I'm dying. Good evening. My name is Latana Reeves and I'm the chair of the Community Commission on Police Oversight. Before we begin, I want to offer a friendly reminder to all members, staff, and the public that these meetings are broadcast live to enable greater public participation. These broadcasts include realtime captioning as a further method to increase the accessibility of our meetings, our proceedings to to the community. Therefore, all speakers need to be mindful of the rate of their speech so that our capturers can fully capture and transcribe all comments for the broadcast. We ask all speakers to moderate the speed and clarity of their comments. At this time, I'm going to call to order this regular meeting for Monday, December 15th, and ask the clerk to call the role. Commissioner Mhenny >> present. >> Shanfield present. Um Stewart >> present. >> Kennedy >> present. >> Barts >> present. >> Inderly is absent. Williams Johnson is absent. Smith >> present. >> Vice Chair Olsen >> present. >> And Chair Reeves >> present. There are eight members present. >> Thank you. Let the record reflect that we have a quorum. Commissioners, the agenda for this evening's meeting is before us. I'm not aware of any proposed amendments to the agenda. So, let me ask if there are any amendments to the agenda from commissioners. Seeing none, may I have a motion to adopt the agenda as presented? >> Smith so moves. >> All right. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. Is there a motion in a second? The clerk will call the role on the motion to adopt the agenda. Commissioner Malhenny >> I >> Shanfield >> I >> Stewart >> I Kennedy >> I >> Barts >> I >> Smith >> I >> chair or vice chair Olsen >> I >> and chair Reeves >> I >> there are eight eyes. >> All right the eyes have it and the agenda is adopted. Thank you. Next we have one set of minutes to accept from our November 18th regular meeting. May I have a motion and second to accept these minutes? >> So moved. >> All right. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. It's been moved and seconded. We have a proper motion. Please call the role. >> Commissioner Mlehenny. >> Abstain. Shanville. >> I Stewart. >> I >> Kennedy. >> Hi. >> Barts. >> Hi. >> Smith. I >> Vice Chair Olsson >> I >> and Chair Reeves >> I [clears throat] there are seven eyes and one abstension. >> All right the eyes have it and the minutes have been accepted. Next in in the order of public comments we'll open the floor to any comments from the public giving each speaker two minutes to address the commission. We'll be taking speakers in the order they register. If you wish to address the commission tonight and haven't already done so, you may register with the clerks at the side of the deis. If any speaker has printed materials, please give those to the city clerk. We have also invited folks to submit written comments using the forms available from the city clerk to be included in the public's record as an alternative to speaking at tonight's comment session. Each speaker will be given two minutes to address the commission tonight. We have a timer to assist speakers in monitoring their use of time. With that, I'll open the public comment period. Our first speaker tonight is Dave Bicking. Hello. Thanks for coming out tonight though. Um, doesn't look great for enthusiasm when you got just got your quorum of 8 at 6:17. So, um, but anyhow, I'm glad you have uh item 10 on the agenda. the police chief reappoint process because that still needs discussing. Um that um I was on the CRA back in 2008 2009 and um the data practice laws in that regard I don't believe have changed since then because I keep an eye on those. And um in any case, we discussed the uh um appointment of the chief and committee and in the full meeting and wrote up a report that was available to the public. And we did that as a commission, the CRA. And I believe strongly that you should be doing your um um reappoint process for the chief in public, not each one of you going separately to say privately what you think. [snorts] So um I hope in that discussion you will bring that up. Uh, I just wanted to mention that members of our group have um uh filed a complaint back in 2023 and uh we have still not heard what's happened to that complaint. Um, and that gives a sense of how long it takes for some of these complaints. It would be interesting to know how many other complaints there are from 2023. Thank you. >> Thank you. Seeing no further speakers on the list, we've completed all public comments and we'll close the public comment period. The next order of business is reports. We'll begin with the report from the Office of Police Conduct Review. I will ask Director Fujisawa to come up and speak and I've allocated 15 minutes for this report. Welcome. >> Good evening. Uh my name is Russell Fiso. I'm the associate director of the Office of Police Conduct Review. Um as usual, we'll work work through our agenda just providing some updates on our intake work and our administrative investigations as well as our review panel um numbers and trends over the course of the year. Um, as you as you know, OPCR handles uh complaints of misconduct by the Minneapolis Police Department. Um, and our jurisdiction is complaints that originate with community members. Um, we continue to work through um, you know, as we move away from the backlog of investigations. We continue to work through the complaints and the cases that we get. Um a and under the settlement agreement and the provisions of the consent decree um continuing to work towards a place where we can look at and consider compliance with those timelines with the timeliness of our investigations and our complaint receipt um just so we can continue to provide that more um more efficient, more transparent uh and accountable investigation practice. Uh, I just have this up because I I know we sort of uh teased this every couple months, but we did have a case investigator start on the 1st of December. Um, and we have another one that is sort of falling victim to the the holidays and they have cleared background, have signed an offer. Um, but because of the holidays, the the really the next onboarding opportunity is going to be January 12th. Um, but we're very excited. Um, and with that addition, OPCR will be fully staffed. Um, it's the first time since I've been here, and I think going back long before I started intake. Um, we reviewed this previously, but this is the um, you know, in addition to the the difference in jurisdiction of our complaints. I I I always like to reiterate how different our intake and our complaint receipt looks uh, compared to internal affairs. Um, again, because sworn members and city employees are much more familiar with the policies and procedures of the department. So when an allegation comes in, it is usually very specific. Um it is tied to a subsection and there is really not a ton of gray area. I don't want to say there's none. I don't want to speak for internal affairs, but it is a much clearer allegation. Um versus [clears throat] OPCR, we often get complaints just about the negative nature of an interaction with an officer and it's our job through the course of that intake and investigation. and it's to determine um that individual or set of policies that are alleged to have been violated. So this requires an interview with the complainant >> [snorts] >> um really an indepth look at available evidence including BWC body one camera um NVR um you know any um any vehicle data anything that we have available within those first 30 days to make an appropriate and thorough determination on the appropriate routing of that case. So that is a lot of work to do in the first 30 days. Um coordinating an interview, you know, really teasing apart what is being alleged um and really assessing that conduct in those first 30 days. And I say that because the average [clears throat] length of our investigation on the intake side really uh hover continues to hover around 20 to 22 days. This past month it was 21 days. So again I want to remind you that 30 days is the uh is the metric for intake from receipt of complaint to case disposition um in intake. So we are ahead of that timeline but as always uh the volume of complaints is is our biggest barrier. Um you can see that the average length of a case in the intake queue is about 75 days. Um and that complaint number um out of compliance continues to hover right around 100. The addition of our two staff members over the course of this month into next is really going to help um start to chip away at this number. I really hope to start seeing that number um you know obviously below 100 and then continue to trend downwards. And that's all in the context of this. So we continue to see this upward trajectory of total contacts by our office. Um complaints continues to to remain steady around um on average two to three days uh or two to three complaints per day over the course of a month. But our inquiries are are really continuing on a significant upward trajectory. And um I I can say it is complaints from other jurisdictions. it is things that are not uh necessarily relevant to police misconduct. I I I will say we have [snorts] a lot of instances anecdotally a lot of instances of of mental health and so we get a high volume of complaints from a small number of people and the challenge right under the settlement agreement under the consent decree and just doing our due diligence is going through combing through these comments these inquiries these contacts to make sure that there isn't an explicit reference or even an implicit reference to uh MPD misconduct that we you know may overlook and may not investigate. Uh, as previously requested, here is sort of the breakdown by incident date of complaints that we received over the past month. Again, a majority, I think it's somewhere around 70% sit within the month of November of 2025. We do have some historical cases or just some unknown dates. So, that trend continues to have a majority of the complaints sit in the month that we are reporting out on. Uh this is something that I um wanted to put together for for for this past month's complaints and this is I think we have to take this with a grain of salt, right? Because this is on the face value the the categorization of a complaint um based on the face value of the complaint. So I I I say that because throughout the course of those 21 potentially 30 days of our intake investigation, the allegations and sort of the heart of the complaint and the case can be completely different from what we receive on from the on the face value of the complaint. Um so this sort of speaks to one the nature of complaints that we receive and is I think we'll try to figure out the best way um to communicate the data without you know any violation of MGDPA in terms of showing the difference between complaint received and and sort of the outcome. Um but I think it's helpful to see sort of the nature of complaints that we receive over the course of a month. Um, so we'll continue to provide this and try to um try to iterate to see what's the most effective way to communicate this information and sort of how that changes over the course of those 30 days of intake. Administrative investigations. Obviously, this is uh cases where we do identify police misconduct according to the P&P. Um and this goes on for a much further deeper um investigatory look interviewing officers, sworn um witnesses and sworn focus officers with a culmination of the ISR that ends up sitting with review panels. Um the backlog work post investigation continues to progress in terms of moving towards uh closure. Um again closure is different than complete uh because right this is OPCR investigative work that has gone through to the chief. Um either a decision is to be made or it has been made but there is grievance and arbitration. So we rely on internal affairs to communicate any discipline that is imposed um and for that to be reported out publicly um prior to us deeming investigation closed and complete. Um there is still, as I mentioned last month, there is still one case uh that worked its way back into assigned um from the backlog. I I personally have have filed the training records request that is needed to to tie that one out. So I'm myself am doing some of the work to to shepherd that through. So continues to hang out there, but um we are making progress finalizing those to the best of our ability within within OPCR. Um the bright spot here is that we continue to assign new cases out that are both current um compliant and current non-compliant. So [snorts] um you know we want to prevent another administrative backlog again. Um so staffing has helped, training has helped um [snorts] setting up and getting uh approval on in compliance on our standard operating procedures so that there is a standard process of work, standard process of investigation. All of that has led to us to be able to um you know have a a solid cadence of case um case assignments, have really a good churn of our investigations through our office. our our current compliant bucket is going to be smaller just because we are still working through some older cases. Uh but we continue to sign those out as well because we want to make sure that we're giving ourselves a fighting chance on the front end of keeping some cases within compliance um while we try to bring those oldest cases um to some type of resolution quickly. I think everybody um is familiar with the review panels and the function it serves. Um again that change to three members on the review panel has really helped expedite um the work of the review panel and scheduling within OPCR. Again, you could take a a closer look at this, but just the trajectory over the course of the year is is very impressive. And I I credit our policy and research unit coordinator Lind De Jang and her team for putting in place all the appropriate uh processes really coordinating these review panels for both IIA and OPCR cases over the course of the last year. And I think we are approaching uh if my math we're approaching uh almost five times the number of cases that we reviewed in 2024 um uh throughout the course of 2025 so far. We're going to try to eek in a few more. Um but this is really again a testament to the work and the coordination um and all the time that commissioners have committed to this work. So very much appreciative of that. Um, but the work continues, right? We know that internal affairs has many cases in supervisory review. OPCR still has cases in supervisory review. And obviously, we have cases that are in investigation right now. So, this will be a steady stream through throughout 2026 as well. Um before I I take any questions, I just also wanted to remind I I know an email went out earlier about the 360 survey uh about civil rights and and its engagement in support of you know general operations uh in the department but also of commissions. Um and it's not just the CCPO I know it's MCR MCCR as well as the workplace advisory committee. So, we're asking to just to see if there are um opportunities uh if there's feedback, if there are stuff that needs to just be improved. We So, we just ask that everybody uh respond to that um before the end of the week. So, with that, I can take any questions. >> Thank you, Director Fujisawa. Can you just say on the slide that has the the types of calls, what is HR IU? that is uh human resources investigative unit. So actually >> that's what I thought of. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Any other questions? >> Okay, seeing no questions. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> I'd like the clerk to receive and file that report. >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I have a quick question. Commissioner Stewart, >> um, on the complaints received, the category complaint slide, is that something that's going to be open to the public at some point or just to the to our commissioners? >> This one? >> Yeah. This is one you're talking about. I I mean this is it was published with the material. So this is out there. Um but again making that that important distinction that this is at face value of the complaint that we received. Um so this is prior to the investigation. Um this is prior to a final routing decision on this. >> Gotcha. So when people ask what are your trending complaints, is this something we can reference them to? Um yeah um in terms of the complaints that we and again with carrying those caveats and we can we're working to to go back in time and working to do this moving forward and but also trying to you know tell the full story of what happens on the back end. So I I think there again we're going to try to figure out what the best way to communicate this is but probably providing a percentage of you know at least within a degree of certainty the the number of or the percentage of complaints that are you know retain the same allegation on the front end and after disposition. Um I I think that's probably the closest we can get to disseminating u meaningful information without uh you know infringing on MGDPA requirements. >> Got you. Thank you. >> Yep. >> All right, Commissioner Shanfield. >> Thank you, Director Fujisawa. Um, thank you, Chair. Uh, curious about I don't mean to put you on the spot. Um, so welcome longer conversation um at some other point, but uh I'm curious every month you come and you present this very useful information. Do you have any guidance for us as we're planning for 2026, sort of what you would like to see us do with some of the information that you provide? I know you work really hard at it. Um I I think I ask I would ask um particularly uh you know from review panel because there is uh you know you do get to see specific case information and you get to see some of the trends that are you know that paint a fuller picture than what we're seeing here what we can present publicly. Um I I think my ask would be to to really take that information um sort of on the aggregate of what you're seeing obviously in context of when the incident date is in the context of the policies being reworked by the department of the training that's improving um of you know even the the social and political landscape and really try to um you know with the PPR and the community engagement committees I think to to the extent you're able to use that information to highlight, you know, where people should be focusing in terms of their efforts, their interest. Um, if there is some public momentum that is needed in certain spaces, um, or just to reaffirm the good work that the department is doing in implementing reforms, um, and new policies and new trainings. I know many commissioners will attend some of the trainings at the academy. So, I mean, you'll be able to paint a much fuller picture than, you know, what we can do here legally and publicly. So I I I would just ask that um you use that opportunity and that uh I guess that access to to do to be that representative voice of your of of your of the communities that you are representatives of. >> All right. Thank you. Clerk, please file that report. Next up is the monthly report from the police department's internal affairs division. IA is unable to attend due to a matter they had to tend to. If there are any questions, we can follow up with staff. Uh, so next up is the monthly report from the police department's implementation unit. Lieutenant Robinson is here to present today, and I've allocated 10 minutes for this report. Good evening. I'm Lieutenant Bryce Robinson. Uh today we're going to talk about uh the previous requests, some key updates and our next steps. Some of the uh previous requests uh the CCPO had for us um it was how they could get more involved with implementation. Uh one is to keep providing that feedback on policies. Um, we're also looking at scheduling you guys some uh dates at the academy where you guys can attend and watch training. Um, and certainly after that you can you can submit kind of what your thoughts are on that on that uh that training. Uh, we're also looking at also getting you guys into some other trainings um and looking at those opportunities. Another way you guys can get involved is uh by doing ride alongs. I know on the previous I think previous month we had an officer's email listed. I think that email was wrong. Um, but he's no longer in our unit. He was transferred out. Um, so we do have the numbers of the precincts uh listed on the slide. You can reach out uh to the desk and ask to speak to the supervisor and they can work to schedule you a ride along. If you call and for some reason you can't get a hold of anybody, um, at the end of the presentation here, there's an email and you can reach out and we will work on getting you guys scheduled. I know Commissioner Barts, I believe you reached out. Um, I've already working on getting you a ride along in the fourth precinct. So hopefully I can get that scheduled here for you. Uh, we're also working on a creating a citizens academy. It's very new, very much in the works. Um, but it's you something you guys can attend and also getting community members out with officers and experiencing our training, what we go through and learning more about implementation. some key updates here. [snorts] Uh we recently had some turnover in our community engagement uh unit. Um we have currently one community engagement manager uh one community specialist who's bilingual and we're looking to have a community engagement project lead start here hopefully in the early 2026. Some of the things that we're working on is creating a implementation newsletter that's external um and just giving a more transparent look at what happens in implementation all the things that we're doing because it's not always covered um in these presentations. Uh we're also looking at uh having uh creating a MPD community policing plan. Um working to build trust with the community and collaborate um to further our public safety goals. Uh, another project that we're working on, um, is a community engagement survey. Um, about a year ago, we had our policies posted for, um, engaging with minors. Um, one of the things that I think that was missing was, uh, getting feedback from those that are actually impacted by those policies, um, the youth. So uh we've created a survey to reach out to those a wide range of different uh people under age of 18 and seeking their feedback and their perceptions on police and how we can change policies and better their experience when they do have contacts with the police. Officer wellness and support. Um, we're scheduling our uh snowshoe shuffle uh in 2026. Um, we had our first one in 2025. I don't know not sure if you guys attended. Um, but it's a great uh a great event. It's a race. Um, you can rent some snowshoes, go out there and um I I look at it as a community event as well as an officer wellness event. Um it's getting officers outside um with community members and uh doing something together other than you know giving tickets or responding to calls um and getting to know the community. Um some recent uh policies that were approved uh [clears throat] members health and wellness, members medical information, injury and incident response and uh the peer support team policy. [snorts] Um some policy updates here. Uh use of force was approved by LEIFA crisis intervention. um MVVG which is mission mission vision values and goals uh non-discriminatory and procedural justice emergency medical response body warn camera officer wellness and peer support uh there's a QR code there um if you scan it uh for community members and CCP CCPO members that aren't on the subscriber list which I believe you guys all are um you can scan that and it'll take you to our implementation page and you can sign up for a subscriber um basically you put your email and and anytime that we release a new policy for feedback, um it sends an email to you so that you know what what's what's out for feedback. Um typically we do anywhere from 45 days to 30 days um for feedback. Um our policies though are always available for feedback, but we're actively looking on the ones that we reach out to people about. [snorts] training updates. Um, one of the things that I also want to touch on too before we move on is the immigration policy. Um, I know uh we you guys got a little extra time to look at the policies really important to the community and the chief and uh it's really appreciated really helped uh in developing that policy. uh just as kind of a example of the flow of how things uh work with the training. Um we develop a policy and then once that's approved, it goes uh into training and development and then we actually have to schedule those policies and get the entire department scheduled. Um so at the end there it shows that uh use of force for example uh it's a three-day training and so that the last day that officers can actually get trained in that is 127 and by that day every officer should be trained in use of force and that's something that they'll actually have to do and be held accountable for him. [snorts] Some of our current goals uh enhancing uh data cap capabilities to increase transparency and meet goals of the department. Uh one of those uh things is uh the policy hub which should come out uh uh early 2026. Uh we've talked about it before here, I believe. Um it's basically making it a lot easier to search uh MPD's policies. Uh find what's available. It's uh will be a great tool for officers, too, cuz right now it's just there's a a PDF and you search have to use the search function to find policies. Um so this way it'll make a lot easier for officers to uh to use that and also the public. Um eventually there's going to be a spot in there too so the public can actually provide feedback uh through that as well on uh MPD policies. [snorts] Um some of the uh what we're working on towards getting approved by AIFA is stops, searches, citations, and arrest and uh the quarterly review panel. We're also working with the LEFA to uh finish the training curriculum uh for the bodywork camera and the 20 uh 26 annual training plan and the CIT refresher. And that email at the end is uh the one if you shouldn't if you can't get a hold of somebody at the desk, feel free to email that uh and I'll try and get you scheduled a ride along. >> Does anybody have any questions? >> Thank you. Any comm questions from commissioners? >> Commissioner Barts. [snorts] >> Uh thank you Lieutenant for your efforts on the ride along and access to trainings. Um I just have a question on kind of what going on behind the scenes in terms of setting up access to trainings. Is it are you thinking um kind of an open door policy where commissioners may be able to drop in and sit in the black back of the class to observe training or um is it you know are you thinking more of a spec scheduling specific trainings for to invite us to attend? Um my thoughts on on open access is just that um it would allow us to uh particularly those of us on the policy committee to kind of track you know the from policy to development into curriculum development and into the actual training. Um and it would be nice if you know we were able to do that on a fairly open basis. Um I'm not sure if that's been broached with the training department or you know how those discussions are going, but if do you anything you can tell us on that would be appreciated. >> Yeah, right. Right now I know it's just scheduling certain dates for you guys to attend. Um I'm not sure if the city attorney has any thoughts on it. >> Yeah, so I mean right now it's scheduling. There's a lot of reasons for that. Among them being like there's only so many spaces in the room. We have a lot of other people who have to attend trainings for mandatory reasons like MDHR and AIFA and IIA and OPCR. So, right now it's very much a logistical thing, but that is on the table to be looked into. We're just not there yet. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. >> Okay. Any other questions? >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Ask the clerk to receive receive and file that report. The next report is from our police policy research and recommendations committee. That report will be given by the committee chair, Commissioner Shanfield, and there are five minutes allocated. >> Wonderful. Thank you, chair. Good evening, everyone. Uh we at the PPR, police policy research uh and recommendations committee like to uh look at the facts. We like data. We like we're kind of kind of nerdy. And so, um, to inform our policy, sorry, our planning work for 2026, um, we asked OPCR, uh, a month ago for a year-end report about the, um, review panels. And, um, just we were curious about, you know, figuring out which data points would best tell us sort of what's happening on the panels. Um, is it a good use of our time? What's how is it useful? How can we get better at this? Um so uh momentarily I guess in a few moments we'll hear from Lolinda um uh Miss Jong about uh the details of that but I'll just say that um we really enjoyed and really grateful um for the hard work that went into that. I know it was not um an easy thing to pull data for because it's the first uh report of its kind, first version that I know of of any data about the panels and it starts to paint a picture of how the civilian panel experiment if we call it that or civilian panels uh are going. A lot of us spend a lot of time on review panels and so we're eager to understand their utility. Um and because we serve on individual panels and therefore cannot discuss those cases with other panelists, we to your point uh director Fuji Sawa, we we lack a bit of a sense of how the panels are functioning across the board. So this report gives us a clear picture of the types of recommendations that are being made by each of the of the panels. Um and the data is pretty fascinating. We also know that what's happening on the panels is relevant to meeting the terms of the settlement agreement. course uh it may indicate places for potential policy revisions and or draw attention to topics where additional training could be beneficial. So that is particular uh reasons that we're looking into this further. We started asking ourselves at our last meeting uh as we looked at the data how we might use this information within the scope of our authority. So for example, for policy review, what [snorts] might we learn from the trends about which policies show up repeatedly in allegations? Or what about policies that don't show up at all? Are there particular policies that we should then note and consider reviewing for 2026? Um what about the um policies that have or like do some policies have high rates of no merit findings on panels? You know, is there any any similarities or trends? could that help us refine the panel process itself better? Um, clearly we have lots of questions and uh are beginning to uh dig further into this. So, we had our first uh look at it at two weeks ago and we'll look again um uh this afternoon or this evening and then again um at our next meeting we'll start to move into action and what we're going to do with the information. Um I'll invite everyone as we uh listen to Miss Jang to speak to kind of thinking about how we might refine the data further. What else are we wondering about? how we might be able to um uh you know slice and dice it differently to give us a different story. Um for example, one thing the PPRR thought would be interesting would be to parse out the data by OPCR cases versus IIA cases. Um that would be interesting to us to look at some trends and patterns there. Um yeah, we're just wondering what else we might want to track in the future. Maybe there's some other uh data that we'd like to be able to pull together and give us a fuller picture. And of course all of this is in uh in uh what's intending uh to improve transparency around discipline and policy violation. So I'll invite everyone u the public included um just to start considering with us what issues or challenges does the data raise and uh how might we use that to inform our recommendations and decision-m um we are also eager to read the forthcoming AIFA report that will give us some more guidance as well as we plan for 2026 and there was one other piece of business on the agenda there's a link to uh a list of the policies that we've reviewed uh in 2025. And I just wanted to take a moment to celebrate. Um all of the folks uh on the PPRR, thank you for your hard work. Um we've done a lot of work in between the meetings. We've a lot of hard work. Uh we use our brains a lot. And so um really grateful for all the time and effort people have put in. Um and really wanted to celebrate the the progress we're making. Um and thank you to the city attorney uh and to Lieutenant Robinson for um all of their ongoing support as well. >> All right. Thank you very much. Are there any questions from commissioners? Okay, seeing none, I'll ask the clerk to receive and file that report. Finally, we have a report from the community engagement committee from the chair, Commissioner Smith, and we've allocated 15 minutes. >> Thank you, Madam Chair, and I'll uh turn to our vice chair, Commissioner Stewart, in a moment. Um, our work on the community engagement committee has focused on uh supporting the staff in the development of a communications toolkit so that every member of the commission can go to neighborhood organizations or other community organizations that uh they would like to share the work of uh the CCPO and also use that as a springboard to uh collect uh more information and feedback about our work. So we will keep uh sharing that out so that you can easily look within the ward you represent. Identify organizations uh that you can reach out and contact and get on their calendar. I think our recommendations came with a an invitation to try to get to at least one or two of those uh organization meetings in a month. Uh the more the better. Um, our community engagement committee also has discussed and recommended the resolution that's later on our agenda about the disciplinary review process. um what we can learn um from not only the information that we're going to be receiving today, but uh the notion of a research uh effort or a survey of all the panel members both sworn and civilian so we can collect information and the committee's engagement in helping that resolution come forward has been uh very beneficial. We are now in discussions uh with Commissioner Stewart's leadership on uh having a community showing of the documentary Paradox Echoes of Reform that has aired on Twin Cities public television. We're hoping for that to take place uh early in the first quarter of next year and the filmmakers uh have uh offered to be a part of that presentation. Um I think at our last meeting we noted uh a desire to clarify membership on our committee and having uh pulled our members and heard back. Um we have four commissioners who are prepared to serve on the community engagement committee going forward. Commissioner Malani, uh Commissioner Newman, who is on medical leave now but hopefully will be back with us uh in the first of the year. Commissioner Stewart and myself. Um, we had not heard from any of the other members uh to confirm their interests. So, I think this is who we have for now. I would note that Commissioner Zyla had been an engaged member of our committee, but has he has since resigned. >> [snorts] >> Um, finally, uh, we'd not only like the full commission's blessing of our committee membership, but also according to our bylaws, the, uh, full commission selects the chair and vice chair. And I'm pleased to report that, uh, Commissioner Stewart and I have had a great, uh, discussion about changing our leadership and bringing some new energy to our community engagement efforts. And she has agreed, I believe, to serve as the chair. and I'm happy to serve as vice chair unless someone else really badly wants to do it. >> All right. >> If Commissioner Stewart, anything else to add? >> No. >> Madame Chair, I would move that the commission elect Commissioner Stewart as the chair of the community engagement committee and myself as the vice chair and that the members be confirmed as Melenny, Newman, Stewart, and Smith. So, I think we'll do them separately just to make sure the minutes are clear. And so, Commissioner Mahoney, Stewart, Smith, and Newman are the ones that will be elected to serve on the commission. Commissioner Smith, would you like to make that motion separately for the record, please? >> Yes, Madam Chair, I would move that commissioners Melanie, Newman, Stewart, and Smith be the community engagement committee. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. Any further discussion? All right. Clerk, please call the role on the members of the community engagement committee. >> Commissioner Mhenny, >> I. >> Shanfield, >> I. >> Baker, >> I >> Oh, wait, sorry, Stewart. >> I >> uh Kennedy, >> I >> Barts, >> hi. >> Smith, >> I. >> Vice, >> I >> and Chair Reeves, >> yes. >> There are eight eyes. Thank you very much. And this next motion, Commissioner Smith, for the chair. >> Madam Chair, I would move that Commissioner Stewart serve as the chair of the community engagement committee and myself as vice chair. >> So we'll do you as separately just for purposes of the of the >> separated even further. Just chair. [laughter] >> All right. Is there a second for the chair? >> Second. >> All right. I heard a motion in a second. Any discussion? >> All right. Clerk, please call the role on the nomination for chair. Uh, Commissioner Melhenny, >> I >> Shanfield, >> I Stewart, >> I, >> Canada, >> I, >> Barts, >> I, >> Smith, >> I, >> Vice Charleston, >> I, >> and Chair Roots. >> Yes, [clears throat] >> there are eight eyes. >> All right, motion passes. Thank you, Commissioner Smith. >> Madam Chair, I would move that uh, myself serve as vice chair of the community engagement committee. >> All right. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. Any further discussion? >> All right, clerk, please call the role on the vice chair. >> Uh, Commissioner Mlhenny, >> I. >> Shanfield, >> I. >> Stewart, >> I. >> Kennedy, >> hi. >> Barts. >> Hi. >> Smith. >> Hi. >> Vice Chair Olsson. >> Hi. >> And Cher Reeves. >> Yes, there are eight eyes. >> All right. Thank you very much. We have a slate for the community engagement committee. I look forward to hearing the work. Um, next up is the police chief reappoint process given by Commissioner Barnett. Welcome, Commissioner. We have allocated 15 minutes for this discussion. >> Good afternoon, uh, chair and other commission members. Uh, I'm Todd Barnett, the commissioner of community safety for the city of Minneapolis. I will not take 15 minutes. I can be shorter than 15 minutes and will be open to any questions that you have. Um because the process is pretty straightforward for the chief of police. similar to all of the mayor's um appointees under the charter um in those new created uh departments like the office of community safety [snorts] um at the end of the mayor's term which uh would be December uh 31st although we know that Mayor Fry will be sworn in again in January what happens is that all for the for those appointees we're carried over to 2026. So, um if the best way to explain it is that um the mayor doesn't have to automatically put us up for reappoint, but the mayor has 120 days to uh formally reappoint us or make that nomination for reappoint. Um from there, uh there's 90 days to confirmation. Uh and so once uh the mayor is sworn in, I believe January 5th, he has 120 days to bring forward each of us um to nominate us for reappointment. Once we're reappointed, once the nomination goes forward, there's 90 days for confirmation hearing to take place and to be confirmed. However, the chief is a little different. He still has the 120 days, same as everyone else, but it's only 30 days uh to be confirmed. And so that's where his um reappoint uh process is different. So um I stand to answer any other questions that you might have. >> Any questions for commissioners? >> Commissioner Shamfield. >> Sure. Thank you so much, Chair. Thank you, Commissioner Bernett. Um just curious about uh we are providing you some input in the process. Curious how you'll plan to use that. >> Sure. Um through the chair um I'm assuming that the question is how would I use the information received for the nomination process? So, uh, for those that might be viewing, uh, and might not be familiar with what's taking place is that, uh, Chief O'Hara is up for, um, an annual performance review. As part of that process, um, a survey has been sent out to all the members of this committee. We've received that survey feedback. Um, also I've offered to meet with uh each member of this committee separately to get any additional feedback. I'm in the process of receiving that there. Um, I've said this before here. Um, and I think the chief of police is different than any other department head in the city of Minneapolis. um that there is public feedback um constantly there's what I would say um unsolicited feedback meaning that I didn't as opposed to what I've uh have been working with with this committee the public will uh email me directly or email the office directly um so I I believe that Um there is a continuous feedback especially when there is a bit of media attention. Um I get a lot of feedback from community members um on on those things. There is no written policy or anything written in the charter that I know of that um mandates me to um at a certain point to give that feedback. back um to the mayor for his nomination decision. And I only say that because I I don't want people to believe that somehow there's some formal process for that. The mayor um I'm sure will uh when the time is right will ask for feedback. Uh um and if it's around performance of Chief O'Hara um I believe that that information would be confidential and I would give the mayor that feedback. Um, if there were questions about any themes from um the surveys that I've received or the meetings that I received, I would definitely um give that to the mayor. I think that where we are in the performance evaluation working with this committee, I believe that all of the information that I will receive from this committee will be completed. And this is going by my memory. I don't think I have any other um interviews with any member of this commission beyond the second week of January. Um I don't believe that there will be any formal um nominations before that time. So I'm sure I'll have every all the feedback if um I was asked to to provide that. But [snorts] the mayor would definitely have any written um documents related to uh Chief O'Hara's um performance. I mean, he will review that written information. So, I believe in some form or some way, either verbally or writtly, he'll have it. I know that's a long way to answer it, but I wanted to make sure um I explain sort of what what the thought process is. So, >> yep. >> Thank you. Any other questions? >> Okay. Thank you very much, >> Commissioner. Thank you. Thanks for having me. Appreciate it. >> We'll ask the clerk to receive and file that report. I will ask Miss Linda Jean to come up and give us the review panel recommendation report and we've allocated 20 minutes. Welcome, Miss Jean. Hello party people. Hello. All right. Um I'm excited to bring this report to the full body. Um and I want to thank you for your patience as we've um as we work to complete this report. you know in addition to the analysis and writing it does take months to create this database to enter in the data manually and then to also like most importantly do a quality control of the data itself. Um the policy and research team is excited to bring you know um additional reports like this to the body in the future. Okay, before I dive into the numbers, going to provide a little bit of background around the review panel process which you are all familiar with. Um, as IIA and OPCR complete the administrative investigatory work that they do, um, those cases then come to a, um, review panel. Um the review panel consists of three members. A police officer of Lieutenant Ringer hire and then two civilians from the CCPO and then through the end of this year also members of the Minneapolis Civil Rights Commission as well. The review panel makes recommendations of merit and discipline to the police chief. Uh these recommendations do not reflect the final dis um discipline imposed. And I just want to stress that is that these are the recommendations coming out of the review panel, not the actual discipline discip discipline imposed. And then this analysis covers the recommendations from January of 2024 through September of this year. The recommendations fall into four broad categories. Um the first is no merit. So the alleged misconduct is not supported by a prepoundonderance of evidence and a prepoundonderance is 50% in a feather. So anything over 50 and then um merit a means that there is merit to the allegation. However um the response is not discipline. It is non-disciplinary corrective action such as you know additional training or per performance improvement plan. And then we have merit B through E which means that there is merit to the allegation and the recommendation is discipline and that discipline can range from a letter of reprimand to um suspension, demotion or termination. And then last we have um a remand and that is when an allegation is returned to the investigative entity for further investigation. All right. Um so the report is primarily descriptive um and not analytical. The purpose is to provide the CCPO with an overview of the review panel um outcomes and this will help support you know your um decision- making and um perhaps influence any um bodies of work. we see that about 45% of the overall allegations were recommended to not have merit and then about um 42 um 15% of the allegations to be recommended a merit a so there's merit to the allegation but no discipline imposed and then about 30ish% to have merit so or to have merit and discipline imposed so that would be merit B through D when we disagre aggregate the data by the um by division. So we have IIA internal affairs and OPCR. We do see some trends emerge. Um so we see that IA does have a higher proportion of merit findings. Merit findings would be merit A through D. So it' be the blue bar and then the green bars combined. And then um in contrast, OPCR has a higher proportion of um no discipline recommendations. So that would be the blue bar merit A and then also the orange bars no merit. um further analysis needs to be done but through this initial review I suspect that these patterns have emerged because the allegations coming from IIA are more technical and procedural in nature. Um IA also gets um their complaint submitted after a committee review so after it's been reviewed by fit or pursuit. Um, and so my suspicions are that because the conduct has already been like formally reviewed by a committee, um, they then submit a complaint to IIE, which is why we see a higher proportion of discipline and merit finding. Next, we have um the recommendations broken out by policy, chapter, and section. So the allegations are spread across 25 chapters with four chapters accounting for the largest concentration. Um we have chapter 5100 code of conduct with 88 allegations. Um 4200 equipment and supplies with 37 allegations. 5300 use of force with 35 allegations and then 7400 vehicle operations with 28 allegations. done. So, um, similar to the previous chart, what we have here are the high volume allegation chapters and then the breakdown of their overall recommendations. Um, I would encourage you to read the full report and familiarize yourself with the appendex. Um, the appendex includes a breakdown um, by section. So, even further than this, this is just an overview. Um and so what I want to do is draw your attention to the first bar which is the overall recommendation. So it's the entire data set and then the third bar which is 5300 use of force. Um we see that although they have similar findings of merit just about the same it's sitting a little bit above 50%. We say that there's a much higher proportion of merit B through D recommendations. And if you look in the appendex, you'll see it broken down that there's actually a like note more notably um a higher level of merit C recommendations. So that means that when um the um evidence does rise to um a merit recommendation is that it the misconduct is usually a little bit more serious then. Um and then through this chart you can see that 4200 and 7400 also have a much higher share of merit findings. And again I suspect that's because um the policy areas in nature are a lot more technical and procedural compared to 5100 and 5300 which are more behavioral based and then require a more um situational and subjective analysis of the conduct. All right. So, in contrast to the high volume um allegation chapters, we also have a couple of chapters associated entirely with no merit recommendations. Um I just wanted to pull these to your attention as well. Um, so while the number of allegations in these chapters were small, the uniformity of no merit recommendations, I think does warrant perhaps maybe a second additional review into these policies. And the chapters listed on this slide are just a few of the um chapters with no merit recommendations. Again, encourage everyone to read the report to um what is it? Uh read through the appendex to see the other chapters as well. And then we had other notable trends. So we had concentrations of um allegations in 7300 specific calls, procedures and 9200 stop, searches, seizures and warrants. So in 7300 we had 12 allegations and nine of those 12 were actually specific to 7314 domestic abuse. Um, of those allegations, five resulted in no merit recommendations alongside one merit A and three merit B recommendations. [gasps] Uh, domestic abuse response remains a scrutinized area of um MPD operations. And so given the visibility and the pattern of these allegations, this section may warrant like ongoing um monitoring and assessing whether additional training or policy review is needed. Then the other chapter is 9200 and all of those allegations fell under 9201 which is stop stops contacts and weapons pat down. Um here we have five of the eight allegations had recommendations of merit and then three of the eight had recommendations of no merit. And um although the sample size is small, I do want to just point the relatively high proportion of merit recommendations among these few allegations which may suggest potential compliance risk um in this policy area. again warranty um further review. All right. So just to go over what I've just shared is of the 271 allegations 52.77% were recommended to have merit. So that's um merit A through D. Um 37.27% of these allegations recommended discipline. And then 60.89% 89% of these allegations were recommended no discipline and no discipline again is a combination of no merit and merit a so a couple of takeaways for the report um allegations do cluster in high contact high- risk areas like conduct equipment use of force and vehicle operations the procedural and technical chapters are more likely to have recommendations of merit and discipline whereas the behavior based chapters show a much more mixed outcome. And then the third takeaway is that um chapters with only no merit recommendations should be monitored or further reviewed then. All right. And this is my last pitch to you all is please read the report and familiarize yourself with the appendix um and bring your ideas to the body whether that's at the committee level or to the full body at our next meeting. uh the report is meant to guide you and inform your decision-m. So like I mentioned earlier um policy and research will be providing um follow-up um research on the trends that we've seen here and then also into other factions of the review panel process. Great. >> Thank you very much. Any questions? >> You can also discuss amongst yourself. It doesn't have to be questions directed at me. Just thank you for a wonderful >> breakdown of all of the information. I think this has been my favorite part of all the information in terms of breakdowns because it's so easy to see and then the public can see where the issues are in terms of policy violations. >> Does any no questions about just like reactions like thoughts what's coming up for people? >> I see Commissioner Kennedy and Commissioner Barts. So, the only reason I was reluctant to say anything is uh I was lucky enough to have the first run through this report at the committee meeting a couple weeks ago. I think it's safe to say there was a lot of uh compliments at that meeting as well about the usefulness of the report. So, I will just say thank you to you and your team. Um I think we can continue to build on this. I think, you know, if we can all uh, you know, report back what we think was most helpful or uh, flag ideas for additional analysis, it would be very helpful to the OPCR team in continuing to get us this data. Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner Barts. >> Uh, just to echo the thanks and, um, say I'm looking forward to continuing discussions in terms of refining what we're looking at and what we need. Um, so thanks Thank you. All right. Seeing no other hands up, I'll ask the clerk to receive and file that report. We will be approving our 2026 meeting dates for January and February. Uh this should be quick, so we'll allocate five minutes for this item. We have two dates. Uh January uh [clears throat] 12th and February 9th are the two dates for the CCPO calendar. And then we have uh police policy research and recommendations committee is proposing meeting dates on Monday, January 26 at 6 p.m. and Monday, February 23rd at 6 p.m. Are any comments or thoughts from commissioners? Do those dates work? Everyone good with those dates? Okay. All right. Would you like to make the motion, Commissioner Shanfield, for your police policy and research dates? >> Yes. >> Yes. I would like to make a motion for PPRR to meet uh on 126 and 223. >> All right. Is there a second to that motion? >> Second. >> All right. It's been motioned and seconded. Any further discussion? All right. Cler, you can call the role for PPR meeting dates. Commissioner Melhenny. >> I [laughter] Shanfield. >> Hi. >> Stewart. >> Hi. >> Canada. >> Hi. >> Barts. >> Hi. >> Smith. >> I. >> Vice Chair Olsen. >> I. >> And Chair Reeves. >> Yes. >> There are eight eyes. >> Thank you. The eyes have it and that's been approved. The community engagement committee has not had a chance to meet. So we are proposing two dates for both January and February that we can choose from. We're proposing either Tuesday, January 20th or Tuesday, January 27th. Is there any discussion from commissioners and I imagine Commissioner Stewart may want to weigh in on that. The new chair, >> um, Tuesday, January 20th works. >> Okay. It sticks with our same schedule. >> Okay. All right. Any other discussion on this the CE group? >> All right. Commissioner Stur, would you like to make the motion to accept for that date of January 20th? >> Sure. I motion for our next meeting to be Tuesday, January 20th. >> Okay. All right. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. >> Second, Smith. >> All right. Motion seconded for January 20th for that meeting and then we have one actually we'll do them both together. So then we have February February 17th or February 24th. >> Um let's stick with that same routine. So it would be February 17th. >> Okay. All right. So let's revise the motion. I'm sorry uh Madam Secretary. So we'll revise the the motion to do January 20th and February 17th. We'll do them together and same second in motioner. Yes. >> Okay. Sounds good. [laughter] All right. So, if clerk, if you can call the role on January 20th and February 17th for the next dates for CE. >> Commissioner Melhenny. >> I. >> Shanfill. >> I. >> Stewart. >> I. >> Kennedy. >> Hi. >> Barts. >> Hi. >> Smith. >> I. >> Vice Chair Olsson. >> Hi. >> And Cher Reeves. >> Yes. >> There are eight eyes. All right. Thank you. So, we now have dates for community engagement. Uh, Commissioner Smith is in introducing a resolution for review panel research. Each commissioner should have a copy in front of them to review. Commissioner Smith, would you like to speak on this item? >> Madam Chair, members, uh, I think we've discussed this a couple of times. I'm grateful to have the uh, help and support from Miss Jean as well as our city attorney's office, Miss Pini. Um our this builds on the research report we just received and uh expands on it in several ways. Um, [clears throat] it grows out of the the sense that the community and the public don't have a strong sense of what this disciplinary panel process is about and we want to share the information that we can share including our analysis of it with the staff and and policy work and uh a survey panel members so that we can collect meaningful data from all the participants in this process both sworn and civilian. So this resolution begins by citing our authority in the city ordinance to request programs of research and study like this and to make recommendations. Um it uh builds on the experience that we have serving as panel members. Uh it identifies that the community engagement committee uh has sensed a desire for the community to be provided a better understanding of the review panel process and that further information about the process could serve to build greater community understanding and trust in that process. Um it also would benefit all of us participating in this process to learn from it. And did I exceed my time? >> Commissioners, would someone like to make a motion to extend time for this discussion? >> Can we extend the time by two minutes? >> Is there a second? >> Okay. By five minutes. >> Is there a second? >> Let's do a voice vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? Commissioner Smith. So uh what this proposes is a program of research and study. First uh on more data analysis expanding on what Miss Jang just presented with a further scope and identified areas. Then the creation and administration of a survey to all participants in the panel process um and the building of a summary report to uh the full commission uh with all of that information. It includes a timeline where a draft survey and research plan would be presented to our committees in January. That the chair of the PPR committee be designated as a leazison to this process with the civil rights department. That [snorts] the survey be implemented in January or February and a draft report presented to CCPO by March 31st. I know that's an ambitious schedule, but I'm told it's reasonable. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there any discussion on this resolution? >> I think this allows for both the Civil Rights Commission and our commission to come together to do work and I know that that has been an ask from multiple commissioners on our oversight committee and it's been an ask from the civil rights. So, I think that this gives us an opportunity to vet to see if we can come together to bring something that's meaningful to the community. >> All right. Thank you. Any further discussion? >> All right. Commissioner Smith, would you like to make a motion for the resolution? >> Madam Chair, I'd move adoption of the resolution recommending a program of research and study to assess two years of review panels. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right, Madam Clerk, if you can call the role. Commissioner Mlehenny >> I >> Shanfield I >> Stewart >> I >> Canada >> I >> Barts >> I >> Smith >> I >> uh V chair Olsen >> I >> and Chair Reeves >> yes >> there are eight I's >> all right the eyes have it and the resolution has been adopted we'll send that on uh Commissioner Baker is introducing a resolution to request uh for a policy on sexual misconduct in his absence Commissioner Shanfield would like to speak on this item? >> Yes, I have uh explicit uh direction to go ahead. Um uh this is something that we've been um uh interested in for several months and so um we didn't want to hold it up just um although he was not able to be here. So, um, we're all aware, uh, we're all here because the Minneapolis Police Department has a documented history of patterns and practices related to an abuse of power or authority resulting in the violation of members of the public civil rights as outlined in the US DOJ report. So, as we were thinking about how we could um bring civilian voice uh uh to the process here, um what we learned uh from OPCR was that the MPD manual does not currently contain a comprehensive policy uh that responds to sexual misconduct. There are um uh several peace meal places and a few different policies, but it doesn't have its own policy. and um you know ambiguity around what clearly constitutes sexual misconduct could lead to gaps and accountability and an opportunity for you know abuse of policy and authority. So we believe that the creation of a dedicated sexual misconduct policy could prevent misconduct and would further build trust with the public and serve as an accountability mechanism to increase transparency. Um I would like to note that I think one of our very very first meetings in 2023. We had two representatives come from um uh uh the global rights for women presentation. They talked about domestic violence. We saw that the um merit is frequently recommended um in the panel data. Um and so this feels like sort of on on the heels uh related not not exactly uh connected but but related here that we're really trying to make sure that um people feel safe and those are lots of cases lots of people have come to our meetings explaining um uh individual cases where this has been important. So um we would recommend uh then in in September 2025 um OPCR came to uh PPRR and uh shared uh the report that they did the very extensive draft and then that was shared with all of us last month and so the idea from PPRR was let's go ahead and put a resolution on the books that says that we are here in support of drafting developing a policy um and that we would of course stand to support um the implementation unit support their work um collect collaborate, draft whatever they need support with. Um, but that this could be a a a connected effort or collaborative effort. Um, one other quick note is that we would recommend that the policy be drafted in alignment with the sample policies OPCR provided. I think Chicago and Metro Nashville were the examples. There were also guidance from the International Association of Chiefs of Police and Law Enforcement Policy Center. So, there's precedent. Um, and there's lots of good examples out there. So, um, yeah, we look forward to supporting that work and this resolution says all of those things. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Any >> would like to go ahead. >> Any discussion? >> All right. Seeing none, Commissioner Champ would like to introduce a motion resolution. >> Yes. I would move uh offer a motion uh to pass this resolution stating that uh with the asking MPD to create a comprehensive policy on sexual misconduct. >> All right. Is there a second? >> Second. All right. Motion and seconded. Clerk, please call the role. >> Commissioner Mhenny, >> I. >> Shan, >> I. Stewart >> I >> Canada >> I >> Barts >> I >> Smith >> I >> vice chair Olsen >> I >> and chair Reeves >> yes there are eight eyes all right the eyes have it and the resolution requesting for a policy on sexual misconduct has been adopted with that we've completed all items on our agenda for this meeting without any objection the commission stands adjourned have a good evening everyone