►
Description
Additional information at
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
A
B
Good
afternoon
and
welcome
to
the
regular
meeting
of
the
police
conduct
oversight,
commission
audit
subcommittee
for
june
21st
2021-
I
am
robert
jackson
pino
and
I
am
the
chair
of
this
subcommittee.
As
we
begin,
I
will
note
for
the
record
that
this
meeting
has
remote
participation
by
members
and
city
staff
as
authorized
under
minnesota
statutes,
section
13d
021
due
to
the
declared
local
public
health
emergency.
B
This
meeting
will
be
recorded
and
posted
to
the
city's
website
and
youtube
channel
as
a
means
of
increasing
public
access
and
transparency.
This
meeting
is
public
and
subject
to
the
minnesota
open
meeting
law.
At
this
time,
I
will
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
role,
so
we
can
verify
a
quorum
is
present
for
this
meeting.
B
B
Let
the
record
reflect
we
have
a
quorum
and
we
will
begin
the
meeting
next
we'll
proceed
to
our
agenda,
a
copy
of
which
has
been
posted
for
public
access
to
the
city's
legislative
information
management
system,
which
is
available
at
lims.minneapolismn.gov.
The
first
motion
is
the
adoption
of
the
agenda.
May
I
have
a
motion
to
adopt
the
agenda.
B
B
B
B
B
B
Target
no
worries
we're
happy
to
have
you
you.
You
just
joined
us
in
the
unfinished
business,
we're
picking
right
back
up
where
we
left
off
last
month
regarding
no
knock
warrants
and
I
do
see
we
have
staff
that
are
on
camera
now,
andrew
and
christopher
would
either
one
of
you
be
willing
to
give
either
a
you
know,
a
summary
of
any
work.
That's
happened
between
now
and
you
know,
between
last
meeting
and
now
regarding
no
knock
warrants.
E
You
know,
what's
the
easiest
way
for
us
to
isolate
the
available,
no
knock
warrant.
You
know
like
like:
what's
the
easiest
way
to
pull
this
data?
Essentially,
since
there's
not
like
one
single
repository-
and
you
know,
how
can
I
identify
these
cases
because
I
think
that's
something
where
you
know-
we've
discussed
the
white
paper,
which
I
think
at
this
point,
there's
probably
enough
material
with
all
of
you
to
start
to
go.
E
You
know
to
go
that
route
and
kind
of
get
that
initial
like
step
done,
but
then
for
a
more
substantive
dive,
I'm
into
looking
at
you
know
the
various
reasons
that
I
know
not
one
was
requested.
What
were
the
outcomes
and
kind
of
like
you
know,
find
a
way
to
be
able
to
measure
kind
of
those
outcomes
against
each
other
to
determine
if
there's
a
certain
area
where
no
knock
warrants
are
being
used
or
requested,
or
just
you
know,
the
outcomes
of
those
warrants
are
just
you
know
it
doesn't
match
up.
E
F
For
the
cases
I
did
look
at
the
dispatch
data
for
search
warrants
in
2019.
2020
is
not
a
complete
completely
for
search
warrants,
because
you
know
covert
affected
the
ability
of
search
warrants
to
be
issued,
as
well
as
other
police
resources
and
for
2019.
There
were
two
questions
or
kind
of
breakdowns.
I
was
able
to
quickly
gather
from
that
information,
and
this
is
based
on
how
the
calls
are
logged
with
the
dispatch
system,
so
for
minneapolis
police.
F
They
do
log
calls
that
are
done
outside
of
the
city
with
their
own
dispatch,
as
well
as
the
local
dispatch.
We
don't
have
access
to
any
data
for
dispatch
outside
of
the
city
city,
so
city
of
minneapolis,
87
of
their
search
warrants
were
within
the
city,
city
limits
and
13
were
outside
of
city
limits
and
then
for
the
breakdown
of
the
search
warrants
conducted
in
minneapolis.
B
F
F
B
F
B
F
A
B
E
B
B
I
guess
what's
important
here,
because
we
we
have
the
three
of
us
together
for
the
first
time
in
in
two
months,
is
to
really
a
firm
understanding
of
we've
had
a
conversation
about
feasibility
here
and
getting
information
from
andrew
and
christopher,
and
I
thank
you
both
for
that.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
making
a
like
a
focused
and
concerted
effort
going
forward
in
defining
our
methodology
appropriately
right.
We
had
a
presentation
which
was
great.
B
We
had
now
follow-up
information
which
is
awesome,
and
we
have
these
two
different
avenues
to
approach.
You
know
studying
and
coming
to
an
understanding
of
no
knock
warrants
and
their
potential
impact
in
the
city
right,
one
being
the
white
paper,
the
other
being
a
more
long-term
perspective,
and
I
think
it's
it's
worth
starting
these
conversations
off
of
saying
you
know
clearly
defining
scope
and,
being
you
know,
very
articulate
in
that
of
what
are
the
types
of
questions
we
want
to
ask.
B
B
B
Maybe
we
should
start
there
of
of
saying
you
know
essentially,
given
that
we
have,
you
know
43
of
462
180
190ish
data
points
from
dispatch.
Correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong,
christopher
from
dispatch
that
we
can
potentially
use
to
to
describe,
or
at
least
pull
some
information
out
on
the
relationship
between
no
knock
warrants
versus
declared
warrants,
and
I
know,
there's
a
specific
terminology
in
the
city
announced
versus
unannounced
is
that
it.
F
A
B
F
It
is
a
bigger
task
because
that
would
involve
looking
at
the
search
warrants
and
if
we
have
to
get
them
from
court
records
with
the
county,
then
you
know
that
requires
going
in
person
to
the
court
record
system
and
obtaining
copies
of
them.
The
copies
also
aren't
free,
so
there
would
be
some
logistics
worked
out
about
how
how
to
do
that,
and
then
it
would
require
manually
going
through
the
search
warrants.
B
I
guess
about
my
my
pre
question
before
the
the
commissioners
start
really
asking
some
of
these
fundamental
questions
since
you're
the
one
who's
looked
at
this
data,
what
jumps
out
as
you,
what
sort
of
questions
or
uses
of
this
data
would
be
the
best
you
know
for
what
we've
already
loosely
described
in
our
interests
around
known,
knock
warrants.
What
do
you
think
would
be
the
best
use
of
that
data.
F
F
F
I
believe
both
those
organizations
recommended
search
warrants
to
not
be
just
for
the
preservation
of
evidence,
so
we
you
know,
look
at
the
number
of
times
where
that
is
that
is
issued.
I
also
think
looking
at
that
rubric,
there
was
not
a
policy
on
the
use
of
flashbangs
or
destro
or
distraction
devices.
F
I
also
think
from
starting
to
look
at
this
data
that
this
is
an
area
where
the
reporting
requirements
aren't
easy
to
follow.
So
you
know
you
can
we
can
go
and
get
copies
of
search
warrants
from
the
course,
but
it's
not
accessible
in
the
same
way.
That
say
the
data
dashboards
are
for
other
areas
of
mpd's.
F
For
so
some
departments
had
you
know
they
restricted
supervisors
had
to
review
a
warrant
or
a
prosecutor
could
minneapolis
seems
to
be
geared
more
towards
the
investigators
can
opt
to
seek
guidance
yeah
instead
of
like
stopped
or
something
like
that,
yeah
and
then
I
think
anything
beyond
that.
You
know
you
need
to
look
at
those
and
kind
of
think
about
the
the
potential
information
that
could
be
out
there.
So,
for
example,
how
many
warrants
are
successful
versus
you
know
they,
meaning
that
no
contraband
is
found
and.
A
B
B
And
yeah,
so
I'm
I'm
already
curious
about
what
the
other
commissioners
would
think.
Now
that
we've
had
that
sort
of
discussion
on
the
you
know,
christopher's
opinion
on
how
this
data
could
be
used
potentially
and
we've
we've
shopped
around
a
few
ideas
before
one
of
which
I
think
was
the
last
thing
that
he
mentioned
of
you
know
defining
success
in
no
narc
warrants.
B
We
came
at
it
from
a
perspective
of
success
from
a
a
health
and
safety
perspective,
but
I
think
both
are
really
useful
of
you
know
a
a
classical
law
enforcement
definition
of
success
in
terms
of
you
know
achieving
the
contraband
or
you
know,
making
the
arrest
that
was
initially
the
prompt
of
the
warrant
as
well
as
success
by
something
I
believe
commissioner
crockett
mentioned,
is
in
terms
of
health
and
safety
of
the
individuals
that
reside
in
the
area.
That
is
being.
B
You
know
entered
by
the
police
and
that
might
be
a
different
type
of
conversation
of
whether
or
not
we
can
get
that
sort
of
data.
But
I
I
think
those
two
ideas
of
of
success
and
rates
of
success
for
each
of
those
different
values
is
something
that
I
think
is
is
a
core
question
that
I've
seen
in
the
past
couple
meetings
here.
What
are
the
thoughts
from
the
two
of
you
regarding
that
and
and
other
thoughts.
D
C
Yeah,
I'm
really
curious
really
curious
about
the
rationales
versus
the
outcome
if
they
use
some
of
those
data
points,
if
you
will
to
justify
getting
an
unannounced
warrant
or
a
no
knock
warrant
versus
what
what
was
actually
the
the
outcome,
I
don't.
I
don't
even
know
if
it's
tracked,
but
it's
interesting.
That
preservation
of
evidence
is
one
that
I
hadn't
considered
yeah,
and
it
makes
me
wonder
if,
if
those
are
being
overused
underused,
what
the
real
life
outcome
is
versus
what
they're
just
marking
on
the
paper.
C
If
there's
a
disconnect
I'd
be
pretty
interested
in
comparing
those.
Do
you
want
to
say
that
commissioner,
pino
you're
so
you're
always
so
thorough
in
your
and
your
explanations
and
your
summaries,
I'm
usually
not
left
with
a
whole
lot
of
commentary
myself,
you
usually
take
the
words
out
of
my
mouth.
B
E
Yep
yep
just
something
to
chris's
point,
sorry
to
remember
how
to
take
my
hand
back
down
there.
We
go
just
yeah
like
to
a
point
that
chris
had
made
too.
I
think
this
is
important.
I
got
this
like
the
stage
that
we're
at
with
this
is
there's
some
of
the
like
some
of
the
topics
that
he
mentioned.
I
think
there's
both
the
deep
dive.
You
know
where
you're
going
to
be
able
to
go
into
it
and
find
kind
of
that
substantive
data.
E
E
You
know
similar
cities,
some
recommendations
from
national
agencies
that
you
know
that
have
identified
that
this
might
be
a
gap
like
you
know,
just
having
any
policy
is
better
than
none
and
then
once
you
had
you
know,
so
that
would
be
something
that
could
be
in
a
recommendation
paper
and
then,
once
we
have
the
other
data,
that's
when
you
can
come
at
it.
You
know
perhaps
more
forcefully
where
it's
like.
We
actually
found
this,
and
now
you
know
we
have
a
more
like
formalized
like
right.
E
You
know,
so
it's
one
it's
sort
of
a
two-stage
process
again
like
if
the
group
would
rather
go
in
a
different
direction
and
wait
to
make
a
recommendation
on
a
policy
until
we
have
like
a
full
substantive
data
poll.
We
can
definitely
do
that
but,
like
I
know
the
one
it
was
in
that
when
we
did
the
comparison
rubric,
it's
in
the
I
think
we
mentioned
it
in
there,
but
they
with
respect
to
the
flash
bangs
and
those
types
of
things
being
used.
E
I
believe
right
now
the
policy
procedure
manual
generally
speaks
about
those
with
regard
to
use.
In
protest
cases,
so
I
don't
know,
I
don't
know
if
that,
if
it's
really
addressed
you
know
their
use
and
no
knock
is
addressed
at
all,
so
that
that
could
you
know-
and
I
think
the
no
no
or
the
no
knock
minnesota
presentation
had
mentioned.
You
know
it
was
like
you
know
any
they
can
only
be
used
in
the
after.
E
Like
oxygen
circumstances
have
been
identified,
which
you
know
like
that
in
and
of
itself
is
not
a
super
restrictive
clause.
Yeah,
you
know
it's
like
it
doesn't
you
know
they
weren't
even
suggesting
that
they
can
never
be
used.
It
just
basically
says
you
know
just
so
that
we
know
that
there
is
some
bar
for
them
being
used.
So
I
feel
like
that's
one
of
those
things
that
you
know
you
could
easily
make
that
recommendation.
Just
in
like
you
know
the
white
paper
type
format
and
then
continue
to
do.
E
E
B
B
B
A
C
B
I'll
I'll
say
from
my
personal
experience,
a
lot
of
the
times.
Yeah
I've
only
been
here
for
a
year
right,
but
when
we
have
discussions
like
this,
and
there
are
people
listening
often
those
discussions
will
potentially
lead
to
internal
changes
that
happen.
We
might
not
even
have
to
get
to
the
point
of
writing
a
paper
and
just
having
that
conversation
could
be
enough
in
some
instances,
others
it
it
does
require.
B
You
know
some
sort
of
publishing
you
know,
either
by
ourselves
or
in
cooperation
with
opcr
and
giving
more
of
a
formal
recommendation.
I
I'll
leave
it
to
andrew.
If
you
want
to
speak
more
to
about
the
you
know,
a
firm
recommendation
approach
versus
just
exposing
a
hole
where
it
is
which
one
might
be
more
feasible.
E
Yeah
I
mean
in
this
case
I
think
that
the
idea
behind
it
is,
if
you
make
a
recommendation
in
some
area
where
it
doesn't
seem
like
you
know,
there's
a
policy
is
lacking.
I
mean,
even
if
you
know,
if
you
can
make
that
recommendation
based
on
best
practices,
I
mean
it
still
is
valid,
and
even
if
you
know
we
do
the
deeper
dive
into
the
data
and
we
determine
that
you
know
what
that
area.
E
Wasn't
anything
that
you
know,
there's
no
evidence
that
it's
been
problematic
at
the
end
of
the
day
I
mean
addressing,
you
know,
like
the
lack
of
a
policy
still
could
in
and
of
itself
be
an
issue.
So
I
think
that
again,
like
I
said
before,
it's
like
one's
not
going
to
negate
the
other.
I
mean,
if
anything,
it
could
just
give
you
more
like
a
more
substantive
like
platform
for
recommending
something
further,
I
mean,
I
think
it's
also
an
opportunity.
You
know
to
just
say
that
you
did
raise
it.
E
I
mean
you
know
these
things.
You
know
like,
like
the
ongoing
like
research
stuff,
I
mean
you
know
when
we
do
the
deeper
dives
it
just
takes.
You
know
it
takes
some
more
time,
so
you
know
like
if
again
like
it's
in
some
of
it
comes
down
to
perception
of
risk
in
the
interim
of
having
not
done
it.
So
I
mean
sometimes
it's
nice
just
to
basically
provide
them
the
opportunity
to
say
hey,
listen.
E
So
you
know
it's
one
where,
as
far
as
again,
I
can't
speculate
on
what
the
outcome
would
be,
but
I
think
just
you
know,
sort
of
having
that
document
like
that.
You
know
having
that
document
that
I
think
just
kind
of
further
strengthens
whatever
you're
going
to
do
on
the
back
end.
Where
you
can
say
you
know,
hey
like
we,
you
know
made
these
recommendations,
and
you
know
at
that
point
you
can
see.
E
You
know
was
anything
adopted
because
if
it
you
know
if
it
wasn't,
and
the
findings
show
that
like
what
you
would
recommend,
it
actually
was
an
area
where
you
know
there
have
been
some.
You
know
like
there
are
some
like
notable
issues
and
I
think
it
just
further
strengthens.
You
know
the
ability
to
you
know
to
make.
You
know
probably
a
more
comprehensive
series
of
suggestions
around
that
specific
topic.
C
B
B
I
know,
commissioner,
sparks
you
weren't
here
for
it,
so
I
want
to
make
sure
that
you
had
a
chance,
at
least
in
this
space,
to
look
at
it
as
well,
and
I
I
encourage
anyone's
discussion
either
commissioners
or
staff
to
give
an
opinion
of.
Is
this
enough
information
to
start
the
core
foundations
of
a
white
paper
specifically,
commissioners,
do
you
want
to
start
a
white
paper
based
off
of
this
information
and,
if
so,
staff
feasibility
on
starting
a
white
paper
based
with
the
information
that
you
have
collected
so
far.
E
So
it's
really
quickly
just
before,
like
anybody
else
jumps
in,
I
was
going
to
say
too,
if
you
know
have
sent
the
white
paper
around
if
this
is
something
where,
since
it
seems
like
there,
isn't
any
explicit
issue
that
I
you
know
and
again
like
this
is
up
to
the
group.
So
if
I'm
misinterpreting
this,
let
me
know,
there's
not
you
know
of
all
the
stuff
we
talked
about
so
far.
There
aren't
any
of
the
issues
where
you're
like
well.
E
B
E
E
B
C
B
C
I
kind
of
like,
where
you're,
where
mr
hawkins
is
going
with,
that
that's
kind
of
my
thought
as
well,
and
I
have
noticed
some
pushback
on
the
on
on
the
part
of
the
city
when
specific
recommendations
are
made,
I
feel
like
sometimes
it's
not
received
in
the
most
positive
way,
but
sometimes,
if
you
lead
them
a
little
bit,
they
can
fill
in
the
gaps
and
they
they
respond
more
positively.
So
I
think
that
makes
a
lot
of
sense
to
me.
It.
A
C
B
D
B
B
C
A
C
On
the
main
committee
meeting-
and
we
know
we
get
a
lot
of
attention,
especially
on
the
on
the
big
committee
meeting
more
people
join
people
from
the
press
stuff
like
that,
and
you
know
you
get
that
public
attention
and
and
people
do
to
pay
attention.
I
mean
we've
seen
it.
We've
seen
the
media
pick
up
on
things,
we've
seen,
staff
and
offices
pick
up
on
things,
and
so
it's
like
kind
of
like
what
you
said.
Mr
pino.
You
know
it's
that
soft
power.
E
B
E
I
think
that
the
sooner
that
the
group
can
kind
of
like
determine
exactly
what
those
look
like
as
well,
I
I
think
that'll
be
helpful,
but
for
yeah
for
the
background
scope,
you
know
research
questions
methodology
stuff,
I
mean
I
think
we'd
like
to
get
that
done.
You
know
here
in
the
next
couple
of
weeks,
and
I
don't
see
why
you
know
we've
already
that
a
lot
of
the
substantive
research
has
already
been
done
at
this
point.
E
F
Sure
so
I
think,
for
the
areas
where
we're
pointing
out
that
policy
is,
is
missing
or
doesn't
match
up
with
the
comparisons.
You
know
that
research
has
been
at
least
partially
done.
You
know
we
have
some
best
practice
recommendations
from
organizations.
We
have
some
comparisons
with
similar
cities
so
that
that
part
is
kind
of
done.
I
think
for
the
a
deeper
dive
into
the
data.
You
know
that
would
of
course
take
longer.
We
would
want
those
parameters.
You
know
it
sounds
like.
There
are
three
main
considerations
and
that's
the
basis
for
the
warrant.
F
F
So
I
think
we'd
also
want
to
consider
what
impact
might
come
about
from
those
policies
so
that,
when
the
recommendations
are
made,
it's
based
on
the
the
most
current
data
yeah,
but
yeah.
It
seems
like
the
the
the
recommendations
that
these
policies
are
missing
or
don't
match.
Other
cities
is
kind
of
done.
The
the
research
part
is
what
would
take
longer.
We
would
need
the
parameters
for
to
continue
with
that.
B
F
B
F
B
B
Could
we
acknowledge,
or
could
we
also
be
collecting
now
data
data
from
the
start
of
this
year
on
and
do
you
know
a
year
to
date?
Comparison
between
you
know
a
control
year
like
2019
and
a
year
past
that
policy
change
to
be
able
to
determine
whether
or
not
there
is
you
know,
a
difference
that
is
significant
enough
to
be
able
to
determine
that
the
policy
has
made
there
there's
at
least
a
correlation
with
the
policy
change
and
a
change
in
you
know
whatever
vectors
that
we're
interested
in.
F
B
B
B
C
B
And
in
the
meantime,
since
it
was
asked-
and
it
is
just
a
directive-
my
and
our
commission's
end
of
the
responsibility
is,
we
will
draft
up.
You
know
three
three
to
five
kind
of
fundamental
questions,
we'll
workshop
that
around
in
an
email
format,
and
we
will
submit
those
questions
publicly
at
the
same
time
that
you're
submitting
that
background
publicly
at
next
meeting.
E
B
B
C
It's
hard
to
have
a
real
specific
question.
Yeah,
you
know
the
the
main
concern.
I
guess
that
I
have
and
kind
of
what
I'm
hearing
from
people
in
my
community
is
that
it's
it's
the
same
concern
that
some
other
commissioners
have
raised.
It's
that
is
coaching
being
used
as
a
way
to
sweep
bad
behavior
under
the
rug
and.
A
C
Is
a
good
argument
that
it
could
be
it's
something
that
we
should
probably
start
looking
at.
It
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
There's
a
huge
amount
of
public
concern
about
that
right
now.
I
think
rightfully
so,
because
there
is
no
transparency
into
the
process,
and
I
know
that
we
met
with
some
people
from
city
staff,
and
I
I
unfortunately
I
can't
recall
her
name
at
the
moment
she
was
the
human
resources
director.
C
I
believe-
and
she
was
pretty
clear
that
you
know
we
have
to
follow
the
same
hr
policies
for
all
city
employees,
and
that
includes
police
and
the
real
concern,
and
I
I
appreciate
that
position
and
I
appreciate
what
the
current
rules
are.
The
issue
that
we
have
with
that
is
like
I
understand
the
need
for
coaching
in
our
professional
lives
that
not
all
discipline,
quote-unquote
discipline
or
coaching
or
whatever,
should
be
publicly
accessible.
C
What
I
think
we
also
have
to
appreciate
is
that
police
officers,
public
safety
officers,
people
like
that-
are
in
a
unique
position,
and
it's
one
thing:
if
you're
you,
you
can
be
a
justified,
mediocre,
employee
anywhere
that
you
want
to
work
and
there's
nothing
wrong
with
that,
and
there's
nothing
illegal
about
that.
There's
nothing
bad
about
that.
Many
of
us
are
not
exceptional
in
every
way
in
our
lives.
The
trouble
is
that
if
you're
a
three
or
four
five
out
of
ten
police
officer,
you
make
mistakes,
you
don't
do
things
perfectly.
C
Sometimes
that
has
an
outsized
impact
on
the
public
and
outside
negative
impact
that
people
in
other
professions
other
fields,
other
employees
don't
have,
and
that
deserves
special
consideration.
I
don't
think
that
a
one-size-fits-all
thought,
process
or
rule
or
policy
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
There.
Police
officers
have
a
very
special
position
in
public
life.
B
B
So
it's
I
think
the
the
challenge
for
us
is
to
understand
those
structures.
Like
you
talk
about
transparency
right
and
to
me
that
goes
to
the
minnesota
data
practices
act
and
the
way
in
which
the
city
has
chosen
to
find
a
a
hybrid
classification
between
discipline.
The
formal
definition
of
discipline
and
the
correction
of
coaching
you
know
so
maybe
part
of
that
is,
is
understanding.
B
C
A
C
On
that,
I
we,
I
know
we
didn't
all
get
to
ask
our
questions,
but
that
was
kind
of
one
of
them
and
the
other
one
was
has
there
ever
been
any
kind
of
like
do
they
audit
these
things?
An
internal
pro
internal
audit,
external
audit,
with
private
results
that
kind
of
thing
I
I
don't
seem
to
recall
that
that
coming
up
so
how
accountable.
D
C
B
B
Have
they
existed,
and
these
might
not
be
those
fundamental
questions
that
we
ask
right,
but
at
least
we're
starting
to
get
the
ball
rolling
and
then
next
meeting
we'll
start
limiting
those
you
know
limiting
a
scope
down
to
a
particular.
You
know
what
what
in
particular
do
we
want
to.
You
know,
start
asking
data
sets
of,
and
you
know,
understanding
the
the
process
and
giving
recommendations
for
that
process.
B
D
Yeah
yeah,
absolutely,
I
think
my
question
kind
of
would
play
off
of
of
what
commissioner
sparks
kind
of
said
as
well.
My
kind
of
question
would
would
re
revolve
around
like
frequency
more
particularly
of
the
the
coaching.
I
don't
remember
if
they
do
have
a
you
know,
a
database
of
you
know
that
that
frequency
of
people
being
closed
or
if
it
you
know.
A
D
B
I
agree,
and
I
know
we've-
that
that
exact
type
of
question
prompted
the
dashboard
update
that
we
we
talked
about
in
our
last
meeting
or
maybe
even
a
meeting
prior.
I
know
we're
we're
a
little
bit
past
time
now,
but
andrew
hawkins.
Do
you
have
an
update
for
us
regarding
that
that
dashboard,
because
I
do
think
that's
one
of
those
things
that
it
probably
will
persist
in
the
the
core
of
this
of
just
understanding,
metrics
around
policy
versus
performance
when
it
comes
to
coaching,
you
know.
E
Yeah,
so
I
mean
obviously,
as
you
know,
right
now,
if
you
go
to
our
lpcr's
public
data
portal,
we
have
a
little
bit
of
information
about
coaching,
that's
available
in
the
coaching
tab.
There
I
mean
not
as
much
as
people
might
like,
but
that
was
why
one
of
the
that
more
kind
of
deep
dive
was
done,
and
there
was
a
coaching
dashboard
that
I
believe
we
shared
out
on
that
goes
from
2014
through
2017,
which
is
actually
prior
to
that
there
was
a
comprehensive
study
that
was
done.
E
In
order
to
make
it
make
sure
that
it's,
you
know
publicly
available
and
presented
on
the
dashboard
with
coaching,
because
you
know
there's
documentation,
then
there
can
be
attachments
and
it's
a
process
that
can
take
place.
You
know
it's
within
the
precincts,
it's
not
as
straightforward
how
to
do
that,
which
is
kind
of
why
it
was
done
as
that
the
kind
of
independent
project
so
yeah,
so
we're
in
the
products
process
of
trying
to
figure
out.
E
Like
you
know
what
does
this
look
like
if
we
want
to
get
this
updated
to
where
it's
something
that
we
just
sort
of
have
an
ongoing?
And
you
know
it
might
not
be
as
long.
You
know,
at
least
in
its
initial
iteration.
It
might
not
be
something
that
you
know
the
data
portal
updates
every
you
know
lives,
it's
live
it's
like,
as
things
happen,
it's
able
to
you
know,
update.
E
You
know
daily
a
couple
times
a
day
and
you
know
provide
that
stuff
sort
of
in
real
time
with
coaching
that
might
not
be
as
possible
with
the
current
structure.
It
might
be
something
where
maybe
it's
you
know
quarterly.
It's
it's
updated,
but
we're
trying
to
figure
out
what
this
would
look
like
and
kind
of
what
the
you
know.
What
like
the
overall
lift
for
this
to
be
done
in
an
ongoing
basis,
would
look
like
as
well
but
yeah
I
mean
if
you've
seen
the
you
know.
E
If
you've
seen
the
temple
portal
that
we
have
for
the
14
to
17
data,
I
mean
I
think
it
is
very
interesting
and
the
biggest
thing
is
in
keeping
in
line
with
data
practices
on
the
current
data
practices
law
is,
you
know
like
barring
any
other,
like
substantive
changes
like
the
biggest
thing
is
just
making
sure
that
you
know
everything
can
be
lifted
up
to
a
point
where
it's
not.
You
know
like
it's
not
personally
identifiable,
so
as
long
as
we
can
do
that
I
mean
I,
you
know,
we've
done
it
before.
E
B
E
B
E
E
You
know
for
when
everything
like
settles,
if
we're
able
to
then
you
know,
have
something,
that's
ready
and
tangible
that
we
can
launch,
however,
like
any
substantive
changes
to
like
the
way
that
we're
present
the
addition
of
new
information.
That
might
be
where
we
run
into
something
where
it's
like,
because
of
the
ongoing
lawsuit
like
everything's,
just
sort
of
on
pause
until
something's
resolved.
There
is
the
other
component
too,
where,
depending
on
what
we're
looking
at,
if
there
are
any
changes
or
anything
that
come
out
of
the
litigation,
then
you
know
that.
A
E
B
Totally
understand
well,
thank
you
very
much
and
I
don't
want
to
hold
people
longer
than
necessary.
We
started
about
five
minutes
late
and
we're
five
minutes
over
right
now,
unless
there
is
more
from
my
colleagues
to
speak
on
the
matter
of
coaching
we'll
table
this
item
as
well
until
our
next
meeting
and
because
the
other
item
of
unfinished
business
ended
up
in
a
directive
to
receive
a
report,
this
one
will
share
a
little
bit
more
of
the
limelight
than
than
it
received
in
this
meeting.