►
From YouTube: January 12, 2021 Police Conduct Oversight Commission
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Let's
call
this
meeting
to
order
good
evening.
My
name
is
cynthia
jackson.
I
am
the
interim
vice
chair
of
the
police
conduct
oversight,
commission
and
I'm
going
to
call
this
regular
meeting
for
january
12th
to
order.
I
want
to
welcome
everyone
who
is
joining
us
this
evening,
I'll
note
that
we
have
remote
participation
by
members
and
staff
as
authorized
by
minnesota
statutes,
section
13d021
due
to
the
declared
local
public
health
emergency
at
this
time,
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
role
to
verify
a
quorum.
C
D
A
Let
the
record
reflect
that
we
do
have
a
quorum
at
this
time.
I'd
like
to
welcome
our
new
members,
jordan,
crockett
john
sylvester
and
carrie
mcguire.
Would
you
all
like
to
share
a
little
bit
about
yourself,
so
we
can
your
eyes
with
you
who
wants
to
go
first.
C
G
Hi
how's
everybody
doing.
My
name
is
jordan
and
a
little
bit
about
me.
Married
I've
been
married.
Three
years
now
live
in,
we
live
in
phillips.
We
live
in
a
duplex.
G
I
work
in.
I
work
remotely,
I
guess
now
since
corona,
but
I
work
at
vanco.
They
do
like
software
for
faith-based
organizations
and
education.
I
love
sports
love,
people
meeting
people
and
definitely
got
a
passion
for
civil
rights
and
and
and
speaking
up
for
for
the
for
those
who
can't
speak
up
for
themselves.
A
Thank
you
who
do
we
have
next
kelly
or
john.
E
I'm
happy
to
go.
Go
next,
thanks
for
not
making
me
go.
First,
I'm
carrie
mcguire,
I'm
been
a
resident
of
minneapolis
since
2013,
I'm
from
the
chicago
area
originally,
but
I'm
also
married
and
my
spouse
is
from
minnesota.
So
I
think
that
generally
means
you're
pretty
much
settled
here
once
you
marry,
I
really
enjoy
minneapolis,
it's
grown
on
me
a
lot.
I
do
immigration
law
and
my
focus
is
removal
defense
for
a
detained
person.
E
So
I
work
a
lot
with
people
who
have
had
some
sort
of
interaction
with
the
minneapolis
police
department
and
are
now
in
ice
custody
or
who
are
working
with
the
minneapolis
police
department
on
visas
for
crime
victims,
so
kind
of
in
a
couple
different
capacities.
E
I,
besides
that
there's
not
much
going
on
during
the
pandemic,
so
I
go
outside
and
walk
and
run,
and
I'm
really
excited
to
be
here.
E
I
I
My
primary
focus
at
the
department
right
now
is
homelessness
in
our
interaction
with
unsheltered
patients
that
we
serve
and
how
we
can
kind
of.
Do
that
a
lot
better.
I
am
really
looking
forward
to
learning
more
about
perspectives
that
probably
differ
from
mine
and
that's.
This
is
a.
This
is
a
phenomenal
opportunity.
So
thank
you
in
advance
to
everybody
who's
going
to
teach
me
some
things.
A
Well,
thank
all
three
of
you
for
for
putting
yourselves
forward.
You
know
to
join
us
on
the
commission.
I
just
want
to
say
welcome
again,
and
I
am
so
looking
forward
to
serving
every
with
everybody.
So
with
that,
we
will
now
turn
to
the
agenda
for
tonight's
meeting.
The
agenda
is
before
us:
are
we
going
to
put
that
up
on
the
screen,
or
are
we
all
just
going
to
look
at
it
separately?
A
This
is
my
first
time
everybody,
so
I'm
kind
of
just
trying
to
not
make
any
mistakes
here
and
there
was
a
copy
that
was
posted
to
the
city's
limbs
site
for
public
access.
Yesterday
and
may
I
have
a
motion
to
adopt
the
agenda.
K
Madam
vice
chair,
just
for
the
sake
of
expediency,
would
it'd
be
okay
for
us
to
have
a
joint
motion
to
both
adopt
the
agenda
and
accept
the
minutes
of
december
8th
2020.
K
A
A
K
A
No
okay.
I
will
then
ask
the
clerk
to
take
a
roll
on
the
motion
to
adopt
the
agenda
and
the
minutes.
Commissioner,
jackson.
C
C
E
F
A
Okay,
thank
you.
So
that's
been
adopted
and
the
next
item
of
business.
No,
we
already
did
that.
We
have
a
proper
motion.
I'm
sorry,
you
guys
I'm
reading
off
a
script,
because
I
I'm
not
real
practice
at
this.
I'm
real
rusty,
so
we've
already
added
the
minutes
and
the
agenda.
A
So
our
next
order
of
business
is
the
acceptance
of
public
comments,
but
before
we
open
the
floor
to
comments
from
the
community,
I'd
like
to
recognize
council
member
fletcher,
who
requested
the
opportunity
to
address
the
commission
this
evening,
he
has
presentation
for
us.
Welcome.
Commissioner
fletcher
are
you
here
with
us
this
evening?
We
want
to
welcome
you.
L
I
am
thank
you
for
the
invitation,
madam
chair
and
commissioners,
and
I'm
really
thrilled
to
be
able
to
present
to
you
today
and
especially
on
several
of
your
first
meeting.
I
know
there's
several
of
you
who
have
stepped
up
into
this
role
and
I
appreciate
your
work.
L
So
thank
you
for
that
to
provide
a
little
bit
of
context,
I'm
here
today
to
talk
about
our
ongoing
work
on
facial
recognition,
technology
and
surveillance
technology
generally
and
wanted
to
just
provide
a
little
bit
of
context
for
that,
and
then
I
also
invited
a
couple
of
community
partners.
Who've
been
working
on
this
to
join
me
in
presenting
the
information.
L
So,
as
as
background
for
those
of
you
who
were
on
the
commission
last
year,
I
came
by
when
we
were
working
on
data
privacy
principles.
So
the
first
step
in
sort
of
establishing
a
data
privacy
framework
for
our
city
was
to
was
to
adopt
principles
that
described
a
shared
set
of
values,
and
we
came
by
and
had
a
discussion
about
that.
L
That,
basically
just
said,
we
recognize
that
we
need
to
protect
people's
data
and
be
thoughtful
about
what
we're
collecting
about
people
and
what
kinds
of
surveillance
people
are
subject
to
as
they're
moving
throughout
their
days
in
in
our
city.
Having
passed
those
principles,
then
we
convened
a
a
community
work
group
around
to
discuss
what
the
next
steps
were,
and
there
was
a
sort
of
broad
coalition.
That's
formed
around
particularly
surveillance
technology.
L
Thinking
about
what
technologies
is
the
city
using
to
watch
over
what's
happening
in
our
city
and
what
data
are
we
gathering
about
our
residents
and
visitors,
and
we
began
the
process
as
many
cities
have,
of
taking
those
data
privacy
principles
that
the
council
passed
last
year
and
beginning
to
turn
them
into
ordinance.
L
L
As
a
part
of
that
conversation,
it
became
clear
that
there
was
significant
community
interest
in
the
issue
of
facial
recognition
as
a
first
step,
and
it's
something
that
we
might
want
to
move
more
quickly
on
then
we're
moving
on
the
broader
surveillance
technology
project,
and
so
we
separated
that
out
into
an
ordinance
that
we
are
moving
towards
passage
on
so
now's
a
good
time
for
us
to
be
talking
about
this.
L
We'll
actually
be
posting
draft
language
in
the
in
the
next
week
and
scheduling
a
public
hearing
so
we're
to
a
place
where
we
actually
have
this
drafted.
And
so
I
wanted
to
come
here,
because
I
had
a
couple
of
meetings
with
members
of
the
pcoc
where
we
had
been
talking
about.
L
How
can
we
build
a
stronger
relationship
and
a
more
generative
working
relationship
between
the
council
and
the
pcoc,
and
one
of
the
requests
was
when
you're
working
on
policy
that
has
a
public
safety
implication
to
come
to
this
commission
for
feedback
and
guidance
and
to
share
ideas.
And
so
we
are
here
today
to
talk
about
our
approach
to
facial
recognition,
work
that
is
fairly
fully
cooked.
L
We're
to
a
point
where
we
have
a
draft
that
we
can
show
you
and
then
also
to
take
feedback
more
broadly
on
surveillance
technology,
to
see
what
ideas
or
priorities
might
be
here
and
that
you'd
be
getting
very,
very
much
in
on
the
early
end
of
of
concept
development
for
that,
so
we're
sort
of
looking
for
feedback
more
broadly
on
the
topic,
but
also
specifically
on
the
question
of
facial
recognition
and
how
that
might
have
an
impact
as
you're
thinking
about
public
safety
policy.
L
So
with
that
being
said,
I
want
to.
We
have
a
a
short
powerpoint
presentation
and
I
want
I
I
want
to
invite
a
couple
of
guests
who
I've
brought
with
munir
muhammad
from
you,
I
think,
is
on
the
call
and
I'll
let
the
guests
introduce
themselves
and
talk
you
through
the
way
that
we've
approached
this
topic.
M
N
Yeah
hi,
my
name
is
chris.
I
am
a
freelance
cyber
security
and
penetration
tester
and
I'm
the
chair,
co-chair
of
restore
the
fourth
minnesota
part
of
the
post
me
coalition.
M
M
Please
all
right
lovely,
let
me
go
back
to
the
beginning.
Can
everyone
see
it?
Yes,
awesome
all
right
so
again
we're
here
to
do
a
quick
briefing
on
the
facial
recognition
band,
ordinance
that
we're
about
to
introduce
we're
working
with
council
member
fletcher
with
our
coalition
public
oversight
of
surveillance,
technology
and
military
equipment
or
post
me?
M
For
short,
it's
dedicated
to
surveillance,
advocacy
within
minneapolis
and
minnesota
broadly
so
again,
just
to
talk
about
why
we're
here,
why
is
facial
recognition
so
important
that
we'd
like
to
introduce
a
ban
on
it,
and
it's
quite
simply
that
it's
incredibly
unreliable,
that
it
has
really
horrific
racial
biases
and
lack
of
regulation
leading
to
really
devastating
consequences
like
false,
false
arrests
and
lack
of
transparency
and
really
harmful
impacts
for
people,
especially
as
we've
seen
with
all
the
unrest
lately,
protesters
are
especially
impacted
by
this,
and
I
think
it
might
be
important
to
note
the
recent
events
at
the
capitol.
M
There
was
a
lot
of
facial
recognition,
facial
recognition,
technology
used
at
the
capitol
to
find
writers
and
protesters,
and
I
think
it
should
be
noted
that
this
is
probably
the
only
population
that
facial
recognition
does
work
on,
that
capital
rioters
were
largely
white
men
and
that
with
any
other
group
or
any
other
demographic,
the
technology
is
just
horribly
unreliable
and
that's
why
we
want
to
regulate
it.
N
All
right,
so
this
is,
I
wanted
to
highlight
this.
So,
as
I
said,
my
name
is
chris.
I
am
a
security
and
I
work
with
tech
every
day
so
and
I've
actually
done
a
lot
of
work
with
facial
recognition.
N
The
the
infographic
is
the
result
of
some
great
mit
that
was
presented
to
the
united
states
house
committee
on
oversight
and
government
reform,
and
you
could
it
blended
together
a
whole
bunch
of
faces
and
or
they
did
a
whole
bunch
of
facial
recognition
on
a
bunch
of
different
faces,
and
then
you
can
see
like
the
composite
results
of
that
in
the
center
there.
N
You
can
see
that
the
average
success
rate
is
around
79
if
you're,
dark
or
female,
and
you
can
see
if
you're
you
can
see
just
the
gap
between
performance
between
darker
skinned
individuals
and
lighter
skinned.
Individuals
is
incredibly
high
and
you
just
have
to
ask
yourself,
like
I
think,
councilmember
fletcher
actually
said
this.
N
One
point
is
like:
if
we
had
a
vendor
come
to
us
and
say
we,
oh,
we
have
a
phone
that
works,
a
hundred
percent
of
the
time
with
white
men,
but
we
have,
but
this
phone
only
works
like
75
percent
of
the
of
the
time
with
with
black
women.
You
know
you
have
to
ask
them.
Well,
I
don't
think
we're
going
to
buy
your
phones
so
yeah
this
you
can
see
the
this
is
from
2018,
but
yeah.
N
You
can
see
that
the
discrepancies
between
how
facial
recognition
impacts,
different
populations
is
fairly
severe
minor.
Could
you
go
to
the
next
slide
please
so
facial
recognition
works
on
what's
called
computer
vision,
which
is
a
form
of
artificial
intelligence.
What
it
does
is
it
just
breaks
down
the
image
and
tries
to
look
for
identifying
patterns,
so
you
can
see
how
this
is.
N
What
we
did
is
we
took
a
picture
and
we
fed
it
into
google
computer
vision
and
then
what
they
did
is
they
looked
at
that
picture
and
they
gave
us
some
confidence
ratio.
So
all
right,
we
see
68
that
this
picture
contains
technology.
N
N
So
this
is
another
picture
that
the
fed
into
the
exact
same
system-
and
you
can
see
that
it
has.
You
know
similar
similar
scenario
guy
just
you
know
pointing
the
thermometer
someone
said
to
take
his
temperature,
but
google
thinks
it's
a
gun
and
it
thinks
and
it
thinks
it's
a
gun
with
an
88
act.
N
You
know
that's
how
confident
it
is
that
there's
a
gun
in
that
picture,
so
yeah
and
then
this
is
actually
research
done
by
e
moon
solomon
and
what
he
did
is
he
cropped
it
and
he
just
turned
up
the
contrast
and
then.
N
N
This
is
the
kind
of
results
you
get
when
you
have
a
code
base
that
isn't
easily
reviewable
and
you
it's
just
the
way
that
machine
learning
worked.
The
way
that
machine
learning
works,
results
in
these
kinds
of
unpredictable
and
not
terribly
easy
to
fix
outcomes
to
make
to
make
a
very
complicated
thing.
Try
more
simple.
M
Thank
you
chris,
so
just
to
talk
about
what's
actually
in
the
bill,
so
the
bill
is
quite
simple.
It's
two
or
three
pages,
and
it's
essentially
banning
the
city
from
requiring
obtaining
the
use
of
facial
recognition
technology.
It
also
bans
the
entering
into
third-party
contracts.
There's
also
some
exceptions,
though,
that
I'm
sure
you
guys
would
have
questions
about
so
things
like
single
user
cell
phones
are
exempt.
Just
using
your
face
to
open
your
computer
or
your
phone
is
exempt
also
if
the
technology
is
bundled
with
something
else.
M
Another
software
that's
also
exempt.
So
there's
also
exemptions
in
that
beyond
just
the
straight
ban,
and
we
also
just
want
to
note
that
this
bill
does
not
ban
the
private
use
of
facial
recognition
technology.
So
I
think
people
like
small
businesses
can
still
use
this
but
yeah.
That
is
the
quick
overview
and
here's
the
timeline
that
we're
looking
at
again.
M
So
we
hopefully
will
have
language
public
by
this
week
and
then
in
late
january,
we'll
have
a
community
feedback
session
just
so
that
community
members
can
give
their
feedback,
give
their
opinions
and
thoughts
to
council
member
fletcher
as
well
as
members
of
our
coalition,
and
we
expect
to
be
in
committee
and
vote
time
sometime
in
february
early
february,
but
yeah.
That
is
the
briefing.
L
Okay,
very
good,
so
I
hope
that
this
is
the
kind
of
presentation
that
the
pcoc
finds
valuable
and
we'd
love
to
hear
feedback.
If
there
are
commissioners
who
have
a
perspective
on
the
use
of
this
technology
or
advice
on
directions,
we
should
go
with
this
policy,
as
this
coalition
considers
its
next
steps
and
thank
you
to
everybody
for
participating.
A
Well,
we
want
to
thank
you
cm
fletcher.
We
really
appreciate
this
information
that
you
brought
to
us
tonight
and
I'm
sure.
As
a
commission,
we
will
be
contacting
you
with
comments
or
questions.
So
thank
you
again
very
much
for
coming
tonight.
O
And
madam
chair,
we
may
need
to
advise
those
who
are
on
the
call
from
the
public
that,
in
order
to
be
recognized,
they'll
need
to
press
star
six
to
unmute
their
phone.
In
order
to
request
you
know,
state
their
name
and
request
recognition.
O
O
A
I'm
not
sure
of
our
procedure
here
is
this
time
reserved
for
the
community
or
are
commissioners
allowed
to
speak
as
well?
I
I
don't
know
someone
advised
me.
O
Yes,
madam
chair,
the
commissioners
requested
recognition,
so
you
should
recognize
her
all
right.
H
Thank
you.
Well,
I
hope
my
remarks
are
worth
it.
Okay,
so
thank
you,
councilmember
fletcher
and
the
post
me
volunteers
for
being
here.
I
think
this
is
a
perfect
example
of
how
the
council
and
pcoc
can
work
together.
So
thank
you
for
this
opportunity
and
thank
you
for
just
bringing
me
up
to
date.
I'm
interested
in
this
kind
of
thing,
but
I
don't
personally
have
a
background
in
technology,
so
that's
kind
of
where
I
get
lost,
so
I
found
this
super
informative.
H
One
thing
I
would
like
to
suggest:
I
do
have
a
background
in
criminal
defense,
so
I'm
kind
of
familiar
with
how
this
might
play
out
in
a
criminal
defense
or
you
know,
a
prosecution,
and
I
would
like
to
suggest
some
kind
of
limiting
language
in
your
ordinance
or
a
standalone
ordinance
that
talks
about
how
this
could
be
used
in
criminal
cases,
and
it
wasn't
an
original
idea
of
mine
as
one
example
there's
a
minnesota
states
regarding
confessions,
it's
minnesota
statute.
I
wrote
it
down
634.03
and
that
statute.
H
It
prohibits
a
conviction
based
on
a
confession
alone,
and
it
also
limits
when
a
confession
can
be
used
in
trial.
Like
it
can't,
if
the
confession
was
coerced,
it
can't
be
used
as
evidence
in
trial,
for
example.
H
I
think
something
like
that
could
work
very
well
in
this
space,
a
city
ordinance
that
would
say
something
along
the
lines
of
facial
recognition.
Technology
shall
not
be
sufficient
to
warrant
conviction
without
evidence
of
the
offense
charge.
Evidence
that
the
offense
charged
has
been
committed
that
tracks
exactly
with
the
ordinance
or
statute
I
just
cited.
Nor
can
it
be
given
in
evidence
against
a
defendant
in
trial
and
by
saying
in
trial
it
still
could
be
used
to
potentially
identify
a
person
conduct
an
investigation.
H
You
know
it
could
lead
to
a
charge
perhaps,
but
it
wouldn't
be
the
only
thing,
standing
alone
at
trial,
and
it
also
wouldn't
be
introduced
at
trial
because
with
such
a
high
error
rate,
particularly
with
people
of
color,
even
just
the
introduction
of
it.
Even
if
the
defense
attorney
tore
it
apart
it
would.
It
could
really
cause
a
lot
of
problems,
so
that
was
it.
A
Yes,
thank
you,
commissioner.
Sarah
thank
you
very
pertinent
points
there.
I
would
like
to
invite
any
further
comments.
A
K
No
worries
and
and
if,
if
councilmember
fletcher,
you
would
like
to
respond
to
council
to
commissioner
sarah
before
I
ask
my
question,
be
more
than
happy
to
yield
my
time
to
you.
L
I
can
I
I
can
respond
briefly.
I
appreciate
the
feedback
and
you
know
I
think
in
looking
into
this.
One
thing
that's
worth
noting
and
that
I
should
have
actually
said
in
the
context
is
that
this
ordinance
is
drafted
as
anything
that
the
council
does,
particularly
because
of
charter
language,
limiting
our
ability
to
write
mpd
policy.
L
This
is
an
ordinance
that
applies
broadly
to
the
city
enterprise,
and
so
it
is
not
only
mpd
employees,
but
it
would
also
apply
to
employees
in
the
city,
attorney's
office
and
employees
in
any
other
department.
That
might
be
considering
deploying
facial
recognition
as
as
the
technology
expands,
and
so
I
think
in
many
ways-
and
I
think
it's
worth
checking
against
the
language
that
you
suggested.
L
Commissioner,
sarah,
we
may
in
many
ways
have
already
covered
this
territory
by
by
suggesting
that
city
employees
can't
use
or
acquire
this
technology,
so
I
think
that
would
probably
apply
at
least
to
the
prosecutor's
staff
for
the
misdemeanor
crimes
that
that
the
city
attorney's
office
manages
we're
not
legally
able
to
restrict
the
behavior
of
the
county
attorney's
office.
C
K
Reclaiming
my
time,
I
just
have
two
questions
that
that
you
might
be
able
to
answer.
I'm
also
new,
to
you
know
the
intersectionality
between
the
criminal
justice
system
and
facial
recognition
systems,
but
in
case
you
do
have
the
answers.
Do
you
know
whether
or
not
md
mpd
have
facial
recognition
systems
already
active
and
then?
Second
from
my
rough
googling,
I
have
understanding
that
there
are
some
systems
that
both
record
and
do
the
analysis
at
the
same
time,
and
then
there
could
be
other.
K
You
know
more
low-budget
ways
of
taking
previously
recorded
material
and
doing
the
facial
recognition.
Analysis
on
that
does
your
ordinance
encompass
both
of
those
in
its
scope.
L
Both
really
good
questions,
thank
you.
The
the
ordinance
does
encompass
both
and
the
accuracy
issues,
and
particularly
the
racial
bias
issues
that
the
coalition
identified
in
their
presentation
apply
equally
to
both,
which
is
why
we're?
Why
we're
looking
at
that?
L
I
think
this
is
one
of
those
interesting
things
where,
if
at
a
future
date,
the
technology
got
to
a
place
where
the
reliability
arguments
fall
away,
then
I
think
we're
going
to
have
to
have
a
different
set
of
ethical
arguments
about
what
kinds
of
surveillance
do
we
want
to
be
subjected
to,
and
and
what
does
it
mean
for
that
data
to
be
collected?
But
I
think
right
now.
L
Actually,
the
reliability
argument
makes
it
a
very
easy
decision
to
say
this
just
doesn't
work
and
we
need
to
not
not
be
relying
on
it.
In
answer
to
your
question,
part
of
the
reason
that
we
wanted
to
move
on
this
in
a
timely
way
is
that
mpd
doesn't
currently
own
their
own
technology
related
to
facial
recognition.
But
what
we
are
starting
to
see
the
way
that
mpd
currently
uses
facial
recognition
in
a
limited
way
is
by
borrowing
the
technology
from
the
county
sheriff
stanek
prior
to
sheriff.
L
Hutchinson's
election
have
made
some
significant
investments
in
technology,
and
so
it's
available
there
and
at
times
there's
been
collaboration
where
they've
sort
of
borrowed
the
technology
from
from
the
county.
And
so
so
we
wanted
to
look
at
that
and
place
some
restrictions
before
purchases
were
considered
so
that
we
weren't
going
to
have
to
claw
something
back
many
of
the
forms
of
technology
that
are
currently
that
are
currently
used
that
I
think
we
probably
are
comfortable
with.
L
Although
there
will
be
some
disclosure
about
it
in
future
surveillance
technology
processes
that
we'll
work
on
setting
up
are
starting
to
offer
facial
recognition
as
an
add-on
feature
or
as
a
as
something
that
you
can
tack
on
and
so
looking
down
the
road.
It's
not
very
far
down
the
road
that
we
would
start
to
see
the
technology
be
part
of
mpd's
toolkit
if
we
weren't
to
regulate
it,
and
I
think
it's
something
that
we
that
we
see
a
reason
to
regulate.
K
K
Lead
yeah
thank
you
for
taking
the
leadership
on
this
yeah.
We
appreciate
you
coming
and
sharing
it
with
us
tonight.
I
have
no
further
questions.
Vice
chair.
E
I
would
like
to
ask
a
question:
if
that's
all
right,
I,
this
might
have
been
something
that
you
know
you've
envisioned
already,
but
you
mentioned
that
there
I
can
imagine
it'd
be
difficult
to
place
restrictions
on
private
parties
using
facial
recognition.
Is
there
any
way
or
has
it
been
addressed,
how
police
law
enforcement,
maybe
locally
or
other
law
enforcement
agencies,
can
access
private
companies
or
private
businesses
facial
recognition
software?
L
Yes,
please!
Yes
thank
you
for
that.
So
so
yes,
our
our
scope
as
a
municipality
to
regulate
private
use
is
somewhat
limited.
Portland
is
actually
taking
an
interesting
stab
at
this
in
places
of
public
accommodation,
so
there's
a
rising
trend,
for
example
in
big
box
retail
stores
of
scanning
customers
to
to
create
ids.
L
So
even
if
you
don't
buy
something,
they
can
track
that
you
came
in
and
sort
of
monitor,
customer
behavior
in
that
way,
and
that's
something
that
the
city
of
portland
is
attempting
to
regulate,
and
I
think
that'll
that'll
probably
face
some
court
challenges
and
be
an
interesting
thing
to
watch
in
the
coming
months.
But
I
think
it's
something
that
we're
interested
in.
L
In
the
meantime,
the
language
that
we're
proposing
would
prevent
city
employees
from
acquiring
that
data
and
using
it
and
so
it
it
would
prevent.
For
example,
there's
been
some
amount
of
collaboration,
although
I
think
this
is
actually
stopped,
but
there
was
a
growing
collaboration
with
ring
doorbells
for
a
while,
where
everybody
had
their
their
doorbells
taking
video,
and
then
there
was
access
being
provided
to
law
enforcement
and
some
municipalities,
and
so
this
this
is
designed
to
prevent
city
staff
from
using
facial
recognition.
A
C
O
Madame
chair,
it's
casey.
If
there's
not,
I
would
suggest
that
the
commission
take
a
vote
to
receive
and
file
this
presentation,
as
there
might
be
further
discussion
at
some
point
on
these
proposals,
and
certainly
this
keeps
it
within
the
ongoing
agenda
of
the
pcoc
to
return
to
and
discuss
in
the
future.
Absolutely.
A
Okay,
clerk,
no
directed.
A
Directed
yes,
thank
you
our
next.
No,
are
we
still
receiving
public
comments
or
no
now.
O
A
Q
Hi,
my
name
is
chuck
turchik.
Welcome
to
the
new
members.
You've
already
received
a
couple
of
emails
from
me,
and
I
thank
commissioner
mcguire
for
her
reply
to
mine
that
I
just
received
before
the
meeting.
A
second
comment
is
that
we
and
the
public
did
not
have
access
to
that
powerpoint.
This
meeting
is
not
on
the
city
council,
tv
channel,
14
site,
nor
is
it
on
youtube.
Q
Yet
so
we
were
unable
to
see
the
powerpoint
that
was
included
in
the
presentation
from
council
member
fletcher
third
comment
is
in
may
that
may
14th
of
2019
in
the
pcoc
minutes.
I
made
a
comment,
part
of
which
was
reflected
in
this
way
in
the
minutes.
The
third
topic-
and
he
was
a
little
disappointed,
was
regarding
the
lessons
learned
from
the
justine
damon
trial.
It
was
his
hope
that
it
would
be
an
agenda
item
specifically
what
role
they.
Q
That
means
the
pcoc
should
play
in
determining
the
lessons
learned
from
the
trial
in
the
settlement
of
the
civil
of
the
civil
suit
and
then
at
the
end
of
that
meeting.
The
pclc
chair,
andrea
brown,
said,
or
the
minute
say
that
she
said
chair
brown
gave
her
final
thoughts.
Everyone
needs
to
take
time
to
process
the
newer
case
in
all
its
multiple
facets.
The
verdict
means
a
lot
of
things
to
a
lot
of
different
people.
The
investigation
meant
a
lot
of
different
things
to
different
people.
Q
Sheriff
brown
wants
this
topic
as
an
agenda
item
in
the
future
and
then
on
june,
7th
hennepin
county
district
court
judge
catherine
quaintance
when
she
sentenced
muhammad
noor
began
her
sentencing
remarks
with
some
questions
that
she
got
from
the
jurors
and
then
she
said
the
jurors
and
the
people
of
minneapolis
need
and
deserve
answers.
I
immediately
sent
a
transcript
of
those
remarks
to
the
pclc
encouraging
them
to
have
this
as
an
agenda
item
on
their
june
meeting,
but
the
june
june
11th
meeting
they.
Q
They
did
not
have
that
as
an
agenda
item
and
they
have
never
had
that
as
an
agenda
item.
My
comment
on
the
june
11th
meeting
included
the
following
again.
I
see
there
is
nothing
on
your
agenda
this
month
about
this
case,
even
simply
about
what
role,
if
any,
the
pclc
should
play
in
helping
to
define
what
lessons
might
be
learned
from
this
case.
The
pcoc
needs
to
become
involved
when
cases
are
such
high
profile
and
when
there
is
all
sorts
of
activity
going
on
elsewhere,
whether
in
city
offices
or
in
the
community
about
it.
Q
So
now
I
ask:
what's
the
pcoc's
role
in
these
high-profile
cases
in
the
past,
it
has
been
reluctant
to
do
anything
beyond
having
periods
of
meetings
when
the
public
could
vent,
and
I
think
that
was
done
only
twice
and
nothing
came
of
those
beyond
the
public
comment
sessions.
So
I
am
encouraged
about
item
number
nine
on
your
agenda
that
asks
opcr
staff
to
conduct
an
after-action
review
that
will
go
well
beyond
issues
that
might
lead
to
criminal
liability,
which
the
bca's
investigation
is
geared
towards.
Q
Q
Second,
there
may
be
data
practices
issues,
just
as
there
are
when
someone
files
a
complaint
against
an
officer
with
the
opcr
and
third,
the
opcr
may
tell
you
or
the
mpd
might
tell
the
opcr
that
nothing
can
be
released
until
the
bca
investigation
or
even
a
subsequent
trial
or
civil
settlement
is
completed.
I
don't
think
that's
true,
but
they
might
tell
you
that.
Thank
you
very.
P
Oh
hello,
this
is
dave
bicking.
I
I
don't
know
if
I'm
next
to
be
recognized
here.
Is
that
the
case
yes.
P
Okay,
yes,
this
is
dave
bicking.
I
am
a
long
time.
I've
worked
for
a
long
time
with
communities,
united
against
police
brutality
or
cuapb.
For
sure
I
want
to
welcome
the
new
commissioners,
and
I
thank
you
for
for
volunteering,
for
this
work.
P
I'll
have
to
be
kind
of
quick
within
the
time
limit
here,
but
I'm
I'm
glad
to
see
that
you're
going
to
be
getting
a
thorough
orientation
and
but
what
is
missing
from
what's
missing
is
an
orientation
by
the
community
instead
of
just
from
city
staff-
and
you
know
so,
ceo
apb
always
offered
to
do
an
orientation
for
new
pcoc
members
we're
20
years
old.
We
were
involved
in
the
design
and
several
redesigns
of
the
civilian
review
authority.
P
P
P
P
We
researched
and
made
many
policy
recommendations
we
have
attended,
I
think
nearly
every
meeting
of
the
cra
and
pcoc
for
the
last
12
years.
So
we
have
that
knowledge
and
we
are
happy
to
share
all
of
that
with
you
in
an
orientation
of
the
in
the
matter
or.
However,
you
would
like
to
do
that.
Please
I
I
hope
you'll
be
the
first
group
of
pcoc
members
to
take
us
up
on
this.
I
think
it
could
be
very
valuable.
P
I'm
disappointed
on
today's
agenda
that
there
is
no
discussion
about
the
pcoc
having
a
special
community
meeting
to
discuss
the
killing
of
delawed
last
month.
I
know
this
was
talked
about
before
the
meeting,
but-
and
it
goes
along
with
chuck's
comments
about
how
you
know
this
has
not
been
done
in
the
past.
At
this
point,
no
one
else
in
the
city
has
proposed
any
such
community
meeting
or
method
for
input
or
a
method
for
even
determining
what
people
would
like
to
know
about
what
happened
that
day.
P
So
I
think
the
pcoc
should
be
the
ones
to
make
sure
that
it
happens.
It
fits
your
outreach
mission
and
I
think
it
could
provide
valuable
input
and
direction
to
the
staff
direction.
That's
on
your
agenda
that
the
community
needs
the
time
to
discuss
this,
so
I'd
like
to
see
the
pcoc
discuss
that
further
and
hopefully
implement
such
a
community
meeting.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
A
Thank
you
for
your
comment.
The
next
caller
is
number
ending,
eight,
seven,
nine
three.
A
P
And-
and
this
is
dave
four
one-
two
one
was
me
so.
O
So
I
think
just
asking
generically.
If
there's
anyone
on
the
call
who
wishes
to
address
the
commission
tonight
and
and
if
there's
not,
then
we
can
certainly
close
that
public
comment
period
and
move
forward.
R
K
R
Yes,
hi,
I'm
david,
I
work
tangentially
with
restore
the
fourth
minnesota.
I
have
a
comment
that
is
general
to
the
subject
of
police
oversight,
but
which
connects
with
today's
discussion
of
a
facial
recognition
bill.
This
is
the
subject
of
parallel
construction.
R
Parallel
construction
is
a
practice
among
american
police
departments
and
national
security
entities
widely
documented
by
human
rights
watch,
in
which
evidence
that's
normally
supposed
to
be
suppressed
in
a
court
case
because
of
a
fourth
amendment,
violation
in
his
collection
or
other
illegalities
collection
is
admitted
because
a
parallel
route
to
discovering
the
same
information
is
introduced
in
court.
R
So,
with
respect
to
commissioner
sarah's
request
for
the
bill
to
include
wording
prohibiting
bringing
up
information
derived
from
facial
recognition
in
court,
I
would
say
that,
unfortunately,
this
is
an
invitation
to
parallel
construction
on
the
part
of
the
mpd
and
the
wording
in
the
draft
of
the
bill
that
I've
seen
prohibiting
the
intentional
use
of
facial
recognition
seems
to
be
sufficient,
because
if
facial
recognition
data
is
used
unintentionally,
then
we
would
like
the
mpd
to
introduce
it
in
court
so
that
if
it
was
actually
derived
from
a
violation
of
the
statute,
we
would
be
able
to
support
the
defendant
would
be
able
to
suppress
the
evidence.
R
So
I'd
like
to
encourage
the
commissioner
to
consider
the
original
draft
and
not
to
introduce
wording
that
would
serve
as
an
invitation
of
power
construction
on
the
part
of
the
department.
S
Comments,
hello:
this
is
abshin
faruzon,
I'm
the
former
member
of
the
pcoc,
and
I
just
wanted
to
I've
been
listening
in
and
I
want
to
say
thank
you
to
all
the
commissioners
who
are
who
are
on
the
commission
now
I
know
I
haven't
met
all
of
you.
Some
are
very
recent
appointments
and
you
know
I
just
want
to
say
the
work
you
do
is
important
and
I
think
you'll
do
a
great
job
and
I
just
wanted
to
give
extra
kudos
to
interim
chair
jackson.
S
You've
done
an
excellent
job
in
putting
together
this
great
agenda
so
far,
and
I
think
that
you
know
so
far
from
what
I've
seen
from
you.
You've
demonstrated
integrity
and
honesty,
that's
really
important
in
in
a
chair
and
serving
on
this
pcoc.
So
thank
you
all
and
best.
You
know
best
of
luck
as
you
as
you
do
this
work
going
forward.
Thank
you.
A
Well,
thank
you
former
chair
palpatine.
I
will
do
my
best
to
make
sure
that
your
trust
in
me
was
well
founded.
Do
we
have
any
other
comments
from
commissioners
or
from
the
public.
A
A
Okay,
thank
you
to
everyone
who
commented
tonight.
We
appreciate
your
input
consistent
with
our
rules,
we'll
begin
with
the
election
of
the
chair
and
then
we'll
handle
the
election
of
the
vice
chair.
Any
commissioner
may
nominate
a
member
including
themselves
to
be
considered
for
election
to
either
the
chair
or
vice
chair
positions.
A
Nominations
do
not
require
a
second
after
nominations
have
closed.
Each
individual
who
has
been
nominated
will
be
given
a
few
minutes
to
explain
why
they
would
like
to
be
considered
for
the
position
when
speeches
have
concluded.
Members
may
enter
a
question
and
answer
period
with
the
candidates
before
the
vote
is
taken
on
the
election
of
the
officer.
A
A
J
I
did
think
I
was
putting
it
up
taking
it
off
mute.
I
would
like
to
nominate
commissioners
at
the
jackson
floor,
chair.
J
Oh
and
then
I'm
sorry,
commissioner
abdi,
and
I
would
also
like
to
nominate
myself
for
vice
chair.
A
A
Okay,
then,
do
you
all
need
me
to
speak
to
why
I
would
accept
this
nomination.
A
Well,
I
don't
like
being
put
on
the
spot
and
have
to
come
up
with
something
like
right
off
the
top
of
my
head,
but
I
I
believe
that
I'm
passionate
about
this
issue.
I
believe
that
I'm
able
to
form
very
good
relationships
with
both
sides
that
I
am
not
polarized
or
entrenched
in
any
one
particular
idea
that
I'm
always
open
to
a
new
perspective
that
I
have
excellent
negotiation
skills
that
I
I
listen
very
well
and
that
I
have
the
heart
of
our
community.
A
Not
the
heart,
see!
That's
why
I
don't
like
speaking
publicly
like
this.
I
I
have
the
best
interest
of
our
community
at
heart
and
I
just
believe
with
my
leadership
that
that
we
can
forge
this
commission
into
a
very
effective
tool
to
bring
about
and
effect
some
real
substantive
change
that
I
think
we're
all
looking
for.
A
Okay,
so
I
guess
we're
ready
for
a
vote.
O
You'll
direct
the
clerk
to
call
the
role
and
members
will
respond
with
an
eye
to
support
the
election
of
commissioner
jackson
to
be
chair
or
nay,
if
that's
the
opposition
or
abstain.
So
when
the
clerk
calls
your
name
if
you'll
just
answer
one
of
those
ways,
then
we'll
be
sure
to
conduct
the
election.
A
A
K
C
T
A
You
guys
I'm
gonna,
be
a
silly
old
lady
and
get
all
emotional
here.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
your
confidence
and
I
vow
to
do
my
best
to
lead
this
commission,
so
we're
going
to
follow
the
same
exact
procedure
for
the
vice
chair
and
I'm
going
to
open
up
the
floor
now
for
nominations,
and
I
would
like
to
on
to
nominate
commissioner
abdi
for
vice
chair.
Do
I
have
any
other
nominations.
A
Okay,
then
I'll
turn
it
back
over
to
you.
I
lost
you.
O
Before
before
you
do
that,
madam
chair,
just
if
commissioner
abdi
wants
to
make
some
comments
on
behalf
of
herself
to
the
group
and
then
if
there
are
questions
that
would
be
the
the
bylaws
would
would
require
us
to
go
through
that
process.
First,.
J
Yes,
thank
you.
I
do
accept
the
nomination
and
I'm
really
looking
forward
to
working
just
collaborating
with
the
chair
and
just
with
the
community
and
yeah.
Thank
you.
H
And
I
do
it's
it's
less
of
a
question
more
of
an
invitation.
H
I
think
that
it
can
be
difficult
to
be
a
leader
of
a
group
that
you
are
only
sort
of
just
getting
to
know
and
just
starting
to
be.
You
know,
part
of,
and
so
I
just
want
to
offer
that
I
guess
commissioner
pino
and
I
are
the
senior
members-
and
we
haven't
even
been
here
that
long,
but
I'm
sure
I
speak
for
both
of
us
and
saying
that
we
would
be
very
helpful
happy
to
help
in
just
kind
of
like
the
logistics
and
and
administering
and
and
finding
your
way
through
this.
H
So
congratulations
on
the
nomination
and
I
I
think
we're
all
here
to
support
each
other.
K
A
Commissioner,
thank
you
for
your
comments,
commissioners,
sarah
and
panel
commissioner
of
d.
Did
you
have
anything
else,
you'd
like
to
say.
C
F
A
Congratulations,
commissioner
abdi
as
our
new
vice
chair.
Thank
you
for
congratulations.
Yes,
let's
see,
I
have
to
catch
up
here.
A
It
has
been
so
long
since
I
have
had
to
follow
robert's
robert's
rules
of
orders
that
I'm
feeling
like
I'm
really
failing
you
all
right
now,
so
just
be
patient
with
me
I'll
get
better,
as
this
goes
all
right.
We
have
done
that
all
right,
our
next
order
of
business.
Am
I
correct
casey.
Are
we
moving
on
to
the
next
order
of
business?
Okay,
thank
you.
This
is
our
regular
presentation
of
our
case
summaries
and
synopses,
and
I
think
we've
all
been
provided
with
those
materials.
A
O
I
believe
that
director
jafar
was
here
and
with
help
from
mr
hawkins,
director
jafar
and
mr
hawkins
to
present
each
of
those
cases
so
welcome
them
to
the
meeting.
U
Welcome.
Thank
you,
chair
jackson.
Congratulations!
Congratulations
to
vice
chair
abby!
This
is
a
really
exciting
moment,
so
I'm
happy
to
be
here
usually
in
the
past.
What
we've
done
is
kind
of
just
done
a
quick
run
through
the
case
summaries
and
then
take
your
questions.
The
material
we've
provided
to
you
is,
as
many
of
you
know,
limited
by
the
minnesota
data
practices
act.
So
we've
pretty
much
given
you
what
we
can
give
you
under
state
law.
U
If
there's
things
I
can't
answer
I'll,
have
to
let
you
know
that
too,
but
with
that
we
can
kind
of
briefly
go
through
each
case
summary
and
then
I
would
be
happy
chair
jackson
at
your
direction.
If
you'd
like
me
to
go
through
one
and
then
take
questions
a
second
and
go
through
questions
a
third
and
go
through
questions
or
we
can
go
through
all
three
and
take
questions,
so
I
that
is
up
to
your
discretion.
A
G
O
Just
going
to
say
that
the
technical
crew
does
have
the
copies
of
these
presentations,
these
summaries,
and
so
we
can
certainly
display
those
as
director
jafar
goes
through
them.
If
that's
helpful,
we
can
have
ted
our
tech
support,
provide.
They
are
listed
and
linked
from
the
agenda,
but
we
can
also
display
them
here
director
as
you
go
through
them
so
ted.
If
you
can
pull
up
the
first
one
which
I
believe
was
labeled
number
18.
A
U
And
that's
actually
helpful
for
me
too,
so
I
can
keep
my
teams
up
instead
of
flipping
back
and
forth
through
screen.
So
we'll
start
with
this
one.
So
in
this
case
it
was
a
case
where
involving
property
and
evidence
you
can
see,
we
put
complete
processing.
This
case
actually
went
all
the
way
through
the
administrative
process
and
was
voted
on
by
the
review
panel.
U
We
did
actually
I
wanted
to
point
to
a
couple
new
things
that
we're
providing
you,
because
I
know
that
you
know
all
of
you
are
still
in
the
learning
phase
about
the
policy
and
procedure
as
a
way
for
you
to
kind
of
get
your
get
familiar
with
it.
We're
actually
hyperlinking
all
of
the
policies
that
are
listed
in
there
to
the
mpd
manuals
you
kind
of
read
as
you
go.
U
We
also
tried
to
hyperlink
any
terms
that
might
be
unfamiliar
so
in
this
one
you
can
see
that
there's
also
a
listing
of
evidence.
So
you
can
you
can
scroll
down
this.
One
you'll
notice
was
an
internal
notification.
We
get
cases
both
externally
and
internally
down
here.
U
There's
a
breakdown
of
each
of
the
evidence
that
the
investigator
reviewed,
so
you
can
see
that
this
one
was
a
complaint
about
a
victim
who
said
they'd
been
sexually
assaulted
and
that
the
the
officer
involved
didn't
include
inventory,
critical
evidence
in
that
case,
so
that
officer
was
interviewed.
You
can
see
in
the
evolve
statement.
They
said
they,
you
know
they
couldn't
locate
it
kind
of,
couldn't
remember
they
would
have
inventoried
it.
You
know,
like
said
they
didn't
inventory
it
put
that
report
together,
put
it
forward
to
the
panel.
U
The
review
panel,
as
some
of
you
may
know,
is
a
mix
of
now
it's
inspectors
and
commanders
of
mpd
plus
people
who
went
through
the
same
appointment
process
that
you
did,
but
just
for
the
review
panel.
They
voted
merit.
However,
there's
there's
a
next
phase
once
that
they
vote
merit,
then
that
officer
is
entitled
to
something
called
a
louder
mill
hearing.
U
I
put
a
there's
a
link
in
this
case
summary,
so
you
can
read
about
ladder
mill
hearings
that
that,
after
that
ladder
barrel
hearing
and
during
that
time
the
evidence
was
actually
located.
It
was
it
was
filed
under
the
incorrect
case
number,
which
is
what
was
causing
all
the
consternation,
so
they
did
find
the
evidence.
It
was
inventoried
so
that,
after
that
was
sent
to
the
chief,
because
the
chief
is
the
only
one
who
can
exact
discipline,
they
ended
up
dismissing
the
case,
essentially
against
the
officer
after,
after
all,
those
steps.
A
U
Lack
of
how
can
I
say
this
and
still
be
within
this-
is
the
difficult
part
for
me
honestly,
because
there's
things
I
can
say
and
can't
say
what
I
would
say,
having
read
that
entire
interview
of
that
case
is
that
it
was
more
about.
I
can't
explain
why
this
isn't
here
is
the
theme
that
I
would
say
that
you
get
the
statement
is
that
they
just
didn't.
U
Remember
doing
it,
and
so,
instead
of
just
saying
I
don't
remember
said
I
don't
remember,
and
then
you
know
normally,
I
would
have
done
this,
but
for
whatever
reason
I
guess
I
didn't,
because
I
can't
find
it
and
so
that
that's
I
mean
it
when,
when
you
look
at
the
entire
case
file,
that
makes
sense
to
me
that
the
panel
found
merit
on
that
what
happens
after
it
leaves
our
office
and
goes
into
the
loudermill
phase.
U
We
we
don't
have
any
decision-making
authority
or
authority
after
on
the
file,
after
that,
once
it
goes
into
that
place.
That
is
completely
that
that
is
where
the
line
stops
and
the
rest
of
that
is
all
in
the
you
know,
disciplinary
process
per
the
chief.
So
you
know
I
read
the
louder
mill
summary
in
this
case.
You
know
we
put
in
what
we
could,
but
you
know
kind
of
the
point
where
it
leaves
my
office
to
the
chief
is
is
a
part
that
we're
really
our
office
isn't.
J
Thank
you.
So
I
have
a
question
so
in
this
case
that
it
was
exonerated
for
the
policy
violation.
But
I
guess
like
I
want
to
know
more
about
the
sense
of
urgency
around
like
that.
Evidence
is
because
like
if
it
isn't
a
sexual
assault
like
there
is-
and
I
think
that
like
I
think
we
all
understand
that,
like
things
happen
and
people
are
forgetful,
but
I
think
when
it
comes
to
that
kind
of
evidence,
specifically
there's
some
urgency
and
responsibility
and
the
fact
that
it
was
marked
wrong.
J
U
That's
a
really
good
comment,
and
I
think
you
know
you
probably
have
to
have
someone
come
from
the
police
department
to
answer
that
question
about
how
it
got
from
that
point
to
the
decision
they
made
in
the
end.
You
know
I
will
note
it's
an
internal
referral
right,
so
somebody
at
some
sense
thought
this
is
a
problem.
It
needs
to
be
referred
for
discipline,
so
you
know
when
we
get
those
internal
referrals
with
somebody
flagging
it,
but
yeah
I
mean
for
that.
U
That's
definitely
the
the
the
chief's
office
or
whoever's
reviewing
the
discipline
could
certainly
flag
that
and
say
we're
going
to
do
something
different
with
this
part.
Now
that
the
course
of
this
case
has
changed,
but
that's
not
what
they
decided
to
do.
I
mean,
I
think
you
know
the
hard
thing
is.
If
you
see
the
whole
ladder
mill
summary
you
know
it
could
change
your
opinion
or
not,
but
really
that's
at
that
point
when
they
get
to
that
hearing
and
the
purpose
of
that
hearing.
U
If
you
didn't
click
on
the
link
is
the
officer
gets
to
just
provide
whatever
they
would
like
to
say
in
addition
to
what's
already
happened
before
the
disciplinary
decision
is
enacted
and
there's
a
panel
of
police
leadership,
people
listen
to
that
type
of
a
summary
that
then
goes
to
the
chief
and
the
deputy
chief
of
professional
standards
who
helps
advise
on
discipline.
They
use
all
those
materials
to
make
decisions
on
discipline.
K
It's
okay,
it's
yeah!
It's
it's
the
little
yellow
hand
icon
in
front
of
our
names.
If
you
can
see
it,
but.
K
A
C
K
It's
kind
of
a
question
kind
of
a
comment
and
you've
already
alluded
to
it
in
your
summary,
a
bit
already
with
saying
that
the
ability
for
you
to
expand
on
this
is
limited
in
some
capacity,
which
we
all
know
is
a
frustrating
thing
on
both
ends,
but
just
to
make
sure
that
we
are
all
clear
in
why
we're
frustrated
to
me
as
someone
who
is
just
looking
at
this
publicly
available
case
summary
it-
and
this
is
my
own
editorialization-
it
looks
like
at
the
end
of
the
day
the
evidence
was
found
and
therefore
there
was
no
wrong
that
was
done,
and
that
to
me
is
what
is
read
into
the
reason
why
this
individual
was
exonerated,
and
my
own
opinion
of
that
is.
K
There
was
some
sort
of
wrong
being
done,
because
the
you
know
providing
evidence
into
inventory
was
not
properly
followed
it.
They
got
lucky
at
the
end
of
the
day
that
the
evidence
was
found,
but
but
the
reality
was
that
some
wrong,
not
as
bad
as
the
initial
cause
of
it,
but
some
wrong
was
caused.
U
I
can't
really
comment
on
that,
but
I
think
what
I'll
say
is
that
just
remember
that
you
know
at
the
end
of
the
day
no
civilian
oversight
agency
in
the
state
of
minnesota
and
pretty
much
across
the
country
gets
to
weigh
in
on
disciplinary
decisions
of
any
kind.
So,
even
if
a
ch
case
changes
course
from
when
it
leaves
our
office
to
when
it's
with
the
chief,
we
are
like
prohibited
by
law
from
saying
you
know
hey.
We
think
that
there
should
have
been
something
here
like
you
should
go
back
to
training.
U
You
should
do
that
because
of
the
way
the
case
the
case
is
already
set
up,
so
you
can
see.
I
think
you
know.
If
I
share
abdi's
question
about
you
know
like
yeah,
it
looks
like
it
changed
from
the
time
it
left
our
office.
U
I
mean
from
the
way
it
read
and
what
you
can
see
in
the
summary
it
looked
pretty
clear
what
was
going
on
the
status
that
chase
case
changed
from
the
ladder
mall
and
that
discretion
was
completely
with
the
chief
to
decide
what
it
is,
but
it
is
hard
and
I
don't
want
to
comment
on
what
the
chief's
decision
was
or
you
know
what
the
what
like
the
details
of
the
materials
are
like
that's
just
a
place.
I
can't
go
to
you
know.
Remember
we
also
do
have
the
city
attorney
on
the
call.
U
Joel
fussy
can
answer
any
questions
you
have
about.
You
know
talking
in
detail
about
those
types
of
things.
I
understand
it's
completely
frustrating,
but
you
know
it.
It
is
the
rules
as
they
are
now.
Maybe
at
some
point
the
legislature
will
change
that.
But
for
now
that
that
is
kind
of
how
things
work.
H
So
I
do
I
just
want
to
echo
commissioner
pino
and
commissioner
abdi,
so
I
have
all
of
those
concerns
and
then
just
add
a
little
bit
onto
that.
I
believe
there
is
a
way
we
can
discuss
data,
that's
not
public
and
still
vindicate
the
open
meeting,
law
requirements
and
data
practices,
requirements
which
is
kind
of
like
a
really
complex
mix,
but
the
operating
rules
for
the
pcoc
walk
through
a
process
wherein
we
can
get
data
that
is
otherwise
private.
H
So
perhaps
it
would
be
in
this
case
some
kind
of
louder
mill
summary
or
there
was
some
piece
of
it
director
jafar
that
you
know.
Obviously
you
can't
speak
to
in
this
space,
because
this
is
public,
but
I
believe
we
could
receive
that
private
data
and
review
it.
H
And
then,
when
we
come
to
our
public
meeting
as
we
are
here
today,
we
could
close
it
just
long
enough
to
discuss
that
private
piece
of
the
data
or
private
data
rather
and
then-
and
I
believe
someone
would
need
to
take
minutes
during
that
private
session
and
then
open
it
back
up.
H
That's
at
least
that's
what
the
operating
rules
talk
about,
and
that's
also,
what
kind
of
like
case
law
around
open
meeting
and
data
practices
talk
about.
Could
we
explore
something
like
that,
particularly
in
this
case
where
I
think
it
seems
like?
Quite
a
few
of
us
have
a
lot
of
concerns
around
this
one.
U
So
that's
not
a
decision
for
me
to
make.
You
have
two
really
good
people
on
here.
Who
would
be
the
ones
to
make
those
type
of
decisions?
First
would
be
joel
fussy,
who's,
the
city
attorney,
who
works
with
the
police
conduct
oversight?
Commission,
who
works
with
data
privacy
rules,
the
other
person
to
ask
would
be
the
city
clerk
who's,
casey,
carl,
as
they
both
work,
like
their
jobs,
are
so
much
more
focused
on
data
privacy.
U
We
just
follow
the
rules
that
are
in
the
city,
and
so
I
would
definitely
defer
to
to
them
for
any
of
those
discussions,
and
if
that's
something
that
you
know
as
a
group,
you
want
to
vote
on-
and
you
know
take
forward
for
discussion,
I
I
think
reaching
out
to
those
entities
would
probably
be
the
place
to
go.
V
Madam
chair,
this
is
joel
fussy
from
the
city
attorney's
office,
and
if
it
would
please
the
chair
and
the
commission,
I
can
certainly
respond
to
that
comment.
A
I
I
was
just
getting
ready
to
ask
you
to
yes,
could
you
could
you
make
some
comment
on
that
and
give
us
some
direction
there?
Thank
you,
madam.
V
Chair,
I
believe
what
the
the
data
practices
law
holds
is
that
the
operative
provision
would
be
13.05
of
minnesota
statutes,
which
essentially
states
that
there
can't
be
any
use
or
dissemination
of
private
or
confidential
data
on
individual
individuals,
unless
it's
limited
to
that
necessary
for
the
administration
and
management
of
programs
specifically
authorized
by
the
local
governing
body
and
the
choice
that
and
the
way
that
the
police
conduct,
oversight,
commission
or
office
or
opcr
ordinance
is
drafted,
is
that
there
was
a
choice
specifically
bifurcate.
V
The
processes
between
the
review
panel
and
the
police
conduct
oversight.
Commission,
when
this
body
was
kind
of
all
encompassed
in
one
in
terms
of
what
was
called
the
cra.
At
that
point,
the
commissioners
themselves
did
the
policy
work
and
they
also
sat
on
the
review
panels
under
the
ordinance
that
exists
now.
The
review
panels,
which
are
made
up
of
both
sworn
officers
and
civilian
review
panel
members.
They
are
specifically
authorized
with
dealing
with
individual
cases
and
individual
facts
and
private
data
that
might
come
about
private
personal
data
in
those
disciplinary
files.
V
Specifically
the
police
kind
of
oversight.
Commission
your
authority
is
lim
is
more
general
to
policy
determinations
and
specifically
to
reviewing
summary
and
aggregate
data
and
you're
not
authorized
to
review
private
personnel
data
on
individual
cases.
I
think
there
was
some
reference
to
operating
rules.
I
don't
know
what
that
document
is.
V
I
do
know
that
that
language
is
just
stock,
boilerplate
language
that
comes
from
open
meeting
law
and
data
practices,
law
guidance,
which
essentially
says
that
if
there
is
an
administrative
body,
a
city
council,
a
civil
service
commission
and
they
do
have
within
their
authority
the
ability
to
consider
private
personal
data
or
private
or
confidential
data
on
individuals.
There
are
certain
steps
that
they
must
take
to
be
able
to
review
that
data
or
access
that
data
or
to
consider
it
in
their
meeting.
V
It
does
not
create
a
blanket
exemption
for
anybody
subject
to
the
open
meeting
law
or
the
data
practices
act
to
to
review
any
sort
of
private
personnel
data,
in
this
case,
the
operating
ordinances
that
do
not
provide
this
body
with
the
authority
to
review
private
personnel
data
and
minnesota
statute.
13.05
specifically,
would
prohibit
you
from
reviewing
private
data.
A
Okay,
thank
you
attorney
jesse,
commissioner,
sparks.
F
Thank
you
and
thank
you
joel
for
that
information.
I
appreciate
it
very
detailed.
I
did
have
a
follow-up
question
about
that.
I
know
that
there's
some
concerns
about
private
personnel
data
and
so
forth,
but
if,
if
that
data
were
redacted
in
such
a
way
sort
of
how
we
do
the
case
summaries
here,
where
names,
personal
information
and
stuff
like
that
are
removed.
V
I
guess
I'll
jump
in
on
that
as
well.
This
is
yes
attorney
fussy,
it's
kind
of
a
general
question,
certainly
what
the
ordinance
authorizes
you
to
review.
It's
kind
of
summary
and
aggregate
data
in
that
would
specifically
exclude
any
information
that
could
be
used,
as
that
would
identify
us
our
particular
case,
as
opposed
to
just
a
type
of
case.
I
think
in
essentially
what's
being
done
in
these
summaries.
Is
that
kind
of
redactive
type
process
to
provide
to
to
equate
just
to
the
level
of
summary
or
aggregate
data?
V
V
Commission,
the
oversight
commission,
you
guys-
are
charged
much
more
with
policy
work
and
and
and
looking
at
those
sorts
of
things
and
not
dealing
with
individual
cases
or
the
outcomes
of
individual
cases,
but
kind
of
looking
at
you
know
through
this
kind
of
audit
work
or
summary
data
work,
doing
issue
spotting,
seeing
areas
that
might
be
of
concern
as
they
relate
not
to
individual
cases
but
to
overall
policies,
practices,
trends
and
police
procedures.
V
A
I
think
director
jafar
you
had
suggested
bringing
in
someone
from
the
mpd,
maybe
to
explain
more
about
this
process
about
how
this
decision
was.
You
know,
and
I
I
know
they
can't
tell
us
everything,
but
a
little
bit
more
information
might
be
helpful,
because
this
this
conclusion,
this
outcome
seems
really
problematic
to
me
that
that.
A
J
And
yeah,
I
just
want
to
piggyback
on
what
you
were
just
saying,
and
I
think
what
is
most
concerning
with
this
particular
instance
is
that
it
was
a
sexual
assault
and
like
that,
the
victim
would
have
been.
I
I
don't
even
have
a
word.
C
J
Re-Victimize,
however,
you
want
to
put
it
on
if
that
officer
lost
that
so
to
just
brush
it
off
and
say:
oh
no
harm
is
done.
It's
okay,
like
I
don't
think
that's
good
enough,
because
there
was
wrong.
That's
was
still
done,
so
that's
just
where
I'm
at.
U
So
chair
and
vice
chair,
if
I
could
make
a
suggestion
to
you
based
on
all
of
your
comments,
we
could
certainly
reach
out
to
property
and
evidence
and
someone
in
the
in
the
in
the
prep
and
the
professional
standards
and
see,
if
maybe
for
your
next
meeting,
we
could
have
them
come
and
they
could
answer
some
questions
about
like
inventorying
property
and
evidence.
Things
are
expected
and
that
way
you
can
get
some
better
information
and
then
and
then
come.
You
know
if
you'd
like
to
revisit
this
in
previous
commissions.
U
What
they
do
is
take
a
case
that
they
had
a
problem
with,
especially
at
that
level
and
put
it
in
what
they
called
a
queue
to
be
something
that
they
would
want
to
address,
like
maybe
as
a
as
a
bigger
issue
or
even
just
individually.
So
that's
that's
some
suggestions,
but
of
course
it's
at
your
description.
What
you'd
like
to
do,
but
I'd
certainly
be
willing
to
reach
out
to
make
those
connections.
If
that's
something
you'd
be
interested
in
learning
more
about.
H
And
I
one
choice:
we
also
have,
as
a
commission
is
to
escalate
this
to
the
mayor,
who
is
of
course
in
charge
of
the
police
department,
and
I
see
that
ms
ritchie
is
on
the
call.
For
example,
we
could
escalate
this
as
a
commission
to
the
mayor
and
say
this
is
extremely
concerning
to
us
for
all
the
reasons
we've
all
just
stated,
and
you
know
for
I-
I'm
not
I'm
not
going
to
close
the
book
on
the
legal
analysis,
but
let's
just
say
for
right
now
we're
not
going
to
get
any
more
data
and.
B
H
A
Okay
in
the
interest
of
time,
because
we
do
have
two
more
case
summaries
to
get
to
before
we
close
this
meeting,
can
we
take
a
general
consensus
because
I'm
in
agreement
with
you,
commissioner,
sarah,
not
only
director
jafar,
would
I
like
to
have
someone
from
evidence
and
and
like
someone
to
explain
what
procedure
an
officer
give
us
more
more
information,
more
complete
information
on
what
the
procedure
that
they
are
expected
to
follow
and
how
that
might
sometimes
not
happen.
A
The
way
in
which
it's
expected
to
like,
I
completely
understand
human
error,
but
not
when
we're
talking
about
something
as
important
as
the
sexual
assault
and
the
evidence
against
the
perpetrator.
A
So
can
we
hold
this
until
the
very
end,
commissioners
and
then
decide
what
we
want
to
do,
whether
whether
we
want
to
wait
and
get
somebody
in
to
say
you
know
more
about
this
or
if
we
want
to
escalate
or
if
we
want
to
reserve
both
those
options.
Can
we
do
that?
U
Okay,
so
this
complaint
was
about
a
complainant
not
being
able
to
get
their
house
keys
and
documents.
It
was
also
alleged
that
the
person
didn't
activate
body,
worn
camera.
You'll
you'll
see
that
on
some
of
these
they
get
added
on
just
for
your
general
information
complaints.
Don't
typically
realize
that
a
body
camera
isn't
on,
but
when
we
look
for
footage-
and
we
don't
find
it-
we
add
it
as
a
policy
violation.
U
So
just
so
you're
aware
of
that,
that's
why
you'll
see
that
kind
of
in
a
separate
line
item
underneath
usually
because
that's
added
by
us
as
an
allegation.
So
basically
they
did
an
intake
intake.
It
got
reviewed
for
coaching
for
the
body,
worn
camera,
which
is
a
pretty
standard.
If
you
don't
have
any
other
offenses
with
body
worn
camera,
you
didn't
turn
it
on
for
a
small
period
of
time
and
we
can't
find
it.
U
That's
a
typical,
like
you
have
to
go
back
to
go
through
the
protocols
of
body,
worn
camera
and
then
the
with
the
evidence
with
with
the
person
having
difficulty
getting
their
evidence
back
after
reviewing
the
pims
with
the
pim
stands
for
police
information
management
system.
That's
where
the
police
reports
are.
U
The
person
was
referred
directly
like
we
refer
the
complaint
itself,
with
our
own
email
and
notification
directly
to
property
and
evidence
having
them
get
back
in
touch
with
the
person,
and
then
we
also
notify
the
complainant
via
letter
like
you,
that
here's,
the
contact,
number
and
person
you
can
talk
to
in
property
and
evidence
who's
going
to
assist
you
with
your
claim
to
find
your
items.
Oh,
I
can
talk
generally.
U
A
lot
of
these
cases
are
kind
of
miscommunication
and
people
just
having
trouble
navigating
the
system
to
figure
out
where
they
need
to
call
and
contact
to
get
their
items
back.
So
this
person
ended
up
getting
sent
to
like
getting
connected
with
property
and
evidence,
and
then
the
officer
was
coached
on
on
when
to
turn
on
their
bodyboard
camera.
A
U
U
A
Okay,
while
I'm
digesting
this
does
any
other,
commissioner,
have
a
comment
or
a
question.
H
This
is
commissioner,
sarah.
I
do
have
my
hand
up,
and
I
see
that
commissioner
abdi
also
has
her
hand
up.
Okay,.
U
I
can't
talk
specifically
to
this
one,
but
generally
they
look
for
all
of
those
things
and
just
like
the
body-worn
camera,
any
additional
things
that
are
found,
including
like
things
that
would
be
under
a
search
and
seizure
policy,
get
put
into
that
complaint
as
an
extra
item,
because
we
can
add
things
as
we
see
it,
body
worn
camera
you
know
is
a
development
that
allows
us
to
see
more,
but
you
have
to
remember
body,
worn
camera
wasn't
really
fully
rolled
out
and
for
us
to
be
able
to
see
all
of
it
until
2017..
U
So
these
you
know
now
you're
in
the
modern
cases
here
and
now
you
can
see
everything
so,
in
addition
to
looking
at
the
pims
report,
both
the
public
and
non-public
supplements
that
list
all
of
these
things
and
looking
through
all
of
the
documentation
of
this,
you
usually
the
intake
investigator.
If
they
do
see
something
like
that,
they
will
add
it
on
to
the
complaint.
Just
like
the
body
worn
camera,
it's
oftentimes
that
things
will
be
added
that
the
complainant
didn't
actually
complain
about.
U
No,
what
they
complained
about
was
that
they
they
just
didn't,
have
their
items
back
and
that's
a
pre.
We
we
do
get
complaints
like
that
and
a
lot
of
times
it's
that
they
they've
asked
for
it
when
the
evidence
is
being
held.
You
know
for
x
number
of
reasons,
but
they
need
an
explanation
for
that
and
I
think
they've
had
trouble
connecting
with
the
right
person
so
a
lot
of
times.
A
U
It
was
reviewed
and
addressed,
and
so
I
can't
like
go
into
the
details
of
it,
but
after
reviewing
and
looking
at
what
the
complainant
complained
about
and
what
was
actually
listed,
the
things
that
were
found
was
that
they
didn't
they
that
they
may
not
have
handled
like
the
evidence
where
it
was
and
where
it
needed
to
be
tracked
down
like
that
piece
needed
to
be
connected
and
a
direct
referral
to
the
supervisor
in
the
property
unit
to
like
connect
with
that
person
was
what
was
made,
but
the
the
policy
violation,
the
one
that
was
the
policy
violation,
was
actually
the
body-worn
camera
and
that's
where
it
gets
tricky.
U
Because,
like
here's,
where
the
line
of
what
the
information
I
can
give
you.
But
what
I
can
tell
you
is
that
everything
is
reviewed.
The
complainant's
allegations
are
reviewed
and
then
the
ones
that
are
seen
as
like,
as
as
like
this
is
the
correct
allegation,
like
our
civilian
intake
investigators,
spend
a
lot
of
time
going
through
and
attaching
attaching
allegations
on
there,
and
so
that
is,
you
know.
You're
you're
working
on
a
person
will
file
a
complaint.
U
A
I'm
sorry
yeah.
I
just
would
like
that
known.
I
cannot
see
when
people
are
raising
their
hands
so
unless
you've
got
it
like
right
here.
Commissioner
abdi,
I'm
sorry
vice
chair
abdi.
J
Thank
you
so
with
this
I
had
some
questions
around
just
like
the
body
worn
camera
policy
in
general.
So
I
don't
know
if
you're
able
to
assist
with
that,
but
I
thought
that
it
was
like
unsettling
that
I
saw
the
phrase
as
soon
as
practical
mentioned,
like
10
times
in
that
policy.
So
I'm
curious
from
the
other
commissioner
is
on.
J
If
this
is
something
that
we
want
to
look
at
further
because
I
think
like
when
it
comes
to
body-worn
cameras
or
when
it
comes
to
anything,
really
really
policing
as
soon
as
practical,
like
what
does
that
mean,
and
is
there
a
lack
of
accountability
there
for
officers
to
kind
of
do
whatever
they
want
when
they
want
so
yeah?
That's
where
my
thoughts
are.
U
Actually,
chair
jackson
vice
chair
abdi,
I
mean
typically
when
they,
you
know
when
they're
going
on
the
call
before
the
interaction
happens,
they're
supposed
to
have
the
body
camera
on.
You
know
when
they
haven't
turned
on
a
body
camera
and
it
doesn't
attack
like
capture
a
critical
interaction
that
goes
on
as
a
violation
of
the
policy
because
they're
absolutely.
If
you're
you
know,
you
can
imagine
right
if
you're
walking
up
to
someone
that
camera
needs
to
go
on,
there's
also
a
30
second
buffer
too.
U
U
Commissioner
yeah,
if
you're
not
aware
it
was
the
pcoc
that
that
made
really
good
recommendations
that
our
office
drafted
on
the
initial
drafts
of
the
of
the
body-worn
camera
policy,
the
policy,
the
way
you
see
it
now
has
gone
through
several
iterations,
but
the
the
version
that
it's
in
now
is
actually
reflects
a
lot
of
the
pcoc's
initial
recommendations
from
several
years
ago,
which
was
to
turn
on
the
camera.
Most
of
the
time.
A
You
start
the
panel
had
his
hand
up,
go.
K
Ahead,
yes,
director
jafar,
you
and
I
have
talked
technical
difficulties
with
body
cameras
in
the
past
year,
and
so
it's
not
a
surprise
that
we're
seeing
more
of
them,
as
you
mentioned,
is
there
any
new
update
on
battery
life
since
we're
talking
about
technical
issues
with
body-worn
cameras,
I
can
imagine
some
versions
of
said
cameras.
Don't
last
that
long.
K
On
the
situation
and
how
new
they
are,
but
some
of
them
may
last
you
know
hours
upon
hours,
a
whole
shift,
maybe
more
just
so
that
way.
People
are
who
are
new
and
haven't
had
a
chance.
Yet
to
read
the
reports
that
are
made
by
the
pcoc.
U
They
did
get
updated
cameras,
not
that
all
that
long
ago,
there's
a
unit
in
mpd
called
the
business
technology
unit
and
they're
kind
of
the
ones
that
would
have
answers
for
you
about
technical
things
about
the
body,
cameras
they're,
the
ones
that
come
and
offer
training
for
us.
When
there's
new
body
cameras,
I
would
say
generally
it's
been.
It's
been
an
interesting
trajectory
because
I've
been
here
since
body
cameras
were
rolled
out
in
the
beginning.
U
It
was
a
lot
of
people
just
forgetting
that
they
were
wearing
them
and
not
turning
them
on
which
all
went
to
you
know
they
were
getting
investigated
or
getting
coach
whatever,
and
so
that
quickly
went
into
people
just
not
turning
it
on
fast
enough,
and
I
would
say,
anecdotally,
I've
seen
a
lot
less
of
that.
Like
a
lot
of
the
cases
that
we
watch
have
the
appropriate
body
camera,
the
challenge
is
that
you've
got
so
many
officers
wearing
them,
for
us
is
that
you're
watching
all
the
angles
to
make
sure
you're
getting
the
right
thing?
U
So
that's
a
good
problem
to
have
rather
than
not
having
camera,
but
we
do
pay
close
attention
where,
if,
like
you,
know,
you're
turning
it
on
30
seconds
too
late
or
a
minute
late
into
an
interaction
where,
by
the
time
I
can
hear
it
you're
already
talking
to
each
other.
You
know:
that's
not
what
we
want.
We
want
that.
You
know
audio
starting
before
you
start
a
conversation
with
someone,
and
so
I
think
that's
you
know
you're
seeing
some
of
that.
U
K
And
since
you
brought
it
up,
there
have
been
moments
in
the
past,
where
not
only
opcr
but
also
pcoc
have
gotten
to
go
witness
a
training
session
of
some
sort,
and
I
assume,
although
I
have
not
been
a
part
of
them
since
going
virtual
to
departments
such
as
the
one
that
you
mentioned
there.
K
U
I'm
working
with
mpd
about
virtual
training
options,
because
where
are
we
in
the
real
world
right
now?
You
know,
I
have
always
offered
the
trainings
that
we
go
to
staff
for
both
the
pcse
and
the
review
panelists,
because
I
think
it's
really
important
for
you
to
get
firsthand
to
see
what
is
being
trained.
So
you
can
be
better
informed
and
then
let
that
give
you
ideas.
You
know
about
what
you
want
to
work
on.
It's
been
a
little
tough
with
kovid
and
the
you
know.
U
H
Thank
you.
This
is
this
is
for
probably
director
jafar.
I
was
looking
at
the
discipline
matrix
and
there
aren't
any
specific
call
outs
for
body-worn
camera
violations
on
the
matrix,
but
there
are
specific
call
outs
for
mvr,
which
that's
the
dash
cam
video.
H
Okay,
so
the
reason
I
just
took
the
time
to
go
through
that
is
because,
since
there
isn't
a
specific
call
out
for
body-worn
camera,
I
tried
to
see
if
there's
like
something
like
it,
and
there
are
specific
call
outs
for
violations
of
the
mvr
or
motor
motor
vehicle,
recording
mobile
vehicle,
recording,
yeah,
okay
and
so
on
the
discipline
matrix
if
the
officer
does
not
turn
on
their
mvr,
that
is
a
b
level
violation
that
gets
according
to
the
matrix,
a
written
warning
or
written
written
something.
So
that
seemed
like
the
most
analogous.
U
So
I
think
you've
got
the
outdated,
like
the
the
chief
has
redone
the
discipline
matrix,
so
that
may
need
to
be
another
conversation
that
we
have
and
they've
taken
out
the
like
a
through
d,
so
that
that's
something
in
the
past,
but
a
good
place
where
you
can
find
historically,
if
it's
still
up
and
I'm
checking
right
now
on
talking-
is
it's
actually
not
the
discipline
matrix?
If
you
pull
open
each
policy,
it'll
give
you
a
range,
so
some
policies
are
a
through
d.
Some
policies
are
b
through
d.
U
If
you
want
to
see
where
the
web
page
is
to
look
at
all
the
policy
and
procedure
and
like
I
mentioned
before,
I've
got
it
hyperlinked
for
each
one
of
the
ones
that
that
you're
looking
at
so
you
can
go
individually
into
each
policy
and
take
a
look
at
what
is
the
bracketing
there,
so
it
for
example,
if
it's
an
a
through
d,
you
know
that
might
depending
on
the
severity
now,
for
example-
and
this
is
where
you
know
it's
like
the
discretionary
piece.
U
So,
for
example,
if
it's
a
really
serious
incident
that
wasn't
captured
on
body
camera,
that
may
be
construed
as
a
higher
level
right,
and
so
it
depends
but
but
for
something
where
maybe
I
am
trying
to
get
this
in
the
chat
here,
so
you
can
see
it
while
I'm
talking,
if,
if
it's
something
that
is,
you
know,
your
camera
activated
10
seconds
late,
you've,
never
you
haven't
had
any
body-worn
camera
violations,
then
you
might
be
in
an
a
so
it
just
kind
of
depends
on
the
situation
as
the
answer,
but
I
put
the
policy
link
in
the
chat,
so
you
can
go
policy
by
policy
and
you
can
see
that
bracket
because
I
think
in
the
old
discipline
matrix
it
might
be
confusing
to
look
at.
U
I
will
get
that
so
that
I'm
going
to
contact
the
police
department
to
get
someone
to
send
it,
because
I'm
always
really
careful
about
things
that
aren't
my
data.
So
I
want
to
make
sure
that
they
send
it
to
me,
knowing
that
I'm
sending
it
to
you
or
whoever
we're
gonna
have
facilitate
that.
But
we
will
get
you
the
updated
the
updated
matrix.
But
in
the
meantime
I
really
would
encourage
you
to
look
at
the
policy
because
it's
got
those
ranges
under
each
one.
H
Yeah
and
I
saw
the
a
to
d-
and
I
thought
well,
if
a
is
the
coaching
thing-
that's
supposedly
not
public,
so
virtually
everything
in
the
whole
manual
I
went
through
all
of
it.
Virtually
everything
is
a
range
of
atd,
a
through
d.
So
basically
that's
saying
to
the
chief:
if
you
don't
want
this
public,
just
call
it
coaching.
U
Right,
I
think
you
would
need
to
talk
to
someone
about
the
police
from
the
police
department
about
that.
You
know
in
in
our
world,
so
this
officer
that's
involved
in
this
incident.
If
they
come
back
with
another
body-worn
camera
violation
within
one
year,
they
immediately
go
into
an
investigation.
They
don't
have
the
option
to
be
sent
to
coaching
anymore
on
our
end,
because
they're
they're
out
of
that
now
they
get
one
chance
and
then
they're
out.
U
Right,
we
have
our
own
database
of
all
the
cases,
so
we
do
a
manual
search
of
that
person
and
make
sure
that
they
did
not
have
the
same
or
similar
within
a
year.
We
literally
look
at
their
whole
record
before
we
make
the
decision,
and
so
that
that's
how
we
know,
but
it
has
to
be
same
or
similar
within
and.
U
Yes
yep,
so
all
our
stuff
is
internal,
we're
all
back.
Our
entire
staff
is
back
mpd
background
checked,
so
we
went
through
the
same
background
check
that
the
police
go
through,
have
to
do
the
confidential
law
enforcement
data
like
exam
to
see
just
us
to
do
that,
so
we're
all
cleared
so
that
we
can
look
at
all
of
those
things
that
you
know
there's
also
internal
dashboards
built
so
that
you
can
quickly
look
up
someone's
discipline
to
make
sure
that
they
don't
have
same
or
similar
within
a
year.
A
Well,
that
that's
something
that
I
am
I'm
concerned
with,
that
we
don't
know
the
exact
numbers
of
officers
who
have
been
either
disciplined
or
coached
for
the
same
issues
within
a
year.
What,
without
violating
the
data
privacy
acts?
How
would
we?
How
would
we
be
given
a
list
of
how
many
officers
you
know
for,
for
which
infraction
and
how
many
repeat
episodes
they've
had
in
12
months?
Is
there
any
way
that
that
you
could
provide
us
with
that.
U
A
Well,
casey,
could
you
could
you
set
that
up
for
us
to
reach
out
and
ask
him
if
he
could
hello
how
we
could
get
that
information
or
why
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
have
it.
O
Sure,
mr
fussy
is
on
the
call
and
he
can
respond.
Okay.
What
was
the
request
again,
I'm
sorry
what
they're
asking
is,
there's
a
question
about
the
ability
to
ascertain
the
number
of
officers
who
may
or
may
not
have
received
discipline
over
the
course
of
a
year
in
a
way
that
would
allow,
through
some
type
of
summarization
of
data
without
violating
the
data
practices
act,
so
that
the
commission,
in
exercising
its
oversight
capacity,
is
able
to
determine
to
its
satisfaction
that
officer.
O
You
know
the
status
of
officers
in
terms
of
discipline
which
may
then
lead
to
an
infraction
that
would
merit
some
type
of
discipline
or
come
before
this
group
in
a
summary
format.
So
is
there
a
way
without
violating
privacy
provisions
under
the
data
practices
act
to
create
some
type
of
tracking
list
for
the
pcocs
reference.
V
If
sure,
that's
something
we
can
look
at
it's
entirely.
That's
you
know
too
complicated
for
me
to
answer
at
this
point,
but
we
could
certainly
look
at
it.
I
will
say
the
general
proposition
would
remain
that
this,
this
half
of
the
opcr,
this
op,
this
police
connect
oversight.
Commission
does
not
have
any
authority
to
access
private
personnel
data
beyond
that
of
the
general
public
and
beyond
that
summary
and
aggregate
data,
but
to
the
extent
that
request
could
fit
within
those
parameters.
We
could
certainly
look
at
it.
O
And
madam
chair,
if
I
might
just
interrupt
for
a
moment,
I
was
going
to
add
on
to
mr
fussy
and
say
this
is
an
area
where
I
think
the
attorney's
office
and
the
clerk
in
terms
of
being
responsible
authority
for
the
city
could
certainly
look
into
that
a
bit
and
give
you
an
answer,
a
more.
As
mr
fussy
said,
it's
difficult.
The
data
practices
law
is
a
very
comprehensive
and
very
difficult
law
to
understand.
O
O
The
legislature
makes
changes
to
it
every
single
year,
so
so,
as
the
city's
responsible
authority,
I
I
can
sympathize
with
with
the
position
you
find
yourself
in,
and
I
think
probably
between
now
and
your
next
meeting
mr
fussy
and
I
could
look
at
that
and
possibly
come
up
with
a
little
bit
more
detailed
analysis
of
what
is
and
is
not
available
under
that
statute.
What
is
and
could
be
made
available
and
what
cannot
be
made
available.
O
I
know
many
of
the
members
are
new,
and
so
this
would
be
something
we
could
bring
forward
as
that
sort
of
level
set.
Expectation
of
this
is
this
is
the
reality
of
the
data
practices,
law,
and
here
are
opportunities
where
we
can
work
within
that
law,
and
then
here
are
hard
stops
that
we
can't.
A
Okay,
so
what
I'm
asking,
though
I
don't
think,
would
involve
any
personal
data
of
the
officers.
A
What
I'm
asking
would
be
for
a
compilation
of
the
violations
that
were
sent
to
coaching
and
if
there
are
repeat
officers
that
have
been
sent
to
coaching
within
the
past
year
and
how
many
officers
have
how
many
coachings
does
each
officer
have
like?
I
don't
need.
I
don't
think
we
need
to
know
the
names
or
any
other
private
data.
It's
just
I
I
would
like
to
see.
A
D
Sorry,
everybody
I've
got
two.
I
have
two
infants
that
I've
been
putting
to
bed
and
it's
been
a
nightmare
and
I'm,
but
I'm
here
what
you're
describing
is.
Actually
it's
already
been
requested
upon
us
from
the
pcoc
there's
a
coaching
study.
We
had
a
previous
coaching
study
where
we
looked
at
officers.
You
know
the
recidivism
that
you
know
that
happens,
and
so
we
can
see
officers.
You
know,
like
you
know
throughout
time
we
can
see
how
many
words
were
in
the
coaching
documents.
D
What
I
want
to
do
is
to
repeat
those
studies
and
then
basically
extrapolate
it
to
where
we're
at
right
now,
so
that
you'll
have
the
opportunity
to
see
and
again
my
my
goal
is
not
that
it's
a
good
or
bad.
My
goal
is
to
show
you
the
data
and
then
you
do
it
with
what
you
want.
D
So
we
that
is
in
the
process.
It's
been
a
lot
we've
had.
You
know
stash
shortages
you're
all
aware,
but
we
do.
We
do
have
people
that
are
here
that
are
doing
the
work,
and
so
the
study
that
you
can
find
on
our
website
right
now
everybody
can
go
to
go
to
it.
Go
to
the
pcoz
website.
D
There's
a
coaching
study
you
can
go
to
you
know
you
can
see
what
that
looks
like
we're,
trying
to
get
that
to
go
from
that
point
to
now
and
so
you'll
be
able
to
encompass
all
of
that
data.
So
I
I
I
hope
that
that's
again,
it's
not
an
answer.
It's
not
I'm
not
telling
you!
That's
it.
You
know
that's
enough,
but
that
isn't
that's
taking
place
right
now.
That
is
relevant
to
this
conversation
that
I
want
to
make
sure
everybody
knows
about
so
so
sorry
to
interject.
A
Okay,
casey,
you
did
not
finish
what
you
were
saying.
Did
you
want
to
follow.
A
Okay,
do
we
have
time
we
have
10
minutes?
We
want
to
go
to
the
third
summary,
or
do
we
want
to
decide
right
now
whether
we
want
to
escalate
this
to
the
mayor's
office,
the
first
summary
or
if
we
want
to
have
some
further
information
from
mpd
from
oh,
my
gosh,
I
I
I
hate
it
when
my
like
words
just
desert
me.
I
can't
I
can't
speak
well
at
the
moment,
but.
U
K
Madam
chair,
I
request
that,
in
regards
to
a
case
summary
18
20737,
that
we
engage
with
help
me
with
the
appropriate
entity
over
at
mpd
director
jafar,
the
the
entity.
A
K
C
O
K
That
we
reach
out
to
property
and
evidence
to
have
someone
from
their
division
come
and
meet
with
us
in
a
public
setting.
So
that
way
we
can
potentially
get
a
little
bit
more
illumination
on
that
case
and
then
I
would
humbly
suggest
after
that
discussion
once
hopefully,
we
have
a
little
bit
more
information.
K
If
necessary,
we
can
talk
to
the
mayor
or
other
entities
afterwards,.
C
A
I
agree
with
you,
commissioner,
commissioner.
Sarah.
H
K
I'm
assuming
that
was
a
directed
towards
my
my
motion,
so
I
I'll
just
elaborate
by
saying
what
I
gathered
from
director
jafar
was
that
she
was
unable,
due
to
her
own
legal
limitations,
to
be
able
to
share
with
us
information
that
potentially
someone
within
minneapolis
police
department
would
be
able
to
share
with
us
in
a
public
setting.
Can.
K
V
U
You
walk
me
through,
like
there's
a
lot
of
information
to
be
gleaned.
That
way,
I
know
the
data
practices
act
is
difficult.
I
find
it
difficult
myself.
I
completely
agree
with
the
city
clerk.
I
just
wrote
an
article
on
this
whole
thing,
so
I'm
I'm
with
you,
okay,
but,
like
you
have
to
look
at
what
can
you
get
out
of
this
right?
U
And
so,
if
you
ask
general
questions
to
learn
about
the
process,
then
when
you
see
cases
that
come
up
that
have
something
that
looks
like
it
deviates
from
the
process,
you
will
understand
that
better.
You
know
the
other
thing
to
keep
in
mind
with
the
case
summaries.
While
you
figure
out
what
you
can
and
can't
do,
past
commissions
have
taken
those
case
summaries
to
find
trends,
to
find
things
that
they'd
like
to
work
on
projects
that
they
think
something
that
they
think
is
problematic.
U
So
don't
forget
that
high
level
view
you
the
nice
thing
about
having
more
of
them
over
time,
and
I
know
that
many
of
you
are
very
new
and
you
know
this
is
your
first
meeting
for
some
of
you,
but
you
have
to
pay
attention
to
the
trends
over
time,
that
that
is
what
helps
guide
and
inform
your
work.
It's
great
to
ask
these
questions
it's
great,
to
have
intellectual
discussion,
but
don't
lose
that
piece
that
you're
trying
to
look
at
things
over
time
so
that
you
can
see.
U
A
Well,
first
of
all,
I
would
I
would
second
your
your
emotion,
commissioner
pineau
so
director
jafar,
if
you
could
reach
out
to
property
and
evidence
and
have
someone
come
and
speak
to
us?
Yes,
because
I
know
that
we're
we're
trying
to
find
patterns,
you
know
that
we
can
identify
and
and
make
suggestions
about
changing
some
policies.
But
this
particular
case
for
some
reason,
is
very
problematic
to
me
that
an
officer
is
just
allowed
to
say:
oh,
I
forgot
it's
no
big
deal
and
that
the
department
accepts
that.
A
So
you
know
I
don't.
I
don't
know
if
we'll
discover
a
trend
here
if
this
fits
a
pattern
of
evidence
being
entered
in
properly,
but
it
will
behoove
us
to
speak
to
someone
at
least
and
get
more
information
on
the
procedures
and
maybe
percentages
of
how
often
their
procedures
are
not
followed.
A
A
O
A
Yep,
so
I
will
turn
it
over
to
casey
and
and
vote
on
that
the
promotion
is
to
invite
someone
from
mpd
property
and
evidence
to
come
and
address
the
commission.
So
the
motion's
been
seconded
and
now
we'll
take
a
vote.
A
E
A
Motion
is
carried
so
director
jafar
if
you
could
reach
out
to
the
mpd
and
and
have
someone
get
back
with
us
about
that
and
that
for
next
month's
meeting
for
february's
meeting.
A
Yep,
I'm
sorry
the
march
meeting,
so
our
last.
B
Summary,
madam.
J
T
R
O
C
O
N
U
A
Okay,
thank
you
very
much,
so
our
next
summary
where's,
the
number
two
zero.
Would
you
do
this
not
me
right.
U
Yeah,
so
basically
it
was
the
officers
were
involved
in
conducting
a
traffic.
Stop
they
collided
with
an
oncoming
vehicle.
They
were
basically
going
through
an
alleyway
there's
a
description
here.
I
don't
think
I
need
to
go
through
this
because
you've
all
read
it.
So
basically
there
was
you
know
there
was
some
minimal
damage,
but
the
car
remained
operational.
Typically,
when
squad
accidents
are
viewed,
we
do
pay
attention
to
the
level
of
damage
sustained.
U
Was
anybody
hurt,
that's
a
big
factor
so
looking
at
that
it
again,
this
is
listed
at
property
damage.
It
was
we
get
referrals.
I
can't
remember
if
you
scroll
if
this
one
was
a
referral
from
the
squad
accident
committee,
and
I
can
explain
what
that
is,
because
you're
very
likely
to
see
a
lot
more
of
those
cases,
because
we
just
get
a
lot
of
them
every
year.
U
Basically,
whenever
there's
a
squad
accident,
it
goes
to
a
committee
for
review
and
if
they
think
the
accident
was
preventable,
then
it
gets
routed
to
our
office
to
review
that
accident
to
see
what
should
happen
this
officer
had,
it
was
a
low.
The
accident
was
basically
a
low
level.
U
Thankfully,
nobody
was
hurt
and
there
was
no
serious
damage
to
the
vehicles,
but
you
know
we
believe
that
the
officer
should
have
to
sit
down
with
the
supervisor
and
go
through
what
they
did
in
that
thing,
what
could
have
been
preventable
and
go
through
the
4-4-1-0,
which
is
city
vehicles
and
on-duty
accidents
so
that
they
did?
You
know
a
policy
violation
was
found
that
the
accident
was
preventable
and
they
were
coached.
If
that
officer
was
to
get
another
accident
within
a
year
period,
then
that
would
turn
into
an
investigation.
U
Other
cases
we've
had
that
turned
into
investigation.
The
officer
has
to
actually
go
back
through
emergency
driving
training
again
or
go
back
through
trainees
again
to
make
sure
that
they're
driving
safely.
A
Okay
well
reading,
through
the
summary
of
evidence,
the
pilot
officer
with
emergency
lights
activated
followed
the
same
course
and
exited
the
alley
by
driving
around
the
school
bus.
I'm
trying
to
interpose
myself
into
that
same
situation,
and
I
think
that
I
think
this
officer
acted
normally
like
I.
I
agree
with
with
the
outcome
that
he
should
have
just
been
coached.
If
he
had
his
lights
on.
A
A
F
Agree,
that's
what
it
sounds
like
to
me
too.
A
You
know
that
that
the
traffic
unit
filed
it
that
the
the
squad
vehicle
or
I'm
sorry,
I
lost
my
place,
a
traffic
squad
and
a
supervisor
both
came
to
the
scene
in
a
state
accident
report.
I'm
I'm
satisfied.
I
don't
think
we.
A
Okay,
well
at
least
you
can
see
the
hand
I
can't
I'm
using
a
different
computer
though
so
I
don't
know
it's
probably
an
outdated
version
of
teams.
Maybe
so
do
any
other
any
anyone
else
here
have
a
a
differing
perception
or
are
we
all
in
agreement.
A
F
Just
stack
up
my
earlier
comments,
I
think
the
individual
case
sounds
fine.
I
do
have
sort
of
a
keen
interest
that
the
the
number
and
the
type
of
traffic
violations
I
feel
like
I
personally
anecdotally,
observe
a
lot
of
these
kinds
of
things
on
other
part
of
mpd,
so
I'm
interested
in
seeing
these
in
aggregate
and
learning
more
about
them,
and
I
thought
it
was
interesting
that
the
director
jafar
noted
that
they
they
see
a
lot
of
these
type
of
complaints.
I
can
imagine
being
that
police
officers
practically
live
and
work
out
of
their
vehicles.
F
There
would
be
a
lot
of
complaints,
but
I
I
have
a
keen
interest
in
these
myself
and
seeing
more
of
these
big
picture
would
would
be
something
I'm
looking
forward
to.
Commissioner.
U
Sparks
that's,
you
know,
that's
the
type
of
case
where,
like
we
do
because
every
squad
accident,
that's
happened,
is
reported
out
and
then
reviewed.
So
there's
no
shortage
of
data
when
it
comes
to
squad
accidents
like
a
lot
of
them
are
more
minor
accidents,
but
it's
still
really
important
to
review
them
to
make
sure
even
on
this
one,
like
you
know,
I
think,
you've
all
said
like
yeah,
this
looks
pretty
reasonable,
but
you
know
in
looking
at
it.
U
You
can
see
we
still
sent
them
to
coaching
for
it
to
be
reviewed
because
you
know
make
sure
you're
paying
attention
when
you're
turning
around
the
bus.
It's
really
important.
You
could
hurt
someone,
you
know
so,
even
though
those
seem
like
they're
they're,
definitely
not
as
attention
grabbing
as
some
of
the
other
things.
That's
a
lot
more
of
our
day-to-day
work
and
it
still
really
impacts
the
quality
of
life
for
people.
A
Okay,
if
we
have
no
further
questions
comments
about
the
summaries,
we'll
move
to
our
final
item
of
business
tonight,
and
that
is
a
proposed
orientation
program
that
would
substitute
for
the
commission's
regular
meeting
in
february.
O
A
O
Casey,
I'm
sorry
to
redirect
your
attention.
You
do
have
one
item.
You
have
both
the
selection
of
three
case
synopses
for
the
march
meeting
number.
Nine
is
the
potential
staff
direction
that
you
had
submitted
with
the
agenda
and
then
the
february
orientation
sorry
to
have
to
pull
us
back,
but
there
are
three
items
remaining.
A
O
And
I'm
not
sure
mr
hawkins
can
probably
help
us
here
or
perhaps
director
jafar,
I'm
not
sure
how
selection
of
the
next
three
case
synopsis
is
made.
I
haven't
been
part
of
that
process
before
so.
The
agenda
item
now
is
picking
case
synopsis
to
be
presented
at
the
march.
Regular
meeting
and
ted
has
pulled
up
for
us
the
view
of
those
case
synopsis
july
2020,
so
they're
in
front
of
the
screen.
If
you'd
like
to
review
those
and
ms,
I
see
that
director
jafar
is
asking
for
recognition.
U
Director
jafar
chair
jackson,
if
you
want
some
because
I
know
even
for
the
neuro
commissioners,
there
was
a
time
when
it
was
suspended,
so
I
thought
it
might
just
be
helpful
for
everybody
to
go
through
how
they've
done
them
in
the
past
again
at
your
discretion.
If
you
want
to
keep
doing
them,
usually
everybody's
read
the
summaries
in
advance.
U
Everybody
makes
a
selection
of
three.
So
then
the
vote
is
tallied,
as
you
call
on
each
commissioner
to
vote.
You
also
put
your
own
vote
in
for
the
three
cases
that
you
would
like.
More
information
on
the
three
cases
that
garner
the
most
votes
are
the
ones
that
are
then
then
done
in
the
bigger
the
bigger
format
where
you
get
more
information.
A
K
At
new
business,
section
eight,
where
we're
saying
selection
of
three
case
synopses,
I'm,
unfortunately
not
seeing
a
link
in
limbs
where
I
would
normally
get
this
information
ahead
of
time
and
therefore
I
don't
actually
have
a
list
of
these
ten
synopses.
O
A
I
also
wanted
to
bring
something
up
as
well
that
I
don't
think
that
it
gives
us
enough
time
actually
to
look
at
these
synopsis
and
choose
three
that
when
we're
we're
only
presented
with
them
at
this
meeting,
and
then
we
have
to
quickly
choose
three
to
summarize
in
the
next
meeting.
Is
there
any
way
that
we
can
receive
these
a
few
days
prior
so
that
we
can
look
at
them
and
then
come
back
to
the
to
the
meeting
with
a
better
idea.
O
So,
madam
chair,
perhaps
while
mr
hawkins
looks
to
do
that,
something
we
could
do
is
move
on
to
the
next
item
of
business,
which
is
the
staff
directive.
We
can
always
come
back
to
this
item
and
pick
case
selections.
I
was
hopeful
to
make
comments
when
we
talk
about
the
orientation
in
february.
O
That
might
address
that.
As
I
mentioned,
the
clerk's
office
is
new
to
assume
responsibility
for
meeting
management
functions.
This
is
our
first
meeting
and
so
I
think,
a
lot
of
those
opportunities
for
process.
Improvements
are
certainly
right
before
all
of
us.
I'm
learning,
as
all
of
you
are
learning,
and
so
to
the
extent
that
we
can
make
those
types
of
process
improvements.
I
absolutely
support
them,
but
perhaps
in
the
interest
of
time
we
could
move
to
item
number
nine
and
then
we
can
come
back
to
number
eight.
A
Well,
if
we'd
like
to
finalize
eight
right
now,
I
would
like
to
include
the
case
synopsis
in
into
the
same
processes
as
when
we
receive
the
agenda.
A
We
always
get
a
prior
look
at
that
before
it's
posted.
If,
if
these,
if
the
synopses
can
be
included
with
that,
if
we
can
just
move
forward
with
that,
so
the
the
item
number
nine.
O
O
I
believe,
what's
called
within
your
bylaws
a
research
program
and
to
bring
back,
verified
facts
and
data
about
that
situation
and
to
provide
a
summary
analysis
of
that,
so
that
you
can
then,
in
your
oversight,
capacity,
examine
what
if
any
policies
or
procedures
were
involved,
where
there
may
have
been
any
lack
of
a
significant
policy
or
procedure
in
place
and
direct
further
opportunities
from
that
regard.
So
this
is
item
number
nine
and
would
be
before
the
commission
to
discuss.
A
O
N
A
O
Director
jafar
has
requested
recognition.
U
I
just
before
you
get
too
far
down
this.
I
think
there's
some
important
information
you
need
to
know
here.
Our
office
has
never
been
involved
in
officer-involved
shootings.
That
may
be
surprising
to
some
people.
We've
been
in
discussions
about
how
we
can
be
involved
in
reviewing
things,
but
to
this
point
and
we're
in
the
discussions
right
now
we
almost
had
an
agreement
and
then
you
know
all
the
leadership
and
mpd
changed
and
we
had
to
start
all
over
again.
U
The
bca
gets
the
the
officer-involved
shooting
they
make
a
report
and
determination
that
often
gets
referred
to
a
charging
authority.
When
it
comes
back
to
the
minneapolis
police
department.
It
usually
goes
to
ia
internal
affairs
for
a
force
review
on
the
incident.
I
I'm
not
gonna
take
an
opinion
on
what
way.
U
I
think
we
should
go
because
we're
still
in
the
discussions,
but
our
office
has
never
been
involved
in
doing
anything
like
you're
requesting,
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
you
know
that
before
you
move
forward
on
it
and
we
would
have
to
if
you
move
the
staff
direction
forward,
we
would
have
to
hammer
that
out
with
mpd
about
moving
forward
on
officer-involved
shooting
cases,
because
that
is
not
something
that
we
have
done
in
the
past.
D
Yep,
sorry
about
that
to
this,
I
I
think
the
clerk's
office
can
actually
speak
to
quite
a
bit
of
it
because,
as
our
public
information
official,
they
are
the
ones
that
are
situated
to
release
all
this
stuff
to
the
public
and
like
casey.
Do
you
have
anything.
O
Chair,
I
would
only
suggest
that
to
director
jafar's
point,
as
it
says
in
the
last
line
of
the
opening
provision,
it
says
based
on
facts
and
evidence,
so
my
assumption
would
be
that,
after
the
evidence
is
weighed
after
facts
are
determined
and
verified,
which
is
the
important
point
here.
Then
there
would
be
an
analysis
of
that
factual
data
sufficient
to
provide
an
analysis
of
what
was
the
incident
as
determined
by
that
research.
That
investigation
not
necessarily
done
by
the
opcr
but
then
afterwards,
sort
of
as
an
aftermath
analysis.
There
would
be
this.
O
O
I
think
that
the
expectation
is
that
opcr
undertakes
its
own
investigation,
but
certainly
after
the
facts
have
been
determined
and
ascertained,
there
is
an
opportunity
I
think
for
for
the
opcr
to
work
with
police,
bca
and
other
agencies,
as
those
facts
are
known
to
to
evaluate
sort
of
as
a
post
audit.
Almost
what
what
policies
were
involved
and
were
there
any
violations
of
those
policies?
O
What
procedures
were
involved
and
were
there
any
infractions
on
those
procedures,
and
then
those
can
be
brought
forward
and
shared
with
this
body
in
an
oversight
capacity
so
that
this
body
then
can
say?
Okay,
we
have
now
found
some
vulnerabilities
in
that
safety
net.
If
you
will
that
net
of
policies
and
procedures
and
what
do
we,
the
oversight
body
want
to
take
at
that
point
in
terms
of
direction,
going
forward
with
recommendations
on
how
those
policies
and
procedures
can
be
strengthened.
O
So
that
would
be,
I
think,
a
more
fuller
explanation
of
the
intent
behind
that
staff
direction
is
certainly
to
after
the
facts
have
been
ascertained,
bring
forward
that
information
to
this
body,
where
the
policies
and
procedures
were
perhaps
insufficient
or
failed
to
be
observed
in
their
fullest
capacity,
so
that
this
body
could,
I
think,
as
director
jafar
rightly
said,
you
know
ascertain
that
baseline
and
say:
okay.
Well,
these
are
the
policies.
So
what
do
we
do
now.
A
Well,
I
I
think
that
we're
concerned
with
the
public
being
being
able
to
comment
on
this,
but
it
was
my
decision
to
delay
opening
it
up
to
public
comment
until
after
we
have
more
information
till
things,
you
know
all
the
facts
and
things
have
been
concluded.
A
So
I'm
sorry,
I
just
lost
my
train
of
thought.
Oh
I've
said
about
the
public
commenting
on
it.
I
I
think
it
it's
it's.
I
think
it's
just
more,
respectful
and
and
more
of
a
complete
process
to
to
have
more
knowledge
about
the
incident
before
we
have
the
community
the
public
weighing
in.
A
We
need
to
give
them
something
to
weigh
in
on,
rather
than
just
immediate
perceptions
of
what
happened.
A
I
mean
I
that
wasn't
relevant
to
moving
anything
forward.
It
was
just
a
a
a
sentiment
that
I
wanted
to
express.
So
all
right,
I
have
to
figure
out
which
computer
I
have
the
agenda
up
on
so
help
me
casey.
Do
I
need
to
make
a
motion
to
accept
this.
O
Madam
chair,
this
motion
is
brought
forward
by
you.
We
would
just
see
open
it
up
for
discussion
if
there's
any
discussion
or
clarification
beyond
what
we've
already
had
and
then,
of
course,
we
would
need
a
vote.
A
second.
A
A
Chair
all
right,
thank
you.
Vice
chair,
so
thoughts,
questions.
E
If
I
make
what
sounds
like
we're
uncertain
on
the
timing,
but
hopefully
this
is
still
the
right
request.
Director
jafar
to
your
office
is
one
question:
is
it
eventually
is
this?
Something
then
that
your
office
will
be
able
to
access
and
answer
that?
I
think
that's
what
I
was
gathering
from
what
you
were
saying
casey.
Is
that
right?
E
E
I
want
to
make
sure
that
that
is
clear,
and
that
may
be
one
thing
we
want
to
include
in
0.2
is
bringing
in
who
can
answer
questions
before
the
commission,
because,
based
on
other
summaries,
we've
gotten
tonight,
sounds
like
we're.
Also
not
going
to
get
there's
going
to
be
a
lot
of
private
data,
and
so
I
want
to
make
sure
that
maybe
we
can
talk
to
someone
who
could
talk
about
general
processes
to
help
kind
of
help.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner
mcguire
for
that
insight
there,
but
I
I
would
also
like
to
ask
or
clarify
that
when
we
receive
all
the
information
that
it
includes
the
reasons
for
the
investigation
in
the
first
place
like
what
led
up
to
this,
and
I
also
think
that
the
handling
of
the
search
warrant
at
his
parents,
home
should
be
addressed
as
well
in
this
director.
Jafar
or
whomever
will
be
handling
this.
U
I'm
probably
gonna
have
to
talk
to
both
the
police
department
and
mpd
records,
because,
like
I
mentioned
before,
this
is
just
not
something
we
we've
ever
done.
We've
been
in
discussions
about
how
to
do
reviews.
You
know
posts
that
it's
important
for
civilians
to
be
involved,
but
we
just
haven't.
We
haven't
gotten
to
this
place,
yet
it's
not
that
I'm
not
willing
to
carry
the
recommendations
forward
and
work
with
the
police
department.
I
am
it's
just
I'm
not
I'm
not
entirely
sure
what
the
outcome
is
going
to
be.
U
I
just
want
to
be
completely
honest
and
transparent
with
you.
This
is
something
that
I've
been
working
on
for
a
while
to
try
and
get
us
in
a
different
level.
Involvement
that
we're
at
now-
and
we
just
we
aren't
there.
A
Well,
I
just
think
that
it's
important
that
the
public
be
well
informed
that
that
they
have
all
the
facts
so
that
we
don't
get
misperceptions
that
get
spread
and
people
people
becoming
very
emotionally
invested
in
a
non-fact.
A
So
before
we
do
that,
I
just
think
that
that
the
whole
picture,
as
as
commissioner
mcguire
was
saying
like
the
whole
picture,
needs
to
be
presented.
So
it's
as
as
much
as
is
possible.
D
Madam
chair,
it's
really
quick,
like
I
think
one
of
the
things
around
this
that
civil
rights
wants
to
talk
about
is
you
know
our
story's
been
hard
to
get
out
there,
and
so
I
think,
with
a
lot
of
things
that
have
happened
recently.
We've
talked
about
it
internally
and
like,
and
we
want
to
be
more
deliberate
about
getting
our
story
out
there.
So
that's
something
that
we
want
to
do.
It
makes
a
lot
of
sense
to
work
with
the
council
or
to
work
with
our
commission.
Sorry
about
that.
D
You
know
like
what
that
messaging
is,
but
I
don't
know
what
you're
talking
about
like
in
terms
of
like
you
know
expressing
like
opinions,
and
you
know
and
and
facts,
and
all
that
I
I
just
wanted
to
reiterate
that,
like
we're
very,
very,
very
excited
about
this,
like
this
going
forward
with
this
new
group.
So
for
that's
worth
I
I
digress.
A
A
C
G
C
E
C
F
A
A
I
guess
we'll
be
going
over
a
historical
overview
of
the
poc.
Poc
purpose
functions
review
of
subcommittees
because,
yes,
in
march
we
will
be
forming
subcommittees
and
appointing
members,
yes
and
then
our
support,
which
is
the
opcr
department
of
civil
rights
in
the
office
of
city
clerk.
O
Madam
chair,
there
was
a
brief
synopsis
that
was
sent
out
with
the
agenda
and
I
don't
know
ted.
Can
you
pull
up
the
summary
of
the
february
proposed
orientation
program
and
I
believe,
madam
chair,
that
mr
reed
might
be
able
to
speak
more
towards
the
intent
of
the
orientation
program?
That's
been
proposed,
given
the
fact
that
there
are
a
lot
of
new
commissioners
and
a
lot
of
changes
just
in
terms
of
the
staffing
and
support
provided
starting
this
year
for
the
pcoc.
So
I
believe
mr
reed
might
have
some
comments
on
this.
One.
W
Absolutely
thank
you
casey.
If
it
pleased
the
chair,
I
would
just
let
everybody
know
that
really.
This
is
an
opportunity
for
us
to
to
give
you
a
good
background
of
what
we
do
and
how
we
can
help
moving
forward,
but
also
to
give
that
important
foundational
understanding
about
what
the
pcoc
does
every
day
and
it's
important
work
moving
forward.
W
I
did
want
to
note
that
you
know
these
are
tough
times,
and
so
we
have
to
make
sure
that
we
work
together
on
all
of
this
and
the
best
way
to
to
get
the
information
to
you
outside
of
being
in
person
to
do
the
the
directives
here,
as
noted
in
the
pcoc
orientation
document,
is
to
do
it
electronically
in
a
virtual
way,
but
we
are
always
open
to
questions
as
you
take
a
look
at
the
the
document
there.
W
C
O
Adam
chair,
as
members
are
digesting
the
proposed.
Oh.
O
I'll
say
that
the
chair
is
rejoining
the
meeting
and
as
she
rejoins
the
meeting,
I
would
say
that,
as
the
commissioners
are
digesting
was
proposed,
outline
for
an
orientation
program
in
february
the
I
will
have
to
take
responsibility
for
the
fact
that
the
materials
associated
with
item
number-
eight,
which
are
the
case
synopsis
to
be
presented
for
summarization
at
the
march
meeting,
are
not
in
our
possession,
and
I
I
don't
want
to
waste
time,
given
the
hours
almost
nine
o'clock,
I
would
suggest
if
the
commission
is
amenable
to
this
proposal.
O
If
we
have
an
orientation
program
which
will
be
a
public
meeting
between
now
and
that
march
meeting,
I
would
propose
to
email
to
all
of
you
that
list
of
case
case
synopsis
and
that
at
the
february
meeting
we
can
be
prepared
to
make
that
selection,
with
the
expectation
that
the
case
summaries
be
submitted
well
in
advance
of
the
agenda
posting
for
the
march
meeting.
So
with
apologies,
I
simply
don't
have
the
materials
to
share
tonight.
On
item
number,
eight.
C
O
So
if
there's
no
objection,
madam
chair,
I
would
just
expect
that
you
direct
the
clerk
to
make
that
happen.
We
don't
need
to
take
a
formal
vote.
I
will
make
sure
that
the
follow-up
happens
as
I've
promised.
I
don't
know
if
there
are
other
questions.
I
know
there
were
some
technical
difficulties
that
created
a
problem
and
you're
you're
joining
us
again,
but
I
don't
know
if
there
are
questions
from
the
commissioners
about
the
proposed
orientation
and
mr
reed
had
some
general
comments.
I
think
it's
a
great
time
to
level
set.
O
I
mentioned
a
couple
times.
This
is
my
first
meeting
and
I
want
to
really
appreciate
my
team,
ted
and
ayan
from
the
clerk's
office
and
mr
hawkins
and
director
jafar
and
everyone
who've
made
it
an
easy
transition
for
me.
It's
my
goal,
as
I
stated
to
help
build
on
upon
the
successes
in
the
past
and
so
many
new
members.
I
do
believe
there
are
opportunities
for
us
to
improve
the
processes
and
I
think
that
tonight
is
a
good
start
for
that.
O
A
All
right
so
so
directed
director
jafar.
We
will
wait
until
february
to
make
our
choices
and
if
there
is
no
further
business
on
the
table
or
any
further
discussion,
I
move
to
adjourn
second
all
in
favor
or
we
don't
do
that.
Do
we
take
a
role
or
can.