May 10, 2023 — Police Oversight Panel Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:13] Alright, I'm gonna start recording. Welcome, everyone. Thank you for being here. We're gonna jump right in just a few. A quick few reminders before we jump into the full meeting. Panelists. Please remember to keep your camera on unless you actually need to turn it off during the meeting. It's important to show that we are present. That's a particularly important. Whenever we take a vote to make sure your cameras on, so we can see who is casting that vote for the public record.

[1:00] And generally we just wanna keep it on. So we are showing our presence and our attention for the work we're doing here tonight. Also as a reminder for panel panelists. If you have something to say to the group, make sure that you say it out loud on video, not in the chat, so we can keep that in front of the public as well if you do have something to bring up one on one on the site that's fine to keep in the chat but also keep in mind, old now line everything in accordance as well. So we want to keep these conversations open and transparent members of the public. We will not be watching the chat for your feedback. If you do have any questions you can drop those into the section of this meeting at the bottom of the screen, and Cory will keep you keeping an eye on those questions throughout the meeting. But then, of course, at the end of tonight's meeting, we will also have public comments. So we'll get to that as well.

[2:02] Coins all right. In that case we're gonna begin tonight's meeting by with a reading of our land acknowledgement. We acknowledge the Rapaho Youth and Shyenne tribes, the traditional custodians of the land on which the police oversight panel and the boulder police department operate, and we pay our respects to their elders past and present. Members of the public. Thank you for being here tonight and making a time. Also any members of the media, any journalists. We also just want to express our appreciation for having you here. You're an important part process of this work oversight in our community, and we do really appreciate all the work you're doing for us. I also want to welcome panel members into the space. Recognizing your volunteering to be here to bring your time, your attention, and your integrity to this work. And so I wanna thank you for that. And I'd also like to direct members of the public.

[3:01] Do you have a complaint to submit against a member of the Border Police Department? You can do so at our website Boulder, Colorado, Dot. Gov, forward, slash services, org slash, police, hyphen, oversight. You can also. So contact the the parent generally through our email police oversight panel at Boulder, colorado.gov. With any other queries. I will now read through our agenda for this evening, so we will begin with Oops. Evening with approval of the April twelfth general Panel meeting minutes. Then we're going to recap our last panel training on April 20 s, that history of civilian oversight and principals of accountability then we're gonna recap and talk about our quarterly meetings with the chief Chief Herald and the other police department leadership. Our last one was April 20, sixth. Our next one will be June 20. Then we have it.

[4:02] A quick update regarding Hussein's Residency. Then we're gonna get a status report on hiring a new independent monitor. Then we will get an update from our consultant Farah on our police oversight panel ordinance in the work. On revising it. Then we will get our report from the Independent Monitor, and then we'll have our discussion this evening about continuing how we continue the voter police oversight Panel's operations, and then, after that we have scheduled. We need to select a selection of the alternates to fill our new panel vacancy. We will have our discussion of our case reviews. Sorry? Oh! And then we have a discussion, scheduled, sorry of public case, review training, and demonstration for the public in the panel. We'll do. Our committee reports from the community Engagement and Communications Committee, the Governance Committee and the Legacy Committee, and then we will select cases for review, and then we will open the evening for public comment so Jumping Right into approval of the meeting minutes for april

[5:09] twelfth. Does anyone have any revisions they need made to those minutes before we approve them? If not, can I get a motion to approve the April twelfth meeting minutes? Motion to approve the minutes. All in favor to approve the minutes and. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, that's the majority. The minutes are approved. Thank you very much. So next up, we just wanna touch briefly on our last training. So that was on April twenty-second. And for members of the public. Farrah our consultant on police oversight, presented a history of civilian oversight for the panel, and then the Oir group, Michael, give us a presentation on principles of accountability and police oversight and so I will just open the

[6:11] floor. Now, panelists, if you have any comments, feedback notes for the public based on those those trainings that we had on April twenty-second. Covid. Oh, that's easy. Then we will also. Oh, never mind, sorry! That's next. So then we also, since our last meeting, had our Quarterly meeting Chief Harold could not be at our last quarterly meeting, but Debbie's Stephen Redfern was there on April 20 s 20 Sixth, sorry for members of the public. Our next meeting with the leadership of the police Department is on June 20, eighth.

[7:01] Those meetings are open to the public. We don't have comments at those public comment at those meetings, but they are open to the public to observe, and so we'd invite you to join us online for our next meeting. On June 20, eighth, but I also wanted to hold space here for a minute. If anyone had any additional comments from our April 20, sixth meeting, or questions, or any notes for the public. In that case, moving right on, I will hand it over to for an update on your residency. Thank you, Daniel, and I apologize in advance. I am having technical difficulties this evening. So that's a little scattered. But pretty much. You just wanted to update the panel and community as well. That so I, and no longer living in Boulder the city of Boulder.

[8:06] I have a home in Lagmont, and as of this week I'm no longer working in Boulder as either. I moved to a job in love, Lent. Obviously I still have friends and family and everything in Boulder, but just to be, you know, transparent that my residency is no longer there, and just to kind of give people an option to comment, and if you know, if the decision is like no, you don't have enough folder. Then that's okay. You know, I'm with whatever the piano would like to decide, but just wanted to kind of inform people on the so anything like to say, go ahead. So how does what does what do their audiences say regarding panel members and residency?

[9:00] Where do they reside? Yeah, so we have had panelists before that have transitioned out of the city of Folder while they were working on the panel, and pretty much it just says there needs to be a connection to boulder, and so that's kind of the language is just have have a connection, and you know, being that my husband was born and raised in Boulder, his family is still there, and obviously I'm here to support. Y'all, if that's what you would like need to do. Yeah, yeah, sure. So I did that answer your question, Chico. Okay, perfect. In short, the ordinances are quite late, so it is what it is right. Same. Yeah, I just to add to that, I pulled up the ordinance and it says that we're volunteers who have strong ties to the city of Boulder.

[10:00] This may include, but it's not limited to residency employment in the city, or having children enrolled in school, is located in the city, so it's not limited to those things, and it's subjective right and in my opinion. But also definitely a strong ties to see a boulder. I don't see any problem. Thanks. Sam, yeah, same, I'm keeping quiet. But I agree 100%, Sam, you know, having worked with the dasa and had asides so many stakes in this work as well, I agree that that Hadassah meets those boundaries of strong ties, we don't necessarily there isn't necessarily a trigger in the ordinance, either for an eventuality where someone's someone loses their strong ties. In that case, as well. And so it is also kind of uncharted territory as well as yeah. As your ties grow tenuous, at what point the panel could could move to remove a panelists from a panelists. But I fully support Hadassah ties to boulder and and hope you stick around on the on the panel. Yeah.

[11:10] Yeah, of course. Yup, I'm of course hearing if you guys need me. So. New one. Yeah. Yeah, I just wanna agree with what you and Sam, you, Daniel and Sam have said, just want to voice my appreciation for her son. Everything she's done on this panel definitely has their place here. Thank you. Thanks. Milan. Any other thoughts, panelists. And so in this kind of case, too, if you have thoughts, you'd like to share with me as the other co-chair. Please don't hesitate to reach out. That's why we have 2 co-chairs on this panelists to be able to, you know, to be able to check each other's powers and balances of opinion. So if you do have anything you'd like to pick up.

[12:08] A phone and call me about, feel free panelists. We wanna keep this as an open discussion. But without further conversation. Oh, we'll keep on as long as she'll keep us cool. Beans. Next is our status report for hiring a new independent monitor. Without Amy here, looking at city staff. Who's giving that update for us tonight? Thanks. I'm happy to Daniel, unless, Erin, I didn't know if you were stepping in there. I don't much about where the I mean, I can just oh, sorry! Someone was saying something. Oh fair! Oh, I thought someone else was speaking. The update is, it's posted.

[13:00] Yay! I've seen it around. I've actually been emailed it several times, which I find very funny. And the posting ends may thirtieth, I believe, and so we still have a few more weeks Amy has asked me to send it out. It's on the Nicole. It's been sent out to Nico. I sent it to my law school 's being sent out to local your local law schools, University of Denver, and I believe, see you as a law school so it's being sent there, too, and so I encourage you all to send it out as well, to your networks. I know the our group has posted it as well on their social media. And so we just, you know, continue to push, push it out and get it out there and then the process obviously after the thirtieth we'll start the the formal process, and I imagine it'll be very similar to what you guys experienced before maybe a couple

[14:00] of weeks. But we'll definitely have more detail after that. Posting closes on May thirtieth. Thanks, Sarah Panelists. Any questions related to independent monitor. I do encourage you if you haven't already. You know this is an opportunity to share this out. If you're comfortable through your social networks, through social media, to raise up the opportunity of this position in our communities and and spread it as far as we can to see, we can bring in. Without any additional questions. I I'll get it wrong back to you for the ordinance update. Thank you, Daniel. Good evening, everybody fair enough. Get in consulting, working on the ordinance Revision. I'm really excited about putting a work group together to start working on it and putting some ideas together I have, or our group recommended.

[15:05] I look at Bart, which is the Bay Area Rapid transit system out in San Francisco, Oakland area. They have their own similar type of well, it's a hybrid. They have a a monitor and a review board. So I did say, some digging spoke to their director. Looked at their ordinance. I looked at my know you guys are modeled off of Eugene organs, ordinance. I looked at them, looks at Albany, has a review board that's going through some changes. I believe, San Diego. I looked a Denver as well, but their Review board is a little bit different and so I'm happy to share share some high-level thoughts that I got from there, particularly with the feedback that I got from the community community conversations. I had so particularly the relationship between the Monitor and the and the panel.

[16:06] I've seen sections about that. I've seen sections in language about outside council. I've seen there's definitely different types of language to get at the objectivity, and impartiality that you are looking for in panelists. So we can definitely delve into that and talk about how different cities have framed that in their ordinances. And so I can't remember if we talked about this before, but I just wanna go over it quickly again. Is that we're hoping to have the smaller work group to really be, you know, rolling up our sleeves, looking at the panel section of the ordinance pretty much line by line and doing a community feedback session in person. Hopefully, you know, projected in June, and then some briefings, potentially a study session and or or a separate briefing with counsel.

[17:08] At the end of the summer, and then we would like, if I remember, the procedure correctly, first reading a counsel to be in September, and then second reading I believe that's the first week of October. So, as I've told everybody, and I apologize if I sound like a broken record is I am a pro. I doing timelines? But I have no control over the timelines, because community input and feedback is always a coding timeline. But I have no control over the timelines, because community input and feedback is always a wild card. So it's the tentative timeline that I put together in that I've shared. But you know again, depending on how deep we go and how the conversations go. The various opinions that may may be brought forward that may swing the pendulum one way or the other in terms of timing. But at least we have, you know, an idea of the timing that we wanna hit, and so I'm gonna try to keep us to that.

[18:08] But again, you know, there's so much is in my control with, you know, community input and feedback and in the interest of your particular community, right? Which is going to be very important in this conversation, so I hope that we, my goal is that we talk about who will be on this work group tonight. I would like us if it's realistic to meet weekly on it. I do have some thoughts on language, and some sections, and ideas, ideas of reorganizing the ordinance. So I can provide this work group with, you know, something to start with and chew on and have feedback with, or 4. But I would really like to see us get started as soon as possible.

[19:04] Eric, can you remind us the composition of the work group that we're looking at? Right. So I'd like it to be no more than 5 or 6 people. Not including myself, so preferably at least the 2 from the panel. We talked about having one, a community member. Okay? And then we talked about potentially having someone from legal there and or potentially someone from the police department. And so those are things that need to be discussed by the panel. It's not, you know. Obviously set in stone, but just, you know, a suggestion for discussion purposes, for the panel. Sparrow. And so maybe let's start there. Panelists. So the question is for this group working group. If we want to invite a member of the police department and or a member of the Se's legal team, or see you cities, legal team to join this working group and so opening the floor for comments and feedback on on that option.

[20:10] And I see no Milan. I see your hand first. Yeah, I do have a question. I'm wondering if we could have. I mean, I understand city legal, but I would like to also have an independent legal advice. Advisor for this panel to review the ordinance. Can we request that? I think you can request it, but in terms of getting a definitive answer, I'd have to take that as a followup. Yeah, I think that would be important for us to have an independent legal advice. I, too, agree with Milan and join her in that request.

[21:02] Just clarifying. Are you saying that? Excuse me, and you would want the legal advice to be an independent voice, or you would prefer both to have sitting involved and an independent yeah. Yes. I would definitely wanna have an independent and then would be interested in hearing the advantages of having the CD. Legal. Be there, but I think it's very important for this panel to have an independent person. There, thank you. And for clarification. This is Independent Council for purposes of providing advice on the changes to the ordinance. Correct. Okay. Okay. I think, one of the advantages of having city counts. Us. Gosh, sorry it's been a long day, all having a city attorney involved in the working group is also that eventually I mean the ordinance has to be passed by city council and vetted.

[22:05] I. City attorneys, and so have, you know, looking at this expedited timeline, getting city attorneys engaged in the process as soon as we can, may help us to move faster. In my opinion, because eventually, right, we have to get it past that final vote. And so that was kind of my thinking around, yeah, having having city attorney representing the working. Yeah. And remind me, if I'm wrong. But I think we've requested independent account various times and I don't record that we've ever gotten any sort of response from that. Am I the calling correctly? I think what we did here is that if that's if the budget wanted, so the panel in the Monitor have a shared budget, and if we wanted to apply budget to hiring independent legal counsel, that's an option for us of course we wanna make

[23:07] Okay. sure that I we have to make sure we've established the relationship, that independent accounts has with the city and city attorneys. But that hasn't been, you know, that hasn't been a no, you can't do it. It has been a hey? Pick your legal counsel and set your budget. So, yeah, so I think that's an option for us. Okay. Awesome. Okay. Thank you. Shiko I was just looking at the numbers that Sarah is talking about. 5 to 6. If we're gonna have independent Council council from the city, from police, one from the community. 6. No, it's gonna work numbers wise. So my preference is to keep it small. But obviously that's just my recommendation.

[24:00] I have done this work with a group of 15 and I'll just be very frank with you. That was a lot of people and it was just a lot. So under 10 would be great but 5 or 6 is ideal. Because it's I mean, it's a smaller ordinance. It's a very specific and directed, but I just find going over 10 is challenging. Cory, yeah. Miss Wilson would like to know why, only one community member, how is that going to be decided? Again, these are just suggestions. And we're talking about that now. So the panel hasn't discussed how it would be decided, because this is the first opportunity that the panel has had to even talk about the makeup of the workgroup. So that's really the purpose of this conversation.

[25:02] Yeah. Slowly. Don. Yeah, so I understand. And the idea behind it, I think that it's a huge time commitment if it like, I'm meeting. And hour 2 h weekly is a lot to ask. So how long do you think this process would take? So, ideally speaking, we would like to have some sort of working draft of some sort by mid-june I attentively put on the project, timeline doing a community event the week of June nineteenth again. This is all fluid. I just put dates up. That made sense. But knowing that it's going to have its ebbs and flows. So we were aiming for potentially community feedback event. The week of June 9, and then around that time, I think through there'd be opportunities for community to give feedback online through.

[26:08] I forgot the name of the the program that boulder uses, and then we, I think, aiming for a study session with counsel. I believe in August, because we wanted first session to be in September, first reading. Sorry first reading in September, and then the second reading, and hopefully passage at the act of the October fifth meeting. So going to. So that's point. I mean, it is, gonna be quick. It is gonna require at least one or 2 h a week, particularly for the you know. This this month, most of June, probably all of July, and then we probably could go by weekly in August until we see it through in October.

[27:05] To jump on that, to so I got in the past. We've set kind of a precedent when select with the Selection Committee. When 2 panelists served on the Selection Committee. We pulled back on their other work on the panel to make room for that work as well. That's not to pull away from just how much work it goes into the ordinance. But I when it comes up to, you know, to meeting our expectations of room in cases participating in, you know, committees. We drew back on that to make room for panelists to serve on the Selection Committee. And I'd expect us to do the same here. Is that so, you know, if we decide to, panelists should join the working group that we would work together to make sure we were facilitating that work with them by picking up their work in other areas of the place. I saw your hand go up. Did you still have? No, I'm good, thank you. Alright. Just one is, I'll check. Thanks. Yeah.

[28:02] I do have a question. We regarding who is working in terms of the panelists working on that committee because I'm interested and the ordinance, and how it's, you know, changing and all that. But maybe I don't have the capacity. I'm just. It's an example. I don't have the capacity to be there every week. But how would I still be able to make comments and give my opinion on what is decided by the committee? Or is it just? I can go and observe as a panel member. But not participate in the decision making. I'm just trying to see how we can navigate that. According to our time, schedule. So I I envision after we have a good working draft presenting it to the panel and giving the panel an opportunity to read it and provide feedback.

[29:09] And you know, and this can be as as open as you is, you know. Kind of you want it to be. I I don't think that the work group meetings will be public, but I have asked in the chairs have agreed that I, you know, be on the agenda every month to provide an update on what's going on with the ordinance. So I'll be able to provide, you know, specific updates at each monthly meeting. But just because you have 2 panelists on the work group, does it negate other panelists being able to provide feedback? I mean because, assuming it passes and everything goes through in October. It, I mean as a current panelists, a directly impacts your work in your ability to do your work. So like, I know I would want your feedback on it, you know.

[30:03] Generally speaking, anyway, because your current panelists and it will directly impact your ability to do the work as a panelists. So there will be opportunity for all panelists to give feedback. It's just the kind of the working part the working of, you know, rolling up the sleeves and the draft language, and all that kind of stuff that is just easier to do if you limit it to a smaller group than if we did it. You know, as 11 panelists versus 10 panelists. That's, I can just tell you that it's just very challenging. Logistically. And just as a follow up, if I may, I think up to now we had 3 panel members on that committee is to also a number like that, or we could have 3 or 4 panel members working in that committee. I'm sorry. I don't understand what you mean by committee, am I? Alright! Alright! The Ordinance Committee are. You're mentioned to panelists, I might.

[31:00] No there reason why I'm mentioning, too, is primarily so that we can work together as a group and don't necessarily have to have it as a public official meeting. I I see. All the time, and keep the numbers smaller. But that doesn't that. Does it mean that like, I can send updates to the panel as we're working on it? I can also report on it every month at the public meetings. So it's not like, you know, we're meant to keep this. This is not going to be a secret. It's just that when you really need to roll up your sleeves and working their bureaucracy like blocks. A lot of the ability to do that. So it was just a recommendation to limit the work group to 2 Panam members for the logistics in the ease of getting the work done but there will be full transparency, particularly in this panel because we need you guys to be involved and aware of the changes, and up to speed on the changes, because I imagine I mean Council is not only going to want to talk to me about the changes, because I imagine I mean Castle is not only going to want to talk to me.

[32:07] About the changes they're going to want to talk to you about the changes in you are going to have to be up to speed and know and hopefully support what the work group recommends. And so you will be fully aware of what's happening as it's happening. No, I'm sorry I miss. I misunderstood work. Group versus committee. So thank you for the clarification. Yeah, and I want to specifically call it a work group so that it doesn't get confused with the committees. And so the work group is specifically for the revisions to the ordinance, which is separate and apart from your panel committees, because it just gets too confusing. You know it's other thoughts or questions. Maybe so to circle back. So on the question of legal involvement seems, you know, the suggestion is that we would ask a city attorney to be involved in the working group raising up Milan and Madeline to say that we're gonna ask Farrah if she

[33:11] could inquire about if we could get independent counsel involved with the working group as well. So we'll circle back. On answering that question, yeah, unless panelists, if there's any accounts who are opposed to that exploration, please speak up. But then to that second question about a representative of the Boulder police department being present on the the working group, comments or feedback or questions. Just a clarifying point. I, the implementation team which originally created the ordinance, did have one police officer to do. You know? Madeleine, can you answer that?

[34:02] What was the question? How many officers were on the implementation team on the Ordinance was first being written. If I recall. Cause. I think there were some officers on it right? Okay. Their worst, and if I'm not mistaken, I think there were who I know. Okay. Al start. That's when I'm at Pam, so I know there, and since it seems to me there was another one. That's fine. Usually, if I recall correctly. Okay. And members of the public just studied. Madlynn was actually on the implementation team. And so thank you, Madeline, your big reason why we're all here today. So. Thank you. And I heard Sterling. I see your hand. Yeah, thank you. Absolutely. Yeah, so, I wasn't part of it. But I do believe there were 2 officers that were involved in the original implementation of this, and I think if you really wanna do like, have good collaboration with the department and get buy in with the ordinance and revisions to it it would be best

[35:14] to have some involvement from an officer with it. Thank you. Thousands of dollars. It makes a lot of sense to have at least one member of the Psu team involved as well since there's so interesting to this work and the relationship between the department, the Monitor and the Panel. So, making note of that. Yeah, just a quick question, Sarah. Can. Can you please repeat your idea of how many people, and who, from where? I didn't catch everyone, so I know I don't know. I need that clarification if you don't mind. Please. Yeah, no problem. So initially, I said, 5 to 6 people, not including cause I would be, you know, facilitating it.

[36:02] So I wouldn't count in the numbers. And so initially, we thought 2 2 from the panel. One member from the community, potentially, one person representing the city attorney's office and one person from the police department, and then, with Milan's and suggestion, is potentially outside council. So those are just, you know, suggestions. The only thing that I'm you know, kind of crossing my fingers and toes is that we just keep it under 10. But I mean that's just something that I just put forward. Oh, thank you so much. Thanks. I agree. Barra, under 10 is absolutely more it's difficult to get 3 to make a decision.

[37:07] You can imagine what it's like to get pinned to make a decision in the Greek. So I agree with you. Beat Milan. I think your hand was up, and then Cory. Got. Just I just wanna say, like, just to repeat that I would like to see. Maybe to at least 2 or 3 community members, I especially people where representing it would be good to have their feedback as well check. And I'm sorry, Daniel. This is the first meeting where I keep getting questions from the community. Are you okay with those being inserted as well? You know. That's a good question, because I don't think we post that to the panel before to interject questions from the community. Mid-meeting. We've we've only approved public questions and feedback in the comments. Section.

[38:06] So I think we'd need to in acknowledging. Sorry I missed this when you brought up the first one, and I should have recalled sooner. So okay, so press pause for a quick second. Panelists on this question. So if members of the community put questions into the Qa. Do? Do we want to answer those in the midst of the meeting, or do we want to refer? Continue referring community members to the public comment sections, or else to email us after the meeting, to be in touch with answers. And so what we would need is a motion to go ahead and answer Qa. What live in the meeting for us to vote on. If we wanted to do that. Hmm! I'm not opposed to it. Let's say, based on some of our previous meetings like that wouldn't even be possible, based on the types of questions that were asked. So.

[39:05] Yeah, yeah, good point with you. Sam. There you are sorry you're dancing around my screen. Nice. I'm worried about time, because I think this next one about suspending the panel's work is the main item for today. We wanna make sure we? Okay, so in that case, if there isn't a motion to change practice, we'll go ahead and say, members of the public, thank you for your feedback. We do have public comment at the end of our meetings, and you're more than welcome to read out. Reach out to that panel email address with any questions, comments, or concerns, and we can address them this way. But we I do not have a motion to change our meeting practice at this time. Thank you, Corey. Thank you for your patience to cool beans. Okay. So back to the question, back to the the composition of the working group.

[40:06] We've touched on legal. Yeah. So we still haven't resolved how we'll members of the community will be selected. And we could. Yes, yes, and so I think to Fairs Point, we need to identify what the composition of the group is. And then our next question is how we we fill each of those cost. And so, yeah, cause, we also need to do that, decide how how we wanna select a member of the Vpd, how we wanna select ourselves for this committee as well as a member of the community. And so our first question in front of us is identifying the composition of the committee. We can vote to approve that. And then, yeah, then we'll turn this discussion to how we actually fill each of those seats unless you're saying I should circle back unless you're saying how we'd select community members might impact the total number of community members we involve.

[41:16] Does that make sense? Yeah. Jason. Maybe this is not something anybody likes, but I I think we should have a committee to deal with the issues and think about the various goods and bads, and then present that to the group at another. Here, another meeting and then we can. Then we can vote on it. Then I think there's too many things interplaying here. At least, that's my idea. So I would make a motion to table these questions in a motion. Maybe the motion is to create a committee to to discuss the issues, to be to be presented to the group so that it can be an organized discussion and answer at the next meeting.

[42:26] Yeah, maply. Yes, I wanna make sure I'm understanding the actual issue right? Now, would you clarify for me? We are always saying, we deciding. If we're going to increase the number of committee members? Or what was what was that discussion, or that those thoughts about that, or comments? So? The question Ferris brought us today is identifying the composition of the core working group on the ordinance.

[43:04] What's what's so? What was proposed and fair, I think we should maybe circle back. Farah hadassah. I owe our group, and and Amy have discussed this question in our chairs, meetings leading up to this. So, Jason, there has been some preliminary conversations about this. And so what we're putting in front of the panel today is the option of a legal representation about this. And so what we're putting in front of the panel today is the option of a legal representative from Bpd representative from the city a legal representative from Bpd representative from the city, a representative from the community, and then 2 men, members of this panel serving on the committee. And so what we're discussing now is, if that's the right composition. Hmm! If we should change that composition, and then we need to take a vote on it, so that Ferrara can. Yes, so we can start moving forward. Does. Is that? And I'm sorry. Go ahead. Yes, yup alright! No, I'm I am of the opinion that we because I say for the people of the people, by the people, I think we should have at least more than one community member if we go back to the beginning of how this was started while it was started in the tone and air of what's

[44:32] going on in society today. Yeah, I think the community would appreciate and probably have more regard and be more interested, invested to have more of a more. Input, so yeah, definitely have as a a question or end a decision to be made that we certainly increase it from one.

[45:06] As far as community representation. Thanks. Daniel, I think when it comes to the so in terms of tabling or waiting, I might have missed this, but we really don't have time. Unfortunately, if we really want this order to be done aap, then we we need to get on. It needs to happen in this vote should have actually happened last month. And so, in order to let Sarah, you know, assist fair, and getting to work and getting this started, it's really urgent that we have, and we make a decision in terms of who is going to be on this working group initially so that we can start getting that work done. So I think personally, if we're thinking about the 4 categories, our Po police oversight attorneys, boulder police and community, then I think there should be 2 of each, and that leaves us with 8.

[46:08] And so you know, potentially in terms of, you know, inside and outside legal counsel, that that leaves both to, you know, Alistair, and maybe somebody else to pickop. And then 2 members of the community, historically selected Selection Committee has 2 members of community. I think it's a good number to start with, for now and of course we will have time for community to to input later on. So we just kinda we kind of need to get it going. So those are my 2 cents. Yeah, thanks, Jason. I saw your hand. Is that still a live hand? Or, you guys? Well what I would say is that I now I understand, and I withdraw any suggestion of tabling, and 2 with all due respect to Madeline, I think each and every one of us is also a representative of the people, and so but

[47:09] I do think that the people's voice will be heard, so I don't know that we need more. All, the thought is a notion. I would second it. And clarifying. So Jason, 2 of each category, 2. Correct. Community 2 panel, 2 legal 2 police. Thank you. Okay. So that I think you're hand was first and then. Yeah, I have a thought suggestion, because I feel we just spent a bunch of time trying to guess what we were doing. And we just I mean, I think I'm just now hearing clearly what is presented and what is being asked from us, and I think if we can start there, you know, this would have been like so much easier. I've been trying to guess what's happening for a while now.

[48:00] I finally have it clear, and I know that you've been having this conversation. And so the more recent to kind of land with that explanation first, like, I think it would have been helpful to start the conversation, saying, we met, this is who who met? Like. I don't know whenever you met. This is what we discussed. This is what we with the same thing. And this is what what we are asking from you. What I agree that kind of this is who we are. We are members of the community, you know, and I think, and I also think that it's important for everyone to participate in this review of the ordinance. My fear is that when you invite members of the community to be part of that that selection process cannot be rush. If you want to respect people applying volunteering, select being selected, or whatever I mean, we'll know what happened with that happens right?

[49:04] So you know. So I think we need to be thoughtful like we don't wanna ask something that we're not ready to respond. So if we're gonna have a like an opportunity for community members to apply or to volunteer for it, how are we going to choose who is choosing? How? How that person's gonna go, and that process only my jeopardize the whole other work, because we didn't do enough good of a job selecting this 2 community members other than who you know naturally, it's gonna be part of the group. So that's my fear right now we're under so much it's good to me if you want. I don't know if it's the right word that I don't want to expose that to another situation where we can start working, because we have to respect the process and I don't foresee selecting 2 members of the community whomever it is.

[50:00] Or apply, or is interested, and selecting them out with tracks in less than I don't know. 2 weeks to promote, to addvertise people in equitable manner that people can apply or can express interest, and then carefully, you know, selecting them and respectfully handling that process. So I'm a little bit troubled with that, because I think we need to look for, you know, coming up with a legitimate process. So then you know, whatever we come out, whatever comes out of this work, troupe is also legitimate legitimate in the eyes of the people that we represent. So that's my fear. Thank you, Milan. And then yes, Sam. Yeah, I I hear. So it adds concern and so much sharing and idea.

[51:00] I'm thinking about. I mean there a lot of organizations that work for some people in our community that we could reach out to and ask them to. Maybe offer some members of their community, so that we make sure that we're listening to this impacted communities. The, thing I wanted to propose for tonight, maybe for deciding. Could we go down the list and say, our 2 panelists enough for this for this work group? How many community members and just go down the list and see who wants only one community members who wants to and then decide that way. Would that be a possibility to have a motion to go down the list of suggested people by Farrah to for us to agree on a number one by one?

[52:05] And and to get this process going so that we can go to the next point of the agenda. Yeah. So the standing motion is to community members, to panelists, to police officer representatives from the police department and to legal representatives. I would like to. I would like to make a motion that we don't vote on the group itself as a whole group. But to go to vote for each category offered by fair. And propose, like for the community members. We don't know if we want one or 2 or 3, you know. Can we vote on? We're gonna have 2 panelists with all vote for the 2 panelists. Do we want one panelists? Raise your hand if you want one, raise your hand. If you want to have a number of police, you know one or 2, or you know, are abstained.

[53:02] And could we just do it like categories by category, so that we are clear on what we are voting on. And so if you have input on changing that number now, yeah, now, we could certainly do it that way. I think, to our earlier points. The concern is the proportion of members, and so, if we do start going down the line, we might end up with a so- so yeah, let's get Sam in here, and then we'll circle back. Then yes, Sam. Okay. Yeah, yeah, I think it might help to center part of the mostivation for this rewrite right, which is the upcoming item on the agenda as well, is also motivated by something similar, which is the profound failure of city council in upholding the current like iteration of the oversight panel, and the immense discipline this has been to the entire community and the community representatives who were chosen 2 select members for this panel.

[54:00] In the first place. So if the purpose of this is to write those wrongs and bring the community's trust back into the fold, I think it's really important to bring those same community members involved into the drafting of this ordinance, right and that means the end of lacyp and all central who are the 2 groups that were completely like just overridden, potentially, illegally by the city. So I think that that's my 2 cents. I don't think we should have a selection, or like a rewrite committee that's like half police slash City. Staff and half community member, slash panel. Because why does it need to be such like a tug of war between 2 sides that have been on opposite sides of this issue? We are the panel overseeing this rewrite. I think as many of us should be on it as are available, and we should include the end of a Cp.

[55:01] And ellcentro, and any discussion about like other community groups. I'm open to, but I think those are the 2 key stakeholders I'd like to see in. Okay, so circling back on this question from Farah. So we need a working group of less than. What we have right now is a proposal of 2 community members to panelists, to representatives from the police department and to legal representatives, one from the city, but one potentially being independent. We also have a suggestion from Milan to go category by category and vote on a number to serve on the committee. But back to Zoom's Point, I think the composition is the question here. The proportion of members. And so I mean, that's my I feel like that's the spirit of the vote right now is not so much.

[56:06] If we go one by one, I feel like we're going to circle back on this question. Is, what's the right proportion of of constituencies in that group? So that was my thinking. But do we? Yeah. Jason. It seems to me that we could do some sort of a vote preliminarily, and then at the end, once we look at the composition, we can say, should we change this at all and go from there? And that is what we have. So we have. We have a suggestion here. Y'all 2 panelists to pop to Bpd to legal representatives. Do we wanna adjust those numbers? Right? That's the discussion. Yes, Sam.

[57:00] There it is! Yeah, let me just put a counter propose on the table one Bpd, one legal representative from the city at least 2 community members, right? Naacp, and I'll send up to, however, many remaining Pop members slash community members to round. Sorry, Sam, when you say to round it out, to round it up to the 10. Yes, up to 10. Clarifying. Yeah. I agree with Sam. I have one other question, Daniel. Is there any? And I guess this would be for Flora. Is there any concern in terms of that number being Yup to be an odd number 2, avoid ties. No cause. It's not really gonna be like a formal group. There's not gonna be votes or anything. It's really about logistics and schedules and being able to get the work done. It's just easier when it's. It's a smaller group. Okay. And then, you know, obviously, if more than 2 more than 2 want to, more than 2 panel members want to want to participate, then it'll always be a public meeting right?

[58:09] And so that has its own set of challenges that we've discussed in other meetings. And so, but the in my perspective. The panel members, who aren't necessarily on the work group will still always be involved, because I will be updating the panel as a whole. Anyway, as we go out throughout the process. So it's not like, you know, the other panel members will be in the dark. It's it just doesn't work that way. Good. Milan, then Hadassah. Okay, I just have a question for Sam like you didn't mention the independent legal counsel. Is that something that you don't want, or that you? No, I don't have any opposition to that. But it. Okay, thank you. And then I go ahead.

[59:00] I just hope they're more independent than the independent legal counsel the city found for Lisa's complaint. I think that would be for us to decide with. The Independent Council is right, then the city, because obviously that doesn't work. And so I agree with Sam proposal. If we can have an independent legal counsel that the panel selects and the city pays for. Dotsa Thanks, Daniel. I just kind of wanted to remind people or it's kind of for me a reminder like the work that we're doing is a quick turnaround, and is to update the ordinance that is already in place. And so I really really urge us to make sure that we are choosing people that are in the midst of it, that know what's going on, that aren't going to complicate things.

[60:05] And are going to understand the urgency and have that availability with that urgency, because we're not trying to rewrite everything. You know, we're just trying to improve what we have. So that we can keep keep doing the work. And so, you know, there, there's definitely gonna be a time for all of community in any community to give input and to give insight. But if we really want this turnaround and works to be done quickly and efficiently, then I think it's best to focus on people that are familiar with what we're doing and go from there instead of trying to re-jeate people and reinvent the wheel. Those are me, my thoughts! If I'm in, I have to say, you know, as like from the consultants side, I have to agree with Hadassah. This is not meant to replicate the committee that Madeline was on that created the oversight panel.

[61:01] This this is not it, this is, you know. We're we're 3 years in. We see some gaps, and we need to update it. And so this really isn't the same thing, type of link and there, you know, there will be opportunities for community input but it's not. I don't want there to be like a drawing of a comparison, because you guys already did the heavy lift. This is really to fix the gaps that that group, after speaking to them, anticipated what happened. They knew that we were gonna be here and need to make changes. And so we're just here to make those changes with a group to push it through and see where the gaps are. And so the other thing that is really important is having people on the work group that understand the nuances of the work. Because what's happening is that you have a group that created the panel very well intentioned. But there are gaps in actually implementation of the work.

[62:01] So people who are actually have been immersed in the work are in a better position to provide feedback on the panel. 3 years later, because you're in it right, and you have more intimate knowledge of it. And so I do think in your, in in your recommendation to who you select to be on it, it's more helpful to have at this stage, at this stage of like looking back and seeing like okay, we know they were well, intentioned when they met this but this did not happen in reality are people who are already really immersed in the work, and it's not in an exclusion. It's just that it's just an area of understanding to help understand what the implications are of the language in the ordinance, like in the true application of it. Thanks, Sarah. I'm gonna make a quick note on time here. I think we should take a break within the next 5 to 10 min. But just noting that in case anyone's looking for a bathroom break soon, we will take a break in the next 5 to 10 min.

[63:08] Nimon I think, yeah, I I wanna be careful about expediency. I think that obviously there has been some major issues with the ordinance, and we wanna make sure that they don't happen again, at least to not to that extent. They will be things left. But I I would prefer to make sure that we take the time to write an ordinance. That's gonna work for this panel and for the community cheese that we are serving, and also. I just lost my point. I I also wanna make sure that I understand that the people who have been on this panel have more experience than I do. But I'll also feel like some of us on this panel are bringing new perspective that need to be addressed, and a new look and a fresh look at the ordinance as it's written.

[64:12] And so I value the experience and the wisdom of the people who have been on the panel, but also really value new fresh look on it. So those are my 2 points on that. I just I just want us to be extra careful and bring in other people that we need to make sure that we are covering everything that we need to be, because alright thank you. Sam then Jason, then. So we're going to talk about how we're potentially going to suspend all the panel work until this ordinance is revised. So this revision is not just like a low stakes. Tweaking around the margin, fixing some punctuation.

[65:03] This is about fixing the structural issues that got us here. In the first place, and the things that allowed the city council to act the way they did, and in order to regain the community's trust, I think this has to involve the community and, like as others have been saying that can just be more transparent like it doesn't need to happen behind closed doors, I think this would be a stronger process with more community involvement in public meetings in lieu of the regular panel meetings like this needs to be a space for the community to figure out what went wrong and to talk about. How it can go forward! Jason. Okay, Sam raises a very good point. I was gonna move. The question suspended to debate and move forward. But I'm curious, and I think there's an answer to this that might allow us to vote. The public is still going to be involved, whether they're on the panel or on this committee panel thing or not, they can still communicate with that group.

[66:07] They can still make recommendations somewhere, right? Yes, correct. So reiterating with fair presented to us, she is scheduling specifically opportunities for the community to engage in person on this conference, and to review and give us feedback over a period of time to send us that feedback at their own leisure after reviewing proposed the proposed revisions as well and so there isn't. There's never at any time been any suggestion of cutting the community out of this. It's how to effectively engage the community and engage the community in an equitable way. To make sure we can get this done on a timeline, because, you know, if we, if we don't handle this right, the ordinance doesn't get changed right. So there is no the ordinance is here, the ordinance is done, the ordinance is law.

[67:00] We have an opportunity here. To revise it, to make it better to improve it for our community. And so what we're charged with is figuring out an effective process that will make that happen in a timeline that doesn't lose us. This opportunity to to make this work better. And so yes. So yeah, fair has laid out that plan across several meetings for us about how the community would will be engaged in this process and critically engaged in this process. And then I would say, This committee is not going to make the decision on the law. That's gonna happen by the Council, right? Okay. The working group is just facilitating the work paper pushers. That. Yeah, they're facilitating the work. They are not the act. They are not the deciding committee on this work. Okay, well, in that case, then I moved the question. I moved to suspend, debate, and vote on whatever that most recent version is.

[68:05] Thank you, Jason. Let's get Hadassah, and let's just make since Hadassah did her hand. I'm gonna pass it to you, Hadassah, and then I'm gonna pass it back to you, Sam, to reiterate the composition that you expressed earlier. Sorry I forgot what that hand was about, ignore. Of course. Okay, real. Yeah. Tassa, will you seed your time to Madeline, then is that what, Madeline? Go ahead. Alright. Thank you. I just want to stress. I during the time that we were working initially for the 2 years we spent on this one of the things that was critical and and we stressed throughout was make gaining and maintaining the trust of the community. I say, that still remains, and we don't get a chance to mess up to, not to get this wrong and think that the community we need to maintain the trust of the community.

[69:09] And it's critical that they see themselves represented. And I agree with Sam. I think the recommendation that he made, would it suffice? To make it, to accomplish that, and it would accomplish somewhat of that concern for me. Thank you. Thanks, Madeline Hadassah. Did you remember? Is that a memory hand? I did. I did just yeah, just because Madeline, mentioning so implementation team, it was 2 years for them to write the original ordinance we don't have that kind of time. Y'all we we don't, and you know, if we're if we're waiting 2 years for an ordinance update, then I think that's that's too long. And, as we know 2 years later, they can come back and say, Hey, we didn't like what you wrote, and so no ordinance is gonna be perfect, is my feeling.

[70:09] And I think that we need to make sure that we are covering the gaps, and in the future always having some sort of eyes and constant revision on this process, that it is not just a one-time thing. This is a this is filling the gaps now and next year we're going to review it again and make sure we fill any other gaps. It should be an ongoing living process and this is just the first step of that. So with that, I want to second Sam's recommendation and go from there. Thank you, Hadassah, and so with a second Sam, would you list out the numbers for us? Alright. So the key thing was keeping the community groups involved. So a representative from the Naacp, a representative from El Central, and one member from the Pd.

[71:05] One memory from the city and 2 panel members right? Since these are just behind the scenes. So that makes 6, and possibly an independent attorney, or mylene suggestion. If one can be found, so either 6 or 7. Thanks, Sam, and since we're getting close to the vote, I'll ask you, could you read that one more time for us to make sure we all got it crystal clear. Alright. So it's 2 community group members, 2 pop members, one pd. One city and one independent attorney. And Sam, do you wanna tie those 2 community representatives to the Naacp and Ami Stad? Is, is that your motion? Yes. Okay, so panelists, member of the Naacp, member of Representative from Boulder Police Department, representative from the city.

[72:09] 2 members of Pop, and then an independent attorney, for example, 6. That's the motion in second. Yeah. Oh, yup! So reopening for discussion. Shiko. Yeah. No, no, no, I was just gonna say, we move on. We vote on this? Oh, okay. Thanks. Yeah. Pedas. Did you have it? Another discussion, point. Sorry I did just. I know that we have previous panelists that are interested in being on this. So they would be communic members, which means, if we are specifically selecting N double Acp and on a stop that would exclude those previous panelists. So just kind of wanted to close that to the team and say, you know, how how do we wanna handle that? Do we wanna incorporate more numbers for that? Or where are we on? There?

[73:00] I think maybe if we wanted to raise up Martha Wilson in particular, had begun leading the charge on community engagement related to Aing, the ordinance mark. Of course, served on the panel. I should mention resigned L last year, and so I know a very least. Martha was interested in being a part of this working group in particular, focused on community engagement. So, raising Martha into that too. But yes, to question panelists and we are at the 10 min mark. So here's what we're gonna do. We have a number. We have. We have a solid motion. This is how it works at all right. Democracy. It's messy, but we get there. Let's take a 5 min human break and meet back here at 7, 54. That that was not recap of where we were.

[74:02] We're looking at emotion to assign the number of members to a working group. I want to clarify. This is not a committee of this panel. It is, and it's not an official capacity group to be taking votes on the ordinances, a working group to work with Farrah, our consultant on making revisions to the current ordinance, and so the current proposal is that this group would be composed of one member representing the Boulder police department, one member representing the city, 2 members of this panel, one independent attorney. And then 2 community members. And this motion is tied that one of those community members would be a representative of the Naacp and another of those community members would be a representative amount of ammunition which would be a total of Us.

[75:01] We had the number wrong total of 7, for this working committee that we're trying to keep under 10 before we left for the break we were discussing whether or not those 2 community seats should be held for representatives of Naacp and and we were bringing up that there are former panel members who were interested in participating in this process as those community representatives. And yes, Sadassi, you were next up with your hand. Thing. Yes, sorry and just, I will add, like, I agree. I would have the preference for having Naacp and people because they've been helping us but it does concern me to tie some thing to a group that at this point has a committed and said that they're available, or is you know what I mean like we can say that's what we want, and then we have to wait another month to vote because they weren't available or can't do it. And so I think, saying to plus community members leaves it open for specific groups that we wanna work with that we have preference for additionally, for previous panelists.

[76:15] Why would it take an extended amount of time? Hadassah? They? You said they. They haven't said that they would, or they, but they haven't said that they won't right. Right? Right? Yeah. I'm just. I don't know I don't wanna make assumptions, you know, like I don't want to assume and say, this is who we're committing to to this work. And then there're not be anybody available just yet it's possible that it's that it works out great. And they have somebody and then awesome. Then there's no problem. But what if? What if there isn't? You know that that's my only concern with saying it's specifically these groups. Well, yeah, I would be willing to come up with a and double-a-cp.

[77:03] Okay. Within the next 42 on that 42. It's 48. What? Okay. 88, 72 h. Awesome. Awesome. Yeah, if you think that my concerns aren't concerning, then let's go forward. Huh? Oh, I'm just saying well, I'll make sure that's handled. Thank you, madam. So it that, we'll take care of it. Thank you. Jason, yeah, I see the hand. Point of order. I think that we have a motion to vote. We? It's been seconded at least by Victor, and we've heard the question. It's just time to vote. There's no more. No more discussion. No Jason, the way this panel is run is at anytime someone wants to discuss. Ask a question, make feedback. We do make time for it before the vote. Okay, I appreciate the clarification and different panels.

[78:02] Yeah. Different rules. Yeah, yeah, that's how we run. Takes a while. But that's how we run Milan. I'll be brief. I like the idea of head of saying 2 plus community members. I think that would if we could decide as we go, as we see, interest rates from the community. How many members from the community we are inviting. I think that would be good. Sorry. So you're suggesting we would. So ahead. Would say, 2 plus community members with an option to bring in former panel members as community members and potentially other organisation members from other organizations who are impacted. By police misconduct, for example, or by representing communities who are impacted by police missconduct so that we can. Make sure that the people who need representation have a presentation.

[79:06] You give us some option. So 2 pluses open-ended, and so I guess. Up to 10 up to 10. Let's maybe cap it. Even so, I'm wondering if maybe we wanna touch briefly on the process. So to point about the process of getting these people seated by. You know, right? So our goal is to start meeting next week right? This working group we got a week to pull folks together, and so I think, leaving that open to. So that would be potentially sorry. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. So 5 community members, 2 plus means, we've left. We were looking for 5 community members in the next week to serve. I will say one thing I like about identifying the naac, and army is that puts us with a direct action to reach out to them immediately and seek representatives.

[80:02] The more we open this process, the more time we have to take the to. To make sure I forgot who mentioned it, but I think we might even email on like the process of application or other organizations. So I think there's we got 2 points here. We got the practical side of time, and in in our principled ideology we got to bring those together somewhere in a proposal. And so I'm not a band of 2 plus. Personally, I think we got to put a number on it. Alright, but I'm also thinking of, you know, organizations like Outboulder, or places like that. Got it? Yeah, and actually, maybe it's helpful. It would be worth reaching out to them as well. I'm also speaking from an experience I haven't shared. So, having led the outrach to nonprofit organizations for the Selection Committee, that was a 3 month process, and we only heard back from a handful of organizations at the end of that.

[81:00] And so so that's that's kind of that's what's informing my opinion as well. I should mention. Cause everybody's busy. And this is a huge commitment. This is a weekly commitment that we're asking of folks as well. So we have to acknowledge that I think. Yeah hadassah. I think I will say I'm okay with select what's saying? N, O. Cp. And all central as long as they're still room to add other community members. As you know it like we said, if Martha is interested, I think that she would be a a key voice in that. So, you know, just to have room so that it's not. Those 2 are filled by those organizations, and we can't include anyone else. Maybe we suggest that we just we we could adjust one of these seats is held for a formal panel member.

[82:02] We could just assign. We could just hold a seat for a former panelist if we wanted. I don't know. Yeah, Sam. Then, fully, Don. That's what I was gonna propose that we could have have a seat for N. Ocp. And this is as you were saying, Addassah, like reserved for them. But if they aren't available to take it, then we'd reconsider right? Potentially find someone else, one C for N double acp, one for a formal panel. Member. That sounds fine to me, bringing it up to 8 people. Okay, so reiterating it, then. So one representative from Bbt, oh, sorry. Sorry. Sorry your hand went down. I lost you. Sorry about that. Yeah.

[83:00] I just think that we're we're overcomplicating this. It's a work group. We need 6 or 7 people. And Mike problem with, if we say sometime, is that I think there's super committed to the work, and I trust that they're gonna find a way to, you know, have someone participate. Also the but like that, and I trust what Martin just said, my concern will be okay. This open one State, and who gets to choose that seat? Who, among all the you know, former panelists is gonna use that face. Why this panelists, not this other one. And then that's how we lose. How legitimate this work can get can be. I think we need to simplify it. I think 2, one that's great, and I will propose we vote on that. I think that the next point on the agenda that's very important for us to cover, and I think the work group is that it's a work group, and we all understood that I also trust that whoever is on that group, it's gonna keep us informed and you know updated and our

[84:09] voice are going to be heard. So I think we need to simplify this. We don't have a lot of time to work on this, and we need to act quickly, especially if you said you want to start working next week like that, you know. No, and and I will be troubled if you know who is going to choose that one person. You know. So yeah. And so, and so clarifying. So does that mean? That you are? You're saying? Then we stick to to community members. First pick goes to Naacp and all Central Navy Office side. 2 members of Pop, a representative from Vpd. A representative from the city and independent attorney attorney, and we keep it at that 7. Yeah. That's that's your proposal.

[85:00] Yeah. Okay. Thank you. So Pamela, that's the standing motion to community seats. We would get in double Acp and I'll send her on the side first. Pick on those seats. First option to use those seats. 2 members of Pop, one member of the Boulder police department, one from Representative from the city, and an independent attorney. Okay, let's start that as a new motion. Can I get a second for that? Proposal. Hmm! Second, yes. Thank you, Madeline. Panelists, any final questions feedback before the panel votes on this. Okay, dokeys. Is is this an either, or are we?

[86:05] Cause for me. For me it's a no, it's a say, we need to include a space for a previous panelists. The details. And other thoughts. But what if this is? May be out in West Field? What if? But I don't hope not. What if previous panel members are members of one of the 2 organizms of the 2? Nonprofit organizations. Yeah, I mean, that's a pass. Very important to be involved in. Yeah, that's a possibility. But what if they're not? Well, I mean what that? Yeah, the Pamela.

[87:03] Yeah, cause, I mean, specifically like, Martha has done a lot of the legwork and starting to get this ordinance community input, and I don't. I mean, I know that she's like in the Facebook group. But okay, yeah, I don't know if we want. If if she's gonna be the one selected or how they do that, selections process, we can just be like mar figure. And then the Bacp. You're also previous panelists here. It, or you know how we wanna how how we wanna do it. No, I mean I mean, if that person is of either organization, they would have the ability to have in was what I had in mind. Yeah. But that's just a thought. Yeah. Chico. I'll I'll second address is view that, having a previous panel is important to this work, because they bring in that institution the knowledge that other outside us wouldn't know.

[88:06] So I'll sit on that. Yes, Sam. It sounds like when people are saying previous panelists. They're really thinking, Martha, and I don't think it's on democratic to just save a steeper, Martha. And that would resolve solidods like issue with selecting this person like, we can just select it here. It's for Martha, and that would bring us up to 8 people and someone other than Martha and. I would be happy with that right. Thank you. Sorry, Madeline, can you see that again? You broke up? No, I just said, same here. Thank you. Yeah. Solidar. Yup. I will, you know, would they want to get this done?

[89:03] But I do want to say that new panelists we don't know. Former families necessarily, and for me, is challenging, because if you already have names in mind, and we should have out there. In favor of transportation like this is the person that I have in mind. That's for all these, and but that would be great. But then, don't, I don't really appreciate when we're having this conversation, when we already had something in mind to get towards to, you know, I as a new panelist, I'm thinking. Okay. Well, then, you know, how is this thing presented? And it troubles me a little bit so. But I want to move things along so just wanted to. Mentioned. That's my problem. Thanks a lot.

[90:02] So at this point. Now we were at the suggestion of what? See for Martha Wilson to community seats that we would give the Naacp and the side first pick of 2 members of this panel a representative from Bpd. A representative from city and an independent attorney. I'm gonna go and make that motion based on where we're at. Is there a second for that? Seconded. Sam thing you for the second panelists any final questions, feedback comments. Okay. In that case we'll do this by a show of hands. Then I show of fans to to approve this motion. One seat for Martha Wilson, 2 seats for members of the community, that we will give into a Cpn. All central, an army stad, first pickup, 2 members of the panel her representative from VPN. Representative from the city and it an independent attorney, all in favor of that composition of the working panel.

[91:10] Please show hands. Please hold those 2, so I so Cory, can get a full count for the minutes. Victor, were you a hand? Just double checking? Thank you. Okay. That's our composition of our panel, Sarah and Hadassah, I'm gonna ask this question to you both directly. First, do we wanna try and tackle right now how we select members of Pop City, Vpd. Independent attorney. What do we think? And I'm looking at the time. It's 8 16. We have the rest of the agenda to get to.

[92:07] The other thought is panel. You could authorize. Hadassah, and I, to act as a subcommittee to reach out to Naacp on the side Will's Martha, and to reach out to all of you to seek your interest on surving on the panel, and then we could pull the working to group together that way. So that's something to consider, as well knowing the composition. You could authorize Hadassah and I to work with Farrah to fill each of these seats. Yeah, I see, Madeline. I see your hand, and then Shiko. Danielle for just for the sec. Of time. I think we. I'll go with your suggestion. We move along. We got a lot of issues, discuss. Thank you, Chico, so I'll go ahead and make the motion. I'm gonna I can make this motion I'll make the motion to authorize the co-chairs of the panel to work with our consultant Sarah to fill the seats of this working group.

[93:07] Chico. Do you want a second that? I will! Hi! I'll check on that. Hey? Thank you, Madeline. Thank you. Chico. Panelists, hands in the air, all in favor for that motion. Please hold them so. Cory can count for the minutes. And actually, Cory, let us know when we can put our hands down. Okay. You're good. Thank you so much, Cory. Thank you all. Farah! Thank you for your patience, genuinely. Thank you all. I know how frustrating these these kinds of decisions can be, and how it can drive. I know it's late, and at the same time I hope we also feel confident that we made a group decision and and at the end of the day we got there, so pain you and yes, we do have a very busy rest of our Agenda to go. Here.

[94:02] So I gotta find the agenda, because it's buried in tabs. Now! Boom. Okay? So on the item, 7 flow at long last, we're gonna turn this over to you to get the intern independent monitors, police report. Cory, can you allow me to share my screen? Please? I'm here this evening on behalf of the Oir group, which is serving as the interim Independent Police Monitor with me is Michael Junaka, principal and founder of Oir Group, and Teresa, Magula, also a member of the Oir Group, and Teresa is going to be reporting on 2 of the cases we're going to be reporting on tonight.

[95:12] Okay. So I just wanted to report on the panel's work in the last month. If this is information on the case, reviews that it conducted the panel conducted 3 full case file reviews in April. There is one case review that it completed and is pending department Disposition. There are 12 cases, the panel previously voted to review, that are awaiting case reviews to case reviews are scheduled, 5 need to be scheduled, and 5 are compending. The completion of the departments. Investigation.

[96:05] The next part of the presentation involves cases that the panel reviewed and that the department closed in April, and the first 2 cases were facilitated by Teresa Maglea, Aggula and she's going to handle the first 2. Yeah, thank, you, I'm Teresa Mugula. I have not met many of you. I was not present at the last meeting, which was the first meeting for many of you, so thank you for joining the panel. Thank you for your commitment to this work, which I'm clearly since we have dedicated our career to it and and Mike and I believe is essential and very important on so we acknowledge your commitment as well, we had several pieces of which had been panel's review 2 of

[97:01] them occurred under in the timeframe when I was assisting flow, and one of them is this, that we see before us here it is case 0 3, 6, essentially what occurred is that the complainant called Bpd to report that her Boyfriend had taken Pills. She was concerned, and wanted a welfare. Check the complaint. However, once officers, reside at residence, I refuse to allow officers to enter, and actually proceed and conduct that welfare, chat. She was removed from the apartment, so that officers could complete the welfare check as well as paramedics. Became argumentative. And she was handcufficient. The allegations you see listed here were against 40'clock officers who responded, the panel after it's review, recommended that officers 1, 2, and 3 be exonerated for their general order. 2 2.

[98:12] 5, which is the use of force, and that the allegation against officer 4. Be not sustained officer, for was had an allegation of being rude and discouraged. The department agreed with those determinations. That is, where the keep landed as well. Yeah. This next case was a rather complicated one. It is 0 3. 7 involves the same landlord and tenant dispute that occurred over the course of several days. In the particular instance, incidence, where the where the department was alleged misconduct. The completed first alleged, the officers issue incorrect citation, and then the second again alleged that officers actually did not issue a citation.

[99:08] In that case, and that one officer was discourteous. We had allegations related to. Yeah, appropriateness of the citations that were issued, as well as one with respect for others. In this case the annual recommended that officers one and for the exonerated for their participation, and that the remaining officers have a finding of not sustainable, and the for their particular participation in this incident the rationale was that there was insufficient evidence to come to a complete. The Department does not agree with those and determine that all officers should be executed or potential allegations.

[100:08] The single sustained allegation was against the officer who was alleged of being discourteous, and that again was sustained by both the panel and the department. Verbal counseling was issued to that particular officer. Thank you, Teresa. Okay, back to you, flow. Theresa took over from me when I was gone out of the country in the last half of December. Thank you, and continues to assist on an ongoing basis. This third case that the department closed in close since our last, since the panel's last meeting is 0 3, one of 22, and this complaints stem from a divorce and custody battle between a mother and a father and the complainants purported violation of a permanent civil court, order, protection, which restrains him, with some exceptions, from contacting his sons.

[101:02] The mother, after receiving the permanent civil order contact, the police gave gave Officer one. The League relevant legal documents and asked the police to enforce the order and officer one went with Sergeant to the father's aggress and found one of the 2 sons there, and spoke with him for about 45 min in a his bedroom and tried to tell him what was going on, and asked him what was going on. At 1 point he asked to see the son's phone and looked at it. That showed impermissible contact between the father and son. But given the situation and the situation at the home that officers did not force the son went, and the other son, who was at school to go to the mom's home.

[102:01] He subsequently provided that at subsequently a detective officer 2 was assigned. This case obtained an arrest, warrant, and arrested the father, or violating the order of protection. The father filed a complaint is asserting that the officer, one improperly spoke with sign and looked at his phone and spoke to it, and that the arresting officer detective improperly. Used that evidence to arrest him. The panel recommended that all the that, with respect to Officer 2, the way he spoke to the sign would that should be exonerated. Judo did not find that the office to coerce the sign to provide the phone. But Colorado law specifies, and this is reinforced in department policy that an officer has to make sure during a police contact that an individual knows that he or she doesn't have to provide a an item or consent to a search, and that that was not done in the panel recommended that

[103:16] that be sustained with supervisory counseling, and with respect to the detective, they recommended that the allegation be not sustained. The apartment. The department agreed, and the chief agreed, and the officer one has received verbal counseling at the department executive order has received verbal counseling at the department exonerated off. And finally, just some case data. During the month of April the Monitor classified 2 cases as Miss Conduct cases one case is serious misconduct, and one case is a community importy. Just to give you a sense of what the one of the one of the main responsibilities of the Monitor is to classify and route complaints.

[104:06] Another responsibility is to actively observe the investation that the Department conducts as it goes on, and that includes having the right to observe the departments, interviews with officers and other witnesses. The Oir group has tried to attend every single one of those interviews, and in April we observed 14 interviews. Another responsibility of the Monitor is before the Department can close the case. Either before it goes to the panel or before the panel are before the department closes it. If the panel is chosen not to review it. The Monitor has to deem the investigation thorough on complete, and in April I deemed the monitor Dean thorough and complete for department investigations. At the end of last month the Monitor, panel docket stood at 19, including those pending department.

[105:06] Disposition that completes the monitors. Report. Thanks, slow. There we go. Thanks. Okay. Moving along. Okay, so hey, I mean, just a second to get any members of the public we're watching caught up on our next agenda item. So in light of City Council's decision last week around room roving Lisa from the panel and I sent a memo to the panel at large, notifying the panel of our intent to put forward a motion about suspending panel business

[106:09] until we've revised the ordinance. And so what I wanna acknowledge is the some of the intent and the feeling, and why we're opening this space now to have this discussion. Of course, and I do not have the power to suspend panel business. We had no time attempted to suspend panel business. This is a motion we we are putting forward as members of this panel to discuss and have a conversation around. And I, I specifically wanna note that the reason. The reason we rose. This was in particular in light of Lisa's resignation is that we were hearing from you all intent and concern about leaving the panel, feeling so discouraged that that you are ready to suspend panel work by leaving the panel

[107:03] and so we wanted to create space. We wanted to hold this panel together long enough to have this discussion together. Long enough for us to voice our concerns and hopefully find a path forward and I wanna repeat, just some of the things we for the public. Just so. The public knows what we specifically said to the panel that this, not this motion, is being offered in recognition that you know over the last year, you know, and before many of our current panelists were even on board. But for a while. Now this panel of divers people has lost its competence in conducting police oversight safely, legally, effectively, and with the trust of our community, and and that significant revisions to the ordinance are required to rectify that issue the motion is also being offered as a bridge to avoid the possibility of this panel's dissolution, and to stand for the continued representation of marginalized people and marginalized voices in the work.

[108:02] When we, when we can do it safely and empowered as marginalized people. And it's also offered to recognize the extremity of this situation and the need for us to take bold and courageous actions to decide how we move forward in this work. You know I've I've been asking if this has happened before if there's another oversight board, this panel could look to where where a panelists had been removed for anything other than misconduct, and and no one's had an existence from me, we're in an unprecedented situation, least of which is that a member of the panel was moved because of their their critical viewpoints of police, and not for misconduct. And was not removed by this might was not recommended for removal by this panel body. So it's an unprecedented moment. I know we also all feel strongly about this, and I.

[109:06] I wanna be clear about my intent. And I'm gonna hand it over to Hadassah. I wanna be clear my intent in bringing this forward is is to figure out how we hold this group. A diverse people together to continue doing this work. I think we have to find a common cause, a common way forward to keep the work going. And so with that, I'm gonna hand it over to. Thank you, Danielle. Now try to keep this quick. I think, for me. This this feeling comes from, as Daniel said, and trying to keep us together, but even more so if. This as far as I know, I'm a rules person. I'm a compliance person. You guys know, that's my jam. As far as I can see, the Selection Committee followed the rules of the Ordinance.

[110:09] The ordinance was very clear about what we do about how it is done. That was exactly followed to a T, and if there are questions and doubting that in Sekting, guessing that, and what I kept hearing repeatedly by city council when they chose to vote, yes, on this was was questioning the ordinance, and and repeatedly they were like I just wish the ordinance was fixed, and in an effort to avoid a large scale walk out what we would like, what we are proposing instead, is sitting in until this work is done, and so that is, that is where we are that is that is the the feeling and the sentiment that we that we have. And we would just, you know, have this space open for anybody who has any thoughts. I see your hand, Shiko.

[111:00] Thanks, awesome and really quick, just really quick. I want to interject. We did ask Erin to be here tonight to answer any answer legal questions she can answer in a public venue of course there may be questions we'd rather that she needs to deliver to us through a memo later or you know if we want to call Aaron for advice. But we did want to have someone from the city attorney's office here about the legality of how and how we can suspend panel operations. One thing we want to know is that the ordinance, of course, designates work for the Monitor's office, that we cannot suspend so the monitors work would continue in accordance with the current ordinance, and there are procedural questions about how we would suspend work. As a panel, or ask for a as Aaron may explain later, a moratorium on certain parts of the panel's work. With that yet, Chico, your hand.

[112:00] So I'm gonna talk about 3 things that concern me, and which at the moment. Would drive my decision not to and I emphasize not to support any suspension of the panel's affairs. And I'll start the first being that I think there has to be a deeper conversation or discussion about the pros and cons of suspending the work we do. I haven't seen that deep analysis done. That's the first one, the second viewpoint is that our work is not perfect.

[113:00] And it's hard to meet or stakeholder aspirations with that said I would rather have half a half glass full than nothing. Some oversight is better than nothing. That's the second. The third viewpoint is that I know we are talking about. Reviewing the audiences, and they talk about, I think Farra mentioned that one of the cables, or one of the things that is not in our control is, how are we going to determine the the time in terms of the community feedback, so in short, even if we say we suspend there is a suspension. We don't know when Ostake or does concerns are gonna be addressed.

[114:02] If they ever be addressed. So, in my view, I think suspension does more harm than good, and I would risk my case until somebody convinces me otherwise. Thank you. Chico panelists. Other thoughts. Sorry I was muted. It's okay. I was just gonna say, one more thing. The the other part of this is that. The the point of removal. What a lot of Council members were saying was, oh, well, we don't know if you know, this case is gonna go, or whatever case is, gonna go to arbitration. So and it goes through a complaint. We make our recommendations to the police chief.

[115:04] Some of those, maybe, are sustained. They go to arbitration and they don't like the specific counts of panelists that was sitting on that specific case. There was a suggestion that that means that they have now leeway to say, Oh, well, we you know this recommendation was not valid, and that to me, jeopardizes all of the work that we do, and if they're saying we can't except this case, because of the way the Ordinance was written because of the members that are on it. Then, that jeopardizes all of the cases. That was the only. And I guess the question is, do we do we feel it, or do we? You know? Do we chug along and keep going? Knowing that's been put out there by Council.

[116:00] Sam. I see the hand. Yeah, I agree with Hadassah. I think that this is a really necessary step for us to kind of preserve the panel as it is, because there's it's not really a question of whether or not we suspend the work or not. I think the work is going to be disrupted, no matter what, because of counsel, not because of us. Right? The question is whether the panel fragments with half of it quitting, or whether we stick together and say we're going to sit in rather than walk out as Hadassah framed it, and as you're saying, we need to decide if this very significant investment of time will ultimately pay off right like i'm putting my Phd. On, pause to analyze the police's data. But I could very easily do the same thing from outside, right like I could do records, request, and do like it more journalistically, and the only value of doing it from within the panel is the idea that it would be eventually recognized.

[117:00] But if it will just be discredited, as like biased like just post. Hoc. Then what's the point of even putting in the work? So I think we need to address those fundamental issues. And we can't do that in the current way of doing things. So I fully support pausing the work until the ordinance is revised. I also think that it relates to the reason they voted to remove Lisa. In the first place, the Council's experts explanation was that they will remove Lisa so that the panel's work can just like continue as if this were not like a completely political process made up of people from overplaced communities, as if we were just like robotically continue doing like this oversight integrated the way that they want, which is apparently not very critical at all. So I I think we need to send counsel a message, and to that extent this also serves that purpose.

[118:00] So I support. Thank you, Sam, solely. Dot. I see your hand, and then Yamelon! Yeah, I have a question. And maybe I'm not as current in in the information. But you'll have to that. There's a number of members that are considering resignning, and I like. I know that I cannot ask this, but you know, like I don't know who is resigning or who is planning on the sign. And is that true? So that's gonna leave the panel like half way or not? But I feel like a little bit L. Sided by that information which I think is critical to make. This decision, and I know that it sounds terrible to put this in a public meeting that I I don't know. I feel blind side a little bit about with that.

[119:03] I can answer that, Milan, I acknowledge your hand. All go ahead. If that. Okay, thanks. Yeah. So your daughter, I agree. I agree with everything you're saying is that I don't. Don't want to put someone on the spot, because I'm also trying to convince. I'm trying to convince you all to stay right like I'm trying. I'm trying. I want us to find a pathway today where we all cast a vote that says, yes, I am going to continue with this work, and so that's what I'm trying to find. And so I don't want to call anyone out, but I will you know, to acknowledge that Hadassah and I have been in touch with with most of you over the course of the last few months about where you're standing on this issue, and hearing hearing what you're saying acknowledging what we're hearing from you, and that, you know, really it was Thursday evening that Hadassah and I had a a phone. Conversation is saying, we're concerned about the number of people who are telling us they are considering, resigning, or intending to resign and that is, that is, that was a big motivator, for why we put this motion forward.

[120:04] Yeah, yeah, okay. Milan, then Victor. Yeah, I mean, this is pretty emotional thing for me, like I really was very disappointed. And if you don't mind, Daniel, I'd like to read something, because I think that in order for me to express everything, much to say, I have to write it. So would it be okay for me to read something? Yes, I think so. Just keep an eye on the timing a lot. I' not making assumptions about how long it is. Yeah, it's no, it's not. It's not very long. But yeah. I think it's within the 2 min said by the city. Thank you. So I wanna call white supremacy with the last week, when the City Council whitewash the Selection Committee's decision to select and confirm Lisa Swinney Moran, the Selection Committee composed of representatives from 2

[121:06] important organizations of color in our community. The Naacp Boulder County Branch, and I'll centro as my dad as we talked about before as well as representative of the existing panel at the time, and members of the city out of the 3 complaints that were in a report why, is aid atkinson's was the only person of color and the only victim of police misconduct, dismissed outright, while the other 2 were upheld. Let's remember that, Mr. Atkinson's case was pivotal in the creation of this police oversight panel to protect vulnerable people like him. By making this decision, Mister Douglas, the council, or this, recommended rather Mister Daglas, the counsel hired by the city, showed a lack of understanding of the situation in Boulder. A lack of knowledge of the purpose of the panel and the lack of awareness of the pervasiveness of racism and his own work.

[122:02] So, in fact, the code, Mr. Douglas followed blindly, was never written to represent black and brown people queer people, people with disabilities and house people and other marginalized community members. It was month to, and still does, uphold white wealth, and the white supremacist. So how much did I work? Has this council done, and how has he selected, and why? And what about the City Council members who voted to remove Lisa? I think they don't have any biases, since they were very quick to cast their stones. So I just want to say, also, I like Lisa. I'm a new panelist. I didn't know Lisa before sitting on the panel, but after going through a few training sessions and meeting alongside her and other panelists, I want to say I have the utmost respect for her for the question.

[123:00] She asked for the focus she brought to this work. Despite all the villification she was subjected to, and for her intelligence, experience, and perspective, that I don't have, she was bringing something that we really needed. So the decision made last week is also clear disrespect of this police oversight panel. As the panel itself should have had the authority to decide on what to do in this case, and I'll just finish with a James Baldwin quote we'll even an age in which silence is not only criminal but suicidal. For if it take you in the morning there will be coming for me that night. This bill vacation of one of us was an attempt to intimidate us, and the work we are here to do. I, personally am not intimidated, and I support this motion. Yeah, thank, you. Thank you, Melan and Victor. See your hand.

[124:01] Yeah, I would just say, you know, in light of. The potential disruption to the panel with multiple. You know, members quitting and setting us back. You know, months, not just weeks, I think. A small pause to take a few steps back. You know. Make sense if we're, you know, setting us entering a situation where we could be set back, you know, multiple months, just also noting that this is a period of transition with your newer panel members. And we still have a monitor to go through as well. There's still a lot of work to be done, and I think some of that will still continue. Even if we did pause. But again, I would just like to vote in favor of you know. Pausing the work to preserve the panel in in the short term with the focus on the ordinance in the long term. And I'm just gonna have to go off camera just 2 to the time.

[125:05] Thank you, Victor Jason. I see the hand. I wanted to listen to everybody, because I have the sense that I started from a different place than it sounds like everybody else. I don't know if there is a person out there that embodies the antithesis to what we all want to do, but if there is, I tried to put myself in the role of that person and think about what we're deciding right now, and if I were that person I would be laughing with that. The police are not gonna be looked at, and there won't be oversight. They have succeeded, in shutting us down and preventing us from doing our job by taking away one of us.

[126:06] I think that we prove ourselves by doing our work and doing it well, and we'll ship forward. They may. My frustration so far being on this committee for this panel is that I don't ever get to review cases and do case work that's what I wanna do. I wanna review cases and do case work. So, that's where I am. I respect all of you and your points of view, and I do understand. I mean, I know that one of the things that we're talking about here is is not just today, but next year in the year after, in the year after and year after. And I think that's important. But I also think that by us doing our job and doing it well, we'll be showing that to thank you. Thanks Jason, and off. Of one thing you had said to Jason about continuing of oversight, since I don't see any hands, I'm gonna take a quick moment to add just a little color to what's behind this motion first thing to remember this would not impact.

[127:10] The monitors work in oversight, and so we are at we are hybrid oversight system, and so the work of the group would continue to conduct oversight, to work to work on investigations. The Psu in the older police department would continue as well. We'll you know. We would only be looking at a moreatorium on our on our work. The work that's under the panel's jurisdiction, and so the color, I'll add, we raise this briefly in our meeting the co-chairs meeting on Friday with Aaron, and essentially, you know, if we were to continue forward with this motion. We would be talking about, when what business of the panel we would be pausing. We would be putting a moratorium on, and we would ask council.

[128:05] We would request counsel to allow us, Aaron, correct me. If I got this wrong, we would request from councils, start date or terms on when the pause on that work would begin, and and then, when the pause on that work would end, is that correct? Erin. That's correct. Thank you. And so that's kind of the color to this situation as well as if we continue with the motion, recognizing what that what Hadassah and I put forward was very broad that we could have an open discussion eventually, if we were to move forward, with this, motion we would need to Clarify what panel business would be. Paused when that pause would begin, and when that pause would end, and the key thing being that Hadass and I had suggested that any pause, the end of any pause would be triggered by the revisions to the ordinance being being made, and so I'm just inviting that. And now I do see Sams hands. I'm gonna hand it over to you, Sam.

[129:01] Yeah, I wanted to express. Sympathy for what you're saying, Jason, you know, as a data nerd, there's nothing I'd rather be doing than nerding around in the Pd's data and finding out what they're doing. And I can understand you wanting to get in the weeds with the cases. And really dig into the oversight and I think it's a tragedy that we've ended up in a situation like this. But unfortunately, sometimes we just don't have the luxury to be in our little comfort zone right? Sometimes we find ourselves in political fights larger than what our day-to-day work demands, and it's our responsibility to take a step back and think about how our work ties in with a bigger picture. And in this case the sort of role that city council has played in setting us up for failure. I think that going to what you were saying, Daniel, that can you clarify a bit for me?

[130:02] What you meant about having counsel, approve the start and end dates of the stoppage. So we would. So we would send. So they this panel is a legal body body, and there's an exit. The the ordinance, isn't it? Is standing law for what this body needs to do, which is primarily the review of these cases, and so to to pause the work, we would need to send a request to counsel that the panel for the for the panel to put a moratorium or a pause on its existing work. And so I think, primarily, that's our committee work and that's Kate reviews. And so, because, of course, we do want to continue the ordinance work. And so that would be I at least think we would still want to go through that legal process to maintain credibility as we move forward. And so and so that is the legal route ahead of us of how we can do this as a legal body, and acknowledging to Jason I hear what you're saying, because you know, for the last 2 years I came here you review cases, and I

[131:16] that's been less than 30% of my work since I've been on this panel. You know we wrote the Bylaws. We got into you know, conflicts with our community conflicts with city council. This conflict. I'm exhausted. Y'all. It took us what an hour and 15 min to decide what a working group would be. That's not case. Reviews. It's it's not the core work of oversight. And so this you know, I think the balance here is that we're in a situation where this work pauses, and one of 2 ways, one, the panel walks, or to we sit in and try to try to find a way to gather forward and my my

[132:03] imminent fear is that if I walk away from this work, or I allow myself to be removed from this work, it's who I'm replaced with, and I'm trying my best to represent my viewpoints and experiences is a queer, person, and I think if diverse people walk away from this process diverse people won't walk towards it again, and I fear for giving up these seats, and so, if my option is the panel walks or the panel suspends business, my vote is gonna be for suspending this my vote is gonna be for sitting in and holding these seats for the diverse folks who are still here, and that's just that's just my thought. Yes, Sterling, I see the hand. Yeah, so this, as a question that may be, Aaron can answer best.

[133:00] What happened to the cases that you guys have already agreed to review. If you do vote to pause like how like and how do you feel that would affect the obligation to the community to review the cases? Yeah, I can answer that. Daniel. If that's all right. So what we had talked about is that the panel could say when or make a recommendation, like we have cases in work, we need to wrap up. So we would like to go on pause as of a date. Certain, and I think that's a discussion for them. The panel to figure out if that would make sense. If that's a direction you're looking at, you know what date would work for all of you, and your work. Thanks. Aaron. And so that was something we had kind of brushed on. Sterling was that we might go ahead and complete the cases complete.

[134:00] The review of cases that we've already approved, but we might consider that we wouldn't take on any new cases until the new ordinance was in place was one of the recommendations. So we we can have that discussion. Is that a new hand or an old hand? You can't think. Yeah, I appreciate your emotional words on this, Daniel. I agree almost entirely with what you said, except for one key point, which is, I don't see how the city council that got us into this situation can make a decision about whether or not we should continue whether or not we how can we get permission to sit in from the place or sitting in that's not Right. Yeah. a sit-in. We need to just do it. I we we need to just stop reviewing cases and stop our panel business until council looks. This situation in the eye, and realizes that they can't have it both ways. They can't claim to be this, like magical, progressive city, and keep gutting the place oversight, panel.

[135:07] And I. I saw the city members, city staffs comment to the press that this would open us up to more complaints. I say, let them file more complaints. That's the process that we were in the complaint process is clearly broken, as Bob Yates is now realizing for himself. Now that he has one filed against him. There will be complaints, no matter what this is. The city's problem. Because yes, that's all I have to do. Alright! Hey, Aaron, I think. Yeah, Aaron. And then, yeah, Madeline. And then. Well, Sam, read my mind a bit. What I wanted to say was to make sure you understand the potential risk. So if you just stop working, that could be a code of conduct complaint against you and potentially grounds for removal.

[136:01] So my understanding is the idea of the sit-in is to hold the seat, and so, going through the process, would, you know, ideally, avoid those sort of risks and counsel, would approve it, and the work would be paused. But you would remain in your seats with the blessing of the Count. Thanks. Thank you, Erin, Madeline, and then solidar. As a product of the civil rights movement, and many more to sit in and protest. I can't recall one where we got permission to do any of that change happened as a result of taking some very drastic actions, and whatever is decided, it has to be decided with. Hard. It has to be decisive, and it has to be unified whatever that is, and.

[137:09] That's all I'll say, for now. Thank you. Yeah, thank, you. Thanks, Madeline, so like I have a couple of thoughts, and I do want to share that I. I have no word what happened. I know we don't have the opportunity to talk, and I know that we some of us have been looking for that opportunity to kind of share and difficult, and it's full of rules, and it makes things kind of difficult to manage. I think, and put you the co-chairs in a position where you're hearing all this, and you know this kind of hard to manage. But anyway, I do feel that what happens would have put me, and I'm not all by myself in a position where I'm really thinking, do I wanna voice my opinion to risk someone complaining?

[138:06] And then city council put me on the spot like Lisa was as a woman of color. I don't wanna be there an app app, you know. I tend to react and avoid that fear, and being placed in that position. But I also know that I'm here for recent. The only thing that I would like to understand better is, what is the outcome that we're looking. That's my first question, and my second one is that, can we? As the panel seek an opportunity to have a conversation with counsel about. An open conversation about the implications of what just happened. That is not happening in social media or through. You know. Can we have a conversation or an opportunity to to talk about what?

[139:01] You know what's going on, you know, in person, I guess, or directly, and not through all these platform platforms that are messing things up, even even for. Thanks. Yeah, and Madelyn and Sam, to your point. I, I've got feet in everyone's camp right now. I think on Friday I my response was that, how do we request? Not to volunteer right? It doesn't. It doesn't sit right. It doesn't feel right. And so the but you know. And so, yeah, I was representing that route as is again trying to propose those options that the we 11 people here have got to figure out how we move forward together without a critical number of us walking away from the work. And so, you know, putting all all the options on the table to bring us all into this conversation.

[140:05] Yeah. Sam, yeah, I see the hand. Yeah, just to try to very directly respond to solidarity's question about what do we hope to see personally what I want to see is the community groups that were betrayed by the city Council. Be satisfied with the outcome of this ordinance process that we're putting through. Like, if we get to an ordinance that gets passed where N. Double A/C. P. And both say like that looks good to us. We have confidence in this process. That's when I think you know, we can continue to do this work in a way that like has the backing of the community right? Because we were selected with their blessing, and so we owe it to them to fight for these changes that will make it possible to do the work. So to me. This is, you know, sit in like the whole point is to build power right like, if we're asking them permission, we're still just acknowledging that they have the power to remove us, and that we care about our seats more than we care about

[141:16] the power, but what we have to do is just hold our seats as Madeline was saying bravely and just with heart and risk being removed right like, what can they do? Someone can file a complaint against us. What happens then? Well, it goes to city council. It's the same thing right? They either the site ahead of time or they decide when they get the complaint. And this way, we're not like weakening our gesture by asking ahead of time. So I, yeah. Thank you. Sam Hadassah. Then Milan. Thank you. I just wanted to add another, another outcome that we're I mean me me personally.

[142:02] I think that we need an ordinance. That city council is going to stand by, not vote to, you know. Vote twice to approve members, and then take back that decision and say, Oh, if only the ordinance was fixed, I would like for them for to have to reach a position where city council is going to stand by that decision! Stand by us! Stand by a selection committee standby. Everything that has been discussed in that ordinance, and not second, guess it and give people that are just looking for ways to shut us down. Room and leeway and ways to do that. So that's my personal. Thank you. Milan. Yeah, I think for me, I agree with what Madeleine and Sam just said, absolutely, and so I did to answer your question for me. In decisions like this. I'm always asking myself, why am I here for what is my purpose?

[143:06] And my purpose is here to represent marginalized, historically marginalized community who have not been part of the process. I think that I, you being, you know, vulnerable, and indicating that you don't like this kind of thing as a person of color is a woman of color. I'm I'm here so that people like you can voice your opinion and and not be afraid right? The city Council members who voted were all white, or presenting his weight, I should say, and to me that is important are the voice of the mark of the it's on the you know. It's on the yeah home page of the span all to give a voice to historically excluded member of our community.

[144:01] This is why I'm here. This is why I'm I feel we need to be strong in our decision, and I'm a new panel. I don't know a lot of you but I feel a sense of community with this panel, and I totally feel sense of trust. I feel that we are here. We cannot let ourselves be intimidated, because that's what they want, and. And that's not my purpose. Thanks. Milan, yeah. Jason. Again. I'm hearing everybody when I list. When when I look at the cases that I've had a chance to review, I do certainly see issues that are important.

[145:00] But I as a criminal defendant, attorney, and somebody that is close with the public defenders at both in this county and throughout the State and other criminal defense attorneys. I know that there are cases that we are not seeing, and we're not seeing them, because people don't trust that process. And these are cases that involve homeless people that involve violence. It involve people that don't think they'll ever be trusted. And I I I wanna help them I'm a little bit stunned by the cases that we've we've had brought to us, because I think we've had one get involved. The use of force since I've been on the panel. And I know that's not the situation. There's a lot of use of force cases that should be reviewed.

[146:07] I think our biggest issue right now is getting people to say I should bring that to the panel, and they will do something about it, and they will look at it. I! In general, I mean mostly I don't know the whole issue with with Lisa, but what I would say is that what I heard was that she was a somebody who said Defund the police, and I don't wanna get into the Specifics. But we have a police officer on on the panel, and so I would assume and I certainly don't detective. I don't want to bring you into this, but I assume that you believe in the police force, and that they should be funded, and I you know, if you don't. That's neat.

[147:00] But whatever so why wouldn't we want somebody on the group that says Defund? It seems like another voice that could balance out. I don't know if that's what the City Council made their decisions on, or what. But so I'm upset about that. Idea, but I'm more upset that people who are suffering violence and are not even willing to bring their issue to us. And I would rather be here available for them to talk to. Then then not be here. So thank you. I wanna. Press pause really quick. It is 9, 12. We do need to follow through on our commitment to open up this conversation, open up this meeting for public comments at the end I wanna acknowledge we do have agenda items set for discussing getting an update

[148:13] from Aaron on the selection of the alternate to fill Lisa's vacancy. We do have cases that have been put forward to the panel to vote on tonight. Committee reports. Oh, as well. And so I'm just making note of that time. As a panel. We've never been in this position before running so late in a meeting, and so I just want to be cautious of our time and our attention for the remainder of this evening. And that's not to necessarily propose anything but to open that up that yeah, that as a panel, if we want to continue this conversation. So we wanna push to taking a decisive vote on this conversation and moving on to public comments. But yeah, just just noting the time for all of us.

[149:11] I would move that we table this till next meeting, so we can finish our work for tonight. I think it's a big issue that we should all think about a lot. If that's the direct. I'm sorry. Sorry I, Milan, and I do see. I saw Victor. I saw you on mute. Did you have something for us, Victor? No, I did not. Okay, thanks, Victor. And then, yeah. And that, Madeleine, you had something sorry. We'll hang it! If we I'm eager to hear comments from the public. But if we decide to. Move this, or defer this for further comment to another time. That's just like us to keep in one thing in mind.

[150:02] I think we're all Lisa. We are I mean, from what I understand in terms of somebody not liking something you said I'm not agreeing with your perspective, your viewpoint, I mean, I live a lot of my life. People not like in the color of my skin. Oh, still, not so. Lightning are not like in. I just say it's a decision, but just keep in mind that we're only one. Somebody's decision away from well, Lisa. Thank you. Thanks. Madeline, Milan. Yeah, I mean, I think there is to respond to Jason a little bit. There is there. It might be a reason why people are not coming to this panel, and if we let ourselves be pushed around by the city council, there's certainly are not gonna come to us if they feel like this this panel is not solid, because anybody can be removed at any point.

[151:17] Just because of what they say. Then we're not solid. And how are we gonna represent our community? Just one more thing. I think it's really important to make this decision tonight. I think we cannot waste time in that. I don't think that a month is going to change anything this is what's happening right now. This is kind of pressing. I think it's important to show decisiveness and and support of one another. In this panel.

[152:01] Thanks, Milan, I saw your hand earlier. Do you still have? I was just gonna second Jason's where he said, we haven't had time to think about this. That's why, in my opening statement, I talked about the pros and cons. We haven't really thought about the pros and cons, and we are. We have. We are now trying to make decisions on on the fly. And for me. That's not the way I operate. Oh! Thank you. I just wanna say an entrance of time, you know some of the updates and stuff could be done by email and voting on some of the cases. And my update can certainly be email. Then if you could just vote and then go to public comment. Thanks, Victor!

[153:06] Yeah, same. So this might be a radical proposal, but it'd be interesting to hear public comment given that people feel like they want to think for a few more seconds before voting. If it's possible, do public comment first, before we vote, we would have a chance to hear what the community thinks on this issue. Yeah, that's something. My right? I mean, we could just bump up public comment with the co-chairs authority of the agenda right? Yeah, I, second, that. Okay. I will, sorry not to jump on that right away. Other panelists. If you have other thoughts, please let me know. Yeah. Okay, yeah, we can. Then in that case, and then at least, maybe we can. Lesson. Numbers of the public journey forth from this meeting, so let's go ahead and move to public comment.

[154:03] Now then, give me half a second. Y'all my shit together. This is public meeting. Excuse me to pull myself together so a long week. Okay, Cory, could you give me co-host permissions? So I can show our stopwatch. Alright, we'll do a timeline. Okay? Public comment. Okay? So no members of the public thank you for hanging on and being here this evening. I'm just gonna run through our rules of public. Every member of the public will be asked if they'd like to comment, and unmuted to give us their answer. Members of the public if they would like to give public comment tonight, each member of the public would get 2 unimpeded minutes to comment.

[155:02] If there is an interruption or a loss of cap we'll stop the clock to make sure we protect your full 2 min. I will give you a verbal notice of time at 20 s. However, I will also put up on my screen on the screen a timer, so you can see for yourself how much time you have left. At 2 min I will ask Corey. Our city facilitator, to mute your feed. That's not meant as disrespect it's just to keep us on track for this evening, and we do always invite you to reach out through the panel's email to give us your full or remaining comments at any time. You'd like, and I do make sure those get forward to the rest of the platform panelists. You're welcome to offer a short response at the end of comment of someone's comment I will pause. You, in an invite the opportunity. If you'd like. You can also just shoot me a chat to say you'd like to give a brief comment.

[156:00] We do want to keep those pretty short. We wanna make sure this is the public's time to give their feedback to us. But we do recognize. Sometimes a question comes up that we do just want to answer right on the spot. So with that, I'm going to share. Today's timer is brought to you by Google. I need to pull up participants list. And so, Corey, if you could unmute are you all on the roof first? Ariel, you can speak. Would you like to give public comment tonight? I would thank you. I first and foremost, I I can't say that watching this has made me miss the panel right now, but it does give me enormous amount of respect for all of you, and getting to see your personalities, and how you are working through hardware issues.

[157:03] I also just want to say, as a former panelists, that I really acknowledge solidar skepticism versus former parentalists, and maybe overly credence being provided to us, and that you guys need to make this your own and I am fully in support of setting a side time personally to disband, because I think you need to create a situation where the city, ignoring panelists demands is more costly than responding to them. But I mostly want to use this time to express my deep frustration with the city in a way that I was not able to, as panelist. More work requires more resources. Tonight. The Far as a paid consultant, not coming with a formal proposal for a working group for these panelists was a disservice to them. It created more work for them, without providing any structure. Hello!

[158:04] I sat in on the co-chairs meeting. I don't have the exact quote, but something that you stated was that this work is a privilege, and it's a strong ordinance. And to think about other communities who don't get to do this work. There is absolutely nothing privileged about this current process in Boulder, and I'd expect more from you with your years and experience. I can. Sorry on. When is this city going to stop requesting that people from backgrounds most impacted by police misconduct do more work with no additional incentives? Thank you. Thank you, Ariel. Next up on our list. Sorry panelists, panelists. Is there anyone? Like to give, follow up with that. Awesome. Okay. Thank you. Next up I we have amber, Alice Carlson.

[159:01] Could you, and mute her amber? You are unmuted. Would you like to get comments this evening? No sorry. I'm with the daily camera, but I I just had asked a question about earlier. And actually it was already answered. So we're all good. Thank you. Thank you, Amber. Thank you so much for being here. Absolutely. Thank you. Next up, Cory, could you unmute Annette, James and that you're unmuted? Would you like to get comment this evening? And that if you're talking, and that we can't hear you may need to unmute on your site as well. But Annette, would you like to get comment this evening? Thank you. I would very minimal. Just one. Say good evening and thanks, but I think that all the information is already available. Right. There is nothing else that needs to be hashed out, and I agree with Ariel.

[160:02] The decision is either this is a panel who wants to have the ability to affect change by being able to offer meaningful policy and procedural recommendations. And that's a whole idea. And if, as soon as anyone says anything negative or perceived as a negative about police, you in jeopardy of being removed, that is absolutely a toothless, worthless pel, and I don't understand why that's not immediately obvious and I don't also don't understand why you have to get permission from council to decide. If you're going to pause, if they decide, this is not something they want, then they decide. And then I think people have to be willing. Where's the integrity you have to be willing to make a stand?

[161:04] And and this is the moment, and to design to work on putting together an audience or revised codes where it's clear, because obviously you can't leave any room in witnesses in boulder and think that good will will come from. Thank you. Thank you so much, Annette. Next up, I think. Let's see we have Dan Williams, Cory. Could you unmute Dan? Dan? You're unmuted. Would you like to get comment this evening? Yes, I would. So first of all, I wanna say, this was the first Pop meeting I've observed, and I was incredibly impressed with the work you're doing, and the dedication you're all putting in to doing the work, you know I've been counsel for Lisa Sweeney Moran and got

[162:07] to see up close and personal. The process at city Council, and got to see the voices from and from the Naacp, and got to see how council members really gave them a you know, it's a Denver post. Put it just a slap in the face and that's not acceptable to me as a member of this community. And I'm really impressed that tonight you're considering standing up to council and saying, That's not a with you either, that it undermines. And fundamentally erodes the credibility of the employment work that you're doing to to allow that to stand and the lever that you have before you, of essentially going on strike, keeping your seats on the pop, but refusing to continue to do work on active cases I think it's the right one and the appropriate one, and I think, since the right message that kap that police oversight panel members may not be intimidated in the way counsel has done by removing one of your own and the way that they did so I really hope you take advantage of that proposal and you

[163:16] do suspend your work. I also agree that Miss Pose suggestion that you should ask counsel for permission to essentially engage in a protest against an action of counsel I just think that's a misguided approach and just eliminates your power. So I would encourage you to tonight. Take the vote, do the right thing if suspend your work until an ordinance is passed that both the end of A-a-cp and all centro are. Thank you, Dan. Next step. Oh, sorry the list change. Next we have Chelsea, Castellano, Cory. Can you unmute Chelsea, Chelsea?

[164:00] Would you like to get comment this? Did Chelsea mute herself? She's unmuted. Oh, she's unmuted! Chelsea! Would you like to get? We can. If you are talking Chelsea, we can't hear you. You may have to unmute on your side. I think she's having Mike issues it unmuted, muted. And now her mic is g10! We can hear you now. Thank you. Can. You now are no, I don't know why. Okay, great Hi! I was not planning on speaking, but I'm happy to weigh in. I am Chelsea, Castello. I have been an activist in the community for the last few years. I ran. The bedrooms are for people campaign to reform boulders, exclusionary housing laws, and the people for voter turnout campaign to move our off cycle elections to even years, to increase representation of young people and communities of color who are underrepresented currently in our offspring elections

[165:18] and worked on city council. Candidates. And I say all of this because I've been involved in the political world of Boulder, and I have worked with the people who are are not with them. But I've seen what the people who have worked to expel Lisa from this panel do, and I promise you that she is not the last person who will receive a complaint. They? They will keep coming for you because they fundamentally distinguish with the work of police oversight. And so I urge you to take this moment. This is a moment in time where you have the power, you have the microphone, and if you do not take it now, it will not have the impact that it could have in the future, and for a short period of time where you can pause.

[166:11] Take a stance, and also make sure that the ordinance is right, and reflects the needs of the pop. It will save you in the long term, because and more complaints are going to come, and at that time it'll be a scramble. It'll be hard to address, and you'll have at some point. 20 s! The work will stop, and you have the opportunity now to do it in your control and to share your message on why, it matters, and why you believe that it's the right thing to do. Yeah, thank you. I'm with you here in solidarity. Thank you so much. Chelsea. So we did hammer, and that are all Chelsea. Dan. I think next is Hope. Hope. Would you like to get a comment this evening?

[167:01] Yeah, thank you. So I I've been living in Boulder, on and off for the past 12 years. And I was very unaware of what this committee does for a really long time. I just know that I have a very, very intense distrust of policing, especially in boulder, and all I wanna say is, when the city Council members did really reminded me of what happened in Tennessee with the Tennessee 3 and then what happened with Zoe's effort, and the Montana legislature. It seems super undemocratic and a big harm to marginalized voices in boulder and I've just been doing research all day seeing what I could do, trying to figure out what I could say. Please don't ask them for appropriate if they are fundamentally against having criticism of the police or understanding why marginalized people are so afraid of of our current policing system, then anyone who says anything negatively is at risk and I think if suspending the work and making it a

[168:17] better safer place for marginalized people. I think that's I think that's what you should do, because, as I think, a lot of the other people are saying, you can't really ask permission, you just gotta take it and fight for. What's right. Thank you. Thank you so much. Hope. Oh, John, I believe John Gifford is next Cory. If you can unmute John, John, would you like to get comments this evening? Sorry. Can hear me. I wasn't. I wasn't actually going to. We can hear you now. Yes, John. But thank you. Yeah, thank you. I wasn't.

[169:00] Actually, I was just watching. Thanks. Thank you. Oh, great! Thank you so much for being here, John. Next up Cory, then will be John Herrick. Shawn. Would you like to get a comment this evening? No, thanks. Just tuning in. I'm a journalist with Boulder reporting lab. Thanks. Thanks so much, John. Thank you for being here this evening. Next up is let's see Kristin Eller, if we, Cory, can you unmute Kristin? She does not want to give comment to make. She put the community. Okay, got it. Thank you. Thank you so much. Kristen. Next. Then is Lisa Spaulding, Lisa. Would you like to get a comment? No, I I would just say one thing. It would be really good if everyone could stop being so angry at each other and start working together because you're doing really important work. And you could have so much support, and you need the support.

[170:01] So please don't be so tied to ideology that you can't understand anyone else in the city and try and convince them. Work with them, do whatever you need, because it is really important work. Thank you. Thank you. Lisa. Next up Corey is Lisa, sweetie Miran! Lisa! Would you like to speak? Yeah. Hi, gosh! It is great to see you all in. It is great to hear you all, and to feel your strength in your work, as you navigate this. It has been in a most emotional night for me, and I know for you as well. Even though I'm not part of your decision-making structure anymore, I'm still always part of the community that supports you. Whatever path you had down here.

[171:01] And I also have to say, as an outside of observer of what you're doing, whatever you decide to do, you don't need to ask permission. You don't need to ask permission from City Council or the city attorney, or anyone else hearing you all being threatened tonight with removal. If you strike was beyond belief, you don't have to stand for that, and you shouldn't. I know that you I know that you all stand together. I know that you stand strong. I know you stand for change and for our community, but you shouldn't have to stand for that. So keep up the good work, and know that, no matter what you do, we are all here as a community with you, and we are all here supporting you. Hmm! Thanks, Lisa. And then, except I think we have Martha Wilson.

[172:02] Great if you need Martha. Hey, Martha, would you like to get comment this evening? Hi! Yes, I didn't necessarily prepare anything, but I've definitely been watching and kind of side settling I don't even know what to call it. Actually. But I just wanted to say that people strike all the time for unsafe working conditions. And that's what this feels like. You guys aren't safe. The community's not safe. Games are being played, people are playing hokey pokey with appointments. It's all a distraction technique from the work. But it's also an opportunity to say no more. We're not gonna stand for it. We're gonna stand up, stand together, and that this point, you know, there's a small list of items that need to be done in prioritizing the ordinance.

[173:03] But I think just so. Everybody remembers why it's so important. I wanna play a little bit of a song that I was thinking of as I've been listening tonight. Martha, we can actually hear the song. I think Zoom may be cutting it out. Who is very scary. The parents feel so unprepared. We can hear it now. Thank you. The world's. He's black. So little black poison girl! 20 s! Don't! Cryined an alibi, so you can go outside her, dad. We'll try.

[174:10] Martha, that is your time. Thank thank you so much for being here, and for your comment. Next up. Oh, sorry, Darren. I think I accidentally skipped over you with your hand. So next up Darren O'connor. Darren, would you like to get comments this evening? Yeah, thank you. Daniel. I just wanna say that you guys have been advised by attorneys for the city, to your detriment since the very beginning. My understanding is that tonight you've been told all the things that could go wrong by the city attorney. The city attorney's office represents the police. They their job by Boulder revised Code is to handle cases, for example, that come in from the police that come against the police and defend the city above.

[175:07] They have more discretion in the city attorney's office to address police brutality. For example, than any single city council member, and the fact that they're potentially threatening you folks on this panel, what things that could happen to you for you know, standing up for the very actions that you need to take to be safe yourself is just an example of why I think that you guys need independent counsel as part of the boulder revised Code on the police oversight panel, and you all absolutely need to get independent counsel. I'd say that as an attorney not giving you, you know, legal accounts, but you need legal advice from someone who is not beholden to the police as my major statement for you all is that you're not getting good advice.

[176:08] 20 s! Yeah, you're not getting good advice, and you need independent counsel. Thank you. Thank you, Darren. Chelsea Hope. John John here, next up, I think, was shelly bobbins Shelly. Would you like to get public comment this evening? Hi! I wasn't planning to give comment, but I do wanna say I was very impressed with everyone on this panel, in all the thoughtfulness and the educated responses, and I just I feel bad for a lot of the burdens that have been placed on and the educated responses and I just I feel bad for a lot of the burdens that have been placed on you in the position. That's it. Thank you. Thank you. Shelley.

[177:01] Next up we have Steve Linen, Steve, would you like to get comment this evening? Steve, if you're speaking, we can't hear you. You may need to unmute on your side. But would you like to get comment this evening? One more checking in Steven Steve. If if you're speaking, we can't hear you. Would you like to do a comment, though, this evening? Otherwise we'll go ahead and move on. Thank you. Thank you for being here, Steve. We will move on to the next person. Then next up is Trisha Holland. Trisha. You're on muted. Would you like to get comments this evening? Hi! No comment for me tonight, but thank you all for your work.

[178:02] Thank you, Trisha, and thank you for being here, and let me double check. I did get everyone. That's everyone. Okay, thank you. Members of the public. Thank you. Panelists. That concludes public comment for this evening. And so, oops sorry I lost my screen. And so yes! Maybe to get this moving, I'll propose a full motion for us to discuss, which is to for the panel, to vote, to spend. Any new selection, or select any selection or review of new cases.

[179:02] I'd like to suggest. We go ahead and complete the reviews. We've already committed to. So we we have some in the pipe, so I'm just introducing this as a motion for us to discuss. So we would complete the reviews that we've committed to. But we would not. You would not consider or review any new cases, and that we would vote to, we would call a vote to end this pause. Once the new ordinance has been proposed to City council. So try it. So this is me just trying to put some language to what I'm hearing, and for us to start to discuss concrete details of what that looks like. Hadassah, yeah. Just yes, hey? And with you the only, I guess clarifying question I would have, and this might be I don't know.

[180:03] His question is for, but so the cases that come in that we're saying, you know, like, for example, the ones we would be voting on tonight if we chose to pause motion. Do we have the timeline to when we resume activities to pick those up, or would those just be lost during that time, I guess, is my my question, and I think it's more about like arbitration, or how that goes sorry flow I see your hand go ahead? I believe that if those those cases would most likely, if you follow Ferris timeline, they would most likely be closed. But they were oh, overseeing and deemed complete and thorough by the Monitor, and the Monitor has independent authority to make recommendations on dispositions and discipline to the police.

[181:07] It would be like. My understanding is that when Joey Lapari was hired as monitor, he, he performed the work of the Monitor until the panel, and continue that work. But the process changed a little when the panel came into being and started to review cases. But it would sort of revert to just the monitor, providing oversight during the time that the panel took its pause. Thank you. Yeah, that makes sense. Thank you. So. Thanks, Glo. And I was gonna mention to additionally that we would suspend committee work as part of the motion to so committee work and new cases would be suspended until and we would take a vote when we have sent a new ordinance to counsel for Approval.

[182:05] Comments, questions. Jason from the dark. Yeah. Oh, it does. Sorry about that. My, the laptop is batteries dying, anyway. Is there a reason why we can't continue to do our work? And just like maybe come up with a statement and issue it. Yeah. So I'll answer that direct so that the I laughed. This has been quite the evolution, so that the idea of a statement is something that this panel has gone through several iterations of. And so the thing is, if we wanted to come up with a statement, we would either need to assign it to 2 panelists to create that statement, or we would create that statement in a public meeting wherein the creation of the statement is the statement. And so it's hard. It's hard to.

[183:05] It's hard to create an official statement because we can be quoted through the whole process or we're not all fully represented and so that's not to squash. What you're saying is this perennial challenge. We've had of, you know, in the past, we said, well, we we wanna just release a statement about a particular issue, and recognizing that, you know, under Oml, we have to craft that statement in in a public meeting. And so this in a way, this is our statement. These meetings are opportunities to say what we need to be, what we need to say. So with that, answered your question. Actually, I'll hand it back to you, Jason, in case you have more. Yeah. I do have a little bit more, and you know this is not to say that I have all the answers or any answer. But for a long time, and and I think this started when I was in my Civil procedure class almost 30 years ago, and and my professor was a person who went down to the South to help the voting rights during Civil Rights Era and he was going to Federal judges in the South to

[184:21] enforce certain rules, and what he was trying to impart to us was that if you don't know the process, you're never gonna get to the substance because they'll shut you down in process in court, and you know I that is it's a great thing for a civil procedure to teacher to talk about, but what I really came to understand over time was that the people in power use process to stay in power, and the people with no power have to argue about substance. To get anywhere.

[185:05] And the reason why I raise this is that everything that we're talking about is process. We're not talking about any substance. We're fighting the we're backling them on their playground. Let's do our substance. Let's show him what we can do. Let's do the thing that we were asked to do. I think that is the way that we were. Anyway. Thank you. Thanks, Jason. Yeah, Sam. And then Hadassah. Yeah, I appreciate you, Jason. I just want to say I agree with Daniel's motion. I think that, as stated right like, we're not asking the city counsel for permission. We're just gonna we're just gonna stop and let the chips fall where they may. Under that interpretation I support the motion. As you just said, I think this doesn't need to mean that we just sit on our hands right.

[186:08] The work of racial justice in Boulder continues like, and we have a fixed budget of time that we can now use on something else. And so for anyone interested, I'm happy to have like a semi-regular meeting with and we could do something like a reading group around the. This might sound dry, but around the around the city code and around the the police general orders as well cause I think that's something that we're really under school then, and that comes up again. And again as something that is sort of a key advantage, that we that the city and police department haven't against us, which is, they know the rules better than we do, and can always just pull cards out of their sleeves. And it's been my intention this whole time to sort of stay up on that.

[187:02] But there's hundreds and hundreds of pages, and this is a good time to do some reading. So if anyone feels guilty about not wanting like about pausing the work like Jason, I'm happy to get in touch, and you know we could read papers about how to do oversight. Well, and other kinds of things that will strengthen us in the long run. Thanks. Sam. Yeah, I just wanted to say, I think the only amendment that I would have to your proposal. Yeah. Daniel is to not suspend committee work because I do know that Sarah plan on using the Community Engagement Committee to connect with community for ordinance work. So I think that we should not necessarily include that in there, and leave that up to the individual committees to decide. You know what and how they're going to continue during the moratorium.

[188:04] What you're saying, yeah. And so just yeah. And so just saying it back to make sure I understand and put it in motion form that we would. We would. Suspend new case reviews, suspend consideration of new case reviews. Finish reviewing cases. We've already committed to 3 allow committees to decide how they move forward in the moratorium. Yes. Yes. Yeah. Is that correct? And then we would have a vote once the ordinance has gone to council, we would call for a vote to end the moratorium. Yes. Yes. Okay, thank you. Thank you. So much. So motion, amended Chico. Yeah. Hadassin! Was that a second for that motion? Then? Yeah, I don't know. Do I need to say new motion if I make changes or. I just wanted the new motion, so you can second it. Okay, thank you. Okay, okay, perfect. Yes. Then, second, that.

[189:02] So right a second point. But we we will finish out conversation. Chico. So, Daniel, I'm more or less stuck between a rock and a hard place with where we are going, because. Same, we wanna proceed with on one side with setting aspects of our work, like community committee work. Then we said, on the other hand, we say we're gonna suspend case review. But what about the people that I expect in some form of resolution, who have complained so? Are we taking those? They are their positions or feelings into consideration? Because on one side you want to do something on the other side, want to stop something. So it's like we want to have our cake and eat it too.

[190:03] Thank you. Chico. Sam. So once, it's a solution. I heard from a community member is we could continue to meet and invite the public who have complaints about the place to come and share their complaints publicly. Right instead of anonymously through the city website, that way, there's still a channel for them to air their grievances. It wouldn't be formally handled by the Monitor's office. But this would be a part of the process for rebuilding trust. Actually, Sam, we can't suspend the complaint process. So that is a process that goes through the monitor's side of the ordinance. And so we don't have that. Yeah. Okay. Right? Right? Right? I'm not saying that we suspend that I'm saying that we can just have longer public comments where we invite people who have to share their interactions with the police in public. And so, thank you, Sam, and yeah, and just, yeah, as a quick reminder in and to what Floyd said to is that the monitor side of business would continue.

[191:05] And so complaints with, we do not have the authority to stop complaints from being submitted to the Monitor's office or the police department, and then those would go still continue through the ordinances. Legal processes of sending those complaints for classification to the to the monitors office, and then investigation by the Psu and the Monitors office, and then the Monitor still withholds the right to make disciplinary recommendations to the chief of coach and so you know our three-legged stool of oversight. We have the authority over the one leg, which is our review of cases before the ultimate disciplinary decision is made. Yeah, Victor, I see your hand. I would like to hear close opinion of moving forward or not moving forward with suspending the work just from her perspective, of just the independent monitoring what that does to her. Her side.

[192:16] I think this is a political decision that is not mine to make, and it's I'm not familiar enough with the boulder community to. I mean, it's just not the Monitor's place to opine, I can tell you as I like. All I can do is reiterate what I've already said, which is what the role of the Monitor would be going forward after the it after the panel's exhausted the pool of cases it's already agreed to review. Thank you, Victor. Thank you. Flow. Milana. See your hand.

[193:00] Yeah, I mean, I hearing what she said, I don't think there should be a partial strike. I mean, what's that about? I personally think that it should be a full on strike, and I understand it's inconvenient for some people, and it has, you know, some people won't like it, but I think that if we wanna make a strong statement let's make a strong statement, and that means stopping everything. So, I mean, I'm sorry, so saying it back to you. Are you saying, then, to suspend all committee activity as image to the new case? Yeah, yeah. Reviews, just double, checking. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Flow. I see the hand. I was. Oh, yeah. Just sorry just to clarify committee. The committee work is needed to do some of the ordinary work. We. We can't have ordinance progress happen without committee work happening. Is, that.

[194:00] That's that's the only reason we need to keep this Selection Committee or the the Community Engagement Committee. Governance committee. Specifically yeah. So is that maybe to suspend committee work that is not if that is not work on the ordinance. Is that maybe the compromise there? Does that make sense to? Every motion that we, we stop everything except working on the ordinance in whatever you know. Maybe that is needed. Yeah. Yeah. Let me true on wordage, and I'll come back after flow. Does that make sense? I'm not sure how to make emotion, but. If that, okay. I just wanna say one thing in response to Milan's comment or I'm not sure exactly what the the proposed new motion would be. But the in the cases that the panelists already voted on those those members of the community have already been advised through the Monitor that the panel is going to review their case.

[195:01] That's it's every time you make a vote to review a case the Monitor sends out a letter, a prizing the community member. That's it's every time you make a vote to review a case, the monitor sends out a letter a pricing the. Thank you. Yeah. Me line and send a new hand. Yeah, I think we did agree that we would work on the cases. That are still pending right? So. Yes, I think so. I think where we're at. If I if I can pull this together, we will review cases that we've committed to reviewing, we will not consider. We will, we will pause. Consideration of new cases to review, and we will suspend all of other panel work that is not in relation to the ordinance.

[196:00] Does that make sense? I would second that. In relation to revising the Ordinance. Okay. That's what we stand right now. Maybe before we get a second on that, just give everyone a chance to chew on that and raise a hand. If they have questions or comments. So the motion is this panel. Would move, would suspend consideration of new cases to review. Will suspend all other panel work that is not related to revising the ordinance. And we would. The only exception is we would go ahead with reviewing the cases we've already committed to routing. And then, Daniel, that just so that I'm totally clear.

[197:05] That said cases, that where it's already been communicated to the community, that action is underway on their case. Would. That's the exception. Those will. We'll go through with those. Only. Okay, got it because the one thing we don't want to lose is the trust of the community, which exactly exactly got it. We don't wanna back off our word. Yeah, yeah, yeah, absolutely. Thanks. Yeah. Other thoughts or questions. Analyst. I wanna open it to. If if we'd like to invite Erin, or flow, or ferret in for feedback or sterling as well. If just opening that door to. If we want to call anyone else into this space before we take a final vote on that as well. I want to open that up to you all. Add slowly, Dot, I do see your hand.

[198:11] Oh, here! Yeah, I'm sorry, but we have been going off so long. I am losing my capacity of thinking, and I need to be at commencement tomorrow. So 30. But can we? I mean I don't know what the options are I don't know for trap at some point. If we can track, maybe above right now. But I don't think we can. We can keep going longer, like it's been super long. Yeah, yeah, I agree. And we're here Para and Florida. Somewhere else. So I hope time change can be a challenge. Yes, yes. So panelists the motion. I'll go and call for a second on this. We will suspend, considering new cases for review we will suspend all other panel work that is not related to to making changes to the ordinance.

[199:12] The only exception is, we will follow through with reviewing cases that we've committed to reviewing at past meetings. That's the motion, is there? A second? It's 2 s, 2 to the power of 2. Second, okay. Second. That's 4 s. In that case panelists by a show of hands, all in favor of the motion. I'll reflect at this time that Sarah Hold asked me to vote for her by proxy, to vote for suspension. Cory, let us know. Once you got all our hands. You're good. Thanks. Cory, and then I'll call for once.

[200:00] I see everyone's hands down. Thank you. Any panelists against the motion show of hands. Thank you, Jason, and acknowledging for the moment to Jason that that the minority voice has always been important to this panel. And I I just wanna thank you for that. Okay. And that's into the point of time. That means the with that, or with that pass I do not believe we will take up committee reports unless committee chairs. If you have anything in relation to the ordinance, I would suggest that we go ahead and just do those updates over email. And that also means we will not move ahead with the selection of cases for for review. Sorry, checking comments as well on the side. Here, panelists, any final comments or commentary?

[201:08] Yeah. Just a clarifying point. Our committee meetings will be still left on the calendar for us to discuss ordinance updates. Is that correct? I think. So. Yeah, let's in that case, you know. Of course, that's the problem of the chairs now, of course, we're we don't have a chair for governance, do we? So yes, I think we could go ahead and leave committee meetings on the calendar. So if there's ordinance work to be done in them that's available, I think in that case, too, unless anyone disagrees, I think we should go ahead and keep the co-chairs regular meetings with the city also on the calendar, so that we can continue to schedule these general meetings, and so that we can continue to facilitate the ordinance work as well. So I don't think we should change meeting schedules at this time. Just so we leave those windows open for the ordinance work.

[202:01] And acknowledging, as far as getting the group together to talk about the ordinance is going to be particularly challenging, since those need to be public meetings. So keeping those slots, I think Will will help the ordinance work move quicker in place. Yeah. Sorry, say that again the account for the vote. Yes. Yeah, Cory, can you give us? Okay. It. It was 8 to one. Yes, Sterling, I see the hand. Thank you. Yeah, so since you guys have to get, I guess permission from council to do this pause, do you know when that decision, when you're gonna talk to them about that? And how that'll be communicated to the other panel members, you know. So that's the question. So, yeah, so that's the question. At the moment we did not vote to send the request to council, and so I I don't know what happens next.

[203:02] Milan Solidad. We we might wanna hear from Aaron next on this as well. Yeah, I just wanted to say I didn't vote for that. Yeah. Solely done. I think it was pretty clear from this panel that that is not the way we're going to go. At least that's my understanding. About the same thing. If we're going with this, I'm not asking for permission. Don't ask permission not to volunteer. Yeah. Panel. Would you like to hear from Aaron? She's here for us. If we wanna hear from her. Yes, she's just doing her job reading the book. It's not a personal attack. So please. Thanks. Victoria. Yeah, I don't know what's going to happen next. This. This is a unique situation. So I'm you know, council members.

[204:01] Are aware this was on your agenda. I'm sure they will be checking in to see what happened, and we'll you know we'll see what direction they wanna take, so I imagine that they'll have some sort of discussion about it to try to wrap their heads around it and figure out what, if anything, they do next? Thanks, Aaron. Panelists, any final thoughts, comments, questions. Yeah. Meal on. I just want to say how much I appreciate this process, and every single one of you agreeing and disagreeing. I think it's been really important, and that's probably the first time that I really, truly feel a sense of communication in this group and get to see you in your full self in this work.

[205:02] And so I'm at just wanna say, I'm really proud of all of us together. And I really appreciate everyone here. Thank you so much. Thanks. Milan, of course you all you know you have mine into Dusk's phone numbers. You have each other's phone numbers reach out, feel free to talk to each other. We do have our committee meeting scheduled. We have our general meeting coming up, and of course as us and I will keep you up to date on anything we hear back through City Council or through the city, through our connections as panels, but otherwise, thank you, I think this this is the longest meeting we've had as a panel. Thank you for sticking to the Marathon. I'm not gonna take any more of your time. Please have a good night, and we will all talk soon. Hi, thanks everyone. We appreciate you. Bye, everyone. Hey, everyone.

[206:00] Good night. Good night. I will see.