While the larger study is going on and the citizen review group is doing their work, the alders are going to start their own to get some preliminary items addressed, particularly use of force, but they aren’t limiting themselves to just that issue. Good discussion and goals! This is what the Common Council Organizational Committee discussed.
Public Comment and Testimony with Questions
Here’s Greg Gelembiuk’s testimony, he was the only one from the public to speak and he said so much and had concrete ideas, so the alders asked for his written testimony, so here it is:
All of the four objectives of the proposed subcommittee are quite valuable.
I think there are multiple examples of beneficial changes to policy, procedure, and training that could be implemented in the near-term, while waiting for the results of the review.
Some concrete examples:
1. Inserting de-escalation into MPD use of force policy, since there’s currently no policy requirement for use of de-escalation. De-escalation provisions from the Denver Sheriff’s Department could be used as one model.
2. Mandating implementation of an early intervention system, to flag officers at risk of misconduct or use of excessive force. An early intervention system with a good statistical model would be most beneficial, and University of Chicago’s Data Science for Social Good is working with police departments on developing optimal early intervention systems.
3. Mandating that people who have been subjected to substantial use of force be given proper medical treatment, with an adequate explanation of their rights and options if they’re uninsured.
4. Mandating implementation of Police Executive Research Forum recommendations to reduce use of deadly force.
5. Potentially implementing Edmonton Model mental health awareness training as an adjunct to current Crisis Intervention Training.
6. Mandating policy provisions such as that in the Philadelphia deadly force policy, which states: “Police officers shall ensure their actions do not precipitate the use of deadly force by placing themselves or others in jeopardy by taking unnecessary, overly aggressive, or improper actions. It is often a tactically superior police procedure to withdraw, take cover or reposition, rather than the immediate use of force.”
These are just a few examples of beneficial changes that could draw widespread community support and that hopefully might not be overly controversial. I think there would potentially be a good degree of community consensus on reforms such as these.
For information sharing, I’ll also note that the Community Response Team has compiled an extensive list of police reform experts, with different areas of subexpertise, who could be tapped for input.
Also, if Shiva is interested in serving on the subcommittee, I would suggest including her, given her involvement in policing issues to date.
Alder Marsha Rummel asked Greg to repeat his ideas after medical treatment because he had said so much. In making his comments he also added that PERF (Police Executive Research Forum) is the premiere organization for policing recommendations. The Edmonton has a adjunct to teh CIT training, which is valuable, but the Edmonton is model is designed to modify police behavior. He says that deadly force discussions are usually based on the split second decisions, but the Philadelphia model looks at what puts them into that position. He says that officers put them in a position where the only way to extricate themselves is by use of a firearm and avoiding that is key to reducing the use of deadly force.
Mark Clear and Ledell Zellers ask for the written comments – it will be emailed to staff and it will be an attachment in legistar.
Rebecca Kemble asked about the early intervention software, she says she thought that he has said that the city already purchased the software, but we don’t use it?
Gelembiuk says that Noble Wray purchased the software but we don’t use it. They started implementing it and there were some incompatibilities that would take some time to resolve and it wasn’t a high priority. He talked to Noble Wray on several occasions and he said it would be done “soon” but it just never got fully implemented. When he went to Koval’s initial community meeting in which the Chief exploded at him, he asked him about when he would implement the early intervention system and he told me that he not it implement it, that he thought it would not show anything he didn’t already know.
Kemble says its purchased, there is something there.
Gelebiuk says its there, he’s not sure about the quality, they differ in quality and the reason he was suggesting Chicago Data Science for Social Good is that they have been known to have some of the best systems, they worked with Charlotte and its top notch. You really need a good statistical model, or artificial intelligence model that will selectively discern which officers will commit a crime or use excessive force.
Sheri Carter asks when the software was purchased.
Gelembiuk says he thinks 2012, because that is when he first asked about it. And each time he asked you could tell Noble Wray felt bad about it and that it wasn’t a priority and he was bugging Wray about it.
Mike Verveer points out the Amelia Royko Mauer also submitted written testimony. That wasn’t available to the public or in legistar but they had it at their places.
Discussion
Verveer gives some background, they discussed this for over an hour at their last meeting and he asked for input for he and Alder Rummel to come up with a proposal to consider tonight to create a body to look at issues in the police department and community relations. There have been many conversations and input with people here and others, including the meeting with the Chief and Assistant Chiefs and what you see before you is a summary of what a proposed subcommittee would do. He thanks Heather Allen for helping to develop it. (Heather introduces their Wanda Fullmore intern) Verveer says they are open to feedback and suggestions and he wants to start the group as soon as possible and would like CCOC to approve the committee tonight. The committee could develop their own objectives, they kept it brief. He also mentioned at the last council meeting that the police department to work with them on this committee and Captain Jim Wheeler will be the liaison and he will assist Heather and Lisa (Veldran) in staffing the committee. He thanks Lisa and Heather for being enthusiastic about staffing the committee, and he opens it up for feedback on the proposal and amendments and he hopes it gets created tonight. Denise DeMarb and Rummel, move approval and second.
This is what the resolution said before modifications:
The proposed Subcommittee on Police and Community Relations will seek to meet the following objectives:
1) Provide a forum for residents and members of the Council to discuss police and community goals, priorities and interactions. Build a deeper understanding of policing for elected officials and members of the public; and
2) Explore models and options from other communities related to use of force and other police policies; and
3) Provide a forum for information sharing regarding police training, policies, data and trends including detailed presentations from the MPD related to use of force; and,
4) Make recommendations to the Council on short-term policy, procedure and training while waiting for the results of the Ad Hoc Review of Police Policies and Procedures.
Maurice Cheeks asks what the focus will be and how it differs from the Public Safety Review Committee, who is supposed to look at policies, priorities, budgets and community relations and safety issues and make recommendations to the council on long range goals for fire and police. He’s not trying to defer it, he just wants to know how this is different.
(Mike won’t say it, but I will – they aren’t doing their job! There should be no need for this, they should have been all over these issues for the past 3 years, but they seem quite irrelevant.)
Verveer says they had this same conversation with Rummel, the Mayor, deputy Mayor Reyes and the Chief and Assistants. They have had a hard time meeting quorum lately, there are two vacancies that the mayor is hoping to fill in the not too distant future. PSRC hasn’t been active. He says and extension of that is how it related to the Ad Hoc Review Committee, that is why it is called out in number 4 of the objectives. He does not think this will duplicate their work on the other committees, one of the differences is that this is only elected officials, unlike the other body, one of the ways he talked about this with the police department, this will give the council a forum to have direct access on a regular basis to discuss a wide variety of issues around policing in our community and the relations between the community and the department. He encourages all alders to attend, regardless of if they are on the committee. He thinks the committee will be different because it will have a focus that will be with us, the elected policy makers, unlike the other bodies and he doesn’t want to duplicate the work, but complement and collaborate.
David Ahrens (not on the committee) says that given the focus in 2 and 3, on the use of force and the attention to the aspects of community relations, he says the title of the committee is misleading.
Verveer says that is a good point, but he didn’t think that was the only focus, he thought the group would come up with their own objectives and mission and he was hoping it would be braod, but your point is well taken, 2 and 3 focus on use of force, it is an acute issues and the singular issue that we get the most reaction about. It is his hope the group appoints its own chair and vice chair and they will flush out the work they are interested in pursuing.
Denise DeMarb didn’t think it was a use of force committee and she would like to change 2 and 3 to make it broader. They strike the words “use of force and other” from 2 and “use of force” from 3:
2) Explore models and options from other communities related to use of force and other police policies; and
3) Provide a forum for information sharing regarding police training, policies, data and trends including detailed presentations from the MPD related to use of force; and,
DeMarb is talking really softly, but I think I got it all. They agree by unanimous consent/friendly amendment to make the changes.
Barbara McKinney (not on the committee) asks about the overlapping with PSRC ans says the committee is outlining its duties and tasks but it has not been able to function and they are trying to move more into what the goals are that are outlined and they are getting stronger, but the ad hoc committee is an extension of the alders that represent Madison and that they will look at the issues deeper. She would like a report and keep the alders abreast of what is going on. Its hard to do a deep dive with 20 alders, so she thinks its important to have a group responsive to the committee of the whole. One of the things she wants to know is how will the body be formed, what is the process.
Verveer says it would be a subcommittee of CCOC (Common Council Organizational Committee) he says that there are 5 members that are interested from CCOC – they aren’t nominated cuz they haven’t created the group, but the ones that are interested are Rummel, DeMarb, Kemble, Carter and Shiva Bidar. He says there are only a few others left on the Committee, himself, Ledell Zellers and Cheeks. He says they can serve as well. He says in terms of feedback and report back from the committee at a minimum he would like the subcommittee to be a regular update at CCOC.
McKinney says she asked for a meeting with leadership to discuss this, she wants to know how this committee is different than the CCOC committee.
Rummel says it is a subcommittee. Verveer says ad hoc committees are created by the council, this is a subcommittee and does not need to be approved by the Council. Kemble says it is a working group, a smaller working group so the whole committee doesn’t spend all their time on this one thing, these alders are agreeing to work on this in addition to their work on the committee and focus on this issue.
McKinney asks because she is interested in working on the issue, she wants to know if this precludes her from being an unofficial member of this group. She says she doesn’t need to be officially on the group, but she is interested.
Carter asks if she is interested in being on the group.
Verveer says her participation is welcome, all the alders are.
McKinney says she needed that clarified. She didn’t want to make any assumptions and wanted to make sure it was part of the record. McKinney says she needed clarity.
Verveer says that they could create a different committee, but it was neater and easier to do it as a subcommittee. They will all be public meetings, all noticed and you are welcome to participate as you have here today. Under the ordinance you have the right to join us and participate under the ordinance. (There is an ordinance that makes all alders ex officio members of all city committees and they can fully participate in discussions – just not vote)You just won’t have a vote and quite frankly there probably won’t be many votes, just on the minutes and adjourning, because these are discussions. You will be welcome and every alder will get the agenda and minutes from Lisa as it moves forward.
McKinney says its rhetorical because she knew the answer already she just wanted it to be official because she had asked to talk with council leadership to discuss it. Verveer apologizes for the miscommunication and thanks her for being there and bringing up the issues.
Cheeks says that this is to address a myriad of issues nationally, locally, externally and internally, but he wants to have a sense for what success looks like? You have spelled out goals and objectives, but at the end of the day, what will be different because of this committee. He asks to set a frame for why this is a good use of our time, this could be really impactful and wants it framed accordingly, not simply a committee to attend in addition.
Verveer asks those serving to chime in as well. He says again he won’t be serving but will try to attend when he can, so he wants them to respond. He says that its true there won’t be alot of votes, but he didn’t mean to say it wouldn’t be impactful work and that there wouldn’t be decisions, he says the main goal is to make recommendations, there is meat on the bone at the end of the day. He says that the last conversation with the Chief and Assistants they didn’t push back, they were eager to work with the group because they saw it as an opportunity to be open, accessible and educate us, the elected policy makers, about their policy and procedures and the genesis of them and answer questions. They don’t feel that they have had that opportunity and we can now all go back to the chief’s now infamous blog in June where he made it seem like the council isn’t engaged in the department work and not supportive, so he thinks this is a way to be more engaged and work in partnerships. Captain Wheeler will be a liaison and Jim will coordinate to have experts come in and have the trainers come in. They seem interested in being accommodating and participating.
Kemble says that the public education alone will be impactful. Through her work reaching out to the police department, doing ride alongs and talking with officers, she has learned so much, some of it quite disturbing actually, about our police department training and procedures that the community is not aware of. And when the mayor said, in an unfortunate context, but I think what he said is true and I support is that the community needs to know what kind of force to expect in dealing with the police. She thinks that the community does not know the kind of force the police are trained for and their policies are set for. And I think at the very least, just information about what currently exists is important. Furthermore, as we collectively learn about that, she feels confident that we will feel that it is important to make some changes to that. We will talk about it in the committee. It will take the collaboration and cooperation of the police department to understand the current reality under which the officers are trained. How are they trained to respond. We took out use of force, but its a big deal and that is why she wants to be on it, just because of what she has learned in the last couple months. So, she is committed to bringing recommendations forward after they learn what the reality on the ground is and after we hear from members of the public who may have suggestions themselves. She thinks it would be a waste of time if there are no recommendations and she hopes that we do that in a timely manner before the ad hoc committee is done with theirs.
DeMarb says that we incomplete information all the time for citizens and the department and sometimes they gel and sometimes they don’t and we will get education so we can discern what sounds right or determine is something doesn’t make sense because we have done a deeper dive. She says things come up and she doesn’t feel like she has enough knowledge to know how she feels about something because we don’t have enough information. She says that she and former alder Schmidt went out and spent a couple hours going over the police tool belt with two officers and everything that is accessible to them, and it was very educational. So, she came away from that with a different feeling than when she went into it. The council will be better educated and be better able to make solid recommendations. We all know we are hiring an expert, but that will take a while, even once they are hired it will take a while and we owe it to the residents of the city to do this work, when that expert comes because we need to understand.
Carter says that she sees it as an opportunity to educate the police, because alot of times what we hear they think it just a small group, but its not. We can educate them about the larger issues.
Rummel says we know there are racial disparities in the criminal justice system, its bigger than just the police, its the system, but we need to police community policing and look at the police in the larger debate. She has asked and you probably have to “Is our police department contributing directly to this larger thing?” And she got one answer from the police department which is that they have to enforce the laws. Maybe there are some laws we should not be enforcing. Cheeks interrupts and says we already do choose that. Rummel says there is discretion, so there is that piece of it. Rummel says that she has been working on this for years and people say we have authority over the police, but at some point its the Police and Fire Commission and State Statute, what power do we have – we haven’t given all our power away so what power do we have. She wants to look at the Code of Conduct and what other communities do. She also wants to know how we deal with the mental health crisis. She used to joke that the police were social workers, but now they are social workers with a gun so do we want to spend money on social workers or police. What does that look like, how do we respond to people in crisis, who should respond. Finally, she thinks the point about the PSRC is good, they need more direction and we should strengthen their authority to do the work they need to do.
Cheeks says he is constantly impressed with the council, he says it is so valuable to put this all on the table, we come in with assumptions, but this is good. Especially he interested in the education piece and is happy that is a high priority. The council is volunteers and we don’t have a legislative reference bureau to dig into this, many other council have dozens (they laugh, they have one). It takes years to get a municipal masters degree here and understand everything – we get informed by department heads and are told what we can’t do. Police is a strange reporting structure and we are wrestling with all this works, and what our role is, its is unusual for a department head to tell us things are non-negotiable. What does that mean that he reports to the mayor but also the PFC. So the education process publicly and transparently with the public and each other, that is exciting.
Verveer asks if others are interested in serving. Zellers says it is of great interest to her but she is not on the committee so her schedule doesn’t dictate when they can or can’t meet and hold up an important and necessary committee. She will attend as many of the meetings as possible.
Cheeks says “ditto” but asks that they are on city channel. Zellers asks for the schedule to be put out as soon as possible. Verveer says the members will be Rummel, Bidar, DeMarb, Kemble and Carter and Lisa will schedule a meeting, they will elect a chair and vice chair at the first meeting and thanks Heather and Lisa for staffing the meeting.
