[0:00] Once again today, like we've seen um [0:02] across the country and like we saw in [0:04] our city last week, uh we saw uh ICE [0:07] agents, federal agents show up in our [0:08] city unannounced uh and come uh to um [0:12] create havoc in our community. There's [0:14] no other way to put it uh to create [0:16] chaos and to create havoc and to stir up [0:18] havoc in our community. Um I'm going to [0:20] share a timeline of events as I [0:22] understand them. Uh and please do [0:24] understand that this is rapidly evolving [0:26] and there are a whole lot uh of details [0:28] to understand and and and we're going to [0:30] have to get kind of a further accounting [0:32] of some of those things as we go. Um [0:35] this morning, my understanding is uh HSI [0:38] agents, ICE agents, um showed up in our [0:41] community um and contacted our police [0:43] department because they had attempted to [0:46] um execute a warrant against an [0:48] individual who they were targeting uh [0:50] and seeking to detain. um and that [0:52] person fled from them um and uh [0:55] potentially uh and somehow ended up at [0:58] the address uh on Rose Street that uh [1:00] that we were all out uh at today. Um I [1:03] have shared from the beginning uh that [1:05] our officer's job is not uh and never [1:07] will be uh to enforce federal [1:09] immigration policy and that of course [1:11] continues to be the case. Uh the [1:13] challenge for this and I understand that [1:14] this is hard to convey let alone [1:17] understand. The challenge for that is [1:18] our officer's job is uh to ensure that [1:21] anytime uh a a fleeing from a officers [1:26] or a potential kind of vehicle kind of [1:28] collision uh anytime um there's a a [1:32] likely conflict between two groups of [1:35] people uh whether they're documented or [1:37] undocumented in uniform or not our our [1:39] officer's job is to be there. Um, we got [1:41] a report uh from those federal uh agents [1:44] uh that someone had thrown rocks and [1:46] bricks uh at them. And again, anytime [1:49] someone anytime there's a report in our [1:50] city uh that anyone has thrown a brick [1:52] or a rock or any something like that at [1:54] anyone else, uh it is our officer's job [1:56] to be there. That's a challenging [1:58] balance to to to hold. And I understand [2:01] that for some of our our community [2:02] members, for some of our residents, uh [2:04] that's a challenging balance to [2:06] understand, but our officers have to be [2:07] able to be uh continue to be police [2:09] officers um even when uh we have federal [2:12] agents in our community uh who are [2:14] intent on operating without cooperating [2:17] without uh operating without working [2:19] with us, operating without giving us uh [2:21] the type of information uh that would be [2:23] really helpful for us uh to best keep [2:26] our community uh safe uh and stable. Um, [2:29] I want to say thank you to the uh the [2:31] the the our paramedics uh and even some [2:34] of our officers uh who worked together [2:36] to ensure a couple of individuals who [2:37] were there who needed medical medical [2:39] attention immediately uh were able even [2:41] in the context of uh the the rapidly [2:44] evolving moment were able to access the [2:46] medical care uh that they needed that [2:48] was important and that was critical to [2:50] be able to get done um in that time. [2:53] Um, as that event was uh wrapping up and [2:57] as our officers were uh seeking to exit [3:01] today, um we saw a scene of a chaotic [3:06] scene break out. And uh I have spent [3:09] today hearing uh significant concerns [3:12] from community members uh who are [3:15] concerned that this um value that we've [3:18] placed uh for the last eight years and [3:21] even longer than that with our St. Paul [3:23] Police Department on on on the trust [3:25] that has to flow between our officers uh [3:27] and our community members uh may not [3:29] have been upheld in the ways that we [3:32] have grown to expect them in our city. [3:35] Uh you all know this in my first 100 [3:37] days as mayor. One of our top priorities [3:39] was completely rewriting the use of [3:41] force policies that govern our St. Paul [3:42] Police Department. We did that through a [3:44] two-way conversation because those use [3:46] of force policies are a covenant between [3:48] our officers uh and our and our and our [3:50] residents. It's not it can't be a [3:52] one-way thing. We called that policy and [3:54] this is one of my favorite parts of it. [3:56] We called that policy officer response [3:58] to resistance and aggression. So right [4:00] in the title uh we made a distinction [4:03] between how we respond to people uh who [4:06] are aggressively resisting [4:09] being aggressive against officers and [4:11] how we respond to people who are uh [4:13] passively or peacefully resisting an [4:16] officer's command. Um that policy [4:19] clarifies that our officers uh are [4:22] authorized to use only the minimum [4:24] amount of force that is both reasonable [4:26] and necessary to secure a lawful [4:28] objective. Um that uh that policy author [4:32] that policy makes clear that our [4:34] expectation is to um to to to to [4:37] deescalate situations whenever possible. [4:40] uh to use the minimal amount of force uh [4:42] in in every single situation and frankly [4:45] to be uh the epitome of discipline uh [4:48] even when folks around us uh are not. Um [4:53] I am concerned and I want to be very [4:56] clear. I am concerned that it felt as [4:58] though some of those federal agents who [5:00] were there intentionally stirred the pot [5:02] and intentionally created as chaotic a [5:04] scene as they possibly could before they [5:06] left. That said, I have to acknowledge [5:10] and I have shared with you all uh when [5:12] uh I'm concerned about the behaviors. [5:16] I've shared with you all uh when I feel [5:18] like some of those actions may have been [5:20] uh frustrating and hard to see. Uh but I [5:22] can't you know it's hard to see another [5:24] way. I will share with you I am deeply [5:27] concerned about some of the some of the [5:30] uh complaints that I've heard today [5:31] about some of the allegations that I've [5:32] heard today and about some of the videos [5:34] that I've seen today. Um, many people [5:37] now have seen a video of a woman on a [5:41] cane [5:43] standing still in front of a vehicle and [5:47] having pepper spray or some type of [5:49] chemical ir earring in her face at point [5:52] blank range. [5:55] Many of us have seen uh different types [5:58] of videos like that that call into [6:00] question whether those values that we've [6:02] lifted high of deescalation, of minimal [6:06] use of force, of maintaining that trust, [6:08] maintaining that balance uh were were [6:11] were upheld today. And let me tell you, [6:13] one of the things that's been most [6:15] critical for us from the beginning is to [6:17] say that we know that anytime you set an [6:19] expectation, there will be moments uh [6:21] and there will be individuals uh there [6:23] will be moments where we have to wonder [6:25] if we fell short of those expectations. [6:27] And let me tell you, I have told you [6:29] before and I will tell you again that I [6:32] have the highest confidence in our St. [6:33] Paul Police Department. I tell my team [6:36] all the time that anytime we see [6:38] something, some institution or some [6:39] staff person or some action that we [6:41] think is above critical questioning, [6:44] that means we don't have confidence in [6:45] it. And because I do have confidence in [6:48] our police department, we have to be [6:50] able to answer ask all of these [6:51] questions and they have to be answered [6:54] with haste. I've spoken to our police [6:56] chief today and our police chief has [6:58] assured me uh that he will be initiating [7:00] a full review of any use of force uh [7:05] exhibited by a St. Paul officer today uh [7:07] that we will be reviewing all of that [7:09] body warrant camera footage um and [7:12] determining getting to the bottom of how [7:15] we perceive those use of forces uh that [7:18] have occurred today. Um I want to be [7:20] clear, I am not a use of force expert. [7:22] I'm somebody with concerns and somebody [7:24] with questions. And that's exactly why [7:26] we need someone who is a use of force [7:28] expert to weigh in, to dig in uh and to [7:31] unfold all of these things so that we as [7:33] a community can gain a full [7:34] understanding of what happened today and [7:36] why and how we should uh calibrate our [7:39] expectations moving forward. That won't [7:42] be immediate. That won't be overnight. [7:44] We had dozens of officers who were out [7:46] there for hours today. Uh so there is uh [7:49] hundreds of hours of uh body warn camera [7:52] footage to review uh to comb through uh [7:55] and to go through and that'll take time [7:57] and that I know is um unsatisfactory to [8:00] some of some people at home watching but [8:04] one of the truisms is sometimes we have [8:06] to choose between the fastest possible [8:09] answer and the most thorough answer. We [8:11] deserve a thorough answer to the [8:13] concerns that we experienced today. [8:16] I need to understand um why the [8:19] decisions were made uh around use of [8:21] force. Frankly, starting with showing up [8:24] in gas masks in the first place uh [8:27] including uh the use of uh commun [8:30] chemical munitions and when those [8:31] chemical irritants were used. Um I need [8:33] to understand better what our policies [8:36] and what our practices we expect to [8:38] ensure that you all the members of the [8:40] media who show up uh to tell the public [8:43] sto the story of what's happening in [8:44] this community and our country on a [8:46] day-to-day basis that how your rights [8:48] and your safety are protected. Uh that [8:50] has to be absolutely critical. Um, I [8:52] will say uh that I have been proud of [8:54] this police department through a lot of [8:56] terrible trauma, through a lot of [8:58] terrible crisis, uh through uh the the [9:01] the protests and civil unrest that we [9:03] experienced uh after the murder of [9:05] George Floyd. Um, I shared with you and [9:08] will and continue to believe that our [9:10] police department did as good a job as [9:12] any department on the planet in walking [9:14] that line between protecting people's [9:16] rights uh to uh to to peacefully protest [9:20] um and denying people the right uh to [9:23] create havoc and destruction uh of [9:26] people's properties and livelihoods in [9:28] our community. That's really critical. [9:29] The other thing that I'll say is, and [9:32] I'll be happy to take any questions, the [9:33] other thing that I'll say is this. Our [9:39] police officers came today partially in [9:42] response uh to a concern or allegation [9:45] uh that bricks were being thrown, rocks [9:47] were being thrown, things like that were [9:48] being thrown um at those ICE agents. Our [9:52] police officers left today uh with [9:54] bricks and rocks and things being thrown [9:56] at them. [10:00] I came into this work, I got into this [10:02] work to fight for a world in which [10:04] nobody throws rocks and bricks or [10:06] anything at anybody. And um for all of [10:10] my friends who agree with me when I say [10:13] that it undermines our community values [10:15] and it undermines our public safety for [10:18] our federal government to send agents [10:20] into our community just like we saw last [10:23] week. We saw uh the the the raid at [10:25] Brotex. Um they arrested 14 individuals [10:28] and afterwards uh ICE issued a release [10:31] saying that one of them had a past [10:32] criminal charges which says to me that [10:34] of the 14 people they arrested not one [10:36] of them had a had a conviction worth [10:39] putting into that statement. Uh they [10:41] showed up and created chaos, created a [10:43] scene uh of of uh uh pepper-sprayed uh [10:47] protesters drove over some of the folks [10:49] uh feet uh in the guise of keeping us [10:52] safe. And I can't imag I can't figure [10:55] out how them doing all of that kept us [10:58] safe. And to all of my friends, to all [11:01] of my constituents, to all of my [11:02] residents, to all of my neighbors who [11:04] agree with me when I stand up to condemn [11:06] those actions, uh we also have to find a [11:09] way to condemn those actions. We have to [11:12] find a way to resist uh without becoming [11:16] the type of people that throw rocks and [11:18] bricks at other people. that's really [11:20] important for our own uh humanity and [11:23] for the world that we are saying that [11:25] we're showing up uh to resist for, to [11:28] protest for, to fight for. Uh that's [11:30] critical. That's a world that I will [11:31] continue to show up uh with all of you [11:34] for. Um I think that that that concludes [11:36] my prepared remarks. I'm happy to take [11:37] any questions with the understanding [11:40] that there's this is a rapidly evolving [11:42] situation. It's a chaotic scene. Um [11:44] there's probably more uh questions uh [11:47] with regard to what occurred today that [11:48] I don't have the answers to at this [11:50] point uh than the ones that I do have [11:51] the answers to. Yes, sir. [11:52] >> Before officers deployed the so-called [11:54] last week missions and tear gas, did [11:57] they get um command approval to do so? [12:00] And did they issue a dispersal order to [12:03] the crowd before using them at this [12:06] point? [12:07] >> That's one of the questions I want to [12:08] get to the bottom of. Um I want to be [12:10] clear. [12:13] I don't understand particularly in the [12:15] morning uh in front of the house uh when [12:19] uh the pepper spray and I I don't know [12:20] which chemical irritant it was uh so I'm [12:22] just going to say pepper spray but [12:23] forgive me if that ends up being the [12:25] wrong technical term but when that [12:27] pepper spray was deployed um with that [12:30] whole crowd there I don't understand why [12:33] that pepper spray was deployed in that [12:35] moment that's one of the questions I [12:37] need an answer to [12:40] >> did that happen that was after the rocks [12:42] and bricks were thrown. [12:43] >> Um, that was after the report. That was [12:45] after I heard reports of rocks and [12:47] bricks and things like that being [12:48] thrown. And again, I want to be clear, I [12:50] don't know everything about what [12:51] happened today. I'm not a use of force [12:53] expert. Um, I'm a neighbor and a [12:55] community member uh who was on site [12:57] today um and witnessed some things that [13:00] uh left me with very significant [13:03] questions. [13:04] and and and this is why I insist on uh [13:07] hearing from the folks who are use of [13:09] force experts uh after they do get a a [13:12] full accounting of everything that [13:14] occurred today. [13:15] >> But several journalists and including [13:16] one of my colleagues, were they [13:18] deliberately targeted by by St. Paul [13:21] police or what what was the reason to to [13:23] hit journalists about this? [13:24] >> I don't have any evidence that uh that [13:26] any journalists were deliberately [13:28] targeted and frankly that would surprise [13:30] me. Um, I think probably what happened [13:32] is, um, oh, and and I should also say, [13:35] um, I [13:38] from what I witnessed out there today, [13:41] um, I was actually, uh, somewhat [13:43] pleasantly surprised by the ability of [13:46] most of the people in the crowd, uh, to [13:48] maintain a sense of discipline. Uh, [13:50] there were moments where we needed the [13:52] crowd to help us with something, uh, the [13:54] protesters who were there to help us [13:55] with something. um and they did to help [13:57] try to reduce the amount of harm that [13:59] occurred out there. Um and uh our police [14:02] officers uh were able to work with those [14:06] uh protesters and with the folks who [14:07] were uh helping to lead that uh I think [14:10] in a in a meaningful way. Um, it also [14:12] seems just like I said about uh the some [14:15] of those ICE agents, it also seems that [14:16] there were some individuals in that [14:18] space uh whose hope was to escalate a uh [14:22] to escalate tensions in that space whose [14:24] hope was uh to to to to create a [14:27] conflict um and uh what it appeared to [14:30] me that happened and again I hesitate to [14:34] give my opinion of what happened because [14:36] I'm not an expert um and and and I don't [14:38] have all the facts yet. Um but I think [14:41] what may have happened is um that uh you [14:44] had a a couple of individuals and a [14:47] crowd of frankly mostly somewhat [14:49] disciplined folks uh who started doing [14:52] taking actions uh that I think betrayed [14:55] the trust of the community who is out [14:57] there uh and betrayed the um the values [15:00] that we try to leave with as a community [15:02] and created a [15:05] community versus police dynamic right [15:08] there. um and what I what I imagine and [15:11] and and again this is one of the [15:12] questions we have to get through um [15:14] because it's not acceptable for members [15:16] of the press to be injured in uh law [15:18] enforcement actions. Uh but my uh [15:21] expectation is that what we'll find is [15:23] uh that we had members of the press who [15:25] were in a crowd as the police department [15:28] worked to try to figure out how to uh [15:30] how to engage that crowd. Not that [15:32] anyone was specifically targeted. [15:35] Mayor, who will be conducting this use [15:37] of force review or will it be an [15:39] internal police investigation? [15:40] >> That's a great question. Thank you. Um [15:42] that will be um uh some of it some of [15:45] the um actions of it will be and some of [15:47] the kind of information will be [15:48] collected by our police department. Um, [15:50] but it'll go to our uh police civilian [15:52] internal affairs review commission uh [15:54] which is all civilians uh who work uh to [15:58] who accept kind of some of the those [16:00] internal affairs um uh um investigations [16:04] uh and they they they receive that [16:06] information uh and they end up coming [16:08] back with a uh recommendation. They end [16:10] up coming back with findings and a [16:12] recommendation back to the police chief. [16:14] So that's one of my uh invitations uh [16:17] for community members. If you have [16:18] information, like I said, we are going [16:20] to conduct the police department, our [16:22] police chief uh has already begun [16:23] conducting a full review of every use of [16:26] force uh that was uh that was uh uh done [16:30] today. Um if you have information that [16:32] would help that review, uh please go to [16:35] stpaul.gov spul.gov/pcarc. [16:41] That's our police civilian internal [16:43] affairs review commission. that is a [16:44] group of civilians uh community members, [16:47] residents of this city um who have been [16:49] trained um and who work to provide that [16:52] kind of civilian level oversight. It's [16:54] one of our values uh that when we give [16:57] people the power of a badge uh the power [16:59] of a badge um in in in in an immediate [17:03] sense uh can feel ultimate and so when [17:05] we give people the power of the badge it [17:07] has to be backed up by civilian [17:08] oversight which is why uh it's our PCR [17:11] who will be the ultimate kind of voice [17:13] of like what the recommendations are [17:15] coming out of today [17:16] >> and just put out a statement saying he [17:20] doesn't believe in any policies today [17:23] especially as it relates to separation [17:25] ordinance. So, do you agree with the [17:26] chief's position at this moment in time [17:28] or is it too soon to tell knowing that [17:30] you have or [17:32] >> I would imagine the chief and I would [17:33] agree that we had dozens of officers out [17:35] there uh who all had um hours likely of [17:39] body worn camera footage. Um, and it's [17:42] just not possible to for if I form a [17:44] conclusion right now, frankly, on one [17:47] side or the other, um, then that sort of [17:50] could at least um, be seen to undermine [17:54] the integrity of the review that I'm [17:55] telling you about. Um, I think what we [17:57] need right now isn't for me to cast a [17:59] judgment or isn't for me to make a [18:01] declaration. Um, I am telling anybody in [18:03] this city who feels like they have [18:05] concerns about what they saw today and [18:06] has deep questions about what they saw [18:08] today that I too have concerns and I too [18:10] have deep questions and I, as the mayor [18:13] of the city, I'm going to make sure that [18:14] we work with our police department and [18:16] with our civilian um, uh, PCR, our [18:18] civilian oversight committee to ensure [18:20] that those questions are answered and [18:22] those concerns are resolved. And that [18:24] when we get through that process, then [18:26] it'll be time for conclusions. Mayor, do [18:28] you know anything more about this [18:30] federal law enforcement operation? Was [18:32] it immigration related? Was it another [18:36] sort of federal law enforcement [18:37] operation where they might have had a [18:39] warrant? It was part of a criminal [18:41] investigation. What have you been [18:43] >> Well, that's the problem. If they would [18:44] check in with us and they know, you [18:47] know, they've they've seen my press [18:49] releases. Uh, by the way, just yesterday [18:52] we won our third indictment, federal [18:54] indictment against the uh, federal [18:57] administration's unconstitutional [18:59] attacks on sanctuary cities. So, we're [19:01] proud to be able to do that. They've [19:02] seen those uh, press conferences. [19:04] They've seen my statements. They know [19:05] that we oppose vehemently the way [19:07] they're operating in communities. They [19:09] know that we abhore when they show up [19:11] with masks on. They know that we abhore [19:13] when they are unwilling to show a [19:14] warrant or even identify themselves or [19:16] show a badge. Uh, they know that we [19:18] don't appreciate that. And so they don't [19:20] coordinate or convey with us. Uh what [19:22] they do, what we've seen a pattern of in [19:24] St. Paul and around the country is sort [19:26] of showing up, creating a chaotic scene, [19:29] and then leaving and leaving our [19:31] neighbors, leaving our residents, [19:32] leaving our officers, our paramedics, [19:34] our community leaders, our community [19:35] members to sort of navigate and manage [19:38] the the chaos that they create in our [19:40] community. They did that on the east [19:42] side today. Um I don't remember the [19:45] question you asked me. [19:46] >> I was just asking if you knew what sort [19:48] of immigration immigration. [19:50] >> So, long story short, um I believe it [19:53] was likely immigration. My understanding [19:55] is it was that there there was at least [19:57] some immigration component to it. Um I [20:00] believe that there may have been some [20:02] type of um uh warrant uh involving one [20:05] individual uh who who who was in that [20:08] home. I don't know is the problem. And [20:10] and and here's where uh the rub is. The [20:13] federal administration keeps telling us [20:15] uh if you're not a violent criminal, you [20:17] don't have to worry about this. But when [20:19] they take an action like this, when they [20:21] take an action like they did at Broex [20:23] last week, when they take an action [20:24] against just a crew of roofers who were [20:26] up on a roof trying to do their job, [20:28] every single person they arrested at [20:30] Brotex last week was some just [20:33] law-abiding person trying to go to work [20:35] that morning. And when they do that and [20:38] they don't tell us, oh, this is what [20:39] we're doing. Oh, this is why that person [20:41] was a danger to the community. this is [20:42] why our community is safer because we [20:45] took this enormously destabilizing [20:47] action in communities today. Um then [20:50] then the the the the the consequence of [20:52] those actions is that families who are [20:54] trying to decide whether it's safe to [20:56] take their children to school tomorrow [20:58] don't know that that people who who just [21:01] want to go to work tomorrow and be a [21:02] part of our community are are afraid to [21:04] do that. And let me say two things. one, [21:06] every time I say that, somebody says, [21:08] "Oh, well, they shouldn't have come into [21:10] this country illegally." Or something [21:11] along those lines. And I want to be [21:12] clear that the people that we're talking [21:14] about are people who may have overstayed [21:15] a visa to finish their dissertation. [21:17] There are people who may have overstayed [21:19] o a a work visa uh to be able to just [21:22] raise their children in a place that [21:24] they love in the only place that they [21:25] know. And we want to criminalize them. [21:27] Our federal government tries to [21:29] criminalize people by virtue of just [21:31] breathing, by virtue of just existing, [21:33] by virtue of doing the exact same thing [21:35] that we've seen people do for [21:36] generations. Our country, I grew up in [21:40] American history class and in social [21:42] studies class learning that what's [21:43] amazing about this country is that it's [21:45] been a beacon for people who have come [21:47] from all over the world. And I think [21:50] maybe they didn't mean all over the [21:51] world because we've been proud of being [21:53] a beacon when people who came were [21:55] coming from when were coming from [21:57] Europe. But as the melanin content of [21:59] the people who have flocked to this [22:01] country has gotten thicker and thicker [22:03] then somehow immigration became [22:05] something that we didn't like. Then [22:06] somehow the people who uh sought a [22:08] better life in America became [22:10] criminalized in our eyes just because [22:12] they sought a better life in America. So [22:14] so I think that's something that's [22:16] that's important to note. [22:18] Do you know um how many people maybe [22:20] were arrested [22:22] were St. Paul police arrested? [22:24] >> Um I don't believe the St. Paul police [22:26] arrested anyone. Uh I believe that there [22:28] was maybe one maybe two individuals who [22:30] were cited uh by the St. Paul Police [22:32] Department. Uh my understanding is um [22:35] the federal agents arrested um one or [22:37] two people uh maybe two people but I am [22:39] not an authoritative source on that [22:41] because again they don't share that [22:42] information with us. Can you confirm [22:44] what type of chemical irritants police [22:47] officers? [22:47] >> I can't. That's a question for our St. [22:48] Paul Police Department. That's what I [22:49] was saying earlier. I said pepper spray. [22:51] I don't know that it was technically [22:53] actually pepper spray. That's a question [22:55] for our police department. [22:56] >> And you said earlier that the person who [22:58] was being targeted by this agent somehow [23:01] ended up at this residence. So, was this [23:03] their home or what is the relation? [23:05] >> I don't have any of those. I don't have [23:06] any of that information. Again, uh this [23:08] is this is unusual because this is a [23:10] situation that we woke up and found [23:12] ourselves in the middle of. Uh somebody [23:14] did that unintentionally, created that [23:15] chaos for us, created that kind of um [23:18] those variables and this these unknowns [23:19] for us intentionally. So, no, I don't [23:21] have any of that information about what [23:23] the nature of it is, uh whose home this [23:25] was, um how they ended up kind of being [23:27] in that in that space. What I know is [23:29] that we ultimately ended up called into [23:31] a space. And and and I want to say this [23:34] and I want to respect all of you all of [23:36] you guys' time. [23:38] We have said to our community members [23:40] from the beginning and it's still true [23:42] that our police officers are not [23:44] enforcers of federal immigration policy. [23:47] Uh, I said this already. The the the [23:49] line exists and the and and the trick [23:51] exists that if there's a scene that [23:53] looks like it's likely to uh maybe get [23:55] out of control. If there's a scene that [23:57] looks like it could turn into a conflict [23:59] uh between two groups of people, one of [24:01] the things I said I've said to our [24:03] police chief for a long time is I don't [24:05] want any unsurprising things. if we look [24:08] back on something and say we could see [24:09] that was about to happen, then that was [24:11] an invitation when we saw it uh to to [24:14] intervene and kind of try to prevent it [24:15] from happening in the first place. So, [24:18] um uh I I I do recognize the distinction [24:21] uh between our officers being there at [24:23] all and I'll tell you at Brotex last [24:25] week, um I had a group of folks who were [24:27] angry because the police officers [24:29] weren't there trying to help enforce a [24:32] free speech type of zone. And so I do uh [24:35] recognize a distinction between having [24:37] any physical presence there at all. That [24:39] doesn't necessarily mean that they were [24:41] in the in in the in the mode of uh being [24:43] federal uh immigration uh folks. Again, [24:46] I understand that that's uh confusing [24:48] and it's complex. Um and that's a line [24:50] that's hard to kind of draw hard and [24:52] fast because there's so many variables [24:54] and how a situation like this can play [24:55] out. I I I told you from the beginning [24:57] of that there's more questions that I [24:59] don't uh that I have more questions than [25:01] answers at this point. Um, and that [25:03] continues to be the case. That's exactly [25:05] why we're calling for the review. That's [25:06] exactly why I've asked our police chief [25:08] to comb through uh all of that uh bodywn [25:10] camera footage uh in the way uh that [25:12] we're calling for the chief to do it. Um [25:14] and um I look forward to being able to [25:16] come on the other side of this and have [25:18] the answers. In truth, you might hear [25:20] those answers uh from another mayor. Uh [25:22] but I look forward to our community [25:24] being able to stand forward and say uh [25:25] we are enforcing our high standards [25:28] because you better believe St. has the [25:30] highest standards of any police [25:31] department in the country and we are [25:32] going to enforce our highest standards [25:34] of transparency, our highest standards [25:36] of accountability and our highest [25:37] standards of uh kind of community [25:39] relations. Yes, last question. [25:40] >> The second immigration rate of this [25:42] magnitude has what would you say to [25:44] residents who see this as a threat to [25:46] public safety? I mean, is this something [25:47] you should expect in this? [25:50] >> I see this as a threat to public safety. [25:52] I don't I don't know a better way to say [25:53] it. I see this as a threat to public [25:55] safety. Um, and again, I have more [25:57] answers about last week than I have [25:59] about this week, which is why I keep [26:00] referencing last week. Uh, but to see [26:02] those um, agents pull up to create that [26:06] chaotic scene, uh, to to to to pepper [26:09] spray a whole crowd. Um, there was a [26:11] woman who was limping because uh, those [26:13] the federal vehicles ran over her toe [26:16] uh, as they were leaving. and to for [26:18] them to say [26:20] uh that, you know, and and and look back [26:23] at the release that they that they [26:24] issued after that action. Um they said [26:26] they they they arrested 14 people [26:29] and they said that one of them had an [26:31] old charge. Now, these folks know well [26:34] enough what the difference is between a [26:36] charge and a conviction. If that person [26:38] had an old conviction, they' have said [26:39] that person had an old conviction. That [26:41] person didn't even one person of the 14 [26:43] had an old charge that wasn't even [26:44] convicted. and they want to convince us [26:47] that that show that they put on, that [26:48] circus they created, that chaos that [26:50] they created was in the guise of public [26:52] safety when what they did was ended up [26:55] rounding up 14 people who were just on [26:56] their way to work like they'd go every [26:58] morning. Um, and they created a [27:01] destabilizing uh presence. Uh, they [27:03] created harm. They created injuries in [27:05] our community to do that. So, uh, this, [27:08] um, notion of criminalizing people, of [27:11] dehumanizing people because of who they [27:13] are, not because of something they've [27:15] done, and this is what I've told you all [27:17] from the beginning, is that nobody's [27:18] better than our St. Paul Police [27:20] Department at holding someone [27:22] accountable for breaking the law. Uh, [27:24] whether you're a citizen or not, uh, [27:27] whether whatever your immigration status [27:28] is, if you break the law, expect the St. [27:30] Paul Police Department to come and and [27:31] and have some questions for you. But we [27:34] we can't be in the business of doing [27:35] that. One, it undermines public safety [27:37] in the moment, but two, it undermines [27:39] the trust. And this is what I've said [27:40] from the beginning. Our greatest public [27:42] safety asset is the trust that our [27:43] residents have to have in our police [27:45] officers. That when they see that badge, [27:47] when they see that unifor uniform, that [27:48] somebody's coming to help them. And [27:50] that's that's how when we brag on [27:52] bringing uh gunfire down by 70% in this [27:55] city, it's because people know that they [27:57] can count on and work with our St. Paul [27:58] Police Department. That's why we work so [28:00] hard to to protect and maintain that [28:02] trust from anyone who would break it on [28:04] any side of our community. Thank you all [28:05] for being here.