February 9, 2026 — Police Oversight Panel Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:05] Nope, there it goes. Okay, so, I think we're good to start then. And we'll keep an eye on attendees and see if Yolanda joins. I don't think that is the first thing on the agenda, so we're going to get started. Okie dokie, so I want to welcome panelists, and welcome all the members of the public that are watching online. Tonight, thank you for being here. So we're gonna… we're going to start with calling the meeting to order. And, proceed with our land acknowledgement.

[1:00] We acknowledge the Arapaho, Youth, Cheyen tribes, the traditional custodians of the land on which the Police Oversight panel And both the Police Department operates and pay our respects to their elders, past and present. So we welcome again, members of the public and, you know, members of the press, if they're here. Welcome, panel members, to our February meeting. We appreciate you all being here. And, just a gentle reminder of our community agreements and, the expectations for panel members to be on camera, especially when voting. Just for transparency and for, you know, us being seen. Then for members of the public, again, there is a Q&A option in the Zoom meeting. So, you're welcome to post questions there. We are gonna try to answer as we go. Keep an eye on it, and halfway, through our meeting, we're gonna have, open comment. So, we're gonna welcome public comments, at that time. We will let you know.

[2:15] And then, just a reminder also that, you can submit your complaints and contact the panel outside of this meeting. Website address is boulderColorado.gov. dash services slash services slash police dash oversight, and our panel email, policeoversightPanel at bouldercolorado.gov. The meetings are also posted on our website, you just need to allow us a few days for them to get uploaded, but they're usually there within a couple of days. And now we're gonna do the roll call for, attendance, and

[3:00] I think, Sherry, that will be you. Alright. Turner? Here. Soledad? Here. Milan? Here. Lizzie? Present. Kristen? Hmm. Jason just sent a message saying he doesn't believe he'll be able to make it. I'm curious! Here. Chico? Yeah. Bill? President. Alan? Fair. and AB. @b's iPad: here. Okay. Okay, so we're gonna move through the agenda, and I'm struggling with only one, screen tonight, so bear with me, please, as I dive into our agenda.

[4:10] Okay, so… We… the first, order of business is the approval of the agenda that was submitted With the package for this meeting, so, unless there's any changes, I'm gonna entertain motion to approve the agenda. I'll make a motion to approve the agenda. Can I say something on adding an item? Yes, of course, Chico, please go ahead. So, I, I don't, I don't see… An item on number… 7… coming down as C on member recruitment and renewal of current terms. Shouldn't that be part of the agenda?

[5:11] Yeah, I mean, we… yeah, it's not in the agenda, we can add that. So, okay, let me make a note, and we can add that. to the agenda. Milan, I see your hand. Yeah, I… we reviewed… some of us reviewed a case today and learned that there is a new, person doing training at, BPD, like, people who are doing train… training in the, police department change. on a regular basis, and now there's a new trainer for police officers, and I was wondering… wanting to entertain the idea of maybe, having a meeting with them, and I would like to maybe discuss that for a few minutes.

[6:03] Also, I'm not sure if next month we are voting for co-chairs, or if we decided, last time that we were going to, wait until everybody was onboarded for that. But if we are voting for co-chairs, I would like to have a conversation maybe tonight, on the process, on how we select co-chairs. Okay, to that point, I'm pretty sure… I didn't see it on the minutes, but if the panel can help me remind, I think we voted to postpone the selection of co-chairs until we had new panelists on boarded, is that right? That's my recollection, yes. Oh, invoice. Yes.

[7:00] Sorry. In which case, maybe we could put it on next month's agenda. Okay, and then we need to make that change to the minutes. Okay. So then we have two things, adding… The, this, topic of new person doing training for BPD to the agenda, and also adding, Chico's, topic on new panelists coming in, and renewing members, is that right? Can I have a motion to incorporate those two items in the agenda, please? And a second. I'll make a motion to approve the amended agenda. Okay, thank you, Alan. Any second? I'll second that. Thank you, Curtis. Okay, so we will add that Do we have Jumbo, Tom? map. Of course, please vote. Everyone in favor?

[8:00] 1, 2, K, awesome. Me. Okay, so we have… @b's iPad: I'm in favor. Okay. @b's iPad: I'm just driving, sorry about that, guys. No worries, maybe. Okay, thank you for unmuting yourself and drive safe, please. Okay, so two items are added. Next thing in our agenda is the approval of the minutes. as we noted, I think that part of… the election… of the co-chairs was missing from the minutes, so I think we… The process will be that we don't… we hold off until they are completed to vote on them, right? Good evening, panel members. Yes, you could vote on approving last meeting's minutes at the next meeting, if there are changes that need to be made, so we don't have to do it on the fly here tonight.

[9:05] Okay. Then we need a sec of… A motion? to… Hold on the approval of the meetings until next meeting, and then a second, and then we can vote on it, please. So moved. Motion to approve. In second. Alright, so just so we're clear, it's a motion to postpone the approval of the minutes until they're. Motion be given. Prove the postponement of the approval. Okay, awesome. Thank you so much. Everyone in favor, please? Okay, thank you. Okay, so we have… Sorry, an agenda. And,

[10:02] Okay, so the first thing in our agenda is panel updates, guest speaker, ad hoc items. So, the first thing that we have is the 5-year review status. I know we have a lot of time for Yolanda, but I'm not sure… I want to give, time… I don't know, Nuria, if you want to lead us in that, and then we hear from Yolanda, and… or how do you want to move with that? Thank you so much, Co-Chair Diaz. I was just going to do a little quick introduction, to Yolanda, and before I do that, I just want to… this may be my last opportunity, to thank some of you. I know that we are in recruitment, and application season. I know and hope some of you will continue on with us, and I know that, for some, you will have, done your public service and wanting to, allow others to step into your shoes, so I just want to thank you. I know this is not easy work, it is,

[11:08] it is hard work to do what you do, it is dedicated work, and I just want to thank you, for what you do for the city and in, betterment of our community, so I just appreciate that, and hope To see, some continue as you move forward, and so we'll see, what the recruitment process looks like. But today I just wanted to sort of kick off, to, as we talk about the five-year review process, and just want to thank you already for, the conversations many of you have already had. with our, consultant, Yolanda Greer. Yolanda has done a lot of consulting over the years, and in particular, I'll say, I'll highlight the work that she has done with BVSD, But when we thought about this review, and I know that I had mentioned this to you all, I want to say in September, sometime in the fall of last year.

[12:02] I had heard from many of you, I had heard from PD, I'd heard from council members, sort of different pieces of oversight that were causing concern at different points, not just last year, but over the years, as you were, doing your work. Because, the new… the last revision to the ordinance that you all had approved included this 5-year provision of looking back. I kind of think of it as an internal audit, if you will, to look and see what's working, what's not working. what's aligned? Where do we need consensus? Where, if the ordinance needs to be strengthened or changed, where does that look like, right? So this is that opportunity, and I'm excited to… eventually be hearing from you, along with some council members who are leaning in, BPD, who is leaning in. We will be asking some former, police oversight members as well, and I understand you all have an interest, perhaps, in doing some community engagement, on the facts, so all of that, hopefully, will be, coming, and we will see

[13:14] what comes from those engagement processes. But for that, Ms. Greer will be taking you through that conversation, and then depending on what comes out of that, we… if there are changes in the ordinance that need to go to Council, we will do that. If there are changes in processes. We will look and evaluate those as well, but first, we've got to have some conversations, and see where… where there are, hopefully, areas of consensus and where there are not to see where we go from there. So with that, I will stop, and send you over to Yolanda. Nuria, and everyone, she messaged me saying that she had some tech issue and is restarting her computer, so she… she missed that.

[14:02] That whole thing. intro. All right, well… Hopefully that won't take. You'll have to jump in. It looks like Lizzie has a thought. Let's see. Yeah, maybe a question for you while we… while we give her a few minutes. Do you… clarifying, like, which… and I've asked Yolanda these questions already, and she's told me her perspective, which was super helpful, but just your total view of everything we're going to be doing that will together create this review process, and ultimately changes to the ordinance, or maybe we decide no changes to the ordinance. Of all the steps that are going to happen, which is the piece that Yolanda is managing right now with us, and what other pieces might there be, if any? I'm trying to determine, like. What is the overlap of Yolanda's piece versus the rest of the process? Yeah, yeah, and I appreciate that. And Yolanda, you missed all the fabulous things I said about you. I would say this. Yolanda has been, is here to help facilitate sort of all of it, the whole container of it, if you will.

[15:08] I will say that it would be unfair for me to ask, there might be some times when there are technical questions about oversight in general. What is the right process for, something that involves, like, PSU or something in NACOL? I, have been talking to someone that, many of you know, Ms. Farrah Muskadin, to see if she may add some support in that area, and if she is unable to do it, she's got somebody else who can… who is recommended on the technical aspects of the oversight process, because I don't think that's fair to add to Yolanda, but Yolanda will help us contain it all, as the convener and the ringing and bridging all of this, trying to get us to align, trying to get to consensus, trying to figure out what is the recommendations and what is happening. But were there to be a question on what is best practice in

[16:05] this particular thing on oversight, that's the technical aspect that I think would be unfair, and that we're going to get some support for, but I expect from Yolanda the entirety of the report to come forward. Does that make sense, Liz? Lizzie? Yeah, would it be correct to sort of interpret that as, like, Yolanda will work with us to gather all the feedback and kind of, get us to a consensus on maybe what the areas for potential improvement are, and then you and perhaps this other consultant will work on, like, knowing what we know about oversight and the kind of technical part of it, what is the solution to those problems? Is that a good way to think about it? It is. It is, although I don't want to preclude what you may come from your conversations. It could be that there's, not just an identification of issues, but.

[17:01] And because they're not just working with the panel, they're also working with BPD, and there may be recommendations about a particular thing, and if that thing versus Something that needs to be… clarified versus a solution that has been identified, those… I don't want to preclude that… that either of those, could come forward, because both of those could come forward, and then we'd have to evaluate that. So, I don't know what it is that you all will eventually share. Okay, thank you. Yep. And with that, Yolanda, I send to you, without the benefit of all the wonderful things I have shared about you. Thank you so much, Nuria. I appreciate this time and space with you all. Thank you for the introduction, for being here. And if I may share screen, is that a possibility, Sherry? That might be helpful for those who are more visual.

[18:04] There we go, thank you. Okay. Hopefully you can see this okay. Let me just reset my screen here for that. Thank you. can see it, so I assume others can see it too. Okay, perfect, thank you for that. So, I, I'm thrilled, actually, to have this time with all of you together in one space, to have this conversation. We have jumped into the one-on-one interviews over the last three weeks. And so answering kind of the one-off questions is not always the best way, but we've… we have a timeline, and we've gotten in there, and so I just appreciate you all, first and foremost, for the work that you are doing on behalf of the City of Boulder, and its residents, and how you're showing up. for the panel oversight, but especially for the community at large, so I really do feel honored to be a part of this process. And I was brought in, to this process as, someone who has done a lot of facilitation work, especially in

[19:13] complex and sometimes, what I like to call as eventful, scenarios, if you will. And my background is in education, and so, as I've shared with many of the panel members, education from the classroom as a teacher all the way to a school turnaround leader, director of leadership development, and chief talent officer. And I say that because those of you who keep up with education, or you have children, who have been through the educational system. You know that that is definitely a complex environment. Political aspects are present, lots of bureaucracy in some spaces, there's all kind of dynamics that happen within our educational systems, and so that gives me a little bit of a window into the world that you all are currently operating into, but keeps me in a neutral position as the facilitator and convener of this work with you all, and so I know that that was something that was very important, is that you all have a non-biased

[20:14] individual in this space with you. So, here we are, and that is how I, come to you. So my role truly is, to be a neutral facilitator, to listen well, and to be able to synthesize the information, that is shared individually and in those group settings, and then really to be incredibly thoughtful about structured conversations and how I'm creating that Time and space for you all to have deeper conversations as a group once we move beyond the one-on-one interviews. Certainly not here to be an investigator. I don't even watch movies like CIA and all those types of things, so no expertise there. Not here to be an investigator, certainly do not have decision-making power or authority, and I will not be advocating for any one group at all. I will be bringing together all of the information as it is gathered.

[21:16] So, just for high level, and, Lizzie and others, I really appreciate the questions that you have asked, so this might help, in regards to the conversation that I entered into this meeting with tonight. kind of that big picture overview process. So, we have been engaged here in Step 1, the initial assessment, or excuse me, we actually are in two, but the initial assessment was just the clarity around the scope, and sequence that I was able to do with Nurea, you know, seeing what is in place that I could leverage as I'm operating and working with you all, and just really creating clarity around the objectives. What's the end goal for my part of the work that you all are engaging in for the oversight review process? Currently, we are engaging in the data collection with the one-on-ones, as I mentioned.

[22:05] I want to tell you that I have completed 12 one-on-one interviews, and there's about 11 pending, so some folks had to reschedule outside of the window that we had originally set, and others we are, or I am waiting for For them to schedule. And so, I don't come to you all tonight with any trends or updates around what the information is telling us, because I want to be fair to all of the individuals that, you know, can contribute to this conversation and to the process. And, when we think about stakeholder engagement, because this question has come up quite a bit. We think about facilitating groups, and you all saw that in my, email communications to you. There was some question around community engagement, and so for me, that community engagement involves those, those of you who are directly involved in the oversight.

[23:06] Those who have recently been a part of it, so maybe a former member, be it on the police department side or as a panel member. And then any near proximity to it, so maybe, city council members. So that is the extent of my community engagement with this process. I know that that question, had come up there. From there, we will move into… triangulating all of that information, synthesizing it, to see, so what is working that we can leverage? What aspects do we need to keep, right, maintain? And what aspects do we need to create or enhance? And so it's really been, fascinating, actually, to listen to the one-on-ones, and I will say, just very transparently.

[24:03] I really appreciate it. Several of you have sent me different things or directed me to make sure that I watch or, you know, read, certain aspects of you all's work, but here's what I want you to know, and I especially want the public to know this. For the sake of… fair and non-judgment, like you. I am a human. I have my, you know, normal, biases like any individual would. But I genuinely wanted to listen and hear from each one of you. those that I will be interviewing before I fully delved into the ordinance, into, the general order. I believe it's General Order 120, Or watched any of your prior meetings. I wanted to meet you as you are. I wanted to get to know you, I wanted to hear your heart, why you show up for this work, why you're engaging in it, what it is, what it is not, and what you believe it should be.

[25:08] And so, once these interviews are complete, then I will do a very deep dive into all the various materials to really help me understand, at a greater level. Okay, so we do have clarity around X part of this work. But where there are gaps, or where, you know, some folks are believing a purpose to be this, and others are believing it to be something else, then I will be able to help us fill in the gaps based on that. One celebration, though, that I will share, just from the interviews that I have completed, to date, is that the purpose is ringing true. Interview to interview. Regardless of which, Department, if you will, that you are sitting in.

[26:01] So… Police Department, IPM, City Attorney, panel members. previous, employees or panel members, everyone has said the exact same thing about what the purpose and the intent of this work is, and who it is in service to. So I just want to pause and celebrate and applaud you all for that part of it. Because I feel like, man, if we are clear on our purpose, we can do great things to help refine and enhance some of those stuck points that we currently have. So, I truly think you should pat yourselves on the back, for that right there. So, when we move, beyond that, we will… I will then create reports that gives the trend data from the interviews, so I will have, checkpoints with Nuria along the way, but the ultimate outcome is then to have an executive-level report for, you know, what is working, what isn't working, and the recommendations of where refinement can occur.

[27:15] And then, I believe that's what I came into that, was being described, what will happen next beyond that. So that's kind of my work. If along the way, if you've asked me questions at different parts of this interview process. I have not been as clear as maybe you would like, and certainly that I would like, trust and believe. I'm a clarity girl and a systems girl, so if you, have felt like, man, does she even know what she's doing? A part of it is because we definitely want authenticity. Right? So, one of the things that I love about, Elevate You, my company, is that there are certain things that I do, but every single package, if you will, is customized to the organization that I get to serve. I don't believe in one-size-fits-all. As an educator, I say that with my whole heart. So it would not be fair for me to promise to Nuria that I can come in and

[28:13] you know, we're gonna do step 1, 2, and 3, and you're gonna get this magical thing at the end. If I don't customize that. to what I am hearing in the day-to-day, and when we get to our group sessions. you know, then you're paying me for… I don't know what you'd be paying me for, and I certainly wouldn't feel good about it. So it has really been important to me that it is very authentic and genuine along the way, and I really appreciate that Nuria has allowed me to kind of check in when I did have a question, something came up, or even Sherry. I can, you know, check in and say, hey, what does this mean, or these acronyms, or, you know, just the different things that there are checkpoints. for that clarity, so again, I'm making sure that I'm making real-time shifts as it relates to your context, not a big, broad context that, you know, we could apply anywhere. So that has really been, an instrumental part of this journey here.

[29:14] So, that is where we are, in terms of that, and so… Phase 2 really matters because you know, I'm looking at patterns, these trends, not personalities, not perceptions, not assumptions. Really, what is the trends that the data is telling me, from the one-on-ones? And what I recognize is that the system just seems to be strained. it's not broken, it's strained, and there's some areas of clarity and enhancement, refinement that we can do, that will get you all to the place where I believe, and what I've heard from you, where you truly desire to be. So… That friction, if you will, the current friction, really seems to be stemming from where structure and relationships, where they interface.

[30:08] And how it is so important to balance both of those things very carefully and thoughtfully. Because, structure without trust can feel very controlling. And trust without structure creates instability. And so, in this system, as I am learning it from you all, again, not from what I see in print, but from what I've been learning from you all, we really need both. And so, how are we going to move together forward to create the conditions so that we have structure and trust? Working in tandem. So what you all can expect from me, clear facilitation and guardrails for how we will and will not, engage, respect for lived experiences and the expertise, the brilliance, oh my gosh, the brilliance that I have experienced with each and every one of you, and again, just that,

[31:08] passion that you all have has really just made my heart sing, and as well as, and I think really importantly, is anonymity and psychological safety, in this process, as much of that that I can create, for and with you all. is certainly a priority, and I don't want there to be surprises. So I know there was a few days there where you probably felt like you were just getting a ton of emails from me, but I want to be communicative with you. And if you're asking me questions through the question tracker that I provided to you all, I want to make sure I'm getting you an answer as quickly as possible. So that, you're not wondering, you don't have to make stuff up, you are hearing directly from me, what it is, or if I don't know, I'll let you know I don't know, in that case.

[32:00] Okay, and what I'll ask, from you all is. genuinely to speak from experience, and not from assumptions. So sometimes, a few of you, experience me saying, okay, well, what's the… what's the facts around what you're telling me right now? Or, how many people you know, felt that way, right? If we're making generalizations, that's a place where I'll definitely pause us, because I need to know And remember, from… I go back to my principal days, right? Where it felt like 5% of student behaviors, if they were, you know, pretty extreme, it could feel like the whole school was on fire. But really, it's 5 students out of 300. How do we… how do we focus in, right, and intervene? And so, having the facts of the matter, is super important in that space. I ask that we also stay curious. Being inquiry-based. To me, is one of the very best ways that we can engage and interact with each other professionally and respectfully.

[33:06] And separating intent from impact. as I mentioned earlier, the heart, and your why, each of you that I have experienced thus far, how you are showing up and why you're showing up. It's really, really evident. And I imagine that there have been times where because you have such passion for your work, for those that you represent, for the entire community of the City of Boulder, that sometimes the impact landed in a way that you did not intend. And so we want to be ever mindful, of that dynamic. And we're going to engage the system, not individuals. You know, thinking about this work as being hard on issues and soft on people. Because we are dealing with people, and so thinking about how do we maintain that humanity mindset, in this process, because we're doing this work for the humans in our community.

[34:10] And so, let us enter in and keep ourselves grounded with that humanity mindset. So, what's ahead? This week will be our first in-person gathering. I know the majority of you have committed and already accepted, and you are able to be present. I believe just a couple folks are not able to attend. So I will find a way, I'll make a way, for you to be brought into that work and make sure that anything that happens, one, that you get your, just, debrief of the assessment that you all took. But also that you have a voice into any of the work that we do specific to, this initial stage of the review. And we will… the goal, part of that, is to leave that session with some agreed-upon norms.

[35:03] And how we're going to communicate and disagree with each other. And just begin thinking about some of the structural clarity and system options that we might take. based on the information that I have at that time. So hopefully, all of the interviews will be complete by Thursday. So I do want to bring you the trend data on Friday, in that space. So that is the goal. But like I said, I want to honor each person that's, has requested or been recommended For the one-on-ones. Okay, so with that, what would be helpful to know beyond what has already been stated? That I can answer for you about my role or our process. Solely done. Hi, Yolanda. Good to see you again. I have a question that, you know, kind of what you said, which, maybe there's a purpose for it, just really coming from curiosity to this one.

[36:11] So, you said that there's a big group. So, of course, everyone knows that the whole panel is involved, but we don't have clarity on who else is part of this group and this process. Like, I don't… I know that I'm gonna see my colleagues from the panel on Friday. But I don't know who else is participating, so… so what should we… expect, who are the faces that we're gonna see in that convening, you know, so I don't know if there's a reason for us not to know, or is that information that we can have access to? Yes, and thank you for asking that, Soledad. It is my understanding that you can see the guest list on the calendar invite, but if you cannot, please tell me. I have made my emails So when it's to the larger group that I'm primarily, working with, Which, my understanding, City Attorney.

[37:10] PSU, IPM, and the current panel members? and the have all been invited, to do that Emergenetics assessment and be present on Friday. Those who sit A layer outside, if you will. of the process. That was a separate invitation, because they were only being invited, to the one-on-one interview process. And again, those individuals… I don't have all the names, but I can tell you the… I don't have it, like, right in front of me. But city council members, I believe the mayor, we had, former… let's see, former Boulder PSU member, there are some other folks

[38:06] Formally on the police department that were directly a part of the panel. Or panel members. And… I believe that's it. I'm trying to… I should have had that pulled up for you, apologies, but it has been either former or current. Thank you. help. Yeah, I was just gonna say to, council members, we sent them an invite, to participate in interviews if they, so desired. There are, I believe, 3 folks who, would do that, including, former panel member Taisha Adams, and I think that's where you were going. And so, I think that, that's, I think that's what you were trying to find in your… in your mind, if that helps. Thank you. Thank you.

[39:02] Lizzie. Hmm. Yeah, thanks for being here today and providing all this, it's really helpful. Could you tell us a little bit more, now that we're a little bit closer to Friday, and, you know, some of the interviews are complete? I know you may not have final themes or trends identified, but could you tell us a little bit more about, kind of, the agenda, or the structure of how Friday will go? So, Friday, the preponderance of Friday is an overview of the Emergenetics profile, and for our, public attendees today, Emergenetics is an assessment that looks at your thinking and behavior preferences. So I know a lot of people are familiar with, like, DISC, which is about your behavioral preferences, or the Strengths Finder, from Gallup. So it's…

[40:00] Kind of a system like that, but this one is really looking at your preferences, your DNA, right? connect it to your lived experiences, which is one of the reasons why, you know, has really drawn me, to use that tool, because it takes into account lived experiences. And in our current context globally, I think that that is a really important aspect to look at. And so, to me, it was very fitting, to bring that into this work right here, but also. To help level set us, To have that understanding, not only about ourself. But about one another, right? So everyone in the room. You're going to learn about those thinking and behavior preferences connected to your lived experiences. In that moment, so that once we get past that overview and debrief of your profiles, now we have this understanding, again, about ourself and others.

[41:03] we'll begin to create, as I mentioned a little bit ago, we'll create the norms for the group. One of the very first questions that I asked when I was being brought on is, does the group have, working norms or rules of engagement? And what I found, or what we have, are the city. You know, off of the website there, we have the cities, kind of the values, if you will, the mission and the vision and the values. But I thought it's really important that we create, using that as a springboard. We want to stay in alignment to the city, because this work is for the city. But what are those rules of engagement for how we're going to work together? So we're going to create that, with each other. And then I'm thinking about two other dynamics, Lizzie, but like I said, I want to get a little bit more feedback. From these interviews that I still have pending this week, and that will frame the rest of the work. So, for anyone who's not able to attend.

[42:08] what we walk out of from that meeting on Friday, I will then put it together, I'll share it back to the whole group, specifically to the individuals who weren't in attendance, so they can give voice and input around any adjustments, and certainly have some agreement there, because we want consensus. On that, how… what we're going to use to move forward, together. And I also want to share on Friday the trends that I have at that time. And like I said, as of now. Everyone will have been interviewed by Thursday, pending any additional reschedules. But I think that we will have enough data at that time to share the trends of where we do have commonalities and where the opportunities for improvement are.

[43:00] Okay, and will we be, like, discussing and workshopping those trends, or is the majority of that session about The sort of reflection and group norms component. mostly the reflection and group norms, and then when I show you the trends and where we have opportunity for refinement. Then it's looking at… because it could just be, you know, sometimes when you get into a group and you're actually having the conversation, it could be now that we're having this conversation and we're all seeing it together. maybe there isn't a disagreement, and maybe we're closer on something than what came out to me in the interviews. So we might be able to say, you know what, that's actually not a priority, because we do have agreement excuse me, shared understanding around that topic. Where we really need to focus is this other thing that you mentioned, and here, you know, because we're kind of separated on that.

[44:02] Alright, thanks. Oh, Kristen, yes, hello. Hi, good to see you. To Noria, I have a question about… we, you know, you begin, Nuria, by saying this would be the last time you'd see some panel members, and just wondering, with… kind of new people being recruited right now, how that will impact this evaluation, too? Like, what will be the role Of new people, how will, people who are ending their term of service, will they participate throughout the whole will they be expected to participate throughout the whole evaluation period, or what… what's the thought on that, I guess? Yeah, so we had a little bit of that conversation, and newtier, please correct me if I'm… wrong in my understanding on this. So, every current member has been invited to interview. Of course, people are making their own personal decisions if they're wanting to engage or not. And I believe that we do have a few individuals that have opted out.

[45:15] Of the process, and… As far as new people coming in. certainly want to share with them where we are in the process, give them that content. Now, it's not for me to onboard them to the oversight panel, you know, holistically. I don't know if that's more of a role of the chairs or whom, but they would get that kind of larger context. Where you all have been, where you are, the work that we're currently focused on now. share with them, at that point of their entry, where we are in the process, where we have landed. So, you know, with those norms, if it has to do with, interpretation of the ordinance. Where have we arrived to at that point?

[46:01] So that they can then give voice to their understanding when they signed up to become, a panel member. What was their understanding? What would be most helpful for them, to engage and contribute in a really meaningful way? So bringing their voice into it in that way. What was their understanding at the point of application? How can they contribute meaningfully based off of where we, this collective group, is at that point? And then pulling them in for any other sessions that may still be, be there. Does that help, Kristen? Yeah, thank you. Milan? Yes, thank you. Yolanda, first, would you mind closing your presentation so that we can see everybody?

[47:01] Sorry. Thank you so much. I was, I was thinking, like, I don't know if you're aware, but the panel does have community, agreements for engagement, and so I think that would be very helpful. Like, we've worked hard on this. And, I think it would be really useful for you to also take that into account. I greatly appreciate you sharing that with me. I did ask a few people, and they were not quite sure. Recall that there had been some work done at the retreat. I believe that you all had Maybe in the summer, or at some point. And so, yes, if you can share that with me, that would be, wonderful, and then we will refine, the next steps accordingly. But…

[48:01] You're bringing that up, and… Right, so that's interesting. It's a great place, to revisit. So that we all have that same understanding. Yes, we do have norms already. For those who didn't know, or… maybe forgot, right? We want to make sure that we are all starting on the same, playing field. Well, I think they, The reason why some might not know that we worked on them was… is probably because they're fairly new members, and then, but we usually, Yeah, we usually have those. Maybe I can ask Soledad or Lizzie to send that to you, because they have direct… You know exactly where it is. Thank you. Thank you so much for calling attention to that.

[49:00] Okay. Thank you, everyone. I'm just… Going to check if there's any other questions, if, there's not… We can keep moving through our agenda. We have a pretty packed… Agenda ahead of us, so… Any other questions for Yolanda or Nuria? No, she's here? Okay, well, thank you, everyone. Thank you, Nuria. Thank you, Yolanda, for coming. And we'll see you Friday. Okay. So, next item into our agenda is, GO120, General Order 120 Panel Review. So this is the document that we shared, that was shared with the panel by, Chief Redfern, we sent it to you all for review. Just so…

[50:03] want to open the conversation, but first kind of acknowledge that there was a request from one panel member to get some additional time to be able to review. It was quite a big document. So… Wanna check the temperature, if we want to have a conversation now. knowing that we might keep talking about it next time, or if we want to keep, I mean, wait for everyone to be able to Review thoroughly that document. Lisi. And then Tico, sorry. Lisi? Tico. I saw you both at the same time, sorry. Chico, please. I was gonna say that, I think I shared with the co-chairs it's… I found it difficult to follow the document, and I would have expected a red line to… document.

[51:01] Of what's changing and what's remaining, the same. So, I would expect that… or it's my hope that We shelve the discussion until we get… A red line document, which is easier to follow. Trying to get to read a 25-page document, that doesn't guide you on what you're looking for, is… It's a tough ask. So, for… in my opinion, I would expect that I would hope that we shelve this until the next session when we get the redlined document. Okay. Thank you, Tikolisi. Yeah, I can give a brief update on that. I appreciated that suggestion, Chipo. I had a similar thought. Chief Redfern did get back to us today and said he, like, apologized for a slow response. He'd been traveling and said he would work on getting us,

[52:05] the previous version, so at least we can compare, but I do agree, like, some sort of… Documentation of the changes, or… a side-by-side, something to help this process would be incredibly helpful. Sherry, I don't know if you have access to anything like that, or have ideas for how something like that could be created. It does feel a little tough to put… to… sort of… forensically analyze this, each of us individually, to try to see what's different and what's, you know… So that could be helpful. I was going to suggest for today, I… I certainly need more time. I did not get close to finishing my review, But I know that Curtis put a lot of time into creating this document, so maybe I'll leave it up to Curtis, but we could have him kind of go through an overview of his feedback, and then continue maybe next discussion, next week, next month, sorry, with the discussion.

[53:09] Okay, Sherry? Yeah, the one thing that, for people who've been toggling back and forth between the current, General Order 120 and these changes, this is sort of reminiscent of, the change to the ordinance, where the format has changed so much that a redlined version is… is really challenging, so I think the idea of some sort of document that… that identifies where the significant changes, are, I think that's probably more likely, because if you get a red line document, it's just going to entirely be red, basically. From… from my understanding of it. And… And… One thing that I have… anticipating some of these… some of these challenges, and I know that the panel, or I expect that the panel would be very interested in… in this, is talking with BPD about possibly having some sort of, like, training opportunity for them to be able to speak

[54:14] with the panel about the… some of these changes. So that's a discussion that we are having. Because 20 minutes in a meeting For such a large document that's so important, doesn't feel sufficient. Kristen? Yeah, I… I think I would agree definitely with, Lizzie and she go to, well, to postpone the discussion of it until next time. It's quite big, and I just wanted, since, there was mention that we were going to turn the floor over to Curtis, to say, Curtis, I really appreciate what you did. Looking at that, I found it really helpful, and I just… I just wanted to give you a shout out to say thank you so much for doing that. And I have other things I could say, but if we're going to table the discussion, I will shut my mouth.

[55:15] Thank you, Kirsten. Okay, so looks like we have two things on the table. One, want to get panel agreement in… oh, Milan, go ahead. No, I was just, wondering if Curtis wanted to say something when he started speaking, so just wanna… Yeah, I was just saying thank you to Kirsten. I don't know if we're going to, continue on talking about it, or waiting until everyone has some feedback and has had time to review it. Either way, I'm fine with either one of those. It'll give me more time to review more pages.

[56:05] Madame? I guess I'll say something. I think it's, I'm, I'm, I'm a little… Frustrated by the way this has been handled, where it's so complicated for us to find the places that have been changed and not changed, and it takes so long, considering that we're volunteer, and when the corrections could have been just, like. the revisions could have been done, as the document was being changed. So I understand that if we do a compare, a file compare, that might be all red, but, just giving us the main areas that have been changed is not enough to me. Like, we can't… we need to see the… It would be nice to have a red line, you know, of all the changes.

[57:02] And, It is really unfair to ask panelists who volunteer to do the work that is required for this, and at the same time, it is super important for each and every one of us to look into this. Aww. So, I guess I just wanted to voice my frustration with the process and the expectations from us. Thank you, Madame. I'd just like to second that, that, yeah, it would… it would be really easy. There was definitely a more efficient way of bringing that about, instead of having us read the entire thing, I didn't consider that there was another reference document, so I was just reading the whole thing like… like it was brand new, and… Which brings me to the question of, like, if we do find errors with the…

[58:01] General Order 120 that… that aren't changes, maybe things from the old one. And we see them and suggest they be changed. Are those within our… within our… Limits or capacities as well? Or is it just about the new changes? To be… to be completely honest, Curtis, I… I don't even know. I… we… we knew that this… there was a revision happening. We requested months ago to be part of that revision process. We were not made part of that revision process, and then we received this final document. you know, to be kind of second with Milan's frustration, I don't even know, like, it should… if it's… they're looking for feedback, but I… I cannot tell you, yes, they're gonna consider our feedback. So…

[59:04] It's a tough one, I think. I'm not sure if changes are gonna be made based on our feedback. I mean, we don't have that commitment, or that even offer, so I… I honestly don't know. Curtis? Thank you. And in that case, if it's possible to get feedback back to Redfern in the future. I think it would be meaningful to ask, like, You know, When asking for our feedback or for our review on something, collaborating with us on how like, how to do that, I think would be, a good step moving forward. Thank you, unnoted, Curtis. Okay, so, Panel members, are we… Kirsten, go ahead.

[60:02] Sorry, I just wanted to know, when the prior order was written, like, how long ago… when was the last general… time the general order was revisited? It says October of 2024, but has it… was it truly revised then, or was that just a mere… a small update? Just… Anyone know? If I remember, I think… Actually, maybe I shouldn't speak, because now I'm… I don't know that I can trust my memory. But we can certainly… I mean, if you're… if you're interested, I can… Ask for the former version. Yeah, or at least to know, because it says it replaces the one of 2024, but That it's a… it seems like it's a, My understanding is it's a substantial rewrite, so when was this version,

[61:06] Was in October 2024 it just a few minor revisions, like a few typos and maybe one line changing, or was that a major revision as well? Like, is… or is this the first time there's been a major revision in several years? I mean, I can say that I know that in, it was either June or July of 2023, it had some serious changes to it. Okay. And then when they were going through CALEA accreditation, a lot of… a lot of general orders got Tweaks. Tweaked, and that would have been around that time. In late 2024. But, I can certainly ask for some of the historical General orders for 120. Yeah, because part of my question has to do with the fact that, like, the panel is mentioned But just mentioned, like, there's no, real role, kind of…

[62:06] it's a maybe in here, if that makes sense, like, and so I was just wondering, if… that might be something to consider as well, because the panel really, like, it's… well, it's mentioned 9 times in my document, but that's because I have notes, and I think so half those mentions are my own notes, and so… I am just wondering about that, if maybe as a group we can talk about that, or what… or even if that's something worth talking about. Bill? Yeah, so I appreciate everyone's comments, and as most of you know, I'm about the process, and I'm just gonna say from a process point. This feels kind of like the way the ordinance was changed and the way we look at cases, in that it almost feels like

[63:00] And I don't know if this is true, this is just my perception, it feels like we were an afterthought that said. We've started this process, and I don't know how many months ago, the Chief and his team Started this process, and then… When it's almost complete, then we get it without enough direction to know what we're actually looking at. To know where they really want feedback in terms of changes and what our role is, and so it almost feels performative. And one of my hopes through this 5-year process is we create some structure around these processes so that We're not brought in at the end if it's something… that they truly want feedback for, and that we're brought in at the beginning to say, here's the problem that we are looking to solve with this rewrite. Because without that, we don't really know what we're looking at, or how to Give feedback, because we don't know what problem that the department is trying to solve for with rewriting this document.

[64:01] And that's really important, and just to get an email doesn't really help us to say, go through this and give us your feedback. It's like. Great, we could spend hours and hours and days, and… and… and not be able to really understand what we're giving feedback on. So… so I want to, say that because… as an overarching piece of our five-year review, I think we've got to talk about how we structure these processes. So there's a… so there's a… Step-by-step approach to whether there's a change in the ordinance, to whether it's a document like this that the department's looking at feedback for. And… and if it's truly input for change, then we have to be brought in at the beginning, and not what feels like the end. So… so I just want to… put that out there, and I know our… Yolanda's here, and… and some of that may be conversations that can be built into this 5-year process, and if not, through her work, then through the other consultants' work.

[65:08] I'm done. Thank you, Bill. Okay, so let's table this for… table, table, for next meeting, we will give it a bigger chunk of time in the agenda, but, let's pay it, I mean. I'm hoping we can receive some information from the chief in the next few days, but also there's going to be opportunity for, talking about this, I guess, when we get together, so… Okay, next in our agenda, we have Community Outreach and Engagement Report. Bill? Okay, I had to reschedule our meeting because of a work conflict. And, Chico, do you want to talk about this, or… I was gonna say, we added an item to this.

[66:00] Didn't we add an item? to the… Agenda? To the agenda, yes. the recruitment, so there's that piece that comes in before Bill. Unless I missed… I got my facts wrong. Nope, nope, you're… I think you're okay. Bill, do you mind if we jump to that, and then we come back to you with a… Absolutely, you go ahead, Chico. I don't have a long report, so… Thank you. Chico. I'll defer that to Sherry to guide us. What's going on? Okay. Yep. Yeah, thanks, Chico. So, where we are in recruitment is the panel, or the recruitment application period closed on the 25th of January. So, we are… I still have to compile some of them, but the advisory committee has, they received the panel applications.

[67:00] And are sending me their… their completed metrics on them. For some of you who've gone through that process before. And we are meeting Tomorrow night to select the candidates who we are going to interview. Interviews are going to be scheduled for February 21st, and… The expectation is by the, next panel meeting, we will have new panel members to appoint. Which maybe was getting the… the cart before the horse, which is… Today is a really… important meeting, because it is the… I got clarity, several of you were asking about it, so I got clarity today. So today is the last day of… most of your first terms, and probably most important, the second term for Chico, So, it is the last day of first terms for everyone besides, Bill and Alan and Kristen, and I know most of the faces that I'm seeing have

[68:12] have reapplied. And we have, I'd like to thank panel members who are on that advisory committee for putting in time during a time when there's being a lot asked of panel members, so I look forward to Seeing you again tomorrow evening. Lissy, were you… Oh, I just was gonna point out that… does that mean this is our last meeting officially with Chico? Can we add an appreciation for Chico's and a send-off to our agenda?

[69:00] I did not realize that was gonna be today. But… It's been a pleasure working with you all, and I wish you the best. You as well. Thank you so much for everything, Chico. Chika, thank you so much. You've been kind of a North Star for us at times, and I really, really appreciate your wisdom. Thank you. Same, thank you, Chico. Thank you. @b's iPad: Thank you, Chico. Thank you. I think once you're no longer on the panel, we need to, celebrate that, too. I think Chico did a fantastic job this year stepping into, like, the elder statesman role by providing so much Historical knowledge that we're losing now. We're losing some of those, you know, first months and years.

[70:01] You will be very missed, Chico. Thank you for everything. And I hope you come back and join our meetings as a panel member. Keep us… keep giving us your opinion and your thoughts and guidance. We would appreciate it. I can't even give you more than 2 minutes. There you go. Yeah, well, I'm… just join everyone's thought. Chico's so happy to… for you to be retiring from this group. Take a break. Get your Monday, evening. back. I wish we would have known before, and we could have not been surprised by the fact that this was your last meeting, and Anyway, and some of us that are also… some… some are reapplying, I don't know who it's from the group. Anyway. Okay, now, Bill… I think… Community.

[71:03] Can I, can I just say something, Soledad? Yes. I mean, so many of you, whether you're reapplying or not, you know, you filled out your terms. It's a long time, I mean, and there were some really… tense times, and we're still in tense times, but, like, that's really… that's really, admirable for how much time you've given, whether it's a one-year… one year term as a student, or a three-year term as a panel member. It's… It was a… it was a big commitment that you all made in service to your community, so… it's not just Chico who deserves accolades and applause, it's almost everyone on this screen of wonderful people. Curtis? Yeah, I don't know if this is the time for this, but it's just, I'm feeling a need to say it. I wonder if in the 5-year review process, if there's

[72:02] Room to discuss, longer terms for student panel members. Simply because I just feel that. for me, I can't speak for any other student panel members, but it took a while to really… grasp what this work is, and how it operates. And one year just really doesn't feel sufficient To really be able to… Meaningfully… engage with the oversight process. So I just wanted to name that. Thank you, Curtis, and noted. Thanks. Okay, Bill, community engagement. Okay, first I want to say, Curtis, I agree with you on that, and I… my… my approach to this is everything's up for discussion in this 5-year review, so I think we should bring all that to the table.

[73:02] And Chico, I just want to say I really appreciate your insight and knowledge. You've brought a really unique perspective to this group. And while you don't say a lot, when you say something, it's very meaningful. And I've always appreciated that about you, even though I've never had a chance to share that with you. So, And you're never really going to be gone from the panel, because we know how to find you, so… Yep. Appreciate you. Lizzie, do you want to say something before I go? Yeah, sorry, just… I want to be super… I want to make sure we're all clear. So, Sherry, you mentioned many folks have reapplied. We will know if those folks are returning next month. Are there any other panel members, though, that are officially done this month that we need to be recognizing and acknowledging? I think Jason… Jesus. It's done this month. Yeah, Jason did not reapply, and neither did AB.

[74:02] @b's iPad: I've been, like, off the radar, buying and selling a house, so… @b's iPad: It's been crazy. I've been looking through the email right now. @b's iPad: to find that so that I can reapply. @b's iPad: And I sent a message to Yolanda, because I think I got something from her, but let me know. Okay, let's… let's… let's talk offline, then. @b's iPad: Okay, great. Okay. Okay, so for Jason, though, can we just briefly say this is the end of his term? Unfortunately, he can't be here with us today because he's traveling, but… Thank you also to Jason for the time and insight, and we appreciated having him on the panel. Wish him well. Thank you, Lucy. There were definitely some case reviews where his knowledge of, criminal courts and Detailed criminal law from his perspective as a defense attorney was very helpful. Yes.

[75:00] Definitely, yeah. Okay, la tercer la benzida. Bill. Okay. So, Milana and I have been talking, because we've been, mostly it's community engagement meetings, about doing a community engagement process sometime in April. I forget, it's around the 20th that we were talking about. We've threw some dates out, and And truly, only 2 people responded to the… to the poll that we sent out. And so, do you remember the dates we were talking about? I thought it was March. I think it was end of March. Okay. 20… Third or something. Let's see… Maybe… We're… somewhere in that time frame. Yeah. But what we want to do is we want to host a Community engagement process to… Share with the community about the panel, what the panel does, and of course, share with them about how to file a complaint, and then just similar to what we did at the Trident, hear questions, kind of.

[76:08] talk about where we are with this 5-year review, and just get community feedback around how they see the panel, how they see our work, policing, and just gather ideas. So it's really gonna just be structured around the work that we do, the role that we play. And how to, be more engaging with the community. And so, I'm gonna do my best to reschedule that meeting either this week or early next week, and so if folks are interested in helping to put that together, it would be really great to have you there. And that's all I have for community engagement. Hold on, please. Milan? I… I also want to say, like. yes, about the work that we do and how to complain and all that, but also about everything that has happened over the last few months, and the changes to the interpretation of the ordinance and all that. I think that's really important for our community to talk about this and to feel

[77:10] seen and heard around that, so… just wanted to add that to the list. Great. So I'll be looking for that invite for the rescheduled, community engagement group. That's all I have, Soledad, thank you. Thank you, Bill. Questions, okay. Okay, running through Independent Police Monitor Report. Sherry? Can everyone see this okay?

[78:00] All right. Yep. Let's do 4. Okay, the… February 2026, Independent Police Monitor Report. Looking at the… the… Case file review information for January of 2026. The panel completed 4 case reviews. None of those cases are currently awaiting disposition from BPD, so they're all completed. And there are currently 6 cases where the panel is waiting to review, and 4 of those Oh, actually, one of them… One of them we did today. So 3 of them we are trying to schedule for the next few weeks, so we are moving through the caseload really nicely. So, since January 1st, cases that have been closed, SM2025-005 has been closed.

[79:05] SM2025-006. The Boulder County District Attorney's Office notified BPD that they issued a Brady letter for Officer 1. During a hearing for a DUI, criminal charges were dismissed based on a judge's ruling that official reports completed by Officer 1 were untruthful. Officer 2 conducted a traffic stop and needed assistance because Officer 2 was not certified to perform a breathalyzer test. Officer 1 arrived to assist, and Officer 2 suggested that they begin the 20-minute deprivation on scene in the patrol vehicle. Officer 1 agreed and certified on the official breathalyzer form that she performed four required actions as part of the deprivation period. Body-worn camera refuted the truthfulness of her documentation. The allegations against Officer 1, Rule 3, Truthfulness, inaccurately completed the 20-minute deprivation period section of the Intoxalizer 9000 Evidential Breath Alcohol Test, the EBAT, report.

[80:10] The panel recommended that this allegation be sustained, and that the officer be terminated. The department agreed to terminate the officer. Rule 8, conduct. Officer 1's representations on the EBAT report reflected unfavorably on her and or the department. The panel recommended that this allegation be sustained with termination. And the department agreed to terminate the officer. And Officer 2, Rule 8, conduct. Officer 2 advised Officer 1 to act contrary to EBAT requirements. The panel… Recommended that this allegation be sustained with a one-year letter of reprimand. The department exonerated Officer 2. The panel also recommended that Officer 2 should become EBAT certified within the next 6 months.

[81:06] And that BBPD should consider auditing the EBAT certification status of all officers to ensure all officers are properly trained and actively certified. BPD should also consider developing systems to track and monitor all necessary officer certifications to proactively flag gaps and prevent future lapses. The chief's response was, I do believe that Officer 2 should become EBAT certified if he is going to continue to engage in traffic enforcement, and this action should be taken. And additionally, this case brought to light the fact that BPD has not prioritized the certification of our patrol officers in that I-9000. And I have directed the chain of command to begin certifying as many of our officers as possible in that testing. For officers in non-enforcement roles, it is not a priority, like detectives, but anyone working patrol should be certified moving forward.

[82:04] MI2025-039. A mother complained that BPD did not sufficiently investigate an incident involving a BBSD security guard and her minor son. In response to the monitor's recommendation, BPD reopened the case and completed additional investigative steps. That was while the complaint was going through. Allegations for Officer 1, Rule 1, Compliance with Values, Rules, and General Orders. General Order 203, Investigative Responsibility and Case Assignment, did not perform a sufficient investigation. That is the same allegation for Officer 2. The panel recommended that these allegations be not sustained, and the department agreed, so they are not sustained. And then Sergeant 1 had a Rule 1 compliance with values, rules, and general orders. General Order 203, Investigative Responsibility and Case Assignment. Did not ensure a sufficient investigation.

[83:00] The panel recommended that this be not sustained, and the department agreed. The panel also, encouraged BPD to take steps to shift officer thinking toward an assumption of credibility on the part of any victim, unless and until evidence to the contrary is obtained. They also discourage BPD members from relying on hearsay without seeking first-hand confirmation or deferring to institutional review processes. Panel members agreed with the recommendation to clarify roles and identify which officer or detective or supervisor is responsible for each investigation. The panel requests a training opportunity to learn in detail how cases are assigned, investigated, and supervised. They also recommend that detective sergeants should play a stronger role in identifying possible oversights or omissions in the investigations conducted by patrol. The Chief's response was, the panel asked for a training in investigations and case assignments. If this is something that the panel wishes, it can be requested through the monitor, and we can arrange for such training in the coming year.

[84:04] MI2025-041. Complainant alleged that BPD officers broke his ribs when they forced him against a railing while handcuffing him. Multiple officers' body-worn camera captured the handcuffing of the cooperative complainant. The railing where he was handcuffed was below the height of complainant's waist, and he remained upright during the handcuffing. The complainant's torso and rib area never contacted the railing, and there was no impact to his torso from officers, nor did he complain or demonstrate injury. Complainants submitted partial medical records from over two weeks afterwards that did not diagnose him with fractured rips. Both the body-worn camera and the medical record refuted complainants' allegation that BPD officers broke his ribs. The allegations against officers 1 and 2 was a Rule 6, use of force, broke complainants' ribs. The Monitor recommended that this allegation be unfounded for both officers in accordance with General Order 120, and the department agreed.

[85:11] MI2025-044, complaint and allege misconduct during a traffic stop conducted by Officer 1. He alleged that Officer 1 was disrespectful and improperly issued him a summons. Additional concerns from complainant were not allegations of misconduct and or did not occur, including the illegibility of the summons, failure to complete discovery tasks, and threat of arrest for non-criminal violation. The allegation… First allegation for Officer 1 was a Rule 4, respect for others, spoke disrespectfully, and or mocked complainant. The panel recommended that that allegation be sustained with verbal counseling. The department determined that it was not sustained, but they agreed for coaching for that officer.

[86:01] And an allegation of Rule 5, police authority and public trust. Issued complainant a citation for failure to present evidence of insurance. The panel recommended that this allegation be sustained with verbal counseling. The department exonerated the allegation, but also agreed for coaching on this allegation. MI2025-050 complainant was insulting and interfering with City of Boulder parking service workers when another community member interjected and told him to stop. Complainant and community member engaged in a verbal altercation, while complainant approached, insulted, and circled around him. Community member removed a folded knife from his pocket and held it unopened behind his back. During the subsequent BPD response, Officer 1 referred to the community member as a Good Samaritan. Officers conducted an investigation and ultimately issued complainant a summons for harassment and obstructing government operations.

[87:04] Allegations for Officer 1 include Rule 1, Compliance with Values, Rules, and General Orders, General Order 240, in-car cameras, body-worn cameras, and personal recording devices. Timely activation of body-worn camera. The panel recommended that this allegation be sustained with verbal counseling, and the department agreed. For allegation Number 2, Rule 1, compliance with rules, values, and general orders. The respect value, refer to the reported suspect in a knife-menacing allegation as a Good Samaritan in the presence of complainant. The panel recommended that this allegation be not sustained, and the department agreed. And… Rule 1, compliance with values, rules, and General Orders. General Order 201, report writings. Did not identify the suspect who reportedly menaced complainant. The panel recommended that this, allegation be not sustained, and the department agreed.

[88:00] And I would like to note that this is an instance where, Chief Redfern Agreed with the panel's recommendations over his chain of command. MI2025-058. Officer 1 conducted a traffic stop on complainant for speeding in a school zone. The speed violation was captured on the officer's in-car camera, and the interaction with complainant was recorded by officer's body-worn camera. The allegation for Officer 1 is a Rule 3, truthfulness, lied on a speeding summons and or during a traffic stop. I recommended the… the Monitor recommended that that allegation be unfounded in accordance with General Order 120, and the Department agreed. MI2026-001. Officer 1 conducted a traffic stop on complainant for failing to stop at two stop signs. These violations were captured on in-car camera, and the interaction with complainant was recorded on Officer 1's body-worn camera.

[89:01] Complainant alleged that Officer 1 profiled complainant on the basis of his ethnicity. Because of the lighting and distance between their vehicles, the ability for Officer 1 to see complainant for the purposes of profiling was highly unlikely. Their conversation was polite and contained no reference to race and or ethnicity. Officer 1 did not issue complainant a traffic summons, but instead advised, I'm going to give you just a warning today, because it's Christmas, or Christmas Eve. But do me a favor, pay attention to those. I don't want you to get into an accident. The allegation against Officer 1, Rule 1, Compliance with Values, Rules, and General Orders, General Order 101, unbiased Policing, discriminated against, and or racially profiled complainant. The Monitor recommended that allegation be unfounded in accordance with General Order 120, and the department agreed. There remains one open 2024 case, that is SM2024-003, that is in the BPD chain of command review.

[90:04] Regarding the case statistics for January 2026, I classified 7 cases. 1 misconduct, 0 serious misconduct, 0 community inquiries, 1 community feedback, 5 unspecified incidents. And one, which was initially classified as a conflict… conflict facilitation process, but then, Ended up with… as a misconduct. There were zero interviews that I observed, zero critical incident scene response, and no investigations were sent to me to be deemed thorough and complete. And in the month of January, BPD closed 5 cases. As of, February 6th of this year, there were 38 total cases open. 14 of those have been classified, 4 are still pending my classification, and 20 are in PSU's preliminary investigative stage.

[91:12] And I've been working with Dr. Daniel Reinhardt from the police department, so this is some preliminary data. We might have to clean it up a little bit more, but I thought it would be better to give people a snapshot, even if some of this might change when we go back through and make sure all the fields are are correct. So, regarding serious misconduct cases, there were 6 cases registered in 2025, And 6 cases were closed, and the panel conducted 4 serious misconduct case reviews in 2025. 57 misconduct cases were registered. And… 80 misconduct cases were closed in 2025, and of those, the panel reviewed 15 cases.

[92:04] For community inquiries, there were 20 registered in 2025, and 18 closed that same year. Community feedbacks, 26 registered, 27 closed, unspecified incidents, 26 registered, 26 closed. Referred to other agencies, 11 of those were registered, and 13 of those were closed. Other cases, one was registered, two were closed. For a total of 147 cases that were registered in 2025, 173 that were closed, and the panel conducted 19 case reviews. Also, for information, 12… Cases were classified as serious misconduct or misconduct, but they were precluded from the panel or monitor review due to the criminal record sealing

[93:04] doc… Statute under Colorado's Clean Slate Law. Some of the things that I did in January included tabling for panel recruitment at the Boards and Commissions open house, attended local Martin Luther King ceremonies, connected with advocates for police oversight in Loveland, Colorado. Attended, Community Connectors in Residence to respond to their questions about oversight changes, was involved with the District 10 Public Safety and Criminal Justice Reform Committee, and attended a training, engagement through data, insight, and tips. And opening it up for questions. I see Curtis has… oh, do I need to keep the slideshow up, or…

[94:05] You're muted, Curtis. Yeah, I think it would be best to keep it up. Okay. Can you still see and hear me? Okay. Yeah, I guess I'll start from the… from the top. 006? dash 006. Where is it at? Let me just pull this thing up here. I find it problematic in the chief's response, maybe this is just feedback that you can give him. He says, For officers and non-enforcement roles, it is not a priority like detectives, but anyone working patrol Should be certified moving forward?

[95:02] what does that really mean? Like, are they going to be certified moving forward, or is it just something that, like. Should be practiced, but isn't. That feels very unclear to me. Those are the exact words that the chief used. I'm not going to try to interpret those for him. Okay. Well, I guess if… can we give feedback on these… on these statements? Or… I don't think there's anything preventing. Okay, I just want to make sure that… yeah. So, I don't know, I feel like to have language that's unclear like that, it doesn't give, Like, certainty of what we can expect moving forward. So I would like it to be more like… officers will… you know, be certified moving forward instead of should. I just feel like that… so that's my only note on that one, and then…

[96:06] What is it, 03… 9… Sorry. I have this written down here. It's this one. Yeah, the panel asks for training in investigations and case assignments. If this is something the panel wishes, it can be requested through the monitor. I wasn't on this case review, but if… if we're… requesting training through… I mean, it feels like that's what happened, right? Like, we requested training through you, you told that to the chief, and now he's coming back saying. Well, if you want that, ask the monitor. So, that, that just feels… strange to me, is what I'm saying.

[97:02] Does that, does that make sense? I understand what you're saying. Okay. And then, yeah, I just wanted to note… On 0-041. Where is it at here? Jazz-041, you mentioned last time that it would… it might be possible. In the future, for you to provide video clips. For cases like this. I wonder if you've had that conversation yet. Yes, I have. Is that gonna be something? The… They've been receptive to that, so the question is what format the… like, in what scenario the panel would get that. But I've made that official request. Okay, yeah, I… in this one being a use of force, it feels like a video clip would be especially important, because in this particular case, someone's claiming

[98:08] They were injured, and you're saying the injury couldn't have happened because the place of impact wasn't, like, there visually? And it would be nice for the panel to be able to see and review that. Curtis? Curtis? How about we take some of this conversation into closed session, so we don't inadvertently, Talk about confidential information in a public meeting. Gotcha. Okay, I'll move on. Sorry about that. It's easy to forget. Yeah. And then, yeah, I had one more question. Sorry about so many questions. But is it normal? I don't understand how… on 044… that… the allegation of, Rule 4? N Rule 1… We're both not sustained, but… But… But they're getting coached.

[99:13] Is that… I don't think… I haven't personally seen that in reviewing cases. I would think that if something was not sustained or exonerated, then there wouldn't be any need for coaching. So I'm just curious about that. Yeah, happy… happy to share about that. So, verbal counseling is considered to be discipline. So, that comes with a… with a sustained allegation. But there can be space between. An officer committed misconduct. And… this was done in a really good way. So there can be something that's not misconduct, and yet we'd like to see something better, to provide the officer with more tools to handle a similar situation in the first place, or instruction that the behavior that the officer did wasn't as helpful to that situation as we would like. So that's what coaching is, where it's not… it's not misconduct, but it can be done better.

[100:10] Okay. Does that make sense? Yeah, that makes sense. Thank you for the clarification. And then on the last one, 00-001. Is this something… this looks like something that only the Monitor and PSU reviewed? That's correct. Okay. Yeah, I again would just like to, name that something… Around bias policing. Not being reviewed by, the panel feels, feels dangerous. And I would really like to see that, especially cases with…

[101:04] With police biasing should be open to a, to a diverse… Body. For… for review. That's all I have. Thank you, Curtis. Kristen, it looks like you have your hand up. Yeah, I wanted to second that, because, like, even though, the officer could not have seen the person it's noted here, there might be other signs on the car that are revealing of race or ethnicity as well. I… I believe I addressed that in pretty significant detail in the confidential summaries that were sent to you. Okay, and then my other question, and this is something, I'm just wondering that, you know, it has the… and this is a question I don't… I would… what is…

[102:02] I wanted to raise the issue of, like, there's the allegation, and then there's, the monitor recommendation, or the panel recommendation, and then the departmental determination. But, there's not… a mention of, like, PSU's recommendation, and I'm wondering if that's intentional, or just because there's not enough room on the slides, or if that's because of confidentiality, or if it might be helpful also, for the public engaging the work that the panel does to maybe have access to that, but I don't know if that's also not possible. No, that's something that we've been working this past year, myself and PSU and Daniel Reinhart, on, making sure that, with data, that we can track this, so… When we get more comprehensive 2025 data, we should be able to see the recommendations from every step along the chain of command.

[103:04] And, I mean, and then including the monitor and the panel. So that more granular detail, we work to build out the system and make sure that we're all entering things in standard ways so that that can be sussed out in the data. Milan? Yeah, I'm wondering about Curtis's first two points on the clarification of the language from the Chief. And on, the panel requesting a training, Can we… I would like to know what the next steps are. To make sure that that doesn't get lost.

[104:03] And I guess that's for you, Sherry. I mean, how does the panel want that to be brought up to the chief? Well, that's what I'm asking you, in terms of… Whose responsibility it is. For the training, it's apparently for you to make sure it happens. for the feedback to… to… to ask the chief for more clarification, I imagine that Curtis or any one of us could ask directly the Chief, since we have that feedback loop. That we can, use. But yeah, I just wanna… I just wanna… I mean… I have clarification on both of those. I mean, one of the… one of the things that… you know, is a benefit to, I think, this entire system? Is the… is our quarterly

[105:04] meetings with the Chief, where you have the opportunity to, you know, ask for clarification. Or make specific requests. To him directly. Instead of going through other people, but otherwise, I'm happy to… I'm happy to pass along these… these issues that Curtis elevated. Well, I think that we have a direct line of access to the chief, right? If we disagree with something that he says, we have the possibility to, Ask him for a meeting and a conversation. That's in the ordinance, unless this has been struck… struck out. Recently, but that's… that's the feedback. That's… one way we can access the chief, so we can access him directly, we don't have to wait months before we can ask him.

[106:01] But regarding the training, Can we make sure that this happens? I mean, if that's a training that is a priority for the panel, then yes, we can absolutely make sure that that happens. I mean, the training schedule, admittedly, is often booked out many months in advance. But… What is our next training? Oh, I mean BPD's training schedule. The next training that we have are going to be the trainings, the annual trainings for… The… the new members on… I think the… 4th and the 10th? Of March? No, of April. Of April, okay. So, do we need to put in a motion right now for… To… for the training? Or vote? Or…

[107:00] I think maybe that would be a good idea. Sorry, Dad, Lizzie. Is anyone, sorry, I realize my screen is still up. Is there any reason to keep this up, especially if there's going to be a vote? I don't think so. Oh, no. Okay, so Lucy's, changing, I'm not sure. Chris, do we need to vote to request a training that… Have been brought up by panel members in a case review? I mean, you could take a quick straw poll and see if anybody's opposed to it. I mean, it sounds like… It seems like there's a lot of interest in the training. And, there is a, as Milan was saying, there is a portion of the ordinance that talks about written communication from the panel to the chief, and so there is that direct line of communication, so…

[108:05] Soledad or Lizzie could send, the Chief an email. I recommend CCing Sherry, just so she's in the loop, requesting the training. Okay, then let's follow that. Guidance, anyone opposed to a training, a specific training that we were talking about? Don't see anyone. Awesome. So, we're gonna move and ask for the train. Perfect. Okay, so we're super behind schedule on the agenda. We… we have a public comment scheduled now, so we're gonna move forward to public comment. just so… we are aware, I'm sorry, who's… who's going to be supporting this? City Manager's Office Admin Person, do you have a name so we can call you? Yes, of course. My name is Lisa. Hi, Lisa, thank you so much for being here tonight. Of course.

[109:00] So if you can help me with, unmuting the participants, so I'm gonna ask the members of the public, if you want to provide public comment, please raise your hand so we can identify you. Once that your hand is up, we're gonna go through the list and give you time… to, Provide public comments, so that will be… 2 minutes. So I think… I see one raised hand, but I can't see whose hand it is. I'm so… okay, Laura Gonzalez, okay. Judy Hughes. Okay, we're gonna start with Laura, that's the first, hand that I saw. So, Laura, you're… we're gonna unmute you. You can also mute yourself. And, do we have a timer in the screen? Nope, yep, I don't see…

[110:01] We do, you should see it on my screen now. Okay. Okay, Laura, please unmute yourself, and your time is running. Go ahead. Can you please restart my time? Sure. Thank you. Let me know when it restarts. I… okay, I'm not seeing that screen, I'm… It restarted. Just restart it. It's restarted right now. Okay. Go ahead. So… I'm very concerned about how we're using our resources as, with the police. I have not looked at any salary of any police officer that's less than 70-something K. And, Chief Redfern is making $202,000… A year, which is $0.97.50 an hour. Here we have Chris Reynolds, you know, the prosecutor, deputy attorney, he's making $175,560 a year, which is $84 an hour. And then we also have…

[111:09] the internal police monitor making $166,000 an hour. $160,000 a year, which is $79 an hour, while the police oversight committee members are getting about $200 a month. So, to me, how can you provide transparency in terms of I want to have a list of, like. you know, the police officers who make that much salary, I want to know their qualifications in terms of their education and their background, to see if the salary is being equitable, and I also want to see the demographic data, because I think also the reason that we have so much Police violence and brutality, and that the police can get away with it, is because they're protecting each other, especially with the salaries, right? Which, they're giving power to each other. And,

[112:01] Also, I want to see what data do you… are you using to say that police officers can just get them kind of coaching and training, even if, you know, they were found, like, not guilty, because there's been, like, so many years of data. that the police are not really preventing any crime, right? They started as slave catchers, which is something that I also want to know. What is the city of Boulder doing to make sure that that's being acknowledged, and how that violence is being still perpetuated today? Sorry, Dad, you're muted. Of course I am. Thank you, Laura. We're… we're taking notes. Thank you. Okay, next we have Judy… Houston? Judy, if you can unmute yourself, please, and, Lisa, we can start the timer. Thank you.

[113:02] B? Yes. Okay, so I just took some notes here. One of the things that I paid attention to is it feels like the, the panel was an afterthought in a lot of different ways, and that it continues to be an afterthought in all sorts of different ways. Also, there are no, as someone mentioned, there's no processes that are structured in a way that you can actually understand. It looks like they make up the, the structures afterwards. And I find that quite disturbing. And then the other thing I'm looking at is the, the large discrepancy between the overall number of cases and those that get reviewed by the panel. It's a huge discrepancy, and it doesn't make any sense to me, and I think that for that communication to be valuable to anybody. Those reasons have to be made very clear.

[114:01] Why that number… why that discrepancy is true. Yeah, so there's… and there needs to be a criteria for who does, review which cases, that is known by everybody up front and not told afterwards. You really need to have something You know, that you could actually see through. And that's all I want to say. Thank you so much, Judy. Thank you. Okay, next I have, TI game? I'm sorry if I'm mispronouncing. Tiagi, please, if you can unmute yourself, and we will start your time. Thank you. Thank you, I appreciate it. First, thank you, Chico, for all of your contributions, and to everybody on the committee and the panel. Yes, just your… all of your insights are valuable, and your time is appreciated. As a member of the public.

[115:03] I just want to note that, I have noticed and feel concerned about… also, I don't add my name to the record as a member of the Address Confidentiality Program. That towards the end of the process, just like the last speaker noted, is when this committee is getting involved. the interpretation changes of the ordinance, are concerning over the last several months as well. From a project management and consultancy perspective, as somebody who's consulted with clients like the airport, CSU National Western Stock Show for 20-year plans. As well as, like, up to $20 million plans. I'd like to note that Elevate U, not including like, the general public as a potential stakeholder is, a potential area of oversight. Now, I don't know the full scope, but that is something that can and is typically requested, which would be general public, and not to conflate that with the public that is serving on this panel.

[116:15] I would also be curious who will the eval be made available to, and how? who has the power to make decisions based on that once those recommendations come back, since this person is acting basically as a facilitator, maybe even a mediator, but a non-partisan person, in essence. And then, yeah, I think I'm about out of time. But I do have concerns, especially, as violence continues, especially in marginalized groups. So thank you for your time. Thank you. Tig, thank you so much. Okay, so we have… Another question from Laura in the Q&A.

[117:05] Can someone help me read that? I cannot open it in my screen. I can read it. Thank you. Can we do a legit study of other cities that defunded the police and funded, human and social services? actually reduced crime? Why do the salaries of BPD keep increasing while we lose positions and funding in departments such as public health? There's another one, too. I think this is her previous comment, but if you want, I can read it. How is it that the Internal Police Monitor makes $166,000 a year, while the people who are doing the real work to review police abuse, police power, and brutality only receive $200 a month? Can we figure out a way to be more equitable? Specifically in BPD? They got the highest raises than other departments in the city that actually do provide services such as mental health.

[118:03] substance use support and counseling. These services prove that they work to reduce crime, while the police has never been proven to actually prevent or reduce crime. I would appreciate if the IPM and the entire BPD reads propaganda. Okay. Thank you, Laura. Thank you for your questions. And noted, Bill, I see your note that you have to leave. Okay, I don't see… does people see any other hand sprays in… participants, so… okay. With that, we are going to close. There's actually someone… Sorry, there's a hand up. Oh, okay, Marcia R, so… yeah, we… we're ready for you, so if you want to unmute yourself, and Lisa, if you can start the… Timer, that would be great, thank you.

[119:04] Marcia, go ahead. Her hand just went down. Marcia, we can't hear you. I think she's… I don't see her in the screen, do you see? Oh, yeah, at the end, okay. She's having trouble. Or with a deck. Okay. Marcia, we cannot hear you, but if you want to type… She's having a problem with the tech, and she's gonna write it in the morning. Okay. Okay, we'll… Okay, we'll go back to it. So, with this last question, we're gonna close open, public comment, and… I have a friend who's also having technical issues, but has a question they'd like to put forward.

[120:02] Okay, who is that person? Their name is, Dr. Dugas. I think they're not currently on the… Okay. They've texted me their question. Okay, do you want to read it then, Curtis, please? The question is, who has enforceable oversight of the BPD? Is it city council? Like, who holds them accountable? Keep them from shutting us out of the process of changes. Hmm. That's a great question. Sherry, do you have an answer for that one? Or Chris, maybe? Good evening. City Manager, is, the police chief's direct supervisor, and so… it all flows through the city manager's office. The whole police department is technically under the city manager's office. The city council has no authority to direct

[121:06] any employee other than the city manager, the city attorney, and they can hire the municipal judge. But all of the other sort of operational employees of the city are under the city manager. Thank you. Thank you, Chris. So now I can see Q&A. And I'm gonna read Marcia's question. I don't think we have an answer, but we're gonna take note. Okay, so the question is, is there data on increases in ability to address crime with Flock versus without Flock in the past. It seems there isn't enough transparency about how this system is actually helping as opposed to hindering our privacy rights. Thank you… Mar… Marcia, Marcia, for… for your question. We're gonna take note. We have a meeting with the Chief coming up in March, so we can… we can bring this with us and… and ask that direct questions and have an answer.

[122:06] Thank you so much. Milan? On that note, we were gonna… the chief said we could… the panel could have a training on the flock cameras and the… and I'm just wondering where that's at, and when that's gonna happen. Yeah, that's something that me and the co-chairs need to talk about per the Chief's last communications. So is it in the process of being done, or is it… Still to be. It's… it's going to have to go through some city attorney stuff, and we're going to need to figure out when makes sense, because the panel… there's been a lot… there's a lot being asked of the panel currently, so to figure out when is going to be a good time. Hmm… Just to note, I think there is a difference. Between what the panel is asking for versus what's being asked from the panel.

[123:05] So, this one is something that we asked for. All the other things are things that we have been asked to do, and that's the difference. So, just, just to make note of that, like, this is a priority for us, so… so we should… move. Forward as, it is a priority. Okay, so let's move now to closed session. We are gonna be there for, hopefully, less than 20 minutes, and we'll be back for case review, voting, and assignments. So… Lisa, can you please put us… Milan? I just want to remind you also that I had put an additional… a motion for an additional, training with the new trainer at BPD that we wanted to discuss. So sorry about that. Can we discuss it when we come back from closer?

[124:01] Absolutely, yeah, that's fine. Okay, thank you, remind me, please. Lisa, can you put us in a breakout room, please? Thank you. Still not showing up.

[125:06] Okay, I'm here, but Lizzie, can… can you manage, maybe, without me in the closed session? Yeah, I'm happy to do that. It's… just… I wish we could have you in here, but happy to facilitate. Maybe you guys can keep working on it. Yeah, just move… Let's move people to the closed session icon. True. Okay, great. Thank you, Lisa. Of course. All right, everyone, we are hopefully all back. It is very late, so I just want to acknowledge the time. Hopefully we can wrap this up relatively quickly, but Soledad, to catch you up, I don't know when you were able… were you able to join the breakout room at all?

[126:07] Or do we need to catch… Well, just for the group and for any, community members in attendance. We are back now in the public meeting. Does anyone from the panel have additional comments? On any other topics before we move ahead. Dan's, hands is up. Thank you, go ahead, one. Yeah, so just for transparency, I hooked up my phone to the meeting that we were having in closed session, so that I could at least listen into it. And then, regarding the classification, or regarding your report, Sherry, about incidents where complaints were meshed with incidents, I think this is the first time that we have this kind of.

[127:05] counts, like, regarding, Curtis' first question, or one of his first questions, and so I'm just wondering… That's something that we disagree on as a panel, that we want to see the complaint separated from the incidents, and I would, I would request that this be, Done as it was, previously done. I'm sorry, I don't understand what… In your… in your… the ident… the identification, I… I don't have the, Unfortunately, I don't have your presentation. I don't have it up either. But if you're making a distinction between cases and incidents, I don't understand what you mean by that. and, like, the… We don't know which ones were complaints. In the cases.

[128:00] Sherry, we'd like a breakout that says how many total Complaints came in, and then… the branching to community inquiry, closed complaints, complaints, like, we want to kind of see the whole picture, I think. Glenn, is that what we're… Yes, thank you for using better words than I am. That's all. Yeah. But yes. Does that make sense, Sherry? No, I'm not… I… I… I broke it down by… Well, the question was what exactly was being broken down, so maybe we can Why don't we offline take another look at the presentation, make sure we're clear on what the data means and how we should interpret it. And if we have questions, we'll send them to Sherry, and we can make sure it's clear for next time. Does that sound okay? And just, again, this is preliminary data. Last year, I gave a, like, tried to do a snapshot from the year before, so I tried doing the same thing this year. I'm sorry, it's confusing, but…

[129:03] It's… I thought it was information that y'all would want to know. Sherry, just for me, we have never seen this unspecified incidence classification before in the, in the cases, the summary of cases. So, we have seen… the serious misconduct. Are you talking about confidential summaries? this… yeah. Yes, you have. the unspecified? Yeah. Okay, I'm gonna have to loop back then. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, I get… because I break it down by… when I give you your… your… the confidential summaries, I give you the misconducts first. And then under that, I put… it's much briefer. Normally, there's some where it's really complicated, so I do provide more detail, but then I'll break it down by any community inquiries, community feedback. unspecified incidents. Okay, well, maybe there were so many this time around, but that…

[130:04] caught my attention. Okay, I'm gonna look back, thank you. Okay, so there's no cases for the panel to vote on. Therefore, I think, that part is done, no case assignment, and not assignment for new cases. Milen… sorry, Milen had a… we bumped her off the… before. Yep, yep, yep, yep. Milan, go ahead, please. Yeah, I was just, So we were reviewing a case today, and we learned that, there was a new, trainer with BPD, and, you know, I think that's some… something that we have never considered before, but our recommendations are often coaching, training, and all that, and so I felt like Learning that there's a new trainer maybe would be a good place for us to meet with them and see what their… how they train, or just have questions, whatever, have an open conversation about how they do their job, and what we…

[131:07] What we are expecting from trainings, and what we've seen, and what we've… feel is missing, and so I just wanted to see the interest of this panel, and I know that I don't know that we have quorum anymore, but just wanted to see the interest of this panel to have a meeting with the new trainer, Sergeant Austin, and, That could be in a different way. It could be doing a presentation at our next meeting, or it could do a presentation maybe at the… during the, meeting with the chief, or we could have an hour to set aside to meet Very, you know, in person, and really, sit down together. So I just wanted to see if there is any interest, and if we could start maybe asking BPD if that's a possibility.

[132:04] And figure out what they can do, and what we'd like to do. If the panel is interested, I think the… having that happen during the meeting with the chief sounds like a good… Good fit. So I'd support that. I will say… I, totally support that. Why don't we plan on asking for this for this specific conversation to happen, next meeting with the chief, if we need to go deeper, and we need more time, we can ask for that. So, let's not close the possibility of going deeper. Yeah, I appreciate that. Sounds good to me. Okay, cool, so, noted. And we'll follow up with that for the next meeting with the Chief.

[133:00] I'm creating a Q1 2026 meeting with the Chief in the March folder right now to put this in. Okay, cool. Okay, so I think that we're kind of… Oh, we'll still have Corona. Okay, Having gone through the agenda, finally, we, I think we're ready to adjourn, unless there's anything else someone wants to say. Okay, I need a motion to adjourn, and then a second. Please. ABs? To adjourn? Okay, and… Okay, we have AB motioned, and then Curtis is second. So, really see, thank you. Okay, all in favor for adjourning the meeting, please. Cool. See you soon, see you around, Tico. Thank you so much.

[134:00] Hi, Chico. Alright, everybody. Thanks. Bye, everyone! Have a good day. 9th, right? @b's iPad: Thank you so much.