of
that
could
be.
Can
some
communities?
L
Members
may
think
that,
well,
if
the
person's
not
giving
the
eye
contact
the
officer's,
not
giving
me
eye
contact
that
they
may
be
rude,
coaching
could
be
a
situation
like
that,
where
the
supervisor
sits
down
and
talk
to
those
employees
and
talks
about
the
importance
of
making
sure
they
have
that
that
really
respectful
engagement
with
our
community,
so
that
they
feel
that
their
voice
is
being
heard.
Our
mpd
policy
2-112
outlines
the
non-disciplinary
coaching
process,
which
has
also
been
consistent
in
the
language
of
our
discipline
manual
and
matrix
system.
M
Thank
you,
so
the
process
that
we
have
in
place
now
for
these
coaching
referrals
generally
begins
with
the
intake
investigator.
The
intake
investigator
will
collect
all
the
available
evidence
about
a
complaint
that
can
include
things
like
the
body
warrant.
Camera
video
reports
from
our
reports
system
call
logs
through
our
cad
system
and
they'll
put
all
of
that
together
for
review
of
by
the
joint
supervisors.
M
You'll
see
that
some
of
our
policies
and
procedures
outline
levels
of
potential
discipline
right
there
in
the
policy
manual
and
those
things
correspond
to
notations
in
our
discipline
matrix.
So
only
the
most
low
level
policy
violations
would
become
eligible
for
coaching
referrals,
as
chief
eridondo
mentioned.
Often
this
is
things
like
errors
in
report
writing
or
the
quality
of
reports
engagement
with
folks
when
our
officers
are
providing
service,
seat
belt
violations
and
driving
violations
related
to
minor
crashes
with
squad
cars.
M
M
So,
even
though,
a
level
violations
are
our
lowest
level
of
non-disciplinary
coaching
for
performance
improvement,
we
do
recognize
the
possibility
that
if
those
violations
do
continue,
we
would
need
to
address
them
in
another
way.
So
that
is
is
a
quick
overview
of
how
the
coaching
process
is
applied.
M
We've
had
about
741
coaching
referrals
that
were
made
since
2013
when
our
current
dashboard
began
keeping
track
and
about
31
of
those
have
resulted
in
a
supervisor
determining
that
there
was
some
coaching
for
performance
improvement
that
was
needed.
So
do
you
have
any
other
questions
about
that?
I'd
be
happy
to
feel
them.
J
N
Thank
you
chair
abdi
members
of
the
commission.
My
name
is
jim
router
and-
and
I
am
the
still
relatively
new
to
the
attorney
here
in
minneapolis-
been
here
since
the
end
of
august
of
last
year,
and
I
certainly
understand
this
issue
has
been
discussed
on
more
than
one
occasion,
even
with
this
commission
and
with
input
from
our
office.
N
As
she
worked
closely
with
the
hr
organization
and
with
the
mpv
I
I
thought
it
might
be
helpful
to
give
an
a
bigger
perspective
from
again.
I
am
new
to
this
role,
but
for
more
than
25
years
I
was
the
chief
labor
and
employment
lawyer
for
one
of
the
largest
employers,
not
only
in
the
state
of
minnesota,
but
in
the
united
states,
and
I
just
think
it's
important
to
underscore
what
we've
heard
from
director
ferguson
and
from
c
ferridando
in
the
sense
of
posting
is
essentially
for
just
about
every
employer.
N
Or
developer
of
the
people
that
you
actually
supervise,
and
ultimately
that
would
just
leave
supervisors
in
a
position
of
really
not
having
any
role
other
than
to
give
direction
and
then
walk
away
from
the
very
employee
of
theirs
on
their
team
that
they're
there
to
actually
guide.
They
would
really
have
no
other
interaction
other
than
when
it's
time
to
actually
engage
in
some
disciplinary
activity.
N
So
I
thought
I
would
share
with
you
that
perspective
for
somebody
who
certainly
has
been
familiar
with
this
faith
with
regard
to
employers
throughout
all
industries
that
I'm
aware
of,
and
with
that,
I
think
I'll
hand
it
over
to
assistant
city
attorney
colonel
to
dig
into
the
legal
issues,
particularly
with
regard
to
coaching
at
the
city
and
the
implications.
Some
of
these
legal
nuances
can
have.
Thank
you.
P
Thank
you,
jim
vice,
chair
commissioners.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
your
attention
to
issues,
especially
regarding
policing
and
your
service
on
this
commission.
I
just
wanted
to
start
off
by
explaining
some
of
the
legal
nuances
related
to
coaching
and
I'll
start
with
the
fact
that
the
state
legislature
defines
classifications
of
data,
and
then
our
office
advises
on
the
law,
as
we
understand
it.
With
respect
to
those
definitions,
some
of
the
other
state
laws
that
come
into
play
here.
P
Another
item
to
note
here
is
a
local
law
that
relates
to
coaching,
and
that
is
found
in
the
city
ordinance
on
civilian
oversight,
and
it
discusses
that
a
level
violations
within
the
police
department
may
result
in
coaching.
Although,
as
deputy
chief
huffman
aptly
noted,
there
are
occasions
where
a
multitude
of
lower
level
violations,
if
they
start
to
compound,
may
result
in
discipline
for
a
detailed
analysis
about
the
interplay
between
these
laws
and
the
city
and
coaching
and
where
it
has
defined
coaching
as
non-disciplinary.
P
I
would
encourage
anyone
interested
to
see
the
legal
opinion
that
our
office
provided
in
september
of
2020
in
response
to
the
then
chair
of
this
commission
of
the
pcoc
and
I'll
just
conclude
by
stating
that
coaching
of
employees
is
not
public
because
it
is
not
disciplinary,
let
alone
reaching
final
disposition
of
discipline,
and
I
I
know,
as
mr
jeffries
indicated,
there
would
be
time
allotted
at
the
end
for
questions
with
the
acting
approval.
Thank
you.
J
Q
I
J
L
Yeah,
thank
you
so
much,
commissioner.
Sarah
for
me,
as
chief
discipline,
would
be
something
that
an
action
or
conduct
by
one
of
my
employees
that
was
significant
enough,
that
it
either
violated
policy
or
procedures
or
certainly
went
against
the
the
values
of
our
of
our
department
and
so
obviously
there's
a
process
that's
in
place
through
the
opcr.
P
But
for
those
of
you
who
haven't
seen
that
the
civil
service
commission
rules
11.04
address
and
define
what
constitutes
discipline
within
the
city
system,
and
that
includes
written
warnings,
written
reprimands,
suspension,
demotion
and
discharge
and
then
the
second
place
to
look
given
that
the
primary
focus
here,
at
least
with
respect
to
the
authority
of
this
commission.
I
should
say
the
federation.
Labor
agreement
could
come
into
play
here
as
well
and
it
does
not
lay
out
the
you
know.
What
is
discipline
at
least
the
way
that
you
framed
your
question.
P
I
I
That
is
precisely
what
the
coaching
process
is
within
mpd.
There
is
a
just
a
verbal
discussion
between
the
supervisor
and
the
focus
officer.
There
is
a
discussion
of
what
was
you
know.
What
was
the
violation?
What's
the
plan
moving
forward
and
then
there
is
a
coaching
documentation
form
that
must
be
filled
out
and
that
form
is
attached.
As
the
last
three
pages
of
attorney
chernosis
memorandum,
I
believe
it's
pages
35-38
of
the
pdf
document,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
that
is
identical.
That
process
is
identical.
J
P
Thank
you
vice
chair
abdi
and
commissioners.
I
can
certainly
understand
that
all
of
the
civil
service
commission
rules
ordinance.
You
know
things
are
subject
to
interpretation
in
the
city.
We
have
a
practice
of
trying
to
always
make
sure
that
an
employee
leaves
a
conversation
understanding.
You
know
whether
discipline
has
occurred
or
not.
P
The
coaching
document
is
more
to
indicate
that
it
occurred
and
that
the
case
was
resolved
or
proceeded
under
the
city
ordinance
with
respect
to
category
a
level
violations
and
coaching.
A
written
warning,
as
is
set
out
in
the
civil
service.
Commission
rules
is
for
something
that
is
actually
disciplinary
and
the
document
would
be
different.
We
use
in
the
city
either
the
chief's
discipline
memo
for
the
mpd
or,
what's
called
a
determination
letter
in
the
city
and
the
subject.
J
M
Thank
you
in
terms
of
the
mpd
perspective,
I
mean,
I
think,
for
us
there's
a
really
significant
difference
in
how
we
approach
coaching
performance
improvement
than
how
we
approach
discipline
in
terms
of
the
timeliness
of
it.
We're
able
to
handle
coaching
referrals
much
more
quickly
than
we
do
disciplinary
cases,
because
disciplinary
cases
require
a
much
more
significant
investigation
in
order
to
handle
those
and
prepare
for
potential
grievance
or
arbitration.
M
That
would
come
out
of
a
disciplinary
proceeding,
and
so
we
do
focus
on
getting
the
coaching
referrals
through
the
system
as
quickly
as
we
can
out
to
the
supervisor,
and
they
don't
require
the
kind
of
lengthy
statement
taking
and
written
reportings,
because
they're
they're,
not
disciplinary.
So
we
can
really
focus
on
a
supervisor
connecting
with
the
employee
building
that
relationship
between
the
supervisor
and
the
employee.
M
But
at
the
end
of
the
day,
those
outcomes
are
not
grievable
and
so
we're
able
to
really
provide
that
kind
of
intervention.
Without
going
down
that
very
adversarial
pathway
that
we
do
when
we
have
a
disciplinary
case.
So
that's
one
fundamental
difference
between
those
two
pathways
and
then
I
can
turn
it
over
to
patients
ferguson
for
some
additional
information.
I
A
question
I
believe
it's
for
director
ferguson,
but
perhaps
director
ferguson
and
attorney
chair
knows
it
sounds
like
there
is
a
there's
two
different
things
that
are
called
coaching.
It
sounds
like
within
the
hr
department,
there
is
there's
coaching
that
is
informal
spontaneous
and
it's
used
more
or
less
constantly
between
the
supervisor
and
the
employee
and
that's
one
coaching
and
then
within
the
mpd.
There
is
this
other
thing
called
coaching
which
we've
been
talking
about
here
today,
which
is
a
very
regulated
process.
It
is
not
spontaneous.
I
There
is
some
sort
of
complaint
or
observation
or
escalation
and
then
there's
an
investigation
and
then
if
the
investigation
is
sustained
or
it
looks
like
that
that
misconduct
occurred,
then
there
is
this
very
regimented
coaching
process,
and
there
is
of
course,
the
form
the
coaching
form
to
be
filled
out.
So
that
seems
like
two
very
separate.
J
P
I
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
one
of
the
differences
between
coaching
and
discipline
would
be
that
coaching
can
occur
long
before
the
coaching
document
is
filled
out.
In
other
words,
the
supervisor
could
have
a
conversation
right
then,
and
there
with
an
employee.
It
wouldn't
even
need
to
necessarily
go
through.
Actually
a
a
coaching
conversation
could
occur
before
a
formal
complaint
is
even
submitted.
So
that's
first
and
then
another
aspect
to
this
would
be
that,
unlike
a
conversation
that
might
lead
to
discipline,
there
is
no
right
to
a
union
representative
present.
P
During
that
conversation,
one
of
the
statutes
that
that
I
didn't
mention
at
the
outset
just
trying
to
keep
this
simple
is
the
police
officer
discipline
procedures
act,
and
that
also
needs
to
be
taken
into
account
with
this.
So
you
know
if
if
the
mpd
could
not
have
more
casual
conversations
right
in
the
moment
and
without
a
really
regimented
structure,
that
would
delay
being
able
to
take
action
with
that
officer
and
would
require
all
the
formalities
that
are
set
forth
in
that
peace
officer,
bill
of
rights
or
the
disciplined
procedures
act
as
it's
officially
titled.
I
P
Not
necessarily,
as
far
as
must
I
I
think,
as
I'm
understanding
your
question,
please
feel
free
to
correct
me
if
I'm
misunderstanding
it,
which
is
that
not
every
sustained
complaint
must
result
in
in
discipline.
In
other
words,
not
every
sustained
violation
of
the
mpd
policy
and
procedure
manual
would
result
in
discipline.
I
I
M
So,
during
that
initial
meeting
between
the
the
joint
supervisor
team,
the
commander
of
internal
affairs
and
the
director
of
opcr
they're,
taking
a
look
at
what
is
in
the
complaint
and
what
evidence
the
intake
investigator
has
been
able
to
gather
and
making
a
determination
about
whether
there
is
a
policy
violation
that
would
not
be
subject
to
coaching.
That's
not
part
of
those,
a
level
referrals
because,
as
you'll
see,
if
you
look
at
the
discipline
matrix,
many
of
our
policies
and
procedures
are
identified
specifically
with
ranges
that
do
not
include
a
violations.
M
Q
I
So
tell
me
if
I
have
this
right:
if
it's
something,
let's
say
a
body
camera
something
violation,
and
that
says
a
through
d,
then,
since
the
it's
possible
to
be
an
a
level,
that
is
the
thing
that
makes
it
eligible
for
coaching
on
your
schedule
of
discipline.
Is
that
right,
yeah?
That
is
correct?
Okay,
so,
under
your
understanding
of
the
matrix,
something
like
excessive
force
would
not
be
eligible
for
coaching.
M
So
I
I
can't
speak
to
the
specifics
of
those
cases,
because
there
are
ongoing
investigations
and
litigation
around
that.
So
in
general
I
can
say
that
our
policy
is
written
with
the
intention
to
only
refer
things
for
coaching
that
are
considered
to
be
low-level
violations
and
so
force
violations.
Use
of
force
violations
themselves
are
not
included
in
those
coaching
referrals.
K
So
please
take
this
in
the
context
and
the
spirit
that
it's
being
given
when
I
look
at
things,
I'm
looking
at
things
from
an
enterprise
perspective,
but
it
seems
like
now
we're
going
specifically
down
this
path,
and
so
I'm
just
a
little.
I
need
a
little
bit
more
clarity
around
this.
Is
there
something
that
our
city
attorney
can
provide
some
more
clarity
around,
so
that
that
I
can
get
a
better
understanding.
I
think
that
would
be
very
helpful.
I
I
G
Yes,
I
I
had
a
really
interesting
question
for
I'm
sorry,
I
don't
remember
your
your
title.
Please
forgive
me
miss
huffman.
If
you
are
available
to
to
speak-
and
you
you
mentioned
particularly
timeliness
in
regards
to
coaching
versus
discipline,
and
I
think
that's
something
that,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
the
definitions
confuse
me
they're,
not
just
confusing
to
anyone
else
who
isn't
saying
it
and
just
thinking
it
they
confuse
me
as
well.
G
M
M
So
coaching
as
a
process
and
administrative
investigations
that
can
result
in
discipline
are
two
very
different
animals.
So
when
we
look
at
coaching,
hopefully
that
is
the
most
timely
process
we
have,
I
mean.
Ideally,
we
would
really
like
to
have
the
shortest
possible
lag
time
between
a
supervisor,
recognizing
that
there
is
something
that
we
would
all
benefit
from:
investing
some
coaching
it
or
the
department
receiving
a
complaint
to.
M
M
M
All
of
the
witness
statements
subject
matter
expert
statements,
the
evidence
from
reports
from
body,
worn
camera,
other
kinds
of
physical
evidence
that
might
be
collected
in
the
case
or
video
evidence
from
outside
sources.
Really
it's
it's
sort
of
parallel
to
a
criminal
investigation
in
terms
of
the
kind
of
evidence
that
you
might
be
collecting,
so
that
can
take
that
can
take
many
months
to
complete
before
you
take
the
final
statement
from
the
focus
officer
and
then
that
case
goes
to
a
panel
made
up
of
two
civilians
and
two
sworn
staff
from
the
department.
M
They
review
the
investigative
summary
and
the
evidence
that
was
collected
and
they
make
a
recommendation
to
the
chief
about
whether
they
believe
that
there
is
merit
to
the
allegation
or
not,
and
then
that
case
will
come
to
the
chief's
office
for
review
and
we
do
some
additional
processing
on
this
end
in
terms
of
giving
the
employee
an
opportunity
to
provide
some
more
information
to
us
before
the
chief
makes
his
final
decision.
So
there
are
a
lot
of
steps
in
that
process,
and
it
can.
It
can
take
quite
a
long
time.
M
Okay,
coaching,
on
the
other
hand,
you
know,
gets
a
gets,
a
review
at
the
beginning
by
the
intake
investigator
and
a
referral
into
the
coaching
pipeline,
and
then
immediately
is
at
the
point
where
the
officer
supervisor
is
sitting
down
with
them
and
talking
to
them
about
what
happened
and
we
like
to
have
that
happen
within
30
days.
So
the
timeline
and
comparison
can
be
much
shorter
and
much
more
direct
than
in
a
disciplinary
investigation,
which
you
know,
after
all,
of
those
steps
in
the
investigation.
M
M
G
M
G
And
if,
if
she
is
not
able
to
speak
on
this
matter,
I
would
love
for,
and
excuse
me
for
forcing
to
be
a
little
bit
more
explicit
just
so
that
way
in
case
we
don't
already
know,
could
you
tell
us
the
other
entities
that
are
involved?
Like
I
mean
the
state
laws
are
obvious
city
level.
Laws
are
obvious,
but
when
we
talk
negotiation,
are
we
talking
with
union
contracts?
If
so,
which
unions
are
we
talking
with
other
core
standards
that
are
shared
amongst
municipalities?
G
M
Sure-
and
I
and
I
think,
trina
will
probably
give
an
even
more
complete
answer
than
I
can,
but
certainly
state
law,
some
of
which
has
been
referenced
before
six.
Two
six,
eight,
nine,
the
peace
officer,
discipline
procedures
act,
we
have
perla,
we
have
civil
service
rules.
We
have
the
contract
that
we,
the
police
department,
has
with
the
police
officers
federation
for
city
enterprise.
G
On
the
other
hand,
what
you
just
said
here
today
was
coaching
is
a
really
useful
tool
to
make
sure
that
we're
having
effective
learning
moments
and
corrections
that
are
that
are
at
least
able
to
be
responded
to
faster
than
the
discipline
process
that
you
explained.
It
may
be
a
naive
opinion.
Why
can't
we
have
both
and
and
having
both
the
transparency
that
people
that
members
of
the
public
tend
to
have
a
concern
about
versus
the
timeliness
that
you
have
explained
behind
coaching?
What
is
the
barrier?
G
M
Sure
so
a
couple
of
things,
probably
in
terms
of
the
timeliness,
disciplinary
investigations,
administrative
investigations
take
time.
We
only
have
a
certain
number
of
investigators,
either
on
the
internal
affairs
side
or
the
opcr
side,
and
we're
very
fortunate
that
the
mayor's
budget
did
allow
for
some
investments
on
the
opcr
side
to
bring
the
number
of
investigators
up.
That
will
reduce
timelines,
but
nonetheless,
having
done
this
kind
of
work
myself
in
the
past.
These
things
just
take
time
more
time
than
coaching
will
take.
G
Is
there
anything-
and
I
am
not
a
lawyer-
I've
been
told,
multiple,
different
perspectives
on
this-
that
I'm
sure
we
could
go
into
if
we
wanted
to
given.
We
cannot
change
state
law
unilaterally
here
in
the
city.
Is
there
something
feasible?
We
can
do
to
adapt
to
the
way
the
data
practices
law
is
now,
but
try
to
reach
that
transparency
goal
that
it
seems
like
there
is
an
interest
in
or
is
that
just
not
happening.
M
G
M
Every
if
we
handled
every
case
as
an
administrative
case
to
run
through
our
official
discipline
system,
you
know
the
timelines
for
every
case,
including
the
serious
ones
would
go
longer,
because
we
would
be
doing
a
full
administrative
investigation
on
many
many
more
cases,
and
so
it
would
just
take
longer
for
everything
at
the
police
department.
At
this
point
in
time,
we
simply
do
not
have
the
staffing
numbers
available
to
massively
increase
the
size
of
our
internal
affairs.
M
Investigative
unit
and
opcr
doesn't
currently
have
the
budget
to
massively
increase
the
size
of
their
investigative
team.
So
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
then
shrink
those
timelines
back
down
by
simply
providing
more
people
to
do
that
work.
And
then,
even
if
we
did,
you
know
we
were
successfully
able
to
address
that
issue.
We
would
also
then
have
an
issue
that
every
single
one
of
these
cases
would
now
become
grievable,
and
so
that
final
disposition
for
discipline
would
be
pushed
out.
We
would
be
pushing
many
many
more
cases
into
the
arbitration
system
into
the
grievance
system.
M
Those
timelines
would
get
longer
and
we
would
not
reach
a
final
disposition
in
anywhere
near
the
timeline
that
we're
looking
at
now,
which
is
already
long
and
many
of
those
cases
would
be,
would
not
be
decided
in
our
favor.
Just
statistically,
you
know
we
win
about
half,
maybe
a
little
more
than
half
of
those
cases.
M
G
K
I
just
like
to
make
a
quick
comment
regarding
the
transparency
piece
related
to
coaching
and
it
gets
back
to
a
question.
I
had
a
few
minutes
ago
that
we
are
also
looking
at
this
from
an
enterprise
perspective,
and
so,
if
we're
looking
at
an
enterprise-wide
perspective
regarding
transparency
and
coaching,
is
not
just
involving
the
police
department.
K
We're
now
talking
about
4
000
people
within
the
city
of
minneapolis
who
were
working
to
develop,
grow,
enhance
their
skills,
and
so
then
I'm
and
I'm
going
you
know
just
the
question
was
asked
what
would
be
wrong
with
transparency
and
I'm
just
not
talking
about
the
discipline
piece,
I'm
specifically
talking
about
the
coaching
piece,
and
so
now
say
that
that
was
open.
We
still
as
an
enterprise
perspective
and
that's
what
I'm
bringing
to
the
table.
K
That
means
that
4
000
employees
would
also,
if
that
in
some
way,
was
taken
into
consideration
and
that
law
wasn't
there.
That's
regarding
looking
at
our
future
workforce
that
every
single
time
a
person
was
coached
that
is
creating
somewhat
of
a
possibly,
I
should
say,
a
disconnect
between
someone,
who's
really
trying
to
grow
and
trying
to
develop.
But
then,
knowing
that
that
could
potentially
open
that
up
to
a
lot
of
other
things,
so
I
just
wanted
to
bring
that
I'm
always
going
to
be
looking
at
things
from
an
enterprise.
K
B
B
I
Okay,
thank
you,
hi
everyone.
We
had
a
great
policy
and
procedure
subcommittee,
meeting
yay
two
excellent
topics
that
we
discussed.
The
first
was
traffic
stops
or
pretext
stops,
and
the
second
was
a
presentation
from
council
member
gordon
about
I'll
call
it
a
framework
for
changes
to
police
oversight.
I
I
Black
and
east
african
people
are
more
likely
to
be
pulled
over
by
a
factor
of
10
than
other
people
in
the
city,
and
so
essentially,
what
he
provided
us
with
was
this
data
that
something
needs
to
change
around
these
pretextual
traffic
stops,
and
one
thing
that
we
discussed
within
our
group
was
some
proposed
language
to
limit
traffic
stops
or
pretext.
Stop
this
language
came
from
the
minnesota
house
of
representatives.
I
It
was
ultimately
included
in
a
larger
public
safety,
omnibus
bill
that
did
pass
the
house
and
is
currently
before
the
senate,
and
so
we,
as
a
group,
voted
unanimously
to
escalate
that
language
to
this
group,
to
the
full
commission
to
vote
up
or
down
whether
we
should
send
that
language
to
the
council
and
the
mayor
and
suggest
that
they
that
each
of
those
bodies
take
action.
So,
in
the
case
of
the
mayor,
what
the
mayor
could
do,
along
with
the
chief
of
police,
is
to
voluntarily
adopt
that
language
as
the
mpd
policy.
I
The
council
could
also
pass
an
ordinance
that
either
mirrors
this
language
or
picks
up
part
of
the
language
or
you
know,
does
something
around
that
and
the
council
could
also
report
to
the
or
give
a
direction
to
the
city
attorney's
office,
the
prosecutors
there
that
they
don't
want
the
city
to
prosecute
offenses
arising
out
of
that
those
kind
of
traffic
stops.
So
you
know
like
every
the
mayor
and
the
council
have
different
roles
within
the
city,
but
they
each
could
take
some
action.
I
G
Mr
wong
provide
a
methodology
behind
these
the
data
within
his
presentation.
I
I
don't
see
it
here,
it's
and
I
just
I
feel
the
need
to
ask
from
from
an
audit
perspective.
I
would
love
to
look
at
the
methodology
behind
it.
I'm
sure
it's
it's
pretty
straightforward
of
in
an
excel
table,
but
do
you
know
if
you
have
that.
J
I
And
you
know
putting
the
numbers
together
and
he
looked
at
different
timelines,
so
he
looked
at
timelines,
leading
up
to
the
murder
of
george
floyd
and
then
a
period
of
six
months
afterwards,
just
to
see
if
there
was
a
change
and
he
controlled
for
other
factors
such
as
the
total
number
of
stops,
the
total
number
of
stops
were
reduced
during
the
pandemic.
For,
like
all
these
reasons,
but
even
when
the
total
number
of
stock
of
stops
were
reduced,
the
rate
stayed
the
same.
N
G
I
G
He
noted
as
such
on
the
the
powerpoint,
which
is
a
great
starting
point.
I
would
just
love
to
see
how
he
got
from
a
to
b.
You
know,
and
that's
it's
the
only
like
quirk
that
I
have
about
it
of
just
like
you
know
it's
the
equivalent
right
now
of
like
you
know,
in
math,
when
the
teacher
says
show
how
you
got
your
answer
like
we
have
the
answer,
but
we
don't
know
how
he
got
to
the
answer
and
would
love
to
just
look
at
that.
G
Yeah
I
mean
if
he
could
that'd
be
great
yeah.
Just
that's.
We
we're
an
evidence-based
group
right
and
I
want
to
make
sure
before
we
put
our
name
on
something
that
we're
at
least
making
sure
where
you
we
got
a
cursory
look
on
how
that
evidence
came
to
be,
not
that
I'm
doubting
it
at
all.
I
I
would
be
surprised
if
he
made
a
mistake,
but
you
know
I
just
you
know.
I
O
J
N
H
I
Thank
you,
and
we
did
have
one
more
piece
that
was
discussed
during
our
subcommittee
meeting.
It
was
a
presentation
from
council
member
cam
gordon.
He
did
include
a
two-page
document
that
I
shared
with
the
commission
that
it
was
not
a
proposed
change
to
the
ordinance.
It
wasn't
like
a
hard.
You
know
ordinance
language.
It
was
rather
a
framework
that
he
is
using
to
guide
his
discussions
around
potentially
changing
the
ordinance
for
police
oversight
and
what
he
offered
to
us
as
a
commission
is
that
we
could
do
a
couple
of
things
we
could
sort
of.
I
You
know
vote
to
like
approve
this
framework,
and
you
know
give
him
a
thumbs
up
essentially
and
and
give
him
that
backing
we.
Could
he
offered
that
we
could
take
this
and
you
know,
have
our
own
commission
meeting
on
it
or
have
an
additional
special
meaning
about
it
and
invite
public
comment,
or
you
know,
do
what
we
would.
I
I
We
discussed
it
in
the
in
our
subcommittee
and
we
all
thought
it
was
consistent
with
our
goals
and
with
the
national
standards
for
civilian
oversight,
and
we
thought
this
framework
was
positive
and
we
we
endorsed
it,
and
we
would
like
the
full
commission
to
endorse
it,
and
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
opportunities
here
for
us
is
a
full
commission
whether
we
want
to
have
you
know
a
special
meeting
or
invite
community
comment
at
a
future
meeting
or
you
there's
a
lot
of
opportunities.
There.
G
I
G
C
F
I
H
I
G
I
J
F
Commissioner,
sarah,
so
my
understanding
of
your
motion
is
that
this
is
a
vote
to
endorse
a
concept
or,
as
you
used
a
framework
of
a
plan
presented
by
councilmember,
gordon,
not
a
uniform
endorsement
of
the
entire
thing,
as
it
was
presented,
it's
in
concept.
In
theory,
the
commission
supports
the
ideas
and
would
submit
it
back
to
the
policy
procedure
subcommittee
for
further
refinement
potential,
public
engagement,
etc.
I
J
G
Is
it
possible
to
have
discussion
on
this
just
so
that
way
like
we
can?
We
can
go
over
it
and
and
make
sure
that
there
isn't
something
you
know
in
here
that
conflicts
with
what
we
want,
but
in
general
it
looks
like
everything's
fine
here,
but
I
would
love
to
hear
a
discussion
from
our
our
all
of
our
colleagues
on
this.
If
possible,.
O
Just
because
this
is
not
an
area
that
I'm
very
familiar
with,
like
you
know,
law
around
traffic
stops
and
and
what
the
police,
what
the
police
might
have
to
stop
someone
for
I'm
just
looking
at
the
wording
of
like
a
mandatory,
secondary
offense
versus
a
present
to
secondary
offense.
So
I
I
guess,
there's
questions
like:
are
we
butting
up
against
the
edge
of
the
law
of
what
the
police
can
and
cannot
do
as
it
exists
or
not?
I
didn't
know:
are
there
other
materials
that
went
into
the
ex
talk
about
the
background
of
that.
I
So
to
answer
that
question
representative
frazier
did
go
through
a
rigorous
process
within
the
state
house.
In
you
know
writing
this
is
a
proposed
law
for
the
state
of
minnesota,
and
you
know
that
whole
process,
and
at
this
moment
I
think
the
motion
concerns
the
the
framework
from
council
member
gordon,
which
is
a
separate.
I
We
had
two
presentations,
so
I'm
sorry
for
so
much
information
in
a
short
time,
but
the
second
presentation
was
from
councilmember
gordon
about
potential
changes
to
civilian
oversight
within
minneapolis
and
what
that
might
look
like,
and
he
gave
us
a
two-page
document.
It's
rather
short.
It's
meant
to
be
an
overview.
It's
not
meant
to
be.
You
know
a
deep
dive
or
statutory
or
anything
like
that,
and
and
what
he
would
like
to
know
basically
is.
I
C
B
F
Madam
chair
and
to
commissioner
sarah,
perhaps
a
better
way
of
framing
this,
then
because
I
hear
concern
about
what
is
the
intention
of
this
vote
and
I
did
attend
the
committee,
the
subcommittee
meeting
and
was
there
for
commission
councilmember,
gordon's
presentation,
and
perhaps
we
could
revise
the
motion.
If
you
concur,
I
think
the
intent
that
the
council
member
was
hoping
to
get
is,
does
the
pcoc
support
potential
changes
within
the
city's
code
of
ordinances
that
deal
with
this
group's
authority
in
line
with
his
two-page
proposal
for
changes?
F
I
think
rather
than
saying
yes,
the
motion
tonight.
Is
we
endorse
it
because
that
seems
like
we've
read
it.
We
agree
with
all
the
two
points.
Maybe
the
question
is:
should
it
continue
to
be
researched,
refined,
discussed
potential
changes,
amendments
perfections
brought
forward
through
the
policy
procedure
subcommittee
so
that,
instead
of
saying
yes,
we
love
everything?
No,
we
don't
it's
really
more
of
do.
We
want
to
continue
this
discussion
at
a
subcommittee
level
where
members
and
the
public
can
both
you
know,
engage
on
this
provide
feedback.
F
Say
we
like
this
concept
and
like
to
see
more
of
it,
or
this
concept
seems
to
have
conflict
with
state
law
or
other
city
policies
and
either
would
need
more
research
or
should
be
removed,
and
here
are
some
areas
you
haven't
even
considered
that
we
would
offer
to
you.
I
think
I
think
really,
commissioner,
sarah,
that's
what
I
I
took
away
from
that
meeting,
and
maybe
maybe
I
didn't
phrase
that
correctly
earlier-
it's
not
an
up
or
down.
We
concur
with
your
proposal.
It's
a
do.
F
I
Yes,
mr
carl,
that's
totally
accurate
and
I
support
that-
and
I'm
really
I'm
sorry
to
make
your
robert's
rules
so
messy
here,
but
I
would
adopt
that
as
my
motion
just
a
vote,
a
vote
of
confidence
in
a
way
you
know
moving
forward.
As
a
commission
like,
we
think
this
is
the
right
direction
and
we
would
like
to
continue
to
work
on
it
and
keep
it
as
an
open
discussion.
B
J
H
F
H
O
G
N
Q
G
Hi
everybody.
I
will
just
briefly
give
my
report
so
that
way,
you're
up
to
date,
with
what
we
did
in
audit
committee,
we
had
a
few
reports
from
staff,
mainly
a
brief
overview
from
andrew
hawkins
regarding
the
mpd
911
working
group
update,
and
we
made
sure
that
that
information
is
at
least
up
on
the
table
for
discussion.
We
might
be
able
to
bring
it
up
later
once
more
events
and
results
unfold
from
that.
G
G
B
We
will
now
take
up
case
summaries
that
are
postponed
from
april
meeting
under
the
unfinished
business.
We
will
take
questions
and
open
the
floor
to
discussion
after
each
case
summary
is
presented,
and
I
would
like
to
recognize
cassidy
gardner
to
present.
The
first
case
summary
is
this
time
before
cassie.
Do
you
speak?
Is
this
time
for
the
clerk
to
discuss?
Okay.
F
R
Absolutely
thank
you
casey,
so
for
the
selection
of
the
was
it
back
in
april
now,
it's
again
time
to
saving
us
the
two
cases
that
were
identified
for
the
earth.
Sorry,
the
synopses
that
were
issued
for
that
meeting.
We
have
a
new
staff.
Member
doing
this,
we
have
a
completed
system
that
pulls
all
these
cases
and
one
of
the
issues
that
occurred
was.
They
was
a
filter.
They
hadn't
turned
it
on.
R
So
the
cases
that
we
pulled
there
were
a
couple
cases
that
were
open,
obviously
we're
not
able
to
discuss
open
cases.
This
is
something
that
we
identified.
It's
actually
happened
in
the
past
with
more
seasoned
staff,
but
because
we
identified
it,
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
didn't
delay
this
process
any
further.
We
didn't
want
to
not
have
case.
I
mean,
obviously
we
didn't
last
month,
but
we
didn't
want
to
not
do
case
summaries
for
that
process.
So
what
we
did
was
we
actually
went
back.
We
pulled.
R
We
compiled
the
entire
list
of
cases
from
the
previous
three
months
for
all
under
2021
and
then
we,
I
believe
that
was
kind
of
related
to
the
clerk
as
an
option.
Just
saying
like
hey,
listen
like
here's
yeah,
you
should
have
identified.
You
know
these.
These
cases
can't
go
forward
because
we
can't
do
a
summary
on
a
case.
It's
not
closed
and
mr
hurley,
if
you
want
to
jump
in
it's
okay,
valium.
F
R
Apologize
myself
so
anyways,
the
so
yeah,
so
we
sent
those
out
because
we
wanted
to
make
sure
we
had
something,
and
you
know
there
were
three
that
were
selected
again
lisa
the
clerk's
office
can
speak
to
you
know
that
process,
but
the
three
that
were
selected
initially,
they
were
still
open
that
we
can't
do
those
are
just
at
home:
they're
not
going
away
they're,
not
you
know,
they're
not
gone
they're,
not
in
a
purgatory
they're,
just
kind
of
in
a
purgatory.
I
guess.
Actually
that
is
a
fair
assessment.
R
R
That
was
identified
as
a
previous
meeting
that
we
just
weren't
able
to
do,
and
you
know
I
say
that
because
again
it
was
you
know
it
was
a
simple
mistake:
it's
happened,
you
know
it's
understandable,
but
at
the
same
time
like
you
want
to
make
sure
that
you
still
have
access
to
those
same
cases.
So
hopefully
I
kind
of
covered
things
from
our
end
and
I
differ
clear
girl
on
the
rest.
F
Madam
chair,
I
know
that
commissioner.
Sarah
has
asked
to
be
recognized
so
I'll,
be
very
brief
and
to
the
point
I've
had
conversations
with
commission
chair
jackson
about
the
selection
process.
As
you
all
know,
I
am
new
to
this.
My
office
and
I
are
both
new
to
this
process.
As
are
many
of
you.
It
has
been
my
observation
that
this
is
a
frustrating
process
to
have
cases
presented
in
a
meeting
trying
to
come
up
with
the
process
of
selecting
those
cases
and
then
bringing
them
forward
the
next
month.
F
There's
not
a
lot
of
coherence
in
terms
of
which
cases
are
selected
or
whether
those
cases
are
in
fact
illustrative
of
policies
that
are
of
interest
to
this
body.
If
there's
a
thematic,
you
know
through
line
to
those
selections
and
so
chair
jackson
had
indicated.
She
also
is
frustrated
and
we've
begun
the
process
of
having
discussions
about
how
we
might
bring
forward
to
this
body
making
improvements
to
that
process.
So
I'm
sorry
she
couldn't
be
here
tonight.
We
did
have
a
fairly
lengthy
conversation.
F
She
and
I
to
start
that
process
and
have
already
set
the
ball
rolling,
to
have
a
conversation
to
engage
the
opcr
staff
about
options
that
we
think
could
make
this
a
better
process
which
would
align
with
perhaps
policies
identified
by
this
body.
So
if
there
were
spheres
of
policy
in
which
this
body
is
specifically
interested
directing
the
staff
to
bring
forward
case
summaries
that
align
with
those
that
would
show
right
across
the
longitudinal
basis
that
there
is
a
practice,
there
is
a
pattern.
F
There
is
something
here,
not
just
some
random
pick
3
and
they
may
or
may
not
relate
to
anything
and
who
knows
what
they
are,
and
so
I
I
don't
mean
to
disparage
the
process
as
it
has
existed
in
the
past,
but
mr
churchik
mentioned
tonight.
If
that
process
doesn't
work
for
this
body,
this
body
has
within
its
power
the
ability
to
change
that.
I
certainly
believe
that
it
needs
to
be
changed.
I
know
I
can
speak
for
the
opcr
staff.
F
They
are
open
to
change
as
well.
We
we
in
fact
have
had
several
discussions
already.
I've
had
conversations
with
chair
jackson,
all
of
which
is
to
simply
say
our
goal
was
simply
because
it
is
in
the
group's
bylaws
that
we
have
to
have
the
process
as
it
is
now
to
go
ahead
and
continue
may
june
and
july
and
then,
through
june
and
july,
bring
forward
proposals
for
change
so
that
there's
a
smooth,
more
seamless
handoff
from
what
has
been
so
we
can.
F
F
So
I
just
wanted
to
share
that
that
that
we
do
see
the
need
for
improvement
and
we
are
working
on
that
and
our
our
hope
was
to
sort
of
create
a
menu
of
options
that
then
the
group
could
pick
from,
and
that
would
inform
the
new
process
that
would
we
bring
forward
change
the
bylaws
and
hopefully
transition
to
that
by
summer.
So
I'll
stop
talking
and
just
appreciate
the
ability
to
put
that
on
the
record.
Thank
you.
I
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
carl.
I
was
actually
going
to
say
quite
a
bit
of
that
actually
and
just
say
this
is
kind
of
a
frustrating
process
and
you
made
a
good
point.
The
way
we're
doing
it
right
now.
We
can't
do
what
is
in
our
operating
rules,
which
is
to
identify
patterns
or
practices,
because
we
don't
even
know
the
year
that
the
incident
took
place.
Much
less.
I
You
know
what
precinct
or
what
the
demographics
were.
You
know
we
just
simply
don't
we
just
we
don't
have
enough
information
to
determine
a
pattern,
and
since
it's
in
our
operating
rules-
and
it's
not
actually
required
under
the
ordinance
we
as
we
can
suspend
this
process,
we
can
vote
to
suspend
it
for
a
period
of
time.
It
sounds
like
perhaps
three
months
would
be
a
good
period
while
the
clerk's
office
and
the
chair
worked
behind
the
scenes
or
for
whatever
for
context.
For
the
other
commissioners,
we
did
vote
to
suspend
this
process
last
summer.
I
I
can't
remember
if
it
was
june
or
july-
maybe
july,
because
we
just
had
so
much
going
on
as
a
commission
at
that
time
and
we
just
felt
like
it
wasn't
a
good
use
of
our
time.
It
takes
up
a
lot
of
time
and
it
wasn't
really
moving
the
needle
in
any
way.
I
was
going
to
make
a
motion,
but
I
see
a
hand
from
from
commissioner
pino
yeah.
G
I
wanted
to
just
bring
up
one
final
thing
in
the
form
of
a
question
to
a
city
attorney
joel.
Do
you
know
whether
or
not
the
current
process
that
we're
going
through
with
picking
these
is
in
fact
a
violation
of
open
meeting
laws?
It
was
raised
in
public
comments,
so
I
just
wanted
to
provide
an
opportunity
for
you
to
advise
us
on
that.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner,
and
madam
chair.
I
I
I
know
that
there
is
a
lot
of
talk
and
there
has
been
talk
about
possibly
changing
the
process.
Obviously,
that's
probably
a
good
thing
for
a
number
of
policy
reasons
and
also
process
reasons.
I
think
the
specific
comment
had
to
do
with
a
practice
that
would
involve
the
commission,
selecting
the
cases
to
hear
kind
of
before
the
meeting
or
offline
and
then
hearing
those
online,
I'm
not
exactly
even
sure
where
in
the
process
we
are
with
these
missed
months
or
if
that's
happening
now.
A
That
being
said,
the
way
I
view
that
and
that's
maybe
that's
an
idea
that
would
have
some
good
advantages
and
could
be
looked
at
it
during
this
pause.
If
there
is
a
pause
or
during
the
next
few
months,
I
do
think
that
that's
essentially
an
agenda
setting
function
and
that
would
not
necessarily
run
afoul
of
the
open
meeting
law.
It's
not
like,
I
think
the
open
meeting
law
is
designed
to
cover
your
formal
authorized
functions.
A
For
instance,
if
you
were
selecting
your
chair
and
vice
chair
or
selecting
and
authorizing
a
research
and
study
process.
But
that
being
said
it
I
mean
those
are
all
valid
considerations.
You
know
in
terms
of
data
privacy
and
also
open
meeting
laws
to
look
at
when
kind
of
devising.
What
might
you
want
as
a
commission
to
have
this
process?
Look,
look
like
going
forward,
so
I
can't
I
I
don't
know
where
we
are
in
the
process
exactly
what's
before
you
tonight
and
how
those
came
about.
A
F
F
I've
had
a
conversation
with
interim
director
jafar
I've
had,
which
also
included
mr
hawkins,
mr
fussy,
and
so
I
do
believe
that
that
will
give
us
adequate
time
to
work
on
options
that
we
would
bring
forward
to
the
body
and
give
us
a
chance
to
what
I'll
call
is
realign
the
the
operating
rules
to
whatever
the
final
selection
is
so
that
we
still
are
in
accord
with
those
operating
rules
going
forward.
I
know
that
it's
been
frustrating
and
I
apologize
on
behalf
of
staff
for
all
the
commissioners.
F
F
The
goals
of
this
body
allows
us
to
identify
those
practices
and
patterns
within
policy,
and
that
would
also
be
transparent
to
the
public
and
known
in
advance,
not
as
mr
fussy
had
just
indicated,
done-
sort
of
offline
in
an
agenda
setting
with
just
the
chair
in
the
vice
chair
and
then
brought
forward
to
the
group
without
a
clear
process.
So
I
think
we
all
are
in
agreement
with
sort
of
that
itemized
list
of
what
needs
to
be
done.
F
That
sounds
like
a
reasonable
time
frame
to
get
it
done,
and
I
appreciate
your
support.
We
do
have
ms
gardner
here
tonight
to
make
the
presentation
the
case
summaries
that
are
on
listed
on
the
agenda
if
you
wish
to
have
them
otherwise
I'll
leave
that
to
your
discretion,
whether
we
go
through
that
or
or
punt.
C
O
C
G
J
J
B
F
One
of
the
things
that
interim
director
jafar
did
do
is
to
designate
mr
hawkins,
the
chief
of
staff
in
the
department,
as
the
principal
liaison
to
this
body
and
to
the
minneapolis
commission
on
civil
rights,
and
so
it's
it's
great
to
have
him
in
that
expanded
capacity
to
provide
direct
support
to
the
pcoc.
So
he'll
be
a
regular
member
of
our
meetings
going
forward
and
working
directly
with
all
of
the
commissioners
on
their
work.
So
thank
you
to
mr
hawkins
for
taking
on
that
expanded
responsibility
during
this
interim
period.
R
Well,
absolutely
I'm
happy
to
do
it,
so
I
was
young,
but
I
need
to
go
to
bed
so
working
with
all
of
you
just
I
mean
I
know.
I've
worked
with
this
group,
a
lot
it'll
expand
into
mtcr
and
then
the
atmosphere
so
yeah
I'm
definitely
again
looking
forward.
I
don't
think
it
doesn't
feel
a
lot
different
to
me,
but
I
could
never
work
on
all
of
you
so
much
you
know
to
begin
with,
but
I'm
looking
forward
to
whatever
the
future
holds.
B
B
R
B
Okay,
is
it
time
for
adjournment?
I
don't
I
don't
hate
to
cut
people
off.
I
just
I
don't
know
okay.
Well,
we
have
concluded
all
items
on
our
agenda
for
this
meeting.
I
will
see
everyone
back
here
for
our
june
8th,
regular
meeting,
seeing
no
further
business
without
objections.
I
declare
this
meaning
adjourned
and
thank
you
for
everyone
being
patient
with
me.
It's
my
first
meeting
sharing
the
whole
thing,
so
I'm
nervous.