►
From YouTube: December 13, 2022 City Council
Description
Additional information at:
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
A
A
C
B
A
Have
Acorn?
Next
we
have
the
adoption
of
our
agenda
colleague
the
agenda
for
today's
meeting
is
before
us:
it's
a
continuation
of
our
last
regular
meeting,
which
was
this
past
Thursday.
So
this
includes
the
single
item
that
we
postponed
at
that
time
to
today,
and
that
is
the
consideration
of
the
proposed
creation
of
the
community.
Commission
on
police
oversight,
which
was
brought
forward
by
the
public
health
and
safety
committee
and
I,
would
entertain
a
motion
to
adopt
the
agenda
as
presented.
F
C
A
Carries
and
the
agenda
is
adopted.
Colleagues
I
just
have
a
point
of
privilege
at
our
budget.
Markup
committee
I
inadvertently
voted,
nay
on
item
number,
16.
and
I
would
ask.
Were
your
Indulgence
and
me
changing
that
vote?
It
was
an
affirmative
vote.
The
actual
item
passed
I
had
intended
to
vote.
Yes
on
that
and
inadvertently
voted
no
and
so
I'll
ask
the
clerk
for
advice.
Should
we
do
a
roll
call
or.
B
Madam
president,
perhaps
we
could
set
that
aside
at
the
end
of
the
meeting.
I,
don't
have
that
particular
set
of
actions
in
front
of
me
right
now.
I
can
certainly
try
and
pull
them
up
so
that
we
can,
as
a
body,
understand
the
request
to
change
a
vote
that
was
done
at
a
previous
meeting.
That
is
adjourned,
and
so
perhaps
we
can
take
that
up
after
we
deal
with
the
public
health
and
safety
committee
item,
I'll,
pull
all
the
information
and
share
that
with
the
council
members
at
the
diocese.
A
For
for
your
assistance-
and
that
is,
item,
number
16,
amendment
by
council,
members,
Chuck,
Tai
and
Chavez,
thank
you
all
right.
As
I've
already
noted,
we
have
this
single
item
for
our
consideration
today,
and
that
is
the
ordinance
that
creates
the
community
Commission
on
police
oversight.
A
C
A
Thus,
the
main
motion
is
before
us,
which
was
postponed
from
last
Thursday.
That
motion
is
to
approve
the
ordinance
since
that
time,
I've
had
the
opportunity
to
work
with
many
of
you
on
amendments
to
further
improve
that
ordinance.
Those
which
I
believe
represent
the
consensus
of
the
body
have
been
Incorporated
by
our
City
attorney
in
a
new
draft,
which
I
am
submitting
as
a
substitute
for
this
body's
consideration
before
I
open
to
General
discussion.
A
To
me,
this
substitute
ordinance
represents
a
consensus
that
reflects
input
from
all
of
us
and
I
want
to
especially
thank
the
city
attorney's
office
for
working
with
us
to
ensure
that
each
of
these
amendments
only
strengthens
the
court
proposal
and
for
helping
us
to
get
to
this
point
where
we
have
a
document
that
reflects
the
consensus
of
the
council,
truly
believe
that
we
are
at
a
better
place
and
that
the
product
is
significantly
better
because
it
reflects
all
of
us.
A
I
want
to
just
point
out
and
highlight,
and
thank
councilmember
Payne
for
his
inclusions
on
the
data,
transparency
and
data
access
for
the
commission,
also
for
bringing
forward
regular
reports
that
both
this
body,
the
new
commission
and
the
public
can
benefit
from
in
understanding
how
police
conduct
is
improving.
A
I
believe
that
these
regular
reports
will
help
us
to
perform
our
oversight
responsibilities
and
will
give
the
public
actionable
data
about
the
performance
of
our
Police
Department.
That
helps
to
restore
and
build
trust.
I
also
appreciate
the
requirement
for
the
annual
public
hearing
as
another
opportunity
for
public
engagement.
A
I
also
think
that
she's
Incorporated
best
practices
for
training
as
a
requirement
I
think
that
this
will
be
a
key
for
future
success
in
terms
of
larger
reforms
that
we
will
consider
for
all
boards
and
commissions.
A
I
also
want
to
thank
councilmember
Chavez
for
bringing
recommendations
that
will
help
ensure
that
this
new
commission
remains
accountable
and
for
recognizing
that
individuals
who
serve
on
this
body
should
have
a
record
of
building
public
trust,
not
division.
A
Lastly,
I'll
thank
councilmember
winesley
for
working
to
build
in
safeguards
for
our
commissioners
so
that
they
can
do
this
important
work.
Unencumbered
I
want
to
thank
all
of
my
colleagues
for
their
engagement
and
contributions
to
this
shared
work.
We
know
that
this
is
just
one
more
step
in
our
Collective
efforts
to
improve
police,
accountability
and
oversight.
A
We
know
that
this
is
an
important
step,
but
it's
just
one
more
step.
There
will
be
many
more
actions
that
we
will
need
to
take,
but
I
maintain
that
this
is
an
important
step
and
truly
believe
that
the
substitute
ordinance
brings
together
the
best
that
each
of
us
have
brought
to
the
table.
I
also
want
to
just
take
a
moment
to
thank
director
civil
rights,
director,
Alberta
Gillespie
and
Mr
Andrew
Hawkins
for
their
work
in
bringing
this
ordinance
forward
and
and
continually
helping
to
craft
and
make
it
better.
A
With
that,
I
am
going
to
move
approval
of
the
substitute
motion
that
formally
creates
the
community
Commission
on
police
oversight.
Is
there
a
second
second
colleagues?
There
is
a
motion
before
us
to
accept
to
approve
the
substitute
motion
to
create
the
community
Commission
on
police
oversight
and
a
proper
second.
Is
there
any
discussion.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I'd,
like
to
say,
I,
think
this
is
a
really
good
ordinance.
We
have
some
last
amendments
to
add
to
it
today.
There's
a
lot
of
really
good
stuff
in
here,
and
thank
you
for
putting
this
consensus
document
together.
It
is
a
very
truly
good
faith
effort
that
has
involved
a
lot
of
conversation
with
the
city
attorney's
office,
including
the
mayor's
office
and
and
I,
think
helps
everybody
feel
that
they
have
been
part
of
the
process.
D
It
includes
over
10,
well
10
suggestions
from
our
colleagues,
a
couple
of
them
like
The
Residency
requirement
and
the
ability
to
clearly
spell
out
how
we
add
additional
meetings
to
the
body
council
member
Chavez
had
those
suggestions
he's
not
bringing
those
forward
today,
but
those
have
been
included
in
this
document
as
well.
I
just
want
to
acknowledge
that
we
we
will
have
further
opportunity
to
shape
this
as
time
goes
on,
but
I'm
eager
to
get
started
on
it.
So
thank
you
for
doing
this.
A
Thank
you,
Council
Vice,
President,
Nixon
Q
is
councilmember
wansley.
Thank.
G
You,
madam
president,
I
just
want
to
get
some
clarification
from
clerk
Carl
about
I
do
see,
there's
a
number
of
amendments
that
we
like
to
consider
to
Council
presidents
substitute
ordinance
and
would
like
to
make
a
motion
to
have
those
amendments
be
considered.
B
Madam
president
to
councilman
wanza's
question
I
also
understand
there
are
a
number
of
amendments
and
I
believe
that
each
of
your
places
there's
a
packet
that
Mr
dealer
put
together
in
order.
The
first
one
on
top
has
in
blue
text
with
amendments
by
underscore
Payne
the
next
packet,
our
amendments
with
Chavez.
As
the
author
next
are
amendments
by
council,
member
suggtai
and
I
will
note.
There
is
a
motion
to
amend
number
seven
by
shadow
that
wasn't
included
to
add
to
the
end
of
that
packet
and
then
a
packet
by
councilmember
wansley
to
amend.
B
This
is
the
point
in
time
at
which
amendments
should
be
brought
forward.
If
there
are
any
and
obviously
in
your
speaker,
queue,
it
says
that
the
Jenkins
substitute
is
now
before
the
body.
So
those
who
wish
to
bring
those
forward
I
think
I
think
the
idea
is
taking
these
packets
in
this
order.
Certainly
the
president
may
have
a
different
proposal,
but
that
was
my
understanding
is
that
these
these
amendments
would
come
forward
in
that
order
and
then
any
further
amendments
before
final
consideration.
A
B
I
believe
that
councilman
murkowski
is
in
queue
and
may
have
a
comment.
The
first
packet
to
take
up
would
be
Council
for
Payne,
so
if
councilmember
Payne
gets
in
queue,
he
could
speak
to
his
packet
of
proposals.
We
should
discuss
and
take
action
on
any
of
those
proposals
that
are
in
the
packet.
B
The
next
in
queue
would
be
councilmember,
Chavez
and
then
we'd
have
all
the
discussion
and
debate
on
each
of
those
issues
when
we
finish
the
packet
from
Chavez
we'd
move
on
to
councilmember,
when
we
finish
those
amendments,
we'd
move
on
to
the
packet
from
wansley,
so
each
of
the
amendment,
packets
or
each
of
the
individual
amendments
within
the
packet
from
each
of
those
council
members
would
be
considered
individually.
There
could
be
comments,
debate
and
vote
on
all
of
them
individually
or
the
body's
discretion.
B
F
Thank
you,
madam
president.
I
just
did
have
a
question
around
one
of
the
sections,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I'm
clear
about
if
I'm,
in
order
or
out
of
order
here.
Is
it
okay
to
ask
a
question
about
your
substitute
motion.
F
All
right.
Thank
you!
Okay.
So
if
we
go
to
section
172.6
number,
five,
so
I
agree
that
all
members
of
the
body
should
have
a
commitment
to
Equitable,
non-discriminatory
policing,
but
I'm
just
curious
to
know.
F
Does
how
does
one
demonstrate
that
commitment
and
how
does
one
meet
that
qualification
for
the
second
qualification
in
this
subsection
we
say
that
the
Civil
Rights
Department
shall
Implement
procedures
to
ensure
that
candidates
meet
the
second
qualification,
but
who
will
implement
the
procedures
for
the
for
these
qualifications
and
I'm,
just
wondering
if
that
can
be
more
clearly
spelled
out,
I'm,
not
sure
exactly
who's?
This
is
this
whose
Amendment
this
was
originally
so.
H
Yes,
council
president
Jenkins
councilman
Koski.
My
intention
was
this:
one
was
to
ensure
that
later
on
down
this
path,
we're
going
to
figure
out
if
we
have
police
officers
on
this
commission
or
not
and
want
to
make
sure
that
anybody
in
this
commission
has
public
trust,
knowing
that
like,
if
someone
has
enacted
police
brutality
on
a
constituent
or
resident
of
Minneapolis
or
has
enacted
some
form
of
are
paying
into
a
Community
member
through
discrimination
that
they
aren't
able
to
be
a
part
of
this
specific
commission.
H
So
the
goal
of
this
is
to
make
sure
that
if
a
police
officer
or
someone
is
a
part
of
this
commission,
they're
not
non-discriminatory
to
community
members,
I
had
original
language.
They
had
a
white
supremacist
ban
on
this
commission
and
after
talking
to
our
city
attorneys,
we
came
up
with
a
new
language
that
was
more
Broad
and
that's
how
we
came
into
this
decision.
So
my
understanding
is
that
the
Civil
Rights
department
will
be
helping
shape.
What
this
looks
like
in
the
future.
F
Oh
okay,
thank
you.
That's
helpful.
I
was
just
wondering
if
we
could
strengthen
that
language
so
that
that
it's
really
clear
that
the
Civil
Rights
department
is,
you
know,
going
to
be
the
one
to
implement
this
and
ensure
I
do
have
some
language
that
I
can
pass
around
to
update
this
and
I
can
hand
that
out
to
see
if
this
would
be
you'd
be
open
to
this
again.
This
is
just
to
strengthen
what
we
have
here
hold
on.
Let
me
pass
this
up.
B
Mr
dealer
is
running
to
make
copies
I.
Think
of
that
for
all
members
of
the
diocese.
It's
a
good
reminder
to
us
all.
If
you
do
have
amendments,
the
rules
require
any
agreement
to
be
in
writing
and
we
need
enough
copies
for
everybody
at
the
dice,
plus
some
additional
copies
for
the
public,
so
the
clerk
will
certainly
try
to
help
with
that.
But
if
you
want
to
send
those
to
us
now
or
your
offices
can
certainly
make
them
I'd
recommend
we
make
about
25
copies
of
anything
we're
going
to
pass
out.
B
B
G
C
G
B
Clerk
is
coming
around
with
copies
right
now,
which
will
be
also
for
the
public
and,
while
he's
doing
it,
I'll
explain
if
you're.
Looking
at
the
amendment
within
the
substitute
pack
at
number.
Five,
it
says
shall
be
persons
with
a
demonstrated
commitment
to
Equitable,
non-discriminatory
policing.
The
Civil
Rights
Department
shall
Implement
procedures
to
ensure
that
persons
appointed
under
the
section
do
not
have
a
record
of
taking
actions
which
would
undermine
public
trust
in
the
individual's
ability
to
conduct
civilian
oversight
of
law
enforcement
in
Equitable,
non-discriminatory
manner.
B
Koski's
proposed
amendment
separates
that
into
two
sub-sections
A
and
B.
It
rephrases
it
to
say
the
Civil
Rights
Department
shall
Implement
procedures
to
ensure
all
persons
appointed
a
have
a
demonstrated
commitment
to
Equitable,
non-discriminatory
policing.
B
do
not
have
a
record
of
taking
actions
which
would
undermine
public
trust
in
the
individual's
ability
to
conduct
civilian
oversight
of
law
enforcement
and
Equitable
and
non-discriminatory
manner.
Perhaps
it's
a
little
editorializing.
It
feels
like
the
Koski
rewrite
is
a
little
bit
more
directive
and
says
the
Civil
Rights
Department
shall
take
actions
to
implement
procedures
to
ensure
these
things.
B
B
Council,
council
president
I
think
it
certainly
is
the
responsibility
of
the
appointing
authority,
which
is
the
mayor
and
Council
as
they're,
making
those
appointments
to
make
sure
that
the
nominees
you
bring
forward
and
ultimately
appoint
comply
with
the
qualifications
in
the
ordinance.
I
think
this
gives
the
admin
implementing
an
administering
Department.
In
this
case
civil
rights,
which
manages
this
function
for
the
Enterprise.
A
an
affirmative.
C
B
Know
prospective
responsibility
to
take
those
actions
and
Implement
procedures,
since
the
Departments
do
help
with
Recruitment
and
the
nomination
procedures
that
are
considered
by
this
body.
So
I
would
say
it's
a
it's
a
double
responsibility.
Ultimately,
the
appointing
authority
is
accountable
for
who
they
appoint.
I
think
this
gives
the
Civil
Rights
Department
the
responsibility
for
as
they
assist
Council
and
mayor
in
making
those
nominations
and
ultimately
appointments
that
the
candidates
have
been
fully
vetted
and
screened
and
comply
with
these
requirements
set
forth
in
the
ordinance.
I
Sorry,
council,
president
I
agree
with
with
Mr
Carl's
in
interpretation.
It's
it's
really
making
I
think
clear.
What
frankly
I
think
already
was
contemplated
in
in
council
member
Chavez's
language,
that
the
Civil
Rights
department
will
actually
be
the
department,
that's
implementing
the
the
hiring
process.
The
background
check,
all
of
those
things
and
so
I
I-
think
that
this
councilmemberkowski's
Amendment
simply
makes
it
clearer
that
the
Civil
Rights
department
is
really
that
the
functionary
in
that
assisting
the
appointing
authorities
in
in
the
appointments.
A
Thank
you
and
I
know.
We
have
council
members,
Payne
palmisano
vital
in
q,
but
I
am
wondering.
Are
you
enqueued
to
speak
to
the
Koski
Amendment,
which
is
on
the
floor
right
now
or
the
overarching
amendment
or
motion?
That's
on
the
floor
procedure.
B
Madam
president
I
I
could
be
incorrect,
but
I
assume
councilmember
Payne
got
in
in
queue
because
of
my
urging
to
speak
to
his
entire
packet
of
amendments
and
probably
is
not
in
cue
to
speak
to
this
particular
issue.
I,
don't
know
if
councilmember
veto
wishes
to
speak
to
the
Koski
Amendment
or
is
in
queue
for
something
else.
A
D
D
Colleagues,
I
think
we
need
Clarity
at
how
this
all
will
transact
and
I
wanted
to
lay
out
my
intent
here
today
to
deal
with
everybody's
amendments
that
I've
seen
up
until
like
an
hour
ago.
I
have
suggested
to
the
council
president
that
we
take
these
in
order.
So
right
now,
I
believe
we'd
be
voting
on
this
consensus
document.
D
We
could
do
it
as
amended
because
it
seems
like
a
very
friendly
Amendment,
says,
council
member
Chavez
to
this
inclusion
on
the
consensus
document,
but
then
I
would
like
us
to
please
go
in
order
of
the
packet,
as
Mr
dealer
put
it
on
our
on
the
Deus
for
us,
and
we
have
every
person
everything
that
they
are
bringing
forward
outlined
here.
Council,
member
Payne's
is
is
a
packet,
but
I'd
suggest.
D
If
that
would
be
all
right
that
we
split
this
out
and
we
can
name
what's
already
been
included,
because
a
couple
of
these
things
have
been
included
in
the
consensus
document
and
go
from
there
in
in
the
order
that
council
member
Payne
suggested
there's
also
times
that
there
are
duplicates
between
different
council
members,
and
so
that's
why
I've
suggested
the
specific
order
to
the
council
president,
so
that
we
can
make
sure
that
we
aren't
missing
anything
that
we
get
through
all
of
it.
It
does.
D
Council
member
chuggtai
include
that
seventh,
one
that
you
had
and
it
and
I
would
ask
that
any
others
that
might
be
coming
forward
come
at
the
end.
Yes,
come
with
all
the
you
know,
numbers
of
copies,
but
please,
if
you
could
wait
till
the
end,
if
you
really
don't
have
your
amendments
done
to
this
point,
that
would
help
us
get
through
all
of
these
in
an
orderly
manner.
That's
my
suggestion.
D
A
A
So
we
have
the
Koski
Amendment
to
the
consensus
ordinance.
B
Wansley
aye
councilmember
Johnson
aye,
councilmember,
Osman,
aye,
council
member
Payne,
aye
council,
member
Koski,
aye
council
member
Tai,
aye
council
member
Chavez,
aye
council
member
Ellison,
aye
council
member
veto,
aye
council,
member
Raymond,
aye
council
member
Goodman
aye.
Vice
president
Paul
Masonic
aye,
president
Jenkins,
all
right.
A
There
are
13
eyes
so
that
amendment
has
been
accepted,
and
now
we
have
the
the
consensus
document
before
us
in
that
document
has
been
properly
second,
that
next
and
Q
is
council.
Member
Payne.
J
Thank
you,
madam
president.
I
originally
gotten
cue
to
introduce
my
amendments
after
this
vote,
but
in
looking
at
the
amendment
packet
there's
an
outdated
version
that
was
presented,
I'd
been
working
pretty
closely
with
the
city
attorney
and
some
of
those
changes
weren't
reflected
here.
So
those
are
getting
printed
out
right
now
and
so
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
say:
let's
go
ahead
and
vote
on
the
consensus
document
and
then
we
can
come
back
to
my
amendments
once
those
printouts
arrive.
A
C
B
Chavez's
amendments
are
next
in
queue
if
there
are
changes
made
to
what
we
had
from
councilmember
Payne,
while
we're
waiting
to
print
the
corrected
version
of
that
councilmember
Chavez
has
a
series
of
five
amendments
that
should
be
in
your
packet,
and
so
these
amendments
would
be
in
front
of
you
and
I
heard.
The
council
vice
president
suggest
that
we
take
each
Amendment
individually.
H
H
From
my
experience,
I
I
know
in
my
ward,
George
Floyd
was
murdered
on
38th
in
Chicago
by
the
Minneapolis
Police
Department
and
it
caused
the
worldwide
racial
Reckoning
and
I
think
it
would
be
a
disservice
to
not
allow
boards
that
have
witnessed
police
brutality
and
police
violence
to
have
a
guaranteed
seat
on
this
commission.
So
my
Amendment
would
guarantee
that
a
place
like
Ward,
9,
Ward,
8
and
every
single
ward
in
reality
can
have
a
say
on
how
this
commission
is
going
to
be
so
foreign.
A
That
that
the
community
Commission
on
police
oversight
shall
be
composed
of
15
members,
13.
of
whom
are
appointed
by
the
city
council
and
two
shall
be
appointed
by
the
mayor.
All
Commissioners
shall
be
appointed
to
the
specific
seats
and
terms,
in
conformance
with
the
open
appointments
process,
as
set
forth
in
Title
II
of
this
code.
In
order
to
stagger
the
exploration
of
terms,
the
original
appointments
of
the
commissioner
shall
be
for
terms
of
one
or
two
years
as
determined
by
the
city
clerk.
Therefore
I'm.
Sorry,
thereafter,
appointments
shall
be
for
three
years.
A
Is
there
a
second
for
this
motion?
Second,
we
have
this
first
amendment
by
offer
by
councilman
Richards,
and
it
has
a
proper
second.
Any
discussion.
E
I
was
wondering
if
this
language
I
support
the
structure
in
the
number,
but
I'm
wondering
if
this
language
speaks
to
each
council
member
making
an
appointment,
because
it
says
13
appointed
by
the
council.
Does
that
mean
that
we
all
get
one?
Each
I
think
we
need
to
Define
this
a
little
bit
better
than
just
the
council
gets
13
appointees,
and
the
mayor
gets
two
yeah.
A
I
I
think
that
councilman
Chavez
did
attempt
to
address
that,
but
and
I
would
interpret
it
as
each
council.
Member
makes
an
appointment,
but
please
councilman.
Let's.
H
Clarify
council
president
and
thank
you
for
the
great
question.
Customer
I
worked
on
this
language
with
our
city
attorneys
and
we
modeled
it.
After
the
click,
appointments
and
the
click
appointments.
The
city
council
is
able
to
appoint
two
per
Ward
and
it's
modeled
after
that
language,
as
well
so
based
on
this
language
or
my
conversations
with
our
city
staff.
This
is
allowing
us
to
be
able
to
appoint
one
member
per
board.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I,
just
wanted
to
point
out.
This
is
something
that
we've
gone
back
and
forth
on
and
frankly
I'm
of
two
minds
on
it
myself.
On
one
hand,
when
one
Council
Office
has
one
named
person
there
or
not,
it
tends
to
that
position
tends
to
be
filled.
D
More
often,
stay
filled
more
often,
on
the
other
hand,
I
think
two
council
member
Chavez,
this
point
that
the
idea
of
being
able
to
have
seven
appointed
city-wide
would
enable
exactly
what
he
said,
which
would
to
be
able
to
add
more
seats
in
areas
where
there
are
specific
concerns
in
specific
nuances.
To
consider
are
people
who
have
specific
skills
to
put
forth
so
I
appreciate
both
of
these
ways
of
thinking
on
it
and
I.
D
Just
I
wanted
to
point
that
out
that
I
do
think
that
then
this
should
be
ultimately
done
as
a
is
an
indiv,
a
byward
kind
of
language,
I'm,
not
sure
it
council,
member
Chavez,
says
he
modeled
it
after
the
click
language.
So
I
can
appreciate
that
and
just
go
with.
That
is,
as
that's,
this
alternative.
I
Council
president
members,
if
you
wanted
to
put
some
clarity
in
this
I,
would
suggest
that
in
the
second
line
after
city
council,
comma
I
would
add
one
per
Ward,
comma
and
two
Etc.
A
Thank
you
attorney
Anderson.
Is
that
acceptable
to
you,
councilmember,
Thomas,
yep.
A
Thank
you.
We
have
some
additional.
A
C
B
A
That
carries
and
that
amendment
has
been
adopted
next,
do
you
want
to
go
to
your
next
Amendment.
H
Councilman
Chavez
I
think
it
council,
president
Jenkins,
the
second
one
was
already
adopted
on
the
consensus
one,
so
we
don't
have
to
look
into
that
one.
So
I'll
move
on
to
the
third
one.
There
has
been
a
lot
of
issues
raised
with
the
FBI
background
check.
I
know
that
in
my
my
personal
opinion,
it
would
exclude
specific
members
who
have
been
impacted
by
police
brutality
to
be
a
part
of
this
commission
and
they
would
make
it
so
undocumented
immigrants
will
struggle
more
by
joining
this
commission,
so
my
Amendment.
H
Basically,
it
adds
to
this
background
check
that
if
any
member
does
not
pass
or
take
a
background
check,
they
may
still
qualify
to
serve
on
the
commission,
but
should
not
be
eligible
to
serve
on
review
panels
that
involve
access
to
data
for
which
background
check
is
required.
There
must
be
at
all
times
at
least
10
members
in
the
commission
who
have
passed
a
background
check.
H
So
basically
this
would
require
this
would
allow
people
to
be
able
to
serve
on
the
commission
that
otherwise
wouldn't
have
been
able
to
participate,
especially
our
communities
who
have
been
impacted
from
you
know.
These
background
checks
and
our
immigrant
community
members
who
may
not
feel
comfortable
are
joining
this
Commission
because
of
it.
A
Councilmember
Chavez
has
moved
amendment
number
three
relative
to
eligibility
for
services.
Is
there
any
discussion?
A
D
You,
madam
chair
I,
just
wanted
to
clarify.
Councilmember
Chavez
has
a
further
amendment
to
go
a
little
further
than
this
further
on
I
appreciate
this
one,
because
I
think
it
really
does
lower
the
barriers
to
entry
as
much
as
possible.
It
does,
as
you
just
said,
put
a
little
bit
of
extra
burden
on
the
rest
of
the
commission.
If
there
is
somebody,
then
that
is
going
to
opt
out
of
a
background
check,
but
so
long
as
like
he
has
in
his
language.
D
There
are
at
least
10
members
who
have
passed
the
required
background
check
then.
Maybe
that
burden
isn't
too
much.
It
really
just
opens
up
the
availability
of
people
being
able
to
apply
that
might
not
otherwise
do
so
because
of
the
FBI
background
check
and
we
need
to
have.
That
is
something
that
really
strengthens.
D
This
whole
evidence
is
being
able
to
give
a
lot
of
extra
information
in
detail
to
members
of
this
very
public
commission,
so
so
I
appreciate
this
is
the
way
that
we
can
lower
the
barriers
as
much
as
possible
without
without
going
so
far
as
to
not
have
them
having
really
redacted
things
to
look
at.
So,
thank
you,
council,
member
Charles.
A
I
You,
council,
president
council
members,
just
for
point
of
clarity.
What
this
amendment
will
do
is
allow
for
individuals
who
don't
take
and
pass
the
background
check
to
participate
in
panels
as
long
as
those
panel
investigation
reports
and
other
data
do
not
contain
criminal
justice
information
system
data.
So
it's
not
a
complete
exclusion
from
participation
on
the
panels.
That
would
simply
be
that
staff
would
have
have
to
make
sure
when
assigning
folks
to
the
panels
that
that
it
is
on
investigations
that
do
not
contain
any
criminal
justice
in
information
system
data.
A
F
F
H
Council
president
Jerkins,
thank
you.
This
amendment
is
more
of
like
an
evaluation
and
checks
and
balance
I
would
say
on
our
Police
Department,
so
it
allows
the
community
Commission
on
police
officer
to
do
a
yearly
evaluation
on
the
performance
of
the
police
chief.
The
evaluation
should
include,
but
it's
not
limited
to
feedback
on
strengths
and
areas
of
improvement.
I
think
this
is
one
tool
we
have
in
our
toolbox
for
police
accountability,
that
the
council
has
the
power
to
enact
today.
A
Thank
you,
councilmember
Chavez.
Is
there
a
second
to
this
motion.
G
C
K
I
Council
president
council
member
rainville,
the
the
responsibility
for
the
evaluation
of
the
performance
of
the
chief
of
police
would
either
be
commissioner
Alexander
or
the
mayor
or
some
combination
thereof,
as
as
the
appointing
authorities
for
that
that
position.
Okay,.
K
So
if,
if
I
may,
council
member
Chavez,
what
is
your
intent
with
this
yeah.
H
Councilman
council
president
Jenkins
councilman
Greenville,
this
language
is
similar
to
the
one
that
was
taken
out
with
this
new
ordinance,
so
our
former
pclc
had
language
on
a
yearly
review
and
oversight
and
evaluation
on
the
police
department.
That
simply
would
just
put
language
back
into
what
was
taken
away.
F
Thank
you,
madam
president,
I
was
wondering
too
maybe
councilman
Chavez.
You
could
help
me
with
this
I'm,
just
curious
to
know
what
the
evaluation
will
be
based
on
or
so
or
what
is
the
rubric
for
the
evaluation
for
the
chief,
then
yeah.
H
I
mean
right
now
it
would
just
allow
the
the
commission
that
we
appoint,
based
on
how
things
go
today,
to
be
able
to
have
a
meeting
to
discuss
the
evaluation
on
the
police
chief
and
report
back
I
would
say
to
the
mayor,
the
council
and
the
Minneapolis
Police
Department.
There
isn't
a
specific
metric
on
how
to
conduct
this.
This
is
work
that
has
been
done
in
the
past
and
I
would
just
want
to
make
sure
that
this
language
and
this
clinician
today
to
make
sure
that
we
can
do
that
work.
L
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
The
creation
of
this
committee.
The
main
focus
is
to
have
oversight
of
police
conduct.
It's
public
kind
of
give
him
different
tasks
of
fit
in
the
work
of
the
Chiefs
doing
and
having
them
to
do
some
I
guess
you
know
evaluation
each
year
and
reporting
back
that
to
him
to
the
chief
I.
Don't
know
how
that
will
be
helpful.
L
L
M
Thank
you,
madam
president.
I
really
appreciate
this
coming
forward
and
I
think
that
we
should
support
this
amendment.
You
know
often
you
know,
we
all
know
how
workplaces
should
work.
You
know
folks
who
are
overseeing.
You
should
have
a
sense
of
how
you're
doing,
but
I
think
that
the
relationship
that
we've
seen
play
out
time
and
time
again
between
the
executive
office
and
police
leadership
has
been.
You
know,
mayor,
stick
by
their
Chiefs
and
and
and
any
kind
of
background
conversations.
M
Any
critiques
that
might
be
happening
aren't
accessible
to
the
public.
Also
I
think
that
more
than
any
other
Department
leading
position
in
the
city,
Chiefs
have
been
measured
by
their
intangibles
by
their
likability
by
their
ability
to
speak
to
community,
which
can
which
is
an
indication
of
something
something
good
that
we
value.
But
it's
not
an
indication
of
everything.
It's
not
an
indication
of
how
well
they're
doing
and
so
I
think
that
to
have
an
independent
body
in
it
like
that,
can
that
can
take
a
look
in
objective.
M
Look
a
more
objective,
look
and
and
create
a
little
bit
of
transparency
with
the
community
is.
Is
a
value
add
again?
This
is
not
by
any
means
saying
that
this
is
going
to
tell
the
mayor
or
the
commissioner
of
Public
Safety
what
to
do
with
this
information,
but
the
fact
that
that
we
could
have
this
information
and
and
ensure
that
this
that
we
take
this
out
of
the
hands
of
political
relationships
or
or
or
any
of
those
other
stickier
situations
that
can
become
personal.
M
That
can
become
political
and
politicized.
I
think
this
gives
us
a
level
of
objectivity
that
the
community
can
trust,
that
the
council
can
trust
and
and
a
level
of
access
that,
quite
frankly,
we
we
haven't
had
before.
So
that's
why
I'll
be
supporting
this
and
and
I
hope
that
we
can
support
this,
or
at
least
find
some
way
to
approximate
this.
If
we're
not
going
to
pass
this
today,.
A
Thank
you,
council
member
Ellison
I
will
recognize
the
City
attorney
Christian
Anderson.
A
Thank
you
attorney
Anderson
and
I
apologize
to
my
colleague,
councilman
vital.
You
had
some
comments
or
a
question.
No.
E
Apologies
necessary
our
Council
just
answered
one
of
my
questions,
but
the
second
question
I
have
is:
does
the
public
health
advisory
committee
review
the
commissioner
of
Public
Health?
Does
this
happen
in
any
other
department?
Can
anyone
answer
that.
C
B
President
I
can
make
a
good
effort
at
that,
and
that
is
that
no,
there
is
no
other
Advisory
board
or
oversight
Commission
in
the
city
that
participates
in
the
review
of
the
department
head.
N
Thank
you,
madam
president.
You
know
I
just
wanted
to
add
to
the
discussion
on
on
this
amendment
that
I,
you
know,
I,
don't
see
this
as
creating
more
unnecessary
work
for
this
Commission.
In
fact,
you
know
I,
don't
think
there
is
a
a
real
or
constructive
manner
by
which
residents
give
their
feedback
on
the
strengths
and
the
areas
of
improvement
for
the
the
chief
of
police
and
so
formalizing
it
through
this
body,
so
that
there
is
there's
a
constructive
and
documented
way
that
that
feedback
is
being
received.
N
I
I
do
think
that
that
is
really
important
and
I
hope
this
is.
This
can
I
hope
this
passes
and
then
I
hope,
there's
a
way
for
us
to
apply
this
type
of
relationship
between
the
our
appointed
boards
and
commissions
and
department.
Heads
in
in
other
ways
right.
The
the
example
that
councilman
member
of
Utah
just
brought
up
is
a
is
a
really
good
one.
N
Oh
I
think
one
of
the
one
of
the
pieces
of
feedback
that
we
often
hear
from
our
appointed
boards
and
commissions
is
that
their
opinion
isn't
taken
very
seriously.
They
don't
do
a
very
meaningful
body
of
work
and
inviting
them
into
to
giving
feedback
in
this
way.
I
think
is,
is
really
important
and
an
important
part
of
further
engagement
and
empowerment
of
of
residents
in
the
way
that
the
City
Works
and
functions
so
I
just
wanted
to
add
that.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I
would
be
able
to
support
this,
as
written
was
able
to
speak
with
commissioner
Johnston
about
it
yesterday.
I
just
don't
think
this
is
an
objective
look
at
one
of
our
city
leaders
it.
This
could
be
one
element
of
like
what
people
in
corporations
call
360
reviews
right
like
a
point
of
feedback
from
one
way,
that
is
one
element
of
somebody's
job.
D
We
were
discussing
this
in
a
leadership
meeting
yesterday.
The
mayor
and
the
commissioner
seem
open
to
putting
out
some
kind
of
you
know,
effort
to
to
ask
how
this
body
you
know
feels
that
they're
doing
based
on
the
information
they
get,
but
there
just
isn't
adequate
information
here
to
be
objective
at
all.
D
The
current
language
of
the
pcoc
is
is
fine
that
way
in
terms
of
it
not
being
a
review.
This
language
is
not
to
me.
D
Another
suggestion
I
want
to
make
is
that
they
could,
if
they
wanted
this
body,
if
they
wanted,
choose
to
hold
a
public
hearing
that
might
be
more
informative
and
be
like
a
take
of
how
the
how
the
public
views
the
chief,
instead
of
just
basing
it
on
the
documents
and
the
more
narrow
Focus
that
that
a
civilian
oversight
body
has
and
I
know
that
council
member
Payne
has
an
amendment
in
the
consensus
document
that
has
a
public
hearing
annually,
where
the
commission
sets
the
agenda.
So
this
is
one
of
those
things.
A
A
That
seems
to
be
a
role
that
this
body
can
play,
but
the
overall
job
performance
I
mean
I
think
we
all
have
an
opinion
about
how
someone
may
be
doing
their
job
and-
and
it
should
be
way
like
any
other
I'm,
not
sure
if
we
need
an
ordinance
for
that
body
to
be
able
to
offer
that
opinion.
A
In
fact,
our
boards
and
commissions
do
offer
their
opinions
quite
regularly
and
recommendations.
So
I
I'm,
just
not
clear
if
this
broad
language
needs
to
be
a
part
of
the
ordinance.
Maybe
if
we
tailor
it
down
that
could
be
impact.
Impactful,
council,
member
elephant,
I
believe.
M
I'll,
keep
it
really
short.
Thank
you.
Madam
president.
I've
already
made
my
case
for
the
for
the
amendment,
so
I
won't
I,
won't
double
down
on
that
and
I
appreciate
the
discussion.
I
will
say
that
there
are
I
think
a
lot
of
ways
that
we
could
develop
an
objective
measure
of
how
a
police
chief
is
doing.
M
You
know
I
know
that
there
was
a
a
point
of
debate
between
members
of
the
community,
the
the
mdhr
and
the
department
about
discipline,
for
example,
just
using
that
as
an
example,
and
that
there
was
a
debate
about
whether
the
amount
of
discipline
that
was
being
purported
to
be
happening
was
actually
happening.
M
You
know,
I
never
got
I,
don't
know
that
any
of
us
ever
got
the
final
answer
on
on
that
or
or
anything,
but
there
was,
but
there
was
certainly
no
objective
way
for
us
to
measure
that
or
for
us
to
for
us
to
take
a
real
accounting
of
that.
I.
Think
that
that
that
having
someone
who
can
analyze
and
give
that
kind
of
feedback
would
be
and
and
have
no
a
vested
interest
in
the
outcome
of
that,
could
be
really
valuable.
M
For
us,
as
a
council
for
the
mayor
for
for
for
everyone,
the
other
thing
I'll
say
is
that
is
that
the
the
chief
of
police
is
fundamentally
a
different
job
than
other
department.
Heads
I
know.
We
don't
want
to
admit
that,
but
no
other
department
might
get
this
kind
of
review,
but
no
other
department
is
empowered
with
killing
our
residents
right
and
and
the
police
are
not.
M
The
police
are
that's
not
their
job
to
do,
but
they
are
empowered
to
do
that
when
they,
when,
when
the,
when
the
when
the
occasion
arises,
this
is
true,
and
so
I
think
that,
with
that
kind
of
power
with
that
with
being
empowered
in
that
way
by
the
state
by
us
as
residents,
there
is
a
level
of
review.
M
There
is
a
level
of
of
accountability
that
should
coincide
with
that,
and
so
yes,
so
I
just
wanted
to
state
that
and
and
then
also
just
sort
of
drive
home
the
point
that
we're
not
exactly
comparing
Apples
to
Apples
here
right
when
we're
talking
about
other
department,
heads
and
the
chief
of
police,
that's
all.
A
Thank
you,
council,
member
Payne.
Thank.
J
You
president
Jenkins
building
off
of
a
comment
council
member
Ellison
made
you
know
there.
We
have
to
follow
the
incentives
here
and
the
incentives
are
for
elected
people
to
look
very
good
to
their
constituents
and
that's
I
think
that's
a
pretty
non-controversial
statement,
but
where
the
controversy
arises
is
how
do
you
make
bad
things?
Look
good
and
I
think
that
there
is
a
long
practice
of
doing
that
in
many
governments.
This
is
not
a
targeted.
You
know
comment
on
anybody.
J
I
think
that
if
we
don't
have
this
language
in
the
ordinance,
it
may
or
may
not
get
included
to
have
this
type
of
review
for
the
chief
or
may
or
may
not
be
included
to
have
these
kinds
of
comments
be
brought
to
light
to
the
public
and
I
think
we
also
have
to
remind
ourselves
that
we
are
still
actively
in
a
reactionary
mode
following
the
murder
of
George
Floyd
in
our
city,
and
this
is
the
very
first
you
know
document
that
we
are
creating
as
a
body
to
directly
respond
to
that
in
our
capacity
as
city
council,
and
we
have
to
remind
ourselves
that
we're
all
still
traumatized
from
that
and
we're
only
thinking
about
all
of
the
toxic
abusive
elements
of
the
history
of
our
Police
Department.
J
A
Thank
you,
councilmember,
Payne
and
again
I
I
think
it's
brought
it.
It
sounds
like
the
amendment
says
that
this
commission
will
provide
the
performance
evaluate
what's
important,
the
police,
Chief
and
I
I
think
in
the
previous
pcoc
ordinance.
It
said
that
they
could
contribute
to
the
performance
review
of
the
police
chief.
A
So
to
me,
it's
it's
too
broad.
This.
This
group
doesn't
interact
with
the
police
chief,
any
more
than
anybody
else
in
our
city.
They
they
will.
A
And
at
some
level
they
can
make
some
thoughts
about
the
chief,
but
really
what
they're
looking
at
is
the
behaviors
and
accountability
or
lack
of
accountability
for
police
officers.
Sorry
for
that
editorial,
councilman
Chapman.
H
Council
president
Jenkins
two
consent:
decrees
rubber
bullets
in
people's
eyes,
calling
my
community
police
leadership
lying
about
the
murder
of
George
Floyd.
That's
what
this
is
about.
I'm,
going
to
make
a
substitute
a
substitute
motion
to
my
amendment
to
basically
edit
this
based
on
the
what
the
console
vice
president
concept,
president
said.
Do
something
that
I
hope
you
both
can
support.
That
will
say,
contribute
to
the
annual
performance
review
of
the
chief
of
police,
which
is
work
that
already
happens
but
was
removed
on
this
ordinance.
G
Thank
you,
madam
president.
Thank
you.
Also.
Councilmember
Chavez
I'm
really
excited
to
support
the
substance,
emotion
which,
just
according
to
council,
our
Council
Anderson,
actually
follows
presidents
with
the
pcoc
and
the
way
in
which
they
related
to
performance
reviews
of
the
Chiefs.
So
thank
you
for
allowing
us
to
have
language
that
reflects
a
current
legal
or
legislative
presidents.
That's
been
set,
I
also
want
to
just
make
some
comments
in
regards
to
you
know
this.
G
This
feeling
that
we're
allowing
the
public
to
weigh
in
or
influence
or
have
too
much
influence
over.
You
know
the
role
of
a
department
hand
specifically
MPD
and
I
just
want
to
note
that
throughout
this
year
it
seems
like
that
has
been
a
practice
that
we've
come
to
a
door
here.
I
will
name,
you
know
just
the
mayor,
Public
Safety
work
group
that
he
formed
at
the
beginning
of
the
year
invited
all
sorts
of
people
across
political
spectrums.
G
Even
in
his
PR
press
conference,
he
was
like
I'm
excited
to
have
the
Team
of
Rivals
part
of
my
Public
Safety
work
group
to
help
shape
our
Public
Safety
priorities
that
actually
led
to
us
having
our
office
of
community
safety
I.
Also
we'll
know,
even
just
the
monsters
body,
councilmember
Vitale
led
the
charge
to
work
with
community
members
to
create
the
police
chief
search
work
group,
where
we
again
invited
community
members
to
help
us
in
the
selection
of
a
new
police
chief.
G
So
we've
been
doing
this
intentional
work
of
partnering
with
you
know:
community
members
and
residents,
and
shaping
not
only
only
our
new
public
safety
system,
but
also
the
leadership.
That's
going
to
be.
You
know
at
the
Hem
of
directing
this
new
system,
so
I
want
to
note
that
this
actually
again
doubles
down
on
the
presidents
that
this
body
has
actually
been.
You
know
moving
forward
this
year
in
particular,
and
also
I,
want
to
note
the
question
around
evaluation.
G
Metrics
one
thing
that
I'm
excited
about
you
know
us
having
in
this
city
entreprizes.
We
actually
have
a
department
that
we
move
through
the
government
structure
ordinance
to
do
exactly
this,
the
craft
or
work
in
partnership
with
the
mayor's
office,
with
the
commissioner
Alexander
with
so
many
folks
and
I'm
naming
the
office
of
performance
and
Innovation.
Sorry
I
can't
if
director
Smith
you're
around
I'm,
sorry
I
messed
up
your
name,
but
you
that's
what
you're
going
to
be
OPI.
G
They
are
charged
with
literally
creating
performance
metrics
in
partnership
with
department
leaders
and
staff
in
this
Council.
So
we
already
have
staff
there
are
more
than
equipped
and
capable
of
developing
a
robust
standard
of
metrics
that
the
ccpo
can
use
and
also
help
shape.
So
we
have
everything
that
we
need.
We
already
have
presidents
in
place
that
we've
done
legislatively
culturally
amongst
his
body
to
really
support
the
substitute
amendment
that
Council
Chavez
just
offered.
A
Thank
you.
Councilmember
next
is
councilman.
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I,
just
wanted
to
quickly
say:
I
I
understand
where
a
council
member
Ellison
was
coming
from
about
like
the
difference
in
the
roles
of
the
police
chief
than
some
of
the
other
department
heads
but
I.
Personally,
as
someone
who's
worked
in
public
health
for
20
plus
years,
the
Department
of
Public
Health
is,
you
know
just
as
important.
E
We've
just
gone
through
a
global
pandemic,
almost
not
quite
finished
yet
so
I
would
say
that
I
get
a
lot
of
questions
regarding
what
the
commissioner
of
Public
Health
is
doing,
just
as
much,
if
not
more,
depending
on
the
day
than
the
police
chief,
so
that
department
head
is
just
as
important
and
I
have
a
lot
of
people
who
I
represent.
That
would
love
to
hear
more
from
that
person
than
they
do.
The
chief
thank.
A
You
thank
you
councilmember
guitar.
Is
there
any
further
discussion.
A
Councilmember
Chavez
has
agreed
to
amend
the
language
to
State
that
the
community
Commission
on
police
oversight
will
contribute
to
an
annual
performance
review
of
the
chief
of
police,
which
makes
this
amendment
palatable
for
my
support.
So
there's
not
any
other
discussion.
I
will
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
wrong.
C
F
F
C
A
Two
Nays
that
amendment
is
adopted
next
amendment
number
five
offered
by
council
member
Chavez.
H
A
Thank
you
so
now
we
will
move
back
to
the
updated
ordinances
offered
by
council
member
Payne.
J
Thank
you.
Madam
president.
Yes
I
prepared
two
separate
documents
for
our
review.
One
is
my
amendments
in
line
with
the
ordinance
and
then
a
separate
document
that
has
a
single
Amendment
around
the
removal
of
members.
I
think
we
should
take
these
up
one
by
one
so
that
we
can
avoid
confusion.
I
know,
there's
a
lot
of
paper
moving
around
and
apologies.
J
A
Sorry
councilor
Payne
are
we
to
be
looking
at
two
different
documents,
or
is
this
Consolidated
into
one.
J
There
are
two
different
documents
one
has
all
my
amendments
are
in
line
with
the
original
ordinance
language
and
a
separate
document.
Excuse
me
for
172.60.
J
And
the
one
that's
in
color
is
outdated
of
my
full
packet.
All
right.
Do
you
want
to
start
here?
Okay,
we're
going
to
start
with
the
stapled
black
and
white
version.
B
J
And
then
I'll
also
ask
the
clerk
for
guidance.
Some
of
my
amendments
are
included
in
the
consensus
document.
Shall
we
skip
over
those
should
I
do
I
need
to
formally
withdraw
those
yeah.
J
All
right
I
will
share
the
ones
that
are
not
included
in.
If
you
can
sense.
This
document,
the
first
one
that
is
not
included
in
the
consensus
document,
is
on
page
three
under
172.60.
J
This
was
the
13
Council
appointments
and
two
mayoral
appointments
council
member
Chavez's
Amendment
just
passed
so
I'm
going
to
withdraw
that
one,
and
so
the
first
amendment
that
I
would
like
for
us
to
take
off
as
a
body
is
on
page
four
number
four
under
the
qualifications
may
not
be
a
licensed.
Peace
officer
may
not
be
a
current
licensed
peace
officer,
as
defined
by
a
Minnesota
statute,
section
626.89,
subdivision
1C,
and
so
this
is
to
narrowly
Define
an
exclusion
around
law
enforcement
membership.
J
So
if
you
have
an
active
peace
officer's
license,
you
would
not
be
able
to
participate
as
a
member,
but
people
with
expired
peace
officers
licenses
could
participate
as
members.
K
K
Right
so
I
struggle
with
that,
because
for
us
to
go
forward,
we
have
to
be
inclusive
and
I,
hear
that
from
you
all
the
time
to
be
inclusive.
This
to
me
would
be
not
an
inclusive,
a
feature
of
this
Commission.
We.
J
B
Okay,
council,
member
Payne
and
Madam
president
I
think
councilman
rainville
to
clarify
and
set
context.
This
amendment
deals
with
the
seats
that
will
be
appointed
by
the
mayor
and
the
council
to
the
oversight
commission.
The
review
panels
would
have
members
selected
to
serve
on
The
View
panels
from
that
membership
of
the
commission
and
from
members
of
the
police
department
at
the
rank
of
I
believe
it's
lieutenant
and
higher
who
serve
concurrently
with
the
civilian
members
on
the
review
panels.
B
The
review
panels
have
a
different
function,
which
is
to
actually
review
and
make
recommendations
on
disciplinary
cases.
The
police
oversight
commission
separate
from
that
review
function
would
then
have
a
public
interface
to
allow
the
public
to
engage
in
understanding
the
police,
department's
use
of
force
policies
and
activities
within
the
community.
So
there's
a
dual
function
there
with
the
commission
and
as
I
understand
this
amendment.
It's
to
say
that
members
of
the
commission
could
not
be
current
members
who
are
licensed
peace
officers,
not
that
peace
officers
wouldn't
serve
on
the
review
panels
themselves.
K
A
I'll
just
share
a
little
bit
of
information
that
we
received
from
nay
call,
which
is
the
National
Association
of
Civilian
oversight
of
law
enforcement
organizations
throughout
the
country,
and
they
they
talk
about
the
participation
of
sworn
law
enforcement
and
I'm,
quoting
here.
Civilian
oversight,
as
the
name
suggests,
should
be
driven
by
civilians.
With
that
said,
there
are,
there
are
oversight,
entities
that
have
successfully
integrated
sworn
law
enforcement
into
their
models.
A
There
are
still
others
that
have
civilian
investigators
working
a
lot
alongside
sworn
investigators
on
misconduct
cases.
The
key
is
to
have
the
process
be
led
by
a
majority
of
civilians
that
ensures
that
there
isn't
any
way
in
which
law
enforcement
has
a
greater
say
in
the
oversight
process
itself,
and
then
they
go
on
to
editorialize
a
bit
more.
As
my
comments
suggests,
this
is
very
complicated
subject
that
always
requires
and
warrants
additional
conversation
and
consideration
by
all
stakehill
stakeholders.
A
I
just
want
to
to
add
that
context
to
our
conversation
and
I,
don't
think
I
see
any
further
discussion
council
member
Chavez.
Are
you
thank
you
saying.
None
clerk,
please
call
the
world.
B
A
Carries
and
I
will
return
to
council
member
Payne.
J
Yes,
the
next
amendment
is
under
organization
H,
and
this
is
simply
just
a
language
cleanup,
I
I,
believe
the
last
amended
version
struck
through
the
mayor.
Appointing
the
chair
and
the
original
language
said
in
the
absence
of
that
designated
chair,
the
body
would
pick
the
next
chair.
B
B
B
Yeah,
what
came
out
of
the
public
health
and
safety
committee
was
an
amendment
offered
by
the
president
through
the
vice
president
and
in
the
current
packet.
It
says
the
commission
shall
select
from
its
membership
a
chair
and
a
vice
chair
to
serve
in
the
essence
of
a
designated
chair,
so
I
think
the
intent's
the
same
yours
rewards
it
to
a
chairperson,
and
vice
chairman
person
of
the
commission
are
elected
by
a
majority
of
funded
members,
but
the
commission
selects
its
leadership
in
both
cases.
A
J
Better,
very
good,
so
I
can
go
to
the
next
one
under
powers.
This
is
to
address
data.
Is
this
in
the
apologies?
Is
this
in
the
consensus
document
as
well?
Yes,.
J
I'm
gonna
skip
withdraw
that
one
as
well
down
to
the
commission,
shall
review
and
provide
the
mayor
and
city
council
with
impact
statements
with
when,
within
120
days
of
proposed
changes
to
all
policies,
procedures
and
special
orders
of
the
police
department
which
govern
use
of
force
or
other
subject,
matters
addressed
in
federal
or
state
court
orders
or
federal
or
state
court
settlements
which
pertain
to
the
police
department.
So
the
intent
of
this
is
to
ensure
that
the
commission
is
reviewing
policy
changes
by
the
police
department.
J
But
when
we
were
having
discussions
about
this,
we
don't
want
them
to
necessarily
waste
their
time.
Reviewing
every
potential
policy
change,
whether
it's
locker
room
assignment
policy
or
something
that
is
just
the
day-to-day
administration
of
the
department.
We
really
want
to
narrow
this
to
policy
changes
that
are
the
most
sensitive
we
went.
We
had
pretty
expensive
I,
had
pretty
extensive
conversations
with
the
city
attorney
around
using
Court
settlements
or
court
orders
as
a
proxy
for
Meaningful
and
important
policy
changes.
J
An
alternative
approach
to
this
would
have
been
to
develop
a
very
exhaustive
list
of
every
potential
police
policy
that
would
be
sensitive,
but
I
think
that
that
could
be
fraught
if
we
miss
something
that
wouldn't
be
included
or
include
something
that
we
later
learned
isn't
as
Mission
critical,
so
use
of
force
is
one
that
I
really
wanted
to
name
all.
Others
are
going
to
be
in
response
to
what
we
learned
from
mdhr
Court
settlement
or
the
doj
consent.
Decrees,
so
policies
that
are
changed
in
accordance
with
that.
J
We
want
to
at
least
have
to
bring
forward
impact
statements
so
that
not
only
us
as
Council
and
the
mayor
can
see
those
changes
and
have
them
highlighted
for
us,
but
so
that
the
public
can
see
those
changes
as
well.
With
the
caveat
that
things
that
are
mandated
by
the
court,
this
body
doesn't
have
the
authority
to
change
those,
but
that's
just
a
proxy
so
that
we
understand
the
significance
of
those
policies
and
make
sure
that
they
are
brought
forward
for
review.
A
That's
where
a
pain
has
moved
this
amendment.
Is
there
a
second.
D
Madam,
chair
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
discuss
this
with
council
member
Payne.
Originally,
as
he
mentioned,
it
was
about
all
policy
proposals
period
for
the
police
department
and
that
would
seriously
take
up
all
of
the
time
of
this
body.
We
felt
so
I
appreciate
your
narrowing
of
it,
but
I
also
see
that
120
days.
May
might
not
be
enough
time
to
even
develop
an
impact
of
some
new
policy,
and
so
while
I
I
would
certainly
put
this
on
the
short
list
of
things
we
might
want
to
consider
for
future
improvements.
D
O
Thank
you,
madam
president,
and
just
gonna
wait
a
second
because
this
is
mainly
directed
at
council.
Member
of
pain.
I
know
he's
getting
some
guidance
right
now.
O
J
J
It
I'm
using
impact
statement
to
say
here,
goes
either
questions
concerns
or
other
considerations
that
the
body
should
be
aware
of,
of
potential
impact
of
a
given
policy
change,
and
so
one
example,
and
we
didn't
necessarily
get
into
detail,
detail
and
talking
about
the
mdhr.
But
it's
pretty
far
along
the
way
in
negotiations.
J
There
may
be
something
in
the
mdhr
court
settlement
that
but
may
suggest
a
policy
but
doesn't
necessarily
prescribe
the
specifics
of
that
policy,
so
there
might
need
to
be
some
additional
policy
work
that
is
done
in
response
to
whether
mdhr
doj
consent
decree.
That
would
be
so.
The
police
department
will
in
police
leadership,
will
interpret
these
court
orders
create
policy
to
satisfy
those
court
orders,
but
it
would
be
good
to
have
at
least
a
first
a
not
like
a
First
Step
at
analyzing.
What
the
actual
impact
of
that
policy
could
potentially
be
and.
O
J
O
I,
like
a
cursory
review
that
you
just
said,
I
think
that
one
would
certainly
be
appropriate.
I
have
one
other
question
with
this
is
is
Mayor
and
city
council
I
was
wondering
around
the
intent
of
city
council
and
the
reason
I
asked.
O
That
is
because
there
has
been
a
lot
of
confusion
with
with
statements
being
made
out
in
the
public
Spotlight
kind
of
conflating
the
council
somehow
having
the
ability
to
set
police
policy
when
that's
clearly
not
the
case
is
I
know
you
know
this
and
I'm
just
explaining
this,
and
so
I
think
the
one
piece
I
would
want
to
be
cautious
of
with
you
know.
O
Certainly
I
would
be
very
interested
in
any
cursory
reviews
of
police
department
policies,
but
I
also
want
to
be
careful
that
if
this
is
provided
in
some
official
capacity
to
the
city
council,
it's
not
perceived
as
or
could
be
mistaken,
as
the
council
can
somehow
act
on
this
from
a
policy
standpoint,
because
I
think
we've
all
been
trying
to
be
very,
very
clear
that
we
do
not
have
jurisdiction
over
the
police
department.
That
rests
with
the
mayor
and
so
I
I
wanted
to
get
your
thoughts
on
that.
J
Clerk
Carl
just
kind
of
nudged
me
with
some
language,
potentially
around
analysis
and
recommendations,
as
opposed
to
impact
statements.
J
I
were
to
strike
or
or
modify
that
I
would
say
available
to
the
public
yeah.
O
J
I
would
say
within
120
like
the
change,
how
the
the
chief
makes
changes
or
the
administration
makes
changes
to
the
policy
or
proceed
or
procedure
manual
and
within
120
days
and
I
use
120
days,
because
right
now,
they're
scheduled
to
meet
four
times
a
year
at
minimum
So
at
their
next
I
I
could
actually
even
state
with
within
the
next
meeting,
regularly
scheduled
meeting
by
the
next
regularly
scheduled
meeting.
But
that's
the
goal
of
that
is
a
policy
change
happens
within
120
days.
They
provide
analysis
and
recommendations.
F
Can
I
ask
a
clarifying
question
so
if
they
haven't
had
a
chance
to
meet
yet
to
to
have
that
conversation
and
do
the
analysis,
let's
say
the
next?
Let's
say
the
policy
comes
out
in
their
next
meeting,
isn't
for
119
days
and
then
they
meet
you
know
I
can
I,
guess
I'm.
Then
they
have
that
time
to
discuss.
But
then
they
only
have
one
day
to
get
that
impact
statement
out.
So
I
guess
I'm.
Does
that
make
sense,
I'm
I'm
trying
to
like
put
the
order
in
of
the
timing
here
they.
J
A
Relative
to
that
I
mean
they
would
need
to
call
that
I
think
we
have
a
emotional
Amendment
speaking
to
this
later,
but
though,
that
special
meeting
would
need
to
be
called
120
days
in
advance
or
whenever
their
last
regularly
scheduled
meeting
was,
and
they
would
need
to
then
set
a
time.
Specific
I
had
a
quick
question,
though,
are
we
so
our
MPD
policies,
subject
to
a
race,
Equity
impact
analysis.
B
Madam
president
I'll
attempt
an
answer
here
and
if
anyone
else
from
civil
rights
can
answer
or
others,
my
understanding
is
no,
that
the
formal
race
Equity
analysis
that
are
required
on
Citywide
or
Enterprise
policies.
Ordinances,
budget
items
that
you've
seen
at
this
level
are
not
necessarily
applicable
to
any
Department,
not
just
the
police
department,
but
any
Department's
operating
policies
that
those
operating
policies
exist
much
lower
in
a
hierarchy
of
authorities
than
do
the
enterprise-wide
policies
made
by
this
body
departments
typically
enact
those
operating
policies.
B
If
I
can
use
that
term
more
broadly,
under
delegated
authority
from
this
body.
So
this
body
holds
all
the
authority
of
the
city
as
a
city
government.
It
delegates
that
authority
to
departments
within
that
delegated
authority
departments
create
what
we
might
call
work
rules,
regulations
standards
that
the
employees
within
the
department
have
to
comply
with
or
comport
to
and
delivering
services
and
operating
the
day-to-day
Department,
Services
and
So.
Within
that
delegated
authority,
the
Departments
create
those
policies
I'm
not
aware
that
any
department
is
required
to
use
a
race
Equity
analysis
in
that
regard.
A
Thank
you,
I
I
mean
I,
I
will
go
on
public
record
and
say,
and
it
would
be
advisable
too,
but
seeing
as
how
it
is
not
a
requirement
this.
This
Amendment
May
in
fact
be
necessary.
A
A
It
reads:
the
commission
shall
rebuke
and
provide
the
public
within
with
analysis
and
recommendation
within
120
days
of
proposed
changes
to
all
policies,
procedures
and
special
orders
of
the
police
department
which
govern
use
of
force
or
other
subject.
Matters
addressed
in
federal
or
state
court
orders
or
federal
or
state
court
settlements
which
pertain
to
the
police
department.
B
Councilmember
wansley
aye
councilmember,
Johnson,
aye,
council,
member
Osman,
aye
council,
member
Payne,
aye
council,
member
Koski,
nay,
councilmember,
aye,
council,
member
Chavez,
aye
council
member
Ellison,
aye
council
member
veto,
aye
council
member
rainville,
aye,
councilmember
Goodman,
it's
absent
Council.
Vice
president
palmisano
aye,
president
Jenkins
aye.
There
are
11
eyes
and
one
day
and
one
ABS,
one
absent.
A
That
carries
that
amendment
is
adopted.
Colleagues
I
believe
that's.
Your
last
Amendment
comes
to
remember.
Payne.
A
Our
colleagues
are
leaving
for
biological
reasons
and
I
have
to
as
well.
I
am
going
to
ask
for
a
five
minute
resess
so
that
people
can
take
care
of
their
physical
needs,
and
we
shall
return
to
this
meeting
at
308..
A
A
Calling
the
meeting
back
in
order
next,
we
have
council
member
Payne
Amendment
to
chapter
172.
Please
conduct
oversight.
J
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
So
this
amendment
on
the
separate
printout
is
to
address
the
process
for
removal.
J
This
was
developed
in
by
a
lot
of
back
and
forth
with
me
and
the
City
attorney
around
some
of
the
concerns
that
she
shared
that
were
raised
by
mdhr
around
removal
for
cause
and
what
kind
of
complexity
that
can
bring
from
a
employment
law
perspective
of
what
you
bring
considerable
expertise
to,
and
so
what
I
wanted
to
do
is
try
to
balance
out
the
need
for
Independence
and
the
acknowledgment
that
these
are
politically
appointed
positions.
J
And
so
what
I
do
in
this
amendment
is
I
strike
out
all
members
of
the
community
Commission
on
police
officer,
Shall
Serve
at
the
pleasure
of
the
appointing
authority,
all
right
and
I'll.
Just
read
it
from
beginning
to
end
so
process
of
removal,
except
as
otherwise
established
by
law
or
city
Charter,
and
to
strengthen
the
independence
of
the
commission.
Members
can
only
be
removed
in
accordance
with
the
following
Provisions
one.
J
The
mayor
shall
give
written
notice
specifying
the
basis
for
the
intended
removal
to
the
chair
of
the
commission,
chair
of
the
audit
committee,
the
city
auditor
and
the
city
in
the
council
president
to
the
audit
committee,
shall
vote
to
approve
or
reject
the
removal
within
30
days
of
receiving
the
mayor's
notice
of
intended
removal.
Following
the
input
from
the
commissioner,
the
commission,
chair
and
City
auditor,
a
special
meeting
shall
be
called
by
the
audit
committee
chair
as
set
forth
by
section
8.140.
If
a
regularly
scheduled
meeting
is
audit
committee
meetings
outside
of
the
30-day
window.
J
If
the
audit
committee
votes
to
approve
the
removal
request,
the
matter
will
be
referred
to
city
council
for
a
vote
to
approve
or
reject
the
removal
within
60
days
of
receiving
the
mayor's
notice
of
intended
removal
and
a
majority
vote
of
the
Fall
City
Council
is
required
to
approve
removal.
So
what
this
does
is
it
allows
any
reason
for
a
member
to
be
removed.
It
just
has
to
follow
a
process
that
ensures
some
level
of
Independence,
because
one
thing
that
we
want
to
watch
out
for
is
some
a
member
of
this
body.
J
That
is
doing
a
really
good
job
is
going
to
be
stirring
up,
trouble
right,
they're
going
to
be
I,
pulling
forward,
conduct
or
behaviors
that
we
don't
want
to
see.
That
might
be
embarrassing
to
us,
and
we
want
to
have
some
protections
for
the
the
people
doing
that
important
work,
but
we
also
want
to
have
the
ability
to
remove
people
who
are
acting
in
bad
faith
or
other.
J
A
And
thank
you
councilmember
does.
Does
this
amendment
address
if
a
council
member
then
wants
to
remove
appointed
member
of
this
body.
J
A
A
For
that
matter,
it
kind
of
seems
like
this
is
a
solution
seeking
a
problem,
but.
O
A
I'm
sorry,
my
computer
timed
out
councilman
Johnson.
O
Thank
you,
madam
president,
and
that
that
was
just
going
to
be
similar
comments
that
I
had
I
was
just
going
to
ask
our
clerk.
Is
my
reading
correct
on
this?
That,
under
at
least
the
Jenkins
substitute,
removal
would
normally
go
through
the
council
and
require
it
to
follow
the
council
procedures
and
public
notice
and
a
vote
and
I'm
guessing
council
members
would
probably
justify
in
some
way
or
need
to
explain
the
rationale,
and
so
you
know
at
least
as
this
is
written
I'm,
seeing
the
clerk's
head
nods
so
I'll.
O
Take
that
as
an
accurate.
An
accurate
assessment
of
this,
so
you
know
is,
is
I
am
looking
at
this
and
I
I
am
very
sure
that
this
was
not
council
member
Payne's
intent,
but
this
would
be
at
least
as
specified
a
transfer
of
power
from
the
council
over
to
the
mayor.
The
way
that
it's
currently
written
I
also
personally
think
all
of
this
additional
process
with
all
of
these
essentially
delays
are
unnecessary
or
excessive,
and
so
I
think
our
current
processes
that
exist
today
around
how
we
would
remove
are
sufficient.
O
I
mean
it's
as
council
president
mentioned
I,
can't
think
of
anyone
removed
before
from
any
of
these
commissions
or
committees.
Personally
and
I
think
there
would
probably
be
quite
a
counter
pressure
to
doing
so,
so
somebody
would
have
to
either
be
non-participatory
completely
or
behaving
in
such
an
egregious
manner
that
it
rises
to
the
level
that
the
council
would
go
through
that
pretty
unprecedented
or
extraordinary
step.
So
unless
this
was
significantly
rewarded,
I
I
don't
support
this.
Thank
you.
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I
would
just
also
say
that
I
feel
like
this
gives
a
transfer
of
power
to
the
mayor
and
I
I.
It
reads
negative
to
me:
it
just
kind
of
reads:
like
you
know,
someone
can
be
taken
off
the
commission
if
I
mean
council
member
Payne's
example
was
you
know,
someone
who
may
be
making
good
trouble,
but
if
others
don't
agree
with
that
kind
of
good
trouble,
then
they
can
remove
them
from
this
commission.
So
I
can't
get
behind
the
idea
of
people
who
are
there
for
the
13.
E
People
will
be
there
for
13
different
reasons
and
it
may
not
align
with
everyone
else
and
I.
Don't
think
it's
fair
to
those
people
to
then
have
to
lie
in
Judgment
of
everyone
else
and
they
could
possibly
take
them
off
the
commission,
so
I
I
can't
support
this
I
think
these
are
going
to
be
adults
who
sign
up
to
do
this
work
and
we
should
let
them
work.
This
kind
of
tedious
thing
out
for
themselves.
A
Thank
you.
Is
there
any
further
discussion.
J
Payne,
thank
you.
Madam
president.
Yeah
I
just
wanted
to
speak
to
you.
Your
comments,
specifically
council
member,
Vita,
I
think
the
intent
I
think
we
share
the
same
intent.
We
don't
want
people
start
making
good
trouble
to
be
easily
removed,
and
the
previous
language
just
says
that
person
making
good
trouble
serves
at
the
pleasure
of
the
appointing
body,
so
I've
actually
added
more
barriers
to
protect
that
person
to
make
good
trouble
through
this
language.
L
Have
a
question
for
thank
you,
council,
president
for
the
city
clerk
and
maybe
seat
attorney.
What
is
the
process
for
other
committees
or
commissioners?
Can
you
give
us
an
example
of
deciding
to
remove
the
chair?
What
how
that
process
works.
B
Through
the
president,
councilmember
Osmond,
we
don't
have
an
established
process
for
removing
someone.
I've
been
city
clerk
since
2010
I've
not
ever
seen
us
remove
a
member
of
a
border
commission.
The
process
would
follow,
follow
de
facto
to
the
council's
legislative
process,
how
they
got
appointed
to
remove
them.
B
And
one
of
the
issues
that
we've
looked
at
at
the
staff
level
is
exactly
this.
If
there
were
a
need
to
remove
a
board
member,
how
would
that
be
and
for
what
reason
or
what
purpose?
And
so
there
is
for
our
ethical
practices,
board
quasi-independent
body,
what
they
call
a
participant
agreement
that
they
sign
and
we've
suggested.
B
You
agree
to
abide
by
the
data
Practices
Act
by
the
open
meetings
law,
things
that
are
applicable
to
how
the
bodies
operate
and
conduct
themselves
and
the
policies
adopted
by
the
city
council,
such
that
a
disregard
for
those
applicable
laws
and
policies
could
then
become
the
grounds
for
the
council
to
take
up
action
through
its
formal
process
to
consider
removing
somebody.
If
that
were
ever
to
become
an
issue,
there
would
be
a
solid
basis
for
us
to
say
you
deliberately
violated
the
data
practices.
B
You
deliberately
violated
the
open
meeting
law
and
the
council
should
consider
whether
or
not
that
merits
consideration
of
a
removal,
and
so
that's
something
that
we
would
propose
as
part
of
board
reform
at
large.
That
I
think
addresses
some
of
those
issues.
But
to
your
specific
question:
how
would
the
council
currently
remove
that
using
the
same
legislative
process
that
we
use
to
get
the
appointments
made
in
the
first
place.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I.
Don't
think
this
process
and
new
responsibility
has
been
presented
to
the
audit
committee.
Well,
I
know
that
hasn't
been
presented
to
the
audit
committee
for
review.
I,
don't
know
if
it's
been
presented
to
the
city
auditor
for
review,
but
if
we're
truly
respecting
the
independent
nature
of
audit
committee,
the
city
council
shouldn't
be
prescribing
them
new
duties
and
responsibilities.
D
Right
now,
I
just
need
to
say
our
audit
committee
has
zero
oversight,
jurisdiction
or
authority
over
this
type
of
topic
and
I
don't
really
want
to
get
into
what
it
would
probably
take
to
try
and
make
that
whole.
But
I
appreciate
the
problem,
I
think.
Maybe
when
we
solve
it,
we
do
it
for
all
of
our
boards
and
commissions
in
a
consistent
way.
N
Thank
you,
madam
president.
You
know
I
I,
support
this.
This
amendment
and
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
have
a
clear
process
by
which
members
of
this
commission
can
be
removed.
N
You
know,
retaliated
against
in
the
form
of
removal
when
they
State
an
opinion,
that's
different
from
the
appointing
body
or
when
they
make
the
appointing
body,
for
example,
look
bad
in
public
these
types
of
guard
rails
that
ultimately
will
allow
for
this
body
to
retain
as
much
Independence
allowed
within
the
current
state
law
is
a
good
thing
and
I
think
we
need
those
protections
guaranteed
for
for
all
members
who
serve
on
this
Commission.
J
I
think
that,
thank
you,
madam
president,
I
just
wanted
to
speak
to
a
point
raised
by
vice
president
Paul
massano.
We
are
still
kind
of
actively
defining
what
audit
means
under
our
new
government
structure
and
I
think
we
really
need
to
reinforce
that
oversight
function,
and
you
know
I
I
raised
this
number
of
times.
You
know,
just
by
contrast.
J
We
spent
10
months
on
our
government
structure
ordinance
and
we're
spending,
maybe
10
days
on
this
ordinance
and
I
I
really
wish
the
ratio
was
the
other
way
around
right
now,
because
oversight
is
the
thing
that
really
needs
to
be
defined
in
this
new
government
structure,
and
we
really
need
to
have
some
clear
articulation
of
the
role
of
audit
and
providing
that
independent
oversight.
And
so
one
of
the
goals
of
this
amendment
was
to
start
formalizing
audits,
oversight,
role
when
it
comes
to
police
accountability,.
I
Council
president,
this
is
actually
to
council
member
Vita's
question
about
about
removal
and
and
how
it's
done
in
other
circumstances,
in
the
existing
pcoc
ordinance.
Removal
is
by
vote
of
a
majority
of
the
city
of
council
and
approval
of
the
mayor
for
incompetence,
neglect
of
Duty
misconduct
or
malfeasance,
or
failure
to
participate
in
and
complete
minimum
training
requirements
that
those
terms
are
not
defined
anywhere
and
there's
not
a
lot
of
process
discussed.
O
You,
madam
president,
this
is
just
a
question
for
clerk
Carl
Mr
clerk.
Are
you
aware
of
any
other
instances
where
the
mayor
would
have
with
our
boards
and
commissions
the
power
to
begin
the
removal
process
for
Council
Members
appointments.
O
Okay,
thank
you,
Mr
Carl
I
mean
I,
don't
want.
Whoever
is
Mayor
to
be
able
to
begin
the
removal
process
for
my
appointee
and
so
I'm
just
gonna
say
this
is
an
unprecedented
transfer
of
council
power
and
so
I
think.
We
need
to
be
really
careful
with
setting
this
precedent
of
that,
because
I
am
sure
there
are
council
members
that
would
have
appointees
that
they
would
like
that.
O
G
Thank
you,
madam
president.
Actually
thank
you
for
raising
that
councilmember
Johnson
because,
actually
and
I
think
as
a
number
of
council
members
have
articulated,
at
least
if
the
mayor
does
decide
to
do
something.
G
Shiesty
like
that
there's
an
actual
public
in
in
and
transparent
process,
that's
which
we
can
hold
them
accountable
to
right
now
it
it
sounds
like,
even
though
there
has
not
been
that
President
set,
that
it
could
still
happen,
that
retaliatory
type
of
approach
can
still
happen
and
there's
no
process
in
which
we
could
refer
to
to
say
Oh,
no
you're
in
violation
of
that
so
I
glad
that
we're
in
the
process
of
actually
putting
guard
rails
in
place
that
again
as
the
oversight
body
of
our
Enterprise
this
this
Council,
we
can
point
to
and
say:
oh
the
mayor,
it
seemed
like
you
did
a
retaliatory
action
there
and
you're
going
after
this.
G
Commissioner,
that's
doing
good
trouble,
that's
a
problem!
Let's
deal
with
that,
so
I
want
to
say
thank
you
for
providing
more
clarity
around
a
process
that
we
currently
do
not
have
half.
A
J
Just
trying
to
speak
to
everybody's
questions
and
concerns
I
and
one
of
the
reasons
I
wanted
to
delay.
This
is
so
that
we
could
have
that
thoroughness
of
thinking
through
some
of
the
language
and
the
implications
of
some
of
the
language
I
would
welcome
an
amendment
as
opposed
to
the
mayor,
giving
written
notice
I
would
say
the
appointing
member
who
made
that
appointment
or
it
could
just
be
mayor
or
city
council
member.
O
It
would
be
an
improvement
over
this
language.
Councilmember
Payne
I
still
have
I
still
take
issue
with
the
timeliness
of
that,
because,
if
I
am
the
appointing
member
and
I
am
able
to
able
to
with
that
language
change,
provide
that
notice
and
start
that
removal
process.
O
Clearly,
that
would
mean
that
that
individual,
who
I
appointed,
is
much
different
in
the
roller
capacity
than
was
expected
and
and
I
will
say
personally.
I
expect
all
my
appointees
to
be
independent
of
my
own
ideologies
or
opinions
on
matters,
and
so
it
would
really
mean
frankly
that
they
would
be
absent
and
they
would
not
be
showing
up
to
the
committee,
and
in
that
case,
if
somebody
clearly
had
a
history
of
being
absent
and
not
showing
up
I
would
say
after
a
demonstrated
history,
let's
say:
maybe
it's
four
months
I'll
throw
it
out
there.
O
I
say
you
know
what
they
just
haven't
shown
up:
they're,
not
showing
any
intent
of
showing
up
I,
think
we
should
remove
them
and
replace
them.
I
could
bring
that
up
right
now
through
RCA.
It
would
have
to
go
through
our
legislative
process.
That
would
take
time,
but
this
would
add
additional
time
where
then
the
audit
committee
would
need
to
get
involved,
and
that
would
take.
You
know
this.
O
O
I
still
think
this
is
overly
bureaucratic
when
we
already
have
a
public
process,
a
democratic
process,
a
transparent
way
of
bringing
this
through,
as
is
and
there's
frankly,
there's
a
lot
of
counter
pressure
to
even
removing
somebody,
so
I
think
it's
an
improvement
if
you're
willing
to
do
that,
I
think
that's
great
I
still
will
probably
vote
on
this.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
councilmember
Johnson,
and
then
we
have
councilmember
wansley,
Payne
and
Chuck
Tai
and
Q.
We
have
still
have
a
huge
slate
of
amendments
to
get
through
and
council
member
Chuck
tag.
N
Thank
you,
madam
president.
I'll
keep
this
brief.
So
it
sounds
like
there's
the
additional
change
that
council
member
Payne
is
is
making
and
then
I
wanted
to
just
make
a
hopefully
friendly
Amendment
to
item
to
item
number
four,
all
the
way
at
the
bottom
of
this
list,
a
majority
vote
of
the
full
council
is
required
to
approve
the
removal.
A
Every
120
days,
and
so
this
nascent
or.
L
L
A
I
I
would
add
to
that.
We
can
actually
remove
a
commissioner
now
without
this
language,
but
is
there
any
further
discussion
from
my
colleagues?
Is
there
cons
I
mean
clerk
Carl?
Did
you
have
comment
I.
B
Just
want
to
clarify
my
understanding
for
the
body.
I
have
the
amendment
from
council
member
Payne
that
we've
been
discussing
in
front
of
us,
which
is
up
for
a
vote.
I
know
there
was
discussion
about
potential
amendments
to
that
I
never
heard
anyone
make
or
a
second
come
to
any
changes
to
it.
So
if
we're
to
the
point
of
voting,
I
just
want
to
clarify
for
all
of
us
that
what
we're
voting
on
is
the
motion
as
it
was
submitted
by
councilmember
Payne.
A
Thank
you,
Mr
Clerk,
and
seeing
no
motions
to
come
before
this
body.
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
roll.
E
D
A
N
First
I
believe
our
clerks,
while
we
were
out
on
recess,
came
by
and
grabbed
the
outdated
versions
of
these
amendments,
but
you
should
have
in
front
of
you
a
packet
with
seven
amendments
on
it
that
include
all
of
mine
and
we'll
just
take
these
up
one
at
a
time
we're
starting
with
amendment
number
one
which
amends
section
172.1.
N
On
the
the
police
conduct
oversight
system
being
established
and
the
Civil
Rights
department
and
police
department
are
named
as
each
having
responsibilities
with
respect
to
police
conduct
oversight,
and
this
amendment
adds
to
it
and
instead
reads
the
Civil,
Rights
Department
police
department
and
City
auditor.
Each
have
responsibilities
with
respect
to
police
conduct
oversight
and
carry
out
their
respective
duties
and
functions
described
in
this
chapter.
N
The
reason
for
adding
in
the
city
auditor
you
know
I
had
a
chance
to
speak
pretty
extensively
with
our
City
attorney
our
civil
rights
director
and
our
city
auditor
about
this.
But
we
know
that
our
our
city
auditor's
office
does
a
lot
of
work
with
respect
to
to
police
conduct,
oversight
and
police
practices
and
procedures
and
policy
oversight.
N
The
the
piece
that
feels
really
important
to
me
is
making
sure
that
this
body,
this
new,
this
new
oversight
body,
has
as
much
independence
from
interference
or
the
the
politics
of
the
members
who
who
serve
in
leadership
within
the
administration
within
the
council
and
the
city
auditor's
office
maintains
a
high
level
of
independence
from
the
politics.
N
They
are
one
of
the
few
places
in
this
Enterprise
where
a
person
can
go
and
where
this
commission
can
go
to
receive
apolitical
analysis
and
support.
The
city
auditor's
office
also
has
unrestricted
access
to
all
information
data
Etc
that
exist
within
within
the
the
Enterprise.
N
We
through
our
budget
amendment
process
also
moved
to
Public
Safety
Auditors
into
the
into
the
city
auditor's
office,
and
we
know
that
this
work
is
already
going
to
be
happening
within
the
auditor's
office
and
it's
making
the
connection
between
audit
and
this
body
more
explicit.
N
We
know
I,
you
know
from
speaking
with
the
auditor,
the
city
auditor,
it
sounds
like
there's
already.
You
know,
plans
that
are
that
are
coming
into
place
around
the
the
relationship
that
these
potential
Public
Safety
Auditors
could
have
with
this
commission,
but
making
That
explicit
in
this
ordinance
is
important
so
that
it
can
Outlast
this
existing
auditor
and
and
and
be
be
a
part
of
what
we
do,
what
this
commission
does
moving
forward.
Thank
you.
A
Is
there
a
second
second,
we
have
a
motion
and
proper
second.
Is
there
any
discussion.
B
Member
wansley
aye
councilmember
Johnson,
aye,
council
member
Osmond,
aye
council,
member
Payne,
aye
council,
member
Koski,
aye
council
member
aye,
council
member
Chavez,
aye
council
member
Ellison,
all
right
council
member
veto,
aye
councilmember,
rainville,
aye
Council.
Vice
president
palmisano
aye,
president
Jenkins,
all
right.
There
are
12
eyes.
N
The
next
Amendment
addresses
mandatory
training
requirements
and
these
were
included
in
the
consensus
document,
and
so
we
don't
need
to
take
this
up
as
a
body
right
now.
We
will
now
move
on
to
amendment
number
three,
which
addresses
section
172.3
c.
That's
data
sharing-
and
this
is
this-
is
an
extension
of
the
First
Amendment
and
and
bringing
some
consistency
to
to
bringing
that
same
consistency
of
adding
in
the
city
auditor's
office
into
Data
sharing
as
well,
and
so
this
Amendment
updates
the
language
to
say.
N
I
will
move
this
amendment
for
the
body's
consideration.
Second,.
A
C
A
I
Council
president
council
members,
I
I,
don't
see
a
problem
with
it.
I
think
that
under
certainly
ordinance
and
I
think
Charter
as
well.
The
city
auditor
has
General
access
to
all
data
in
any
event,
so
including
the
city
auditor.
Here.
N
D
You,
madam
chair
to
the
city,
attorney's
Point,
I,
believe
the
auditor
or
office
already
has
the
ability
to
request
this
if
needed,
but
I'm
not
sure
what
the
author's
sense
of
purpose
is
of
the
auditor's
office
receiving
this
information.
It's
not
like
the
council
can
direct
them
to
do
anything
with
this
information.
Only
audit
committee.
So
if
there's
an
idea
that
audit
should
be
doing
this
kind
of
work,
that
would
then
get
brought
to
audit
committee
for
consideration
so
I'm
just
curious
about
what
the
purpose
is
of
this.
N
The
you're
right,
the
audit,
the
city
auditor's
office,
has
unrestricted
access
to
all
data
created
in
in
any
Department
that
they
can
request
at
any
time
and
are
required
to
receive
the
goal
here
is
that
with
each
complete
investigation,
when
appropriate
data
is
shared
with
the
appropriate
staff
in
civil
rights
in
the
police
department
in
the
city
attorney's
office,
with
members
of
the
review
panel,
that
that
is
also
then
flagged
for
the
city
auditor's
office,
with
the
appropriate
staff
within
the
city
auditor's
office
on
a
case-by-case
basis,
and
there
aren't
further,
there
aren't
barriers
to
that
work
happening
since
they
can
request
it
already.
N
L
I
I,
just
I,
think
I
heard
City
other
office
already
have
access
to
request
any
data
they
might
want
just
copying
or
CC
in
City
Auto
or
any
data,
that's
collected.
What
would
they
do
with
that
data
once
they
have
it?
We
don't
have
a
direction
here
that
will
tell
them.
Well,
you
got
a
copy
of
the
data.
Here's
what
you
have
to
do.
N
N
Just
now,
we
approved
an
amendment
that
names
the
city
auditor's
office
as
having
a
role
in
supporting
members
of
in
carrying
out
their
work,
as
it
relates
to
police
oversight
and,
as
it
relates
to
this
body,
but
we
don't
tell
this
body
in
particular,
doesn't
tell
any
Department
within
this
Enterprise
what
to
do
or
how
to
do
it.
N
I
Council
president
council
members,
my
interpretation
of
this,
this
data
sharing
provision
is
actually
just
it's
listing
out
the
the
staff
and
offices
that
have
access
to
data.
It
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
they're
going
to
access
data,
there's
no
provision
saying
that
that
folks
shall
be
copied
or
or
anything
of
that
nature.
It's
simply
a
really
a
finite
list
of
data
can
only
be
shared
with
these
certain
offices
or
staff
members
and
again,
the
city
auditor's
office
does
already
have
access
to
this
data.
A
Thank
you,
Miss,
Anderson
and
I
believe
I
saw
council
member
wants
only
in
q,
but
maybe
you
eliminated
yourself,
and
so
we
have
a
motion
before
us
offered
by
council
member
Chuck
Tai.
Is
there
any
further
discussion
saying
non-clerk?
Please
call
the
world
council.
B
Member
wansley
aye
councilmember
Johnson
council
member
Osman,
aye
councilmember,
Payne,
aye,
council
member
Koski,
aye
councilmember,
aye,
council
member
Chavez,
aye
council
member
Ellison,
all
right
council
member
Vito,
aye
council
member
rainville
aye.
Vice
president
palmisano
aye
President
James
aye.
There
are
12
eyes.
A
Carries
that
amendment
is
adopted,
councilman.
N
Thank
you
we're
now
moving
on
to
Amendment
four,
which
also
addresses
the
the
same
section
that
we
were.
We
were
just
talking
about
172.3
C
data
sharing,
so
this
now
adds
that
complaint
investigation
and
discipline
records
anonymized
sufficiently
to
to
be
provided
consistent
with
Minnesota
state
statutes,
section,
13.43
and
other
other
applicable
law
shall
be
shared
with
members
of
the
community
Commission
on
police
oversight.
N
Can
be
actually
I'm
going
to
step
back
for
a
second
I
remember
in
our
earlier
briefings,
with
with
civil
rights,
when
we
first
started
talking
about
creating
this
new
body,
one
of
the
one
of
the
items
that
was
brought
to
us
by
both
the
the
city
clerk
and
the
Civil
Rights
director
was
that
there's
a
silo
that
exists
right
now
in
our
in
our
oversight
function
where
we
have,
you
know
the
pcoc,
and
then
we
have
the
pcrp.
N
The
police
conduct
review
panels,
and
these
panels
are
the
ones
where
we
have
members
actually
sitting
in
on
complaint,
investiga
and
receiving
complaint
investigations
receiving
that
full
unrestricted
like
receive
making
recommendations
to
the
chief
of
police
on
discipline.
N
That's
one
important
step
in
addressing
the
core
problem
we
were
trying
to
solve,
for
the
second
step
is
making
sure
that,
as
much
of
that
data
from
these
complaint
investigations
that
we
can
share
and
do
so
in
a
responsible
manner,
we
share
with
all
members
of
the
commission
so
that,
when
they
are
making
recommendations
on
policies,
procedures
that
that
is
informed
by
actual
data
and
actual
cases
of
you
know,
what's
going
on
day
to
day,
that's
what
the
intention
of
this
amendment
is
and
I
will
move
it
for,
for
this
body's
approval.
A
Thank
you,
councilmember
Chuck
Tai
is
there
most?
Is
there
a
second.
B
Madam
president,
before
there's
a
second
I
just
to
clarify
with
everyone,
this
language-
that's
before
you
in
the
amendment
number
four-
is
almost
verbatim
already
included
in
the
base
substitute
that
the
president
has
moved,
and
perhaps
it
was
unclear
that
it
was
councilmember.
Payne
had
brought
this
forward
as
an
amendment
that
was
incorporated
by
the
president
under
Section
172.60.
B
This
is
under
the
powers
of
the
commission
on
the
second
to
the
last
page,
it's
in
red,
highlighting
in
subsection
I
paragraph
one
and
you'll
see
the
underscoring
says
that
the
commission
has
the
power
to
request
programs,
research
and
study
from
the
service
department,
including
requesting
complaint
investigation,
discipline,
records,
anonymized
efficiently,
to
be
provided
consistent
with
Minnesota
statute,
section,
13.43
and
other
applicable
law,
and
that
information
then,
would
be
shared
with
the
community
commission.
N
So,
if
I,
if
I
may
I,
appreciate
the
clarification
we,
the
City
attorney
and
I
actually
went
back
and
forth
on
on
this
and
the
language
that's
used
in
this
amendment
was
pulled
from
from
the
pain
Amendment,
what's
different
in
the
in
the
section
you're
referring
to
where
the
commission
has
the
power
to
request.
N
And
this
is
that,
in
this
case,
we
are
saying
in
this
Amendment
states
that
every
complaint
investigation
that
comes
in
as
they
are
coming
in
and
as
they
are
being
completed,
that
that
information
shall
be
shared
with
all
members
of
the
review
panel
and
that
the
anonymizing
that
data
making
sure
it's
consistent
with
State
data
practices
that
that
work
is
is
done.
A
Thank
you,
councilmember.
Would
that
include
people
who
self
opt
out
of
background
check.
N
I
Council
president
council
members,
it
essentially
what
would
have
to
happen
is
that
any?
If
there
were
members
of
the
panel
who
had
not
taken
impact
passed
a
background
check
any
c
just
data
would
actually
have
to
be
removed
from
the
information.
That's
that's
given
to
them.
I
Anything
else
would
have
to
be
anonymized,
but
that
see
just
data,
even
an
anonymization
wouldn't
be
sufficient.
We'd
have
to
pull
it,
pull
it
from
the
packet,
so
to
speak,
that's
gone!
That
goes
to
those
panel
members
direct
me
to
the
commission.
Members.
I
G
Thank
you,
madam
president.
I
also
just
want
to
know
council,
member
Chuck
Tai.
Thank
you
for
the
addition
to
the
language
of
just
especially
since
we
just
passed
the
prior
Amendment
of
the
inclusion
of
the
city
auditor's
office.
That
is
a
new
addendum
to
the
consistent
amendment
that
we
are
all
referring
to
and
also
how
that
then
factors
into
a
more.
You
know
thorough
analysis
that
could
be
provided
to
members
of
the
panel.
G
F
C
O
Thank
you,
madam
president.
I
I
just
wanted
to
put
out
there
publicly
in
a
couple
minutes.
I
am
going
to
have
to
leave.
I
do
have
a
sick
kid
that
I
need
to
take
over
Child
Care
duties
for
because
we
don't
have
anyone
else,
that's
able
to
and
I'll
I'll.
Just
note
too,
that
you
know
in
my
nine
years
on
the
council.
O
I,
don't
remember
another
instance
where
we
have
taken
up
at
a
full
city
council
meeting
this
many
amendments
on
an
ordinance
so
I,
you
know
I
expect
this
body
is
going
to
finish
going
through
these
amendments
today,
but
I
would
be
remiss
if
I
didn't
say
that
I
hope
this
body
would
also
consider
a
delay
on
the
overall
ordinance,
just
from
procedural
Justice
standpoint
for
the
public,
I
have
had
an
opportunity
to
talk
with
the
city
attorney
and
colleagues
to
really
understand
the
rationale
but
behind
trying
to
pass
something
today
and
well
I
understand
that
it
would
be
ideal
two
for
a
couple
of
reasons.
O
I
also
don't
think
it's
necessary.
Personally,
that's
my
opinion
and
so
I
think.
In
light
of
that,
that's
why
I
I
personally
would
feel
more
comfortable
if
that's
what
this
body
did,
but
I
I
also
think
it
makes
sense
to
go
through
the
Amendments.
O
I
won't
be
here,
unfortunately,
for
that
part
of
this,
but
I
did
want
to
state
that
on
the
record.
Thank
you.
N
All
right,
we
are
now
moving
on
to
amendment
number
five,
which
addresses
section
122.6
I,
in
which
the
commission
is
empowered
to
make
recommendations
to
the
city
council,
mayor
and
chief
of
police
about
its
finding
based
upon
programs
of
research
and
study.
This
is
a
more
substantial
change
in
which
we
are
allowing
the
commission
to
make
recommendations
to
the
city
council,
mayor
and
or
chief
of
police
relating
to
Police
Department
practices,
internal
controls,
collective
bargaining
agreement
and
other
related
matters
contained
within
a
program
of
research
and
study.
N
The
commission
may
refer
to
the
City
attorney
for
consideration
and
recommendation
any
matter
related
to
compliance
with
applicable
law
or
regulation
with
respect
to
police
policies
and
procedures.
The
point
here
is
to
to
name
very
explicitly
the
the
scope
of
of
work
that
this
commission
can
make
recommendations
on,
and
you
know
the
the
piece
that,
when
I
started
working
on
this
amendment,
I
really
deeply
cared
about
was
adding
in
their
their
recommendations
to
collective
bargaining
agreements.
N
I
know
that
earlier
this
year,
the
the
council
president
and
I
worked
on
doing
Community
engagement
sessions
around
the
city
on
the
the
police
Federation
contract.
It
was
the
first
time
that
our
city
had
ever
done
that
and
overwhelmingly
what
we
saw.
Members
of
the
public
share
with
us
was
Hunger
for
More
formalized
Ways
of
giving
this
type
of
feedback
to
us
when
we
allow
this
commission
that
is
really
seeing
where
things
are
going
wrong
and
is
really
focused
on
oversight.
N
They
can
help
us
strengthen
the
one
of
the
tools
of
accountability
that
we
have
in
the
in
the
form
of
collective
bargaining
agreements,
as
well,
as
you
know,
Department
practices,
internal
controls
and
and
other
matters,
and
so
creating
that
structure
and
allowing
for
this
commission
to
give
recommendations
on
this
issue.
I
think
is
really
important
and
then,
beyond
that
the
commission,
referring
to
the
City
attorney
for
consideration
and
recommendation
any
matter
related
to
compliance
with
applicable
law.
N
We
know
that
the
city
attorney's
office
is
the
only
body,
that's
that
has
the
the
charter
given
authority
to
state
legal
opinions
for
anyone
within
this
Enterprise,
and
so
we
didn't
want
this
commission
to
make
recommendations
around
compliance
with
other
relevant
laws.
We
wanted
that
to
be
vetted
actually
through
the
city
attorney.
Who
could
then
make
that
recommendation?
J
B
N
All
right
amendment
number
six
is
referring
to
section
172.4.
N
For
a
the
review
panel
procedure,
which
which
talks
about
the
the
review
panels
that
oversee
each
complaint
investigation
composed
of
five
members,
two
of
you,
these
being
sworn
officers
of
holding
the
rank
of
lieutenant
or
higher
and
then
three
being
civilians
from
the
community
Commission
on
police
oversight.
N
This
instead
makes
the
change
to
each
review
panel
being
composed
of
five
members
selected
from
the
community
Commission
on
police
oversight
and
all
being
civilians,
and
not
current
or
former
peace
officers,
part-time
peace
officers
or
Reserve
officers,
as
defined
by
Minnesota
State
Statute.
N
The
the
point
here
being
you
know,
I
was
really
called
back
to
the
Minnesota
Department
of
Human
Rights
investigation
report
and
in
it
there's
is
a
large
section.
That's
actually
devoted
to
an
assessment
on
each
of
the
existing
mechanisms
of
oversight
and
discipline
within
the
police
department.
So
it
talks
about
Internal
Affairs
talks
about
HR
talks
about
opcr
pcrp.
N
All
of
these
things,
and
one
of
its
biggest
criticisms
or
conclusions,
is
that
the
the
the
form
of
Civilian
oversight,
the
opcr
and
and
the
pcoc
and
oversight
yeah,
the
the
form
of
Civilian
oversight
that
exists
right
now
are
not
independent
enough
from
the
police
department
and
that
results
in
discipline
not
happening
for
misconduct
and
it
I.
You
know
I
really
interpreted
that
as
there
we
have
a
deep
need
for
us
to
have
oversight
that
is
as
independent
as
as
we
can
make
it
within
the
current
constraints
that
exist.
N
There
are
internal
controls
that
that
will
exist
before
and
after
for
for
police
officers
and
for
the
police
department
to
be
able
to
handle
discipline.
That's
what
the
whole
point
of
internal
affairs
is
and
making
sure
that
these
review
panels
consist
of
civilians
and
are
as
independent
from
the
police
department,
which
this
investigation
tells
us
is
what's
needed,
is
really
important,
and
with
that
I
will
move
this
amendment
for
approval.
A
Councilmember,
the
amendment
is
there
a
second.
G
L
Really
hear
Council
I,
remember
trip
ties
our
argument.
I,
don't
know
for
me.
I
feel
like
excluding
the
police.
Leadership
might
not
be
helpful
in
a
way
I
feel
like
they
could
be
helpful,
because
what
we're
talking
about,
and
especially
having
a
recommendation,
you
know
this
kind
of
puts,
puts
US
versus
them
type
of
way.
L
You
know
when
you
go
sit
down
with
the
front
of
the
public
safety
commissioner
or
achieve
you
know
this
review
panel
recommendation
only
will
consist
and
the
public,
but
you
know
in
my
in
my
interest
and
my
I
feel
like
they
could.
It
could
be
helpful,
especially
having
a
a
MPD
leadership,
two
of
them
in
that
in
that
panel
they,
if
the
end
of
the
day
that
I
believe
the
real
change
will
have
to
come
from
the
MPD
leadership.
L
L
A
E
N
The
council,
member
Vita.
N
G
You,
madam
president,
in
response
to
some
of
the
concerns
raised
by
councilmember
Osman
in
regards
to
not
having
representation
by
law
enforcement
on
this
panel.
I
do
want
to
refer
back
to
actually
a
powerful.
G
You
know
reference
that
council
president
even
made
earlier
in
our
Amendment
session,
where
she
shared
the
recommendations
from
the
National
Association
for
civilian
oversight
of
law
enforcement,
where
they
even
named.
Community
oversight
pays
the
role
to
accountability,
police
accountability
and
they
Advocate
also
for
civilianized
representation.
Majority
civilian
knives
represents
a
representation
on
local
boards
like
what
we're
considering
today.
So
this
is
a
recommendation.
G
That's
fully
in
aligned
with
even
the
national
kind
of
Association
that
provides
recommendations
about
how
to
structure
boards
like
this
ccpo
in
a
way
that
actually
encourages
trust
between
the
public,
the
city
and
the
police,
but
also
that
strengthens
and
empowers
civilians
to
have
a
real,
meaningful
influence
in
this
process
too.
In
rendering
oversight
over
our
police.
G
So
I
just
want
to
name
that,
and
also
thank
council
president
Jenkins
for
raising
this
earlier
and
again
see
this
as
a
baseline
for
the
the
intentions
of
of
councilmember,
Chuck
Tai
and
bringing
this
amendment
forward.
A
Thank
you,
councilmember
wansley
and
before
I
call
him
councilman.
Promisano
I
will
just
restate
what
I
iterated
earlier
from
the
from
nikol.
A
They
say
that
the
key
is
to
have
a
process
be
led
by
a
majority
of
civilians
that
ensures
there
isn't
in
any
way
in
which
law
enforcement
has
a
greater
say
in
the
oversight
process
itself,
so
just
clarifying
what
what
I
shared
I
I
don't
think
they
really
make
a
recommendation
in
any
way
or
another.
A
They
offer
their
insights
and
opinions
and
I
took
that
into
consideration
and
and
offer
that
there
will
be
a
majority
of
civilians
on
those
panels
which
is
included
in
the
original
ordinance
Council.
Vice
president
palmisano.
D
Thank
you,
madam
president.
It
is
that
amendment
that
weighs
it
more
to
civilians.
That
I
think
is
the
appropriate
step
to
make
here.
I
wouldn't
build
a
house
without
consulting
an
engineer.
That's
what
would
help
me
understand
how
to
make
it
stand
up.
I
was
surprised
to
see
in
the
Tableau
documentation.
That's
publicly
available
that
less
than
four
percent
of
the
time
does
our
current
opcr
panel
even
have
split
decisions
in
the
last
six
years,
and
currently
those
are
those
panels
are
two
civilians
and
two
sworn.
D
If
I'm
not
mistaken,
they
are
I'm
getting
kind
of
confirmation
from
staff.
So
less
than
four
percent
of
the
time
is
there
even
a
split
vote
and
on
those
split
votes
it
is
not.
It
is
not
shown
the
delineation
of
where
those
two
sworn
versus
too
civilian,
or
was
it
one
of
each
in
that
Split
Decision?
D
It
just
simply
says
there
was
a
split
decision
I
before
I
was
a
council
member
had
an
opportunity
to
participate
on
Citizens,
League
panels
and
a
rule
of
thumb
and
one
that
I
think
everybody
here
believes
in
on
this
body.
Is
that
in
everything
else
we
say
that
those
impacted
by
the
decision
need
to
be
involved?
D
It
does
not
mean
they
need
to
have
the
upper
hand,
but
it
needs
they
need
to
be
involved
in
crafting
that
we
say
that
about
Community
all
the
time.
It
is
one
of
the
tenets
of
what
we
do
here.
So
if
that's
the
premise
we
use
for
everything,
then
how
are
we
building
trust
with
police
if
they're
excluded
from
this
accountability
process?
I
think
that
is
a
step
too
far.
H
Council
member
Chavez
council
president
Jenkins,
as
we
rebuild
trust
in
police
and
community
relations,
I
think
it's
a
reasonable
request
that
consumer
truck
tire
is
making
there's
a
reason.
Why
there's
barely
discipline
within
our
Police
Department?
As
of
today,
police
investigating
police
friends
investigating
friends,
can
lead
to
a
flaw
process.
This
should
be
civilian
civilian
LED,
so
our
constituents
can
actually
trust
this
process.
I
think
we
can
certainly
add
police
once
we
actually
do
reform
the
City
of
Minneapolis.
K
Thank
you.
Madam
president,
council
member
Chuck
I
voted
for
every
one
of
your
amendments.
I
thought
they
were
well
thought
out.
However,
with
this
one
I
I
agree
with
councilmember
Osmond
and
council
member
Paul
massano,
you
have
to
have
the
police
to
build
the
trust
to
fix
the
problem.
You
have
to
have
everybody
at
the
table
and
that's
been
my
life
experience
and
so
I
will
not
be
voting
for
this
amendment.
Thank
you.
N
I
really
appreciate
the
discussion
here
today,
as
we
wrap
up
discussion
and
move
into
voting
on
this
amendment
I.
You
know,
I
want
to
come
back
to
a
couple
of
points
that
feel
really
important.
N
Ultimately,
review
panels
make
a
recommendation
that
goes
to
the
chief
of
police.
At
the
end
of
the
day,
the
chief
of
police
is
the
one
who's
making.
The
final
decision
on
whether
that
recommendation
is
is,
is
upheld
or
not,
and
so
ultimately,
law
enforcement
is
making
the
decision
on
whether
discipline
is
warranted
and
what
that
discipline
looks
like
and
the
upper
hand
right
at.
N
The
conclusion
of
this
process
still
rests
with
senior
leadership
within
the
the
police
department,
but
I
am
what
I
the
problem
I'm
trying
to
solve
for
is
our
like
Minnesota
Department
of
Human
Rights
investigation
telling
us
no
meaningful
independent
review
process
exists
for
assessing
MPD
officers,
content
conduct,
as
described
in
more
detail
Below
in
practice.
Opcr
and
Internal
Affairs
are
not
distinct
from
one
another,
and
almost
every
investigation
of
a
police
misconduct
complaint
against
an
MPD
officer,
no
matter
how
preliminary
is
addressed
or
Guided
by
sworn
MPD
officers.
N
This
is
about
asserting
independence
from
that
process
and
having
there
be
a
purpose
to
these
review
panels,
that's
different
from
from
internal
affairs,
which
is
all
members
of
the
police
department.
Thank
you.
C
E
D
N
All
right,
this
is
the
final
Amendment
that
that
I'm
bringing
for
this
body's
consideration.
This
addresses
the
very
last
section
of
this
ordinance
section
172.7
around
effective
date
and
implementation,
and
it
changes
the
the
the
language
as
written
in
which
this
chapter
becomes
effective,
120
days
after
publication,
except
section
172.8,
which
is
repealed
immediately,
and
then
it
also
allows
staff
to
to
take
next
steps
on
implementation
of
this.
N
This
full
chapter,
my
Amendment,
keeps
the
120
day
period
for
implementation
of
this
chapter
and
could
still
allow
staff
to
take
appropriate
next
steps
in
facilitating
recruitment,
appointment
and
training
of
members
of
the
commission
prior
to
this
effective
date,
but
it
instead
says
that,
upon
this
chapter
becoming
effective,
172.8
is
going
to
be
repealed
so
for
context,
section
172.8
is
what
creates
the
pcoc,
the
police
or
the
the
yes,
the
pcoc,
when
we
and
I
understand
that
we
need
time
to
implement
this,
this
this
chapter
and
I,
don't
want
to
set
deadlines
right,
I,
don't
want
to
say
30
days,
60
days,
whatever
that
we
are
going
to
end
up
missing
later.
N
That's
it's
really
important
for
us
to
get
this
right.
I'm
not
disagreeing
with
that
at
all.
What
I
disagree
with
is:
we
are
creating
a
new
form
of
community
oversight
of
our
of
our
Police
Department,
and
we've
seen
a
lot
of
criticism,
particularly
from
members
of
our
community
and
members
who
have
or
have
had
in
the
past
roles
with
with
the
pcoc
and
then
what
we're
doing
is
we're
saying
hey
for
the
next
120
days,
so
that
gets
us
probably
through
April
right.
N
N
Think
in
this
moment,
with
an
issue
as
sensitive
as
this
one,
removing
communities,
removing
Community
input
and
any
formalized
way
in
which
We
Gather
that
input
and
Empower
Community
to
have
their
voice
heard
on
this
issue
is
a
problem
and
I
understand
that
in
the
future
the
the
pcoc
won't
exist
and
it
does
make
sense
for
us
to
repeal
it
once
the
the
new
chapter
is
implemented
and
so
lining
up
those
two
dates
so
that
we
don't
have
that
120
day
interim
period,
where
we've
got
no
form
of
community
oversight,
is
really
important.
A
Council,
member
Chuck
Tai
has
moved
Amendment
number
seven
or
approval
is
their
second.
Second.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I,
also
have
to
speak
against
this
amendment.
I
am
I,
am
glad
that
council,
member
Chuck,
Tai
and
I
are
on
the
same
page
about
needing
some
time
to
ramp
up.
There
is
a
later
amendment
by
council
member
wansley
that
would
decrease
that
ramp
up
time
by
75.
D
So
we
do
agree
on
that
portion
of
your
Amendment,
but
I,
don't
think
I
do
think
the
way
staff
originally
put
this
draft
together
makes
the
most
sense,
and
that
would
be
that
City
staff
should
spend
their
time
in
this
next
120
days
in
helping
us
to
post
these
appointments
to
interview
for
these
appointments.
Allow
our
city
council
to
then
make
important
careful
approvals
for
these
appointments
and
then
have
Nicole
in
and
all
of
the
training
that
we
will
be
giving
to
these
new
Commissioners
to
set
them
up
for
Success.
D
What
I
do
not
want
us
to
be
beholden
to
anymore
is
the
need
to
go
and
do
that
for
a
pcoc
that
would
be
essentially
defunct
as
soon
as
this
takes
effect
in
120
days.
So
that's
why
I
won't
be
able
to
support
this
amendment.
I
appreciate
the
the
desire
to
not
let
go
of
something
till
we
have
something
else,
but
in
this
case
this
would
be
a
very
lame
duck
type
of
commission
and
it
would
be
in
such
short
order.
D
A
Thank
you,
councilmember.
Is
there
any
further
discussion.
C
A
G
You,
madam
president,
home
stretch
here
all
right.
So
first
motion
is
to
amend
section
172.40.
G
Around
panel
recommendations
and
Civil
Service
rules
so
essentially
codifying
Civil
Service
rules
into
this
commission
will
help
strengthen
accountability
by
ensuring
that
you
know,
panel
recommendations
are
consistent
in
the
way
that
the
city
uses
discipline
with
all
employees
who
work
at
the
City
of
Minneapolis.
G
Also,
the
mdhr
noted
that
there
was
a
severe
disconnect
on
how
discipline
was
used
by
MPD
and
the
standardizing
of
language
between
MPD
and
the
commission
and
has
created
a
lot
of
confusion,
a
lot
of
issues
with
that
low
percentage
of
of
discipline
that
the
former
pcop
actually
rendered
so
by
actually
using
the
Civil
Service
rules
will
be
not
only
standardized
in
this
process,
but
creating
a
level
of
consistency
that
this
commission
needs.
G
And
once
again,
you
know
I
want
to
highlight
the
mdhr
report
even
took
issues
with
this
practice
and
noted
that
MPD
used
workarounds
to
avoid
accountability
by
using
you
know
terms
like
coaching,
which
we
had
a
thorough
presentation
on
just
this
past
August
with
Public
Safety
experts,
Professor,
Richard,
Moran,
and
also
the
former
PCO
sorry
pclc,
chair,
Abigail
Sarah,
where
you
know
they
highlighted
again
coaching
being
used
as
this
avoidant
kind
of
practice
for
discipline.
So
this
amendment
Amendment
will
basically
provide
parameters.
How
we
should
be
disciplining.
G
Employees
who
engage
in
misconduct
I
mean
again
provide
that
consistency
that
is
needed.
I
also
want
to
note.
You
know
throughout
this
year
I've
been
a
vocal
proponent
of
standardization
of
our
policies,
and
there
are
so
many
ways
in
which
MPD
operates
completely
outside
of
the
standards
that
we
hold.
Every
other
City,
employee
and
City
Department
to
and
I
think
we
will
all
agree
that
MPD
is
not
above
the
law
and
they
are
not
above
City
policy.
G
So
by
basing
the
ccpo
on
the
same
civil
Service
rules
that
govern
every
other
City
employee.
That
will
help
remove
MPD
from
the
island
that
I
think
we're
trying
to
you
know
discontinue
from
happening
as
we
move
forward
to
a
more
comprehensive
Public
Safety
service.
So
with
that,
I
will
move.
This
item
forward.
Consider
iteration.
D
Thank
you,
madam
president.
I
won't
be
able
to
support
this
amendment
today
and
it's
and
here's
what
I
agree
with
about
it.
I
absolutely
agree,
and
we
all
clearly
recognize
gaps
in
discipline
in
the
past
in
our
department
and
I
am
not
arguing
that
doing
something
towards
Civil.
Service
rules
wouldn't
be
Equitable.
It
would
be
MPD
absolutely
needs
to
get
on
board
with
Equitable
and
consistent
discipline.
I
Council
president
Council
vice
president
I
guess
maybe
I'll
make
two
points,
one
as
I
understand
the
current
system.
While
the
panels
recommend
Merit
or
no
merit,
they
don't
currently
recommend
disciplinary
actions.
So
this
would
be
a
departure.
I
certainly
have
seen
in
the
past
and
in
my
employment
law
career
when
just
you
know,
a
decision
making
or
a
recommendation
body
recommends
suspension,
for
example,
and
then
the
hiring
manager
decides
no.
This
is
more
significant
conduct.
A
Thank
you.
Is
there
any
further
discussion,
I'm,
sorry,
councilmember
wansley
thank.
G
You,
madam
president,
I
just
want
to
know.
You
know,
I'm
glad
that
Council
vice
president
sought
out
advice
from
employment.
Attorneys
I
sought
out
advice
from
the
mdhr
that
explicitly
named
this
as
a
a
clear
issue
in
terms
of
lack
of
standardization
between
discipline
and
the
type
of
recommendations,
those
metrics
that
you
refer
to
and
then
what's
actually
being
delivered
in
in
in
disciplined
actions.
So
this
actually
creates
more
clarity
and
parity
between
those
things
by
standardizing
what
we
already
use
to
govern
all
of
our
city
employees.
What?
G
Ideally,
the
chief
should
also
be
using
it,
helps
qualify
that,
instead
of
you,
know
referring
to
an
employment
attorney
in
different
sectors.
That
might
not
be
relevant
because
those
sectors
are
currently
not
under
a
consent.
Decree
I
will
also
know.
This
will
help
with
arbitration
process,
which
the
MDR
or
mdhr
report
constantly
highlights
how
we
have
failed
to
actually
do
standardize
discipline
amongst
our
officers,
and
that
is
why
arbitration
tends
to
go
against
us,
because
we
fail
to
hit
all
the
check
box.
We
failed
to
actually
have
a
standardized
process.
G
We
engage
in
this
arbitrary
enforcement
of
discipline
depending
on
the
officers,
so
this
again
will
allow
for
a
standardization.
So
we
can
bring
stronger
cases
to
arbitration
that
could
then
successfully
pass
that
phase
so
again,
hitting
those
check
box
and
also
I
would
love
to
see
the
percentage
or
reports
where
across
the
country.
Where
are
we
really
seeing
civilians
like
majority
civilian
oversight
bodies,
actually
giving
lower
census
or
discipline
to
officers
that
are
documented
and
having
misconduct?
I
absolutely
do
not
believe.
That's
a
a
popular
or
Trend
that
actually
our
Council
just
noticed.
G
So,
if
there's
data
that
approves,
that
would
love
to
see
that
but
I'm
very
concerned
that
that's
actually
a
thing,
that's
grounded
in
reality
and
I'm
pretty
sure
our
civilians
are
more
than
willing
and
more
than
ready
to
hold
officers
account
people
using
these
Civil
Service
roles
to
administer
actual
standardized
discipline
that
we
administer
to
all
of
our
city.
Employees.
J
Thank
you,
madam
president.
Council
number
one
is
he
actually
touched
on
the
point
I
wanted
to
make,
but
I'm
going
to
make
my
point
regardless
just
to
emphasize
it
we're
gonna
get
hurt
in
arbitration
when
we
can't
pass
the
seven
tests
of
just
cause
when
we
discipline
and
one
of
those
tests
is
prior
enforcement
and
I'm
just
going
to
read
it.
An
employer
may
not
be
penalized
for
violating
a
rule
or
standard
that
the
employer
has
failed
to
enforce
for
a
prolonged
period.
J
So
we're
talking
about
this
hypothetical
scenario
of
the
commission
making
a
recommendation
for
discipline
in
the
in
the
chief
going
above
that
that's
like
a
hypothetical
it
would
be
nice
to
have
some
real
world
data
nobody's
gonna,
google
that
right
now,
I,
don't
think
we
need
to
Google
that
right
now,
because
we
already
have
the
real
world
data
of
losing
arbitration
cases,
because
there's
clear
demonstration
that
we
don't
consistently
enforce
our
rules
and
policies
and
the
discipline
or
lack
thereof,
reflects
that
so
I
think
the
bigger
legal
risk
we
have
is
the
lack
of
clarity
that
I
think
this
amendment
actually
helps
all
for.
A
A
C
D
A
That
carries
that
amendment
is
adopted.
The
next
Amendment.
G
We're
almost
there
all
right,
so
so
second
one.
This
is
amending
172.50
B
around
disciplinary
decisions
in
30
days
again
pursuant
to
the
Civil
Service
rules.
This
is
an
amendment
that
is
definitely
in
response
to
the
community
input
that
we
receive.
You
know
once
this
ordinance
became
public.
Specifically,
you
know
from
former
pcoc
Commissioners,
who
have
spent
several
months
now
explaining
what
is
needed
for
this
commission
to
be
a
credible
body.
That's
capable
of
oversight
and
accountability.
G
I
also
know
that
both
the
public,
as
well
as
the
council,
is
aware
of
how
MPD
exploited
the
term
coaching
once
again
to
avoid
accountability
to
officers
who
were
engaging
in
bad
and
violating
racist
behavior.
These
officers
were
able
to
escape
any
public
scrutiny
because
their
supervisors
in
MPD
leadership
allow
coaching
to
be
the
cloak
against
accountability.
So
this
amendment
assures
that
any
sustained
misconduct
from
MPD
officers
results
in
a
response
that
is
once
again
pursuant
to
the
Civil
Service
rules.
G
These
rules
of
also
again
govern
all
of
our
city
employees
and
are
actually
created
by
an
independent
body
to
ensure
parity
amongst
all
of
our
city
workers.
So,
by
linking
sustained
misconduct
of
these
rules,
we
are
again
just
you
know,
building
that
that
reinforcement
wall,
that
no
workarounds
will
happen
when
it
comes
to
accountability,
which,
unfortunately,
those
workarounds
is
what
allow
MPD
officer
Derek
Chavin,
to
stay
on
the
force
in
the
first
place
years
before
he
murdered
George
Floyd.
G
So
you
know
we
know
this
lack
of
accountability
and
transparency
is
what
has
allowed
not
only
officers
like
Chavin,
but
so
many
other
officers
to
receive
hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars
and
payouts
just
this
year.
Alone,
even
though
they
committed
egregious
acts
of
violence
against
our
residents,
so
discipline
and
MPD
is
is
desperately
needed
when
it
comes
to
this
aspect
and
again
linking
it
to
the
Civil
Service
rules
helps
establish
a
clear
and
transparent
standard.
So
with
that,
I
will
move
this
item
for
consideration.
G
A
D
I
Council
president
Council
vice
president,
the
the
way
it's
written
in
the
way
that
I
considered
it
does
not
require
disciplinary
action.
We
couldn't
do
that
under
state
law.
It
is
the
chief
and
only
the
chief
who
has
the
ultimate
decision-making
Authority
about
whether
discipline
is
or
Isn't
merited
So.
This
does
not
supersede
the
chief's
responsibility
again
guaranteed
under
state
law.
I
This
simply
means
that
if
there
is,
if
the
chief
decides
to
render
discipline,
then
it
has
to
be
consistent
with
the
Civil
Service
rules,
except,
as
might
be
inconsistent
with
the
collective
bargaining
agreement.
Collective
bargaining
agreement
does
Trump
the
Civil
Service
rules
if
there's
a
conflict
and
then
obviously
a
catch-all
that
that
the
decision
has
to
be
consistent
with
with
all
applicable
laws.
So
with
that
understanding,
I
don't
have
a
concern.
C
D
G
All
right
amendment
number
three,
so
we
are
amending
sections
172,
6.60,
subsection
two,
so
this
is
in
regards
to
frequency
of
meetings
and
basically
my
Amendment
changes
it
from
four
to
eight
I
want
to
know
again.
This
is
absolutely
in
response
to
community
feedback,
where
you
know
folks
really
commented
with
their
dissatisfaction
with
the
frequency
of
meetings.
That's
currently
included
in
this
ordinance.
You
know,
while
I'm
aware
that
this
body
came
together
to
vote
on
that
this
body
can
come
together
to
vote
on
whether
or
not
they'll
have
more
meetings.
G
I
believe
the
fact
that
you
know
we're
about
to
enter
into
two
consent.
Decrees,
that
you
know
this
commission
will
be
incredibly
busy
for
the
next
several
years,
so
I
propose
a
minimum
of
eight
meetings
so
that
when
applicants
apply,
they
are
fully
aware
of
the
time
commitment
that
they're
signing
up
for.
In
order
to
be
part
of
this,
you
know
critical
work
of
the
commission
and
we
want
to
absolutely
be
transparent
about
the
type
of
work
upload
that
is
going
to
be
required
of
this
commission
and
I.
G
Believe
you
know
having
four
meetings
with
you
know.
Vagueness
is
actually
unfair
to
people
who
are
really
trying
to
make
informed
decisions
around
if
they're
going
to
have
the
capacity
to
be
fully
involved
on
this
board.
So
you
know
we're
going
to
be
asking
this
body
to
make
recommendations
to
the
mayor,
to
city
council,
to
the
public,
about
a
wide
range
of
issues
involving
police
policies
and,
and
so
many
more
other
aspects
too.
That
will
largely
be
shaped
by
the
mdhr
report
in
consent
decree,
as
well
as
the
doj
findings.
G
So
there's
going
to
be
a
lot
of
work
ahead
for
this
body
to
consider,
and
this
amendment
essentially
reflects
the
very
minimum
that
you
know
this
body
will
take
up
just
in
the
year
ahead.
So
with
that
I
move
this
for
a
consideration.
A
Councilmember
wansley
has
moved
this
amendment.
Is
there
a
second?
Second?
Is
there
any
discussion,
councilmember
Osmond.
L
Doing
the
math
here,
it's
three
every
three
months
there
will
be
a
meeting
if
it's
eight
times
is
that
correct
am
I
I'm,
that's
wrong!
How
often
it
would
that
be
a
couple
of
months,
a
meeting
if.
L
Minutes
a
year,
but
I
council
member
one's
only
once
eight
a
year
every
six
weeks,
okay,
so
this
is
a
voluntary
job
for
for
the
folks
that
are
doing
I.
Think,
of
course,
you
know
highlighting
that
on
the
application
could
be,
could
be
clear
for
them
to
to
make
that
commitment.
L
I
have
a
question
with,
or
city
clerk
and
I'm,
not
comparing
the
commission.
You
know
the
committee
is
here.
I
know
this
community
is
very
important
and
has
a
real
actual
thing
that
I
once
achieved.
But
what
is
the
schedule
for,
for
example,
I,
don't
know
other
committees
that
we
have.
How
often
do
they
meet
a.
B
Year
through
the
chair,
councilmember
Osmond,
it
varies
based
on
the
different
boards
and
commissions.
Typically,
I
will
say
the
majority
of
our
boards
conduct
regular
meetings
monthly,
so
it's
usually
a
monthly
meeting,
not
always
but
usually
a
monthly
meeting.
It
will
add
that
the
reason
that
the
staff
said
a
minimum
of
fluorophore
was
because
in
the
past
we
had
two
separate
bodies.
We
had
the
police
conduct,
oversight,
commission,
the
pcoc,
and
we
had
the
review
panels.
B
They
were
separate,
they
had
separate
members,
they
did
separate
functions,
the
amendment
to
create
the
ccpo
combines
them,
and
so,
in
addition
to
public
meetings,
the
members
of
the
ccpo
will
be
expected
to
do
service
on
those
panels,
and
so,
in
order
to
you
know,
manage
their
time
better.
It
was
seen
as
you'll
have
at
least
four
regular
meetings.
B
You
can
always
call
additional
special
meetings
like
any
of
our
boards
can,
as
long
as
you
give
the
statutory
notice
so
that
the
public
is
informed,
you're,
adding
meetings
to
the
calendar
and
then,
in
addition,
you
have
to
do
this
work
that
is
on
the
review
panels.
So
it
was
in
recognition
that
these
members,
a
smaller
pool
of
people,
are
doing
double
duty.
That
was
the
reason
for
the
proposed
change.
B
My
understanding
and
I
think
council
member
Vita
said
that
this
would
make
the
regular
meetings
the
amendment
councilmember
wands
was
put
forward
about
more
than
once
a
month.
So
every
what
six
or
eight
weeks
is
going
to
be
some
months.
You'll
have
two
regular
meetings.
Some
you'll
only
have
one
just
depends
on
the
the
cycle
of
how
those
go,
but
it
would
be
closer
to
what
is
today
where
they
have
monthly
meetings,
rather
than
only
four
as
a
minimum.
A
Yeah
and
I
did
put
myself
in
queue.
You
know
I
I
just
get
concerned
about
the
challenge
we
have
appointing
people
to
boards
and
commissions,
particularly
this
one,
and
you
know
I
I
really
appreciate
that
I,
the
intent
of
transparency
of
the
workload
I
I,
certainly
think
we
can
do
that,
because
this
commission
may
not
require
eight
meetings
a
month.
I
I
think
they
should
determine
that
as
a
autonomous
independent
body.
A
G
Thank
you,
madam
president.
I
just
want
to
start
off
with
just
noting
that,
once
again,
this
board
is
not
like
any
other
board
at
the
city,
just
on
the
basis
of
no,
the
board
is
going
to
have
to
be
weighing
results
from
a
consent
decree
coming
from
the
state,
as
well
as
incoming
consent
decree
coming
from
the
Department
of
Justice.
G
So
once
again,
the
idea
that
you
know
the
same
type
of
level
of
frequency
that
many
of
our
other
boards
and
commissions
currently
operate
under
is
going
to
be
on
par
with
this
Commission.
In
reality,
that's
just
simply
not
about
to
be
true.
I
also
want
to
just
provide
some
clarification
of
you
know.
We've
never
had
an
issue
with
recruitment
around
the
pcoc.
It
was
Council
in
prep
for
this.
G
This
creation
of
this
that
we
did
not
make
appointments
to
it,
it
let
it
become
defunct
and
which
has
now
led
us
into
a
lawsuit
around
this.
So
I
do
want
to
note,
like
there
is
going
to
be
a
number
of
civilians
that
are
really
excited
to
be
part
of
this
board,
especially
if
it's
credible
and
that
they
should
absolutely
have
a
accurate.
G
You
know
presentation
around
this
workload
that
they're
about
to
walk
into
with
again
the
guise
of
two
percent
decrees
and
the
recommendations,
that's
going
to
be
coming
from
that
as
they
make
policies
for
us
to
consider,
as
counsel
for
the
mayor
to
consider
and
ultimately
for
the
police
chief
to
consider.
So
that
is
the
reality
of
the
situation.
This
amendment
reflects
that
reality
and
would
love
to
have
y'all
supported
on
it,
if
not
cool,
but
we
could
move
forward
to
to
be.
You
know
considered.
A
A
K
D
A
G
Thank
you,
madam
president,
so
this
one
is
amending
section
172.60,
subsection
I,
and
this
is
related
to
complaintist
and
whistleblower
protections.
You
know.
Another
aspect
of
this
ordinance
that
was
flagged
by
the
public
was
that
there
was
no
language
about
how
the
complaint
process
will
work.
You
know,
even
at
the
public
hearing,
it
was
noted
that
those
who
have
filed
complaints
against
MPD
officers,
experience,
retaliation-
and
you
know
these
complainants
were
even
minors.
G
We
heard
from
former
miners
of
our
career
explorers
program,
that's
a
program
of
MPD
who
engaged
in
this.
They
face
retaliation.
G
I
also
want
to
note
that
section,
6,
section
7,
was
also
put
in
place
to
Grant
protections
to
MPD
officers,
who
also
reported
Disturbing
Behavior
and
misconduct
they're.
You
know,
as
documenting
the
ndhr
report,
there's
been
a
documented
history
of
MPD
officers,
who
also
have
face
retaliation
from
their
peers
for
speaking
up
about
bad
behavior
and,
ultimately,
you
know
this
type
of
culture
even
led
to
those
officers
being
pushed
out
of
MPD
for
crossing
the
quote-unquote,
then
Blue
Line,
in
fact,
I
hope
many.
G
My
many
of
my
colleagues
are
already
familiar
with
the
story,
but
if
not
I
encourage
you
to
look
up
and
read
about
the
lived
experience,
a
former
MPD
officer,
Colleen
Ryan,
who
experienced
this
retaliatory
culture
themselves
and
that
was
documented
by
local
and
National
media.
G
So
you
know
I
want
to
acknowledge
that,
there's
that,
in
the
consensus
ordinance
too,
that
we
just
passed,
we
did
approve
language
that
prohibits
retaliation,
which
you
know
came
from
my
office
conversations
with
our
city
attorneys
and
you
know
I
appreciate
the
inclusion
but
I'm
also
bringing
forward
this
amendment
because
it's
actually
stronger
than
what's
included
in
the
consensus
document
and
my
Amendment
empowers
the
commission
to
work
with
staff
to
establish
the
protections
that's
needed
so
that
they're
not
just
written
on
paper
without
any
type
of
enforcement,
and
also
it
adds
transparency
and
I.
G
A
Thank
you,
councilmember
1sley.
Can
you
just
identify
what
those
specific
Provisions
are.
A
You
you
said
that
this
was
stronger
than
the
already
included
language
that
you
offered
and
so
I'm
I'm
having
a
problem
understanding.
What's
what's
the
significant
difference.
G
G
And
then
my
proposal
says
for
six
amend
that
section
to
say,
recommend,
clear
detail,
process
for
complaint
investigations
and
other
necessary
policies
that
build
in
safeguards
against
community
members
who
are
vulnerable
to
retaliation.
Point
seven
then
says
which
will
be
an
addition,
recommend
policies
that
protect
against
retaliation,
also
for
police
officers
who
may
fall
under
the
category
of
whistleblowers
or
are
vulnerable
to
retaliation.
So
again,
it
provides
more
clarification
to
that
section.
It
helps
strengthen
enforcement
mechanisms
around
it.
A
Thank
you,
councilmember
and
and
I
do
appreciate
your
initial
Amendment
and
thank
you
for
strengthening
it.
Councilmember.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
We
all
want
the
most
robust
kind
of
language
in
here
as
possible.
I
have
a
question
again
for
the
City
attorney.
That
is.
Is
it
the
right
place
to
put
it
in
here
where
we
have
where
it
exists
today
and
what's
been
amended,
is
under
complaint
filing,
which
seems
to
make
sense
to
me.
Council
member
wansley's
proposal
suggests
that
we
include
it
under
the
powers
section
and
I
believe
that
something
like
whistleblower
law
is
its
state
law.
D
That's
not
something
that
we
can
have
a
civilian
commission
do
or
take
on.
So
could
you
weigh
in
on
where
it
should
be
appropriately
vested
and
then,
if
we
can
effectuate
that
whistleblower
section
into
here
legally.
I
Council
president
Council
vice
president,
so
so
what
we
do
in
the
consensus
document
in
the
complaint
filing
and
resolution
process,
we
have
a
directive
to
to
City
staff,
MPD
civil
rights,
to
adopt
policies
and
among
those
policies.
In
the
consensus
document,
we
drafted
a
requirement
to
adopt
essentially
an
anti-retaliation
policy.
We
don't
use
the
term
whistleblower,
because
whistleblower
is
actually
a
term
of
our
defined
in
state
law
and
many
of
these
complaints,
don't
necessarily
are,
are
not
necessarily
complaints
of
the
violation
of.
C
I
We
don't
we
don't
want
to
just
limit
this
to
whistleblowers,
as
it
would
be
defined
in
state
law.
This,
the
way
that
the
consensus
document
was
written
was
intended
to
be
broader
to
really
catch.
You
know
to
create
a
a
policy
that
applies
to
all
complainants,
all
folks
who
participate
in
investigations.
I
You
know
whether
again
it's
civilians,
other
employees,
Peace
Office
officers
and
give
them
just
general
anti-retaliation
protection,
whether
their
complaint
does
or
doesn't
rise
to
the
level
of
whistleblower
protection
or
not.
So
that
was
really
the
intention
of
putting
that
item
in
the
policies
and
procedures
that
staff
would
have
to
adapt.
I
You
know
I,
I,
think
council,
member
wants
land
and
I
don't
mean
to
speak
for
you,
but
what
what
you're
looking
at
here
is
is
then
also
giving
some
authority
to
the
commission
to
make
recommendations
about
those
types
of
policies.
You
know
again,
I
think
that,
having
that
broader,
getting
away
from
the
term
whistleblower
and
having
that
broader
anti-retaliation
language
is
I,
think
preferable,
but
that
to
me
that's
sort
of
the
distinction
that
that
the
consensus
document
really
is:
is
a
directive
to
staff.
I
Who
is
we're
going
to
be
responsible
for
actually
adapting
the
policies
to
adopt
that
anti-retaliation
policy?
So
yeah
I,
don't
know
if
that
answers
anybody's
question.
I
Maybe
I
didn't
but
I
think
that
it,
it
absolutely
does
belong
in
the
consensus
document
in
that
directive
to
staff
to
adopt
policies
that
that
is
the
staff's
requirement
to
adopt
policies.
I
would
not
take
it
out
of
that.
Yeah.
A
A
Complaint
filing
and
resolution
section
number
172.30
number
six.
I
Yes
and
I
think
it
should
definitely
be
in
172.30.
That
is
absolutely
the
appropriate
place,
because
again,
staff
is
going
to
be
promulgating.
These
policies,
if
council
member
wansley,
also
wants
something
in
the
powers
of
the
the
body
to
make
recommendations
about
those
policies.
You
know
as
long
as
they're
just
recommendations.
The
commission
can't
actually
adopt
the
policies,
but
if
they're
going
to
make
recommendations,
they
can
make
recommendations
to
staff
about
what
those
policies
might
contain.
D
So
Madam
chair
with
that
explanation,
I
think
that
keeping
it
the
way
that
it
is
in
the
consensus
document
helps
it
be
Broad
and
strong
and
would
apply
to
more
people
and
that's
just
what
I
want
to
say
about
them.
A
A
I
guess
allow
the
ccpo
to
make
additional
policy
recommendations,
which
we
already
passed,
that
they
could
do
that
earlier,
but
I
mean
if
we
want
to
identify
this
particular
policy,
making
I
think
it's
fine,
councilmember
wansley.
G
Yeah,
thank
you,
madam
president.
Again
this
doesn't
strip
anything
from
that
section.
I
think
the
City
attorney
clarified
that
I
hope
for
you
Council
vice
president
palmisano.
If
anything,
it
reflects
again
additional
power
and
that's
why
we
put
in
there
in
section
six
that
ability
for
the
ccpo
to
make
those
recommendations
which
I
think
you
also
shared
again
like
that
is
fully
within
the
Wheelhouse
of
the
ccpo
too.
So
just
having
that
be
codified
in
the
consensus
ordinance
as
well.
A
Wonderful
is
there
any
further
discussion
I've
seen
on
clerk?
Please
call
the
world.
B
C
B
C
C
C
G
G
G
So
you
know
I
know
that
was
a
concerned
product
with
council,
member
Payne's,
Amendment
and
I'm
hoping
this
helps
build
on
that
that
discussion,
while
also
continuing
to
leave
this
power
with
Council
because
of
past
practice,
and
also
this
language,
is
meant
to
reinforce
the
standards
that
we
currently
have
for
all
appointing
these.
This
amendment
will
also
require
that
we
fill
the
seat
within
60
days.
G
This
ensures
that
we
are
actively
recruiting
and
promoting
open
seats
and
when
they
are
not
filled,
we
will
promptly
inform
the
public
of
the
reasons
why
I
believe
the
additional
language
will
help
us
towards
this
goal
of
of
building
back
trust
with
the
public,
as
it
will
show
that
we
have
learned
the
mistakes
that
we
made
as
it
relates
to
communication
about
past
pcoc
seats.
So
with
that,
I
will
move
this
item
forward.
Consideration.
H
E
You,
madam
president,
I,
was
just
wondering
if
this
conflicts
with
some
of
the
other
Provisions
that
we've
already
approved.
G
Would
love
if
council
member
Vita
could
I
from
my
understand?
We
did
not
move
forward
council
member
Payne's
Amendment
for
removal,
so
we
have
not
considered
anything
around
removals
yet,
and
this
will
be
additional
Amendment
for
us
that
somewhat
provide
clarification
around
that
process.
I.
E
Think,
I'm
speaking
more
to
the
council,
president
Jenkins
I'll
ask
the
clerk
or
the
City
attorney
to
please
weigh
in
on
that.
B
To
the
president
to
council
member
Vita
I
think
there's,
there
was
a
very,
very
lengthy
discussion.
You'll
recall
about
appointments,
the
process
of
removing
whether
or
not
we've
ever
removed
anyone
and
what
the
process
would
be
to
remove
someone.
The
current
consensus
document
shows
that
members
who
are
appointed
to
serve
at
the
pleasure
of
the
appointing
authority
and
would
be
removed
by
the
appointing
authority.
There
was
a
proposal
by
councilmember,
Payne
I
believe
to
change
that
that
extensive
discussion
resulted
in
a
vote
that
that
proposed
amendment
didn't
pass.
B
This
amendment
raises
the
issue
of
removal
and
provides
that
members
don't
serve
at
the
pleasure
of
the
appointing
authority
they
serve
for
a
defined
term
unless
the
seats
vacated
for
resignation,
death
or
removal
not
sure
how
individuals
would
be
removed.
The
seat
is
then
filled
for
the
balance
and
must
be
done
within
60
days
or
a
public
announcement
made
that
talks
about
the
measures
being
implemented
to
ensure
why
why
the
seed
is
vacant
and,
what's
being
done
to
fill
it,
that
I
capture,
councilmember,
wansley,
you're
intent.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I.
Think
what
that
says
to
me
is
that
we
should
probably
keep
it
consistent
with
the
way
that
we
do
things
so
that
when
we
figure
out
how
we
have
some
regular
consideration
process
or
grievance
process
or
removal
process
that
it's
consistent
amongst
all
bodies
and
I'm,
not
sure
that
we
would
ever
we've
ever
had
a
place
or
a
way
to
provide
reasoning
on
why
the
seat
is
vacant
and
what
measures
are
being
implemented.
I'm,
not
sure
where
that
would
be
posted
I
guess
it
could
be
posted
on
the
website.
D
A
I
Anderson,
council
president
members
of
the
council,
just
back
to
the
question
about
about
conflict.
What
I
see
in
the
the
consensus
ordinance
is
an
e
for
removal
and
then
an
F
for
vacancies.
So
if
council
member
wansley's
Amendment
were
to
pass,
it
would
be
in
conflict
with
f
vacancies
in
the
consensus
document.
It
simply
says
that
the
seat
shall
be
filled
for
the
balance
of
the
unexpired
term
by
the
appointing
authority
council.
I
Member
wansley's
Amendment
would
have
a
60-day
requirement,
so
there
would
have
to
be
some
sort
of
reconciliation
done
between
if
council
member
wansley's
Amendment
passes
as
e,
then
I
would
recommend
that
we,
the
we
strike
f.
I
172.60,
E
and
F
are
what
we're
discussing.
G
G
That's
why
we
talked
about
removal.
Nothing
about
my
Amendment
comes
in
conflict
with
a
standardized
practice.
In
fact,
it
actually
builds
upon
that
by
allowing
Council
to
continue
to
be
kind
of
The
Guiding
appointing
process,
so
there's
actually
not
a
difference
in
that
piece.
But
what
is
being
moved
before
you
is
for
this
amendment
to
replace
the
vacancies
piece
in
our
consensus
document.
B
President
councilmember
wansley
I
think
maybe
one
thing
you
might
consider
is
the
attorney
has
said
that
your
proposed
e
conflicts
with
what's
in
the
consensus
document
F,
so
one
thing
you
might
consider
is
adding
a
strike
of
letter
F
of
section
F.
So
if
e
passes
it
would
also
include
a
strike
of
f.
Thank.
A
B
A
Thank
you
Mr
and
councilmember
Wesley.
You
are
amenable
to
that
change.
Yes,
colleagues,
we
have
before
us
councilmember
winesley's
Amendment,.
B
B
B
D
A
That
Amendment
fails
and
we
move
to
the
last
Amendment
offered
by
council
member
wansley.
G
Thank
you,
madam
president.
This
is
regards
to
the
conversation
that
we
had
again
around
the
the
timeline
for
the
ccpo
I.
Do
want
to
note
that
you
know
most
ordinances
that
are
passed
by
this
body
actually
take
effect
within
30
days,
and
if
we
were
able
to
have
question
one
take
effect
in
30
day
30
days
in,
we
certainly
can
begin
work
for
ccpo,
especially
since
we
know
there
is
a
significant
amount
of
public
interest
in
moving
this
forward.
G
120
days
is
unnecessary
delay,
especially
since,
against
the
city
facilitated
the
end
of
the
functioning
of
the
pcoc
earlier
this
year
and
I
think
we've
all
agreed
that,
having
months
without
some
type
of
oversight,
commission
is
not
something
that
I,
though,
and
I'm
pretty
sure
the
public
is
not
comfortable
with,
and
this
amendment
reflects
the
feedback
that
was
given
by
the
community
and
aligns
the
implementation
of
this
ordinance
on
the
timeline.
D
Chair
I
just
need
to
offer
a
Counterpoint
most
ordinances
that
we
pass
don't
require
posting
for
15
applicants
and
then
interviewing
and
then
appointing
them
and
then
having
in
a
National
Organization
to
help
do
their
training
and
do
the
kind
of
onboarding
that
we've
added
into
this
ordinance
to
make
it
robust
on
Race
Equity
I.
Don't
think
that
that's
reasonable
for
us
to
be
able
to
do
in
30
days,
but
I
am
eager
to
get
started
on
this
too.
D
D
C
A
Five
eyes
Okay,
my
apologies,
so
we
have
dismissed
with
the
wansley
Amendments
and
we
are
returning
to
council
members.
Chavez
Amendment,
president.
H
I'm
sorry,
sir
council
president
I
just
will
not
put
that
12
out.
A
I
do
want
to
emphasize
again
and
I'll
probably
State
this
again,
but
as
would
any
ordinance,
this
certainly
is
one
that
will
require
and
should
require
additional
review
additional
amendments.
As
we
noted
in
our
deliberations,
we
talked
about
impact
analysis
and
trying
to
understand
what
policies
May
mean,
and
that
is
certainly
the
case
for
this
ordinance
as
well.
All
of
that
said,
we
are
back
to
the
original
ordinance
offered
by
myself
with
the
Amendments,
with
the
prevailing
amendments
as
attached
and
in
Q.
A
M
Thank
you.
Madam
president.
I
really
appreciate
the
process
that
we've
had
here.
I
know
that
you
know
a
couple
of
weeks
ago,
I
had
missed
committee
and
was
very
concerned
about
whether
or
not
I
had
all
my
all
the
information
I
needed
in
order
to
support
this
and
I
do
also
want
to,
but
I
do
appreciate
the
process
that
we've
gotten
up
until
this
point.
M
M
I
think
that
councilmember
wansley
made
raised
a
good
point
in
saying
that
we
took
a
lot
of
time
to
consider
things
like
government
structure
and,
and
so
I
still
feel,
like
you
know,
with
some
of
the
feedback
from
my
colleagues
and
with
councilmember
Johnson,
making
pretty
much
a
direct
request
for
for
this
item
to
be
delayed.
I
would
like
to
make
it
would
like
to
make
a
motion
for
this
item
to
be
delayed.
M
I,
don't
want
that
to
be
a
reflection
on
how
vice
president
Paul
massano
and
president
Jenkins
have
engaged
in
this
discussion.
I
think
that
it's
that
that
it's
been
a
good
discussion
if
this
item
is
not
delayed,
I
do
think
that
I
will
support
it
today,
but
with
how
much
this
document
has
changed
and
with
you
know,
one
of
our
colleagues
feeling
a
number
of
our
colleagues
feeling
like
this.
This
work,
a
lot
of
this
work
has
been
done
outside
of
committee.
M
Thus
this
is
this.
Is
the
time
we're
going
to
be
voting
on
it?
I'm
gonna
still
go
ahead
and
and
make
that
motion.
So
thank
you.
C
C
D
D
A
That
motion
fails
and
we
are
back
to
the
original
motion:
councilmember
Ellison,
no
I'm,
sorry,
council,
member
Osman.
L
Oh,
thank
you,
madam
president.
I
do
want
to
thank
council
president
Council
vice
president
for
really
working
on
this
document
and
also
working
with
my
colleagues.
It's
not
perfect,
but
we're
able
to
go
somewhere
from
here
and
like
I,
say
previous.
This
is
a
work
in
process.
L
We
can
always
come
back
to
it
and
it's
a
good
intention
for
this
to
to
really
make
sure
that
you
know
our
police
officers
are
behaving
the
way
we
want
them
to
behave
and
protecting
the
resident
while
our
residents
are
safe,
so
yeah
I
do
want
to
thank
you,
council,
president,
and
all
of
you
for
P
impatient
and
working
on
this.
M
Thank
you
and
I'll,
just
Echo,
councilmember
Osmond's
sentiments
I
know
that
I
was
able
to
have
a
number
of
conversations
with
council
president
Council
vice
president
Paul
massano,
as
well
mainly
about
some
of
the
changes
and
I
think
that
there
were
a
lot
of
a
number
of
changes
that
were
added
into
the
consensus
document
and
and
where
there
wasn't
maybe
a
more
Earnest
consensus.
M
All
those
items
were
taken
up
for
a
vote
and
and
I
think
that
this
document
changed
a
lot
more
than
I
thought
it
would,
and
so
you
know,
I
still
want
to
see
improvements
to
this.
It's
it's
still
not.
You
know,
maybe
exactly
the
ordinance
that
I
would
write,
but
that's
rarely
the
case
when
we,
when
we
make
a
laws
together
when
we
make
ordinances
together.
So
I
just
want
to
thank
the
council
president,
and
vice
president
for
the
process
and
I
do
believe
that
I'll
be
supporting
this
today.
E
Thank
you,
madam
president.
I
just
wanted
to
quickly
thank
the
Civil
Rights
department
for
all
the
work
that
they've
put
into
this
process.
You
know
as
the
chair
of
public
health
and
safety,
they
started
meeting
with
me
almost
immediately
after
being
sworn
in
about
this,
and
although
it's
not
perfect,
I
think
that
our
staff
has
really
been
committed
to
this
process
and
done
a
great
job
at
getting
us
to
this
point.
E
So
again,
I
just
want
to
thank
the
Civil
Rights
staff,
specifically
Andrew
Hawkins,
who
has
spent
a
lot
of
time
with
me
and
my
staff
and
a
lot
of
time
in
community
talking
through
this
process.
I've
appreciated
him
in
this
process
a
lot
along
with
a
lot
of
other
civil
rights
staff.
So
thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
council
member,
any
further
discussion
clerk.
Please
call
the
roll.
B
F
B
A
That
carries
and
that
ordinance
is
adopted.
I
do
want
to
just
take
a
moment
to
thank
all
of
my
colleagues
for
their
insightful
and
passionate
and
committed
attention
to
this
ordinance,
which
I
do
have
to
correct
what
has
been
stated
in
public.
It's
been
more
than
10
days
that
we
have
been
working
on
this.
We
had
three
Community
sessions.
A
We've
had
input
from
several
community
members
about
this
process
and
I
I
think
we
have
gotten
to
a
really
good
place.
Is
it
perfect?
No?
Can
it
be
improved
absolutely
as
with
everything
in
life,
and
it
is
our
duty
to
to
make
that
happen.
I
really
want
to
thank
director
Gillespie
and
her
team,
specifically
Andrew
Hawkins,
for
his
efforts.
A
Their
efforts
on
creating
this
I
want
to
thank
the
City
attorney,
who
spent
many
many
many
nights
over
looking
over
these
amendments
and
helping
us
to
get
to
a
place
where
they
meet
the
legal
standards
and
yeah
thanks
all
of
you
for
coming
back
for
a
final
adjourned
city
council
meeting
thank
the
clerk
staff
for
all
of
their
work.
To
really
I
mean
the
flurry
of
amendments
changed
amendments
revised
amendments
has
just
been
a
really
Herculean
effort.
A
I
will
say
and
thank
you
clerk
Carl
and
to
all
of
your
staff
and
team
for
helping
us
as
a
council
to
work
through
this.
We
are
a
journeying
this
meeting
and
we
completed
all
of
our
remaining
business
before
I
close.
The
meeting
I
will
ask
my
colleagues
if
they
have
any
announcements.
H
Council
president
Jenkins
I
did
just
want
to
thank
our
staff
Andrew
and
director
Gillespie
I
do
want
to
say
I'm,
very
thankful
for
your
work
throughout
this
entire
process.
Our
City
attorney,
who
worked
she
received
my
emails
very
late
at
night
and
was
willing
to
work
and
find
language
with
my
office
to
make
sure
that
we
can
make
this
as
powerful
as
possible.
H
Do
you
want
to
thank
the
council
president
and
vice
president
for
making
sure
that
there
was
at
least
a
compromise
on
moving
the
date
to
Tuesday
with
councilman
truck
time
and
customer
Payne
I
know
you
won't
work
that
out
I
very
much
appreciate
it.
The
extra
time
to
be
able
to
deliberate
and
make
this
ordinance
as
strong
as
possible.
I
wasn't
able
to
support
it
based
on
three
different
things
that
I
hope
that
we
can
find
a
compromise
at
least
starting
next
year
in
January,
I.
Think
I'm
still
concerned
about
that
oversight
of
120
days.
H
I
think
we
can
find
something
to
make
sure
that
we
can
assure
folks
on
that
police
accountability
aspect.
I
do
have
my
own
separate
opinion
on
the
police
being
on
the
oversight.
Commission
in
terms
of
like
I
think
it
should
be
civilian-led
I
think
this
body
can
find
a
compromised
early
January
and
that
I
think
that
we
can
find
a
different
method
in
the
process
that
consummate
Payne
was
working
on
on
the
employment
and
removal
process.
H
A
Thank
you
councilmember
Chavez,
and
to
be
clear,
the
Amendments
added
to
the
strength
of
the
ordinance,
and
so
it
it
is
not
about
personalities.
It's
about
trying
to
get
this
whole
thing
right.
If
I
fail
to
thank
the
city,
attorney's
office,
which
I
think
I
did
but
I
will
reiterate,
we
are
grateful
for
your
service.
A
You
just
came
to
the
city
and
shepherded
at
us
through
the
Tailwind
of
our
government
restructuring
and
then
through
this
very
important
ordinance
that
we
are
creating
this
Community
Commission
on
police
oversight.
So
thank
you
once
again
and
with
that
colleagues,
we
are
adjourned.
I,
wish
everybody
a
happy
and
safe
holiday
season.
Whatever
you
celebrate,
and
our
next
meeting
is
January
third
2023.