 Okay, so today is Tuesday, February 15th, 2022. It is 5 36 PM and this is the Public Safety Committee. We have an agenda that is listed on board docs. You'll forgive me. I'm sort of on a couple of different screens. The first item on the agenda is the approval of the agenda. Before somebody makes a motion on that, I would just ask that we add to the agenda, that we add to the agenda just like 4.05, just an item before we get to the discussion of the CNA report, there was something I just wanted to ask the committee members about before going forward. Other than that, if there's, and that would be just a discussion about the tapes, the recordings that we've had so far of the CNA meetings and posting them on board docs. I didn't wanna make that decision without both of you being able to have some input if you wanted some. But other than that, if there's a motion to adopt the agenda, that would be great. I'm sorry, a point of order with regarding the posting of the meetings, I guess part of that discussion would be why they're not being posted to town meeting TV as well. I'm not clear as to why it's being limited to board docs. Okay, well, that's fine, Milo. We can get to that, sure. Okay, all right, so with just that additional item that would just simply, we can just simply label that recording of meetings. I would welcome an emotion to adopt the agenda. Move to adopt the agenda as amended. Thank you, and seconded. All those in favor of the agenda as amended, please say aye. Aye. Aye. So we have an agenda. The next item is the minutes of the February 8th, 2022 Public Safety Committee. Have both of you had a chance to look them over? Yeah, yes. Okay, if there are any amendments now is the time, otherwise a motion to approve would be great. Move to approve. Second. Great. Motion and move to a motion to approve. And second, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. So those are great. Thanks, Jared. And then we have the public forum. I don't know. We do have a couple members of the, I believe actually that people that are members of the public forum that are listed as attendees are members of the press. So imagine they probably are not here to speak if you are and wish to be recognized by all means, please raise your hand. There are no other members of the public. So I think we can move on from that. If there are people that come between now and then, Jared and they want to speak, you know, I'll try to monitor it, but please let me know if you see something. So we can, thanks. So we'll close the public forum. The item that I had mentioned, which is just before the discussion of the CNA report, it was brought to our attention this afternoon that the recordings that we have of the January 11th, 25th, the 1st of February and 8th of February, there were Zoom recordings of these meetings and we have those recordings and just wanted to ask the committee members, you know, if you, how you feel about, you know, what you would like to do with those, we can post those on board docs. We can also, I'm not really sure what the mechanism is to get them on town meeting TV. Maybe other people know how that works, but if that was what our wish was, then we could simply, you know, ask staff to take care of that. I'm fine with anything being posted. All right, is that okay with you, Jane? Yeah, I mean, I don't really see why we shouldn't. So, yeah. Right, I mean, I don't either, but, you know, it came to our attention this afternoon that they hadn't been posted. And, you know, I'd rather the three of us just have the opportunity to talk about it if anyone has any concerns that we should, we, you know, as a committee, we make, we can make that decision. So, I don't know, Jared, do you know what the process is? And then we'll get, and then we'll get to Milo. Do you know what the process is for doing that? In terms of posting it to board docs, I think we should be able to, so currently the way that we're recording these Zoom meetings is we're using the city attorney's account and it's saved onto the iCloud. I don't know how much space our account can hold. So I, and when that discussion came up earlier today, when Milo posed the email before we addressed it, I did do a little background hunting to find out, do other committees post the recordings? Some do, some don't, as it's not required by the open meetings law. We have to have minutes of the meetings, which we do have. But I can figure that out. I think it might take just continuing to ask a few more questions and maybe Lori knows better because of the council and your regularly posted meetings through YouTube and everything else. But I can definitely get the links up on board docs without issue and I'm sure we can figure out how to connect with other sources of distribution if we want to. It seems to me the police commission or at least the meetings that you had of the joint committee, Soraya, those were all posted. I think the recordings of the meetings were posted. I don't know what the mechanics are. Milo, go ahead. Yes, so to your point, the public safety meetings have been posted to town meeting TV. So that's why I'm surprised that we have to have this discussion. I would think and it would be important that we would also post these to town meeting TV and that there seems to have been some sort of breakdown because this has been the practice. I'm not asking for something new. This has been the practice and was something so important. We, I mean, I don't know how many people will look at it. I'm used to looking at all these committee and commission meetings and going back and reviewing certain parts. So I'm pretty skilled at finding these things. So I was pretty surprised not to find any of them posted and that raises concerns for me. I don't want us to look like we're trying to hide information from the public. So we really should be endeavoring to find out what happened between the end of last year where the meetings were posted through December and we've suddenly stopped posting them. Okay, well, I mean, honestly, I really don't know, but point well taken and we will take care of that. So from this point forward, once we know what the mechanism is, we will, once the, once we're able to do that physically and have the recording and can post it, it will be posted. I would imagine that that can be done fairly quickly. So Jabu, did you have a, go ahead. Yeah, I was just going to comment that it's, at least from what I've noticed is that if Taminin TV is not at a meeting, it's generally not posted to it. So I wonder if it's just as simple maybe like supporting a copy of the file of the video of just Taminin TV, they post up there. Okay, all right. Well, we'll figure it out and your point is well taken Milo. There's, these meetings are too important and we certainly don't want anyone to feel that we are not making them easily and readily available. So thanks for bringing it. Thank you for bringing it to our attention. The, I think what we'll do is move into the recommendations. We, I believe that we left off at what on this, what on the spreadsheet is line 41 and that would be recommendation 1.32.1, 132.1. And that is actually, I think those what we were talking about these things all, to some degree at one time. And those were the victim witness assistants because I think there were several of them. Let's see here. Or no, actually this one is about the updating the directive 21.01, which is the domestic violence response policy to describe the position and responsibilities. And that would require amending 21.01. And I don't know if the other ones related to that. It doesn't appear that that directive has been discussed. Yet. There appeared to be pretty much a cross the board agreement that this is a priority. And most people labeled it a priority too. Do not know how much work is involved with that would leave that either to the chief or Detective Byrne perhaps to tell us. And Karen, if I can, because we did discuss it and I think we didn't capture some of the discussion around it because I think we did decide to, sorry, are we on 1.311? Yeah, line 41. Yes. I think we had based on some of the things that John had said made it later, but I don't know that I captured the notes on it is, I think that was my fault, basically. I think we did discuss it. All right. So maybe we put that maybe we put that into Q7. We don't have a seven yet. I don't know to say that are there of the of the working group or our chief or others are there. Is there any, any comments on that? Or is that as a director of review? Is that something that people feel comfortable in waiting to what would then be the third quarter of next year? Okay. So why don't we, why don't we. Why don't we do that, Zariah? You're so good at doing this. Taking the feeling filling in those lines. Rose or column C and D. On the next couple of items are. Lines 42 through. 50. I think. Well, for the most part are on. The I don't know if we think that are a bargainable. Those are, and I'm not really sure. Other than to categorize those and to prioritize them. As a, as a working group. I don't know that there's a whole lot more we can do with them. And I'm just wondering, Jared, what your, what your opinion is, as we go into some of these that involve bargaining. how you feel we we could approach those as a group. Sorry, I'm muting myself here. As I think it's important that if you feel that things need to be expressed as it relates to the contract. And as we've, I think discussed in meetings prior to this that we capture those notes I don't know if it's easier for us to break that out into a separate sheet of its own like still leave it on the master met matrix, but creating item that are specific to the contract negotiation. I think would be easier in terms of trying to transcribe that information to the interested parties whether that's my office HR. Okay, so on the ones that we had before on that were union on. So there were the, the bucket, there was a bucket of items that were training related, and then there was a bucket of items that are on bargain union related union negotiation related. Maybe when we get through section one, maybe it would make sense to go through and, and you know and put those into two separate spreadsheets on because it looks as though we will get through section one this evening and maybe have a little bit of time. But I'm, I'm just wondering how other than other than going and prioritizing what more, what more we can do. And we can't there really are no next steps other than the fact that they're bargain able, and this is our, this is our recommendation as to what the priority is is that pretty much right. Yeah, I think that that's fair and right I mean I, I think that it would be in the best interest of the committee to give is clear indication to those in the at the negotiating table, how important it is for this to be included. You know, ranking them the best they can. Okay. Okay, so go ahead. Sure. Yeah, I can just maybe ask a question around that which is, to what extent, I guess, to what it like, we just hired a new position that is supposed to review this footage to my knowledge and so I guess I'm wondering what the disagreement is and if we're just proposing an alternative process. So would like to hear, I guess from the department on the position that the council approved last month is not a reviewer it is a person who nearly redacts incidents that have been identified for that person. So it's different than review the issue here is around the idea of random audit. And it has to do with the fact that that is not it was there was an agreement made between the union and the department, when the body cameras were put into effect the first agency and state to do this, trading new ground on on really issues of the the idea that you're being compelled to wear a device that gathers evidence potentially against you. And that had bargainable implications. It was not directly inserted into the contract instead it was understood to be an agreement between I believe, then chief of police Shirley, and the then board of the union that this was going to be a component it was at the time a standard component in any number of agencies that was exploring that excuse me that were exploring body cameras that randomized auditing was not going to be a component. So, when I have a civilian when I have a citizen complaint, I go to the body camera when I have a use of force, particularly one that upon review of the written use of force narrative indicates that there may be complications, or use of force that resulted in an injury, I go to the body camera. Certainly with regard to the redaction specialist that position will be going to body camera for specifically delineated instances outlined by agreement between the police commission and the department. I don't remember what they are exactly but they are basically uses of force where there's an injuries of force where tools are used. That is, you know, baton or pepper spray, and then some others. But it's not all and it's also not random. So, the, in both of those instances, there is a prohibition on the notion of having random review. And I guess what that is is, if that is a priority for the administration for the city council for the police commission via the city council. And that would be something that we would, you know, I mean, we would have, we would have to work on together is that is that a, is that a fair. assessment of what the situation is. I don't know who else ever wants to answer that. Yes. Yeah. So I guess what the, you know, we've got 123456789, we have nine, nine or so of these items right here. And a couple of them. I noticed that a couple of them or and had put, had said that they should really go into section seven on. And you'll forgive me the spreadsheet is so long that I can't, can't remember now which ones they were. This was a good analysis section seven. Yeah, 41, and, and 50. Yeah, basically, basically anything to do with them staffing by our schedule, I thought it would be more efficient to have in section seven, we're probably going to have a pretty in depth conversation when we get to that so to do in section one and then again to do in section seven, just for the purpose of time and efficiency I thought it would be better saved to Dan. Okay. I'm, I'm okay with that I mean just because just because CNA put them in section one doesn't mean that we couldn't discuss, discuss them with the others I mean I don't. I don't know what their specific rhyme or reason was to it but does anyone have a concern with moving that those. And we literally would we literally could move those lines. Just into section seven. Does anyone have any concerns about that, or is there something I might be missing. Yeah, I think that just because maybe I'm being an optimistic but I would say that the sooner we can get any recommendations to on bargaining to folks that are coming out of this report. Maybe somebody else is doing that analysis but maybe not I wouldn't hesitate to move anything that is bargaining that they trust us to finish on time but maybe I don't trust us to finish on time to later sections. Are you are you doubting that we're going to get this done. I strongly agree with Zariah. I cannot tell you how I just live in fear that the bargainable items are going to fall through the cracks like someone's going to come up with some kind of reason why they weren't discussed. So we really have to make sure that these make it onto that list so that they make it into those conversations so I wholeheartedly agree that we just have to handle the bargainable first even if we're just to say they're reasonable and they're going on the list and just to have that process what is the acknowledgement that these have been received to be discussed I mean I know we kind of went into that last week where it fell on the public safety committee but I just I just really I think a lot of people in the community have a lot of deep concerns because some of these have been mentioned numerous times by members of the community so they're important thank you. All right I mean it would seem as though just in the interest of time that we try as best we can to if we're going to have the we're going to have the conversation so that we can get these items in the queue. For the purposes of getting them in the queue and trying to prioritize on by work of the committee that you know on the items that we know we're probably going to have to do we're going to be discussing again at a later time. Hopefully, you know in in about a month on that we just try to limit the conversation as best we can so we can get through them on so. And I certainly don't see the harm and you know and having that conversation and then if we if we need to we have part of the conversation, a little bit later. By the way I see that Jeff has joined us Jeff thanks so much for for being here. Are you able to hear us. Well, I hope I'll hope I'll hope so. But so these are items going from line 42 to line 50. I'm starting with 42. Irrespective of the agreement or disagreement which we can all respectfully have agreement or disagreement, it would be the idea of the working committee to come up with a way of prioritizing these items. And again, I mean, we'll try to have the conversation in some level of linear order, so that we move on from one to the other. The first one being the one that we've just discussed are there. So the column where it's a suggested timeline, really doesn't apply in this case, because it's a, it's a bargainable action. So it would more just simply be a conclusion. So it has an opinion about how high a priority that would be from one items one, two and three to know or no. That's number 42 correct. This is, yeah, line 42. Yes, it's recommendation unfortunately these recommendations have these awful numbers. I just want to make sure we're like talking about the same ones and also make a note of what we want in the queue. So, so that I mean and that's the other thing is that we've got, you know, we've got right in here to four, six, eight, nine of these. They can't all be one, you know, I mean they could, but if you're looking at making inroads, it's hard to have them all be a priority one. So, go ahead. I was just going to say they'll just start the conversation I mean I personally think that 1.34.1 should be a one. Yeah, I mean I think that's something that is quite a high priority. But just, you know, happy to obviously talk about that and talk through that. Okay, this is 1.34.1. So that you're asking you're mentioning Jane now do you have a do you have a feeling about 1.33.1. Also, yeah, also a priority. Yep. Sorry, both of those. Okay. All right, I know, I know Milo you would, you've spent a fair amount of time on these. I know you've got your hand raised go go ahead. I just want to say one of the reasons that I support 1.33.1 is that in trying to determine and get to the root causes of the racial disparities that continue in the department. I'm looking at some of this footage. Having that reviewed by supervisors might be helpful in trying to make those determinations. Is this I don't know if I have to look to see what I gave it yeah I end up giving it a two. I don't give everything a one, but I, I agree that it's something that we need to do. So when you say you say you gave it a two, you gave it a two when in fact and again I'm, I'm, I'm a little bit hampered by the fact that I can't look at the whole spreadsheet at one time, or the other items that go from lines, you know, 42 to 50, or the, were there others Milo that were a one for you. I'm, I'm actually trying to scoot over to the columns that I'm in. I want to say I had some that I said I needed more information on and then I had a lot of them just, I didn't prioritize because they're related to the contract. So it's like we have to get past the bargaining issues related to some of these. I agree with them I think I need to hide some of the columns so that I can see my responses better. Because there were a couple that I had tagged as I needed more information on and then I had others that were tagged the contract like can we really prioritize something at this time that has to go through contractual negotiations. And one thing that I was struck by in this and I don't know how others feel is that the lines 45 through 50 were all bargainable actions those were, those were on those were items that on that the, the chief agreed with on, they were also items that were also items 4045 on that, with the exception of 50. So 4546 4748 and 49 or items that were that the chief had said, adding to the adding to the renegotiation, and that the BP OAs response was either needs to be negotiated, not opposed. To the conversation, or there was no comment. So I'm feeling as though those are items that maybe we as a committee say, great. We move those on and those are, those are, you know, ones we I mean we seem to all agree with them. And then the question would be, are they important enough to us to assign them a one or a two I mean at this point if there is agreement I, I can't imagine why we would want them to be a three. Go ahead. All right, just wanted to add to the debate we haven't been giving things priorities on numbers as a group we've only been putting a timeline on it based on priorities and a, and a comment. So I can add those priorities if we're saying just for the bargainable ones we want to have priorities between them, like as a tool to folks we can do that but it's not something we've done historically. Yeah, we'd have to sort of instead of suggested timeline. I guess, I guess maybe we need another column. I can just add it to the notes I can add it to I can just put a high medium and low priority and the in the notes column for those ones. But yeah I think I agree that anything that has agreement on it to me as a higher priority for. Yeah. Like 45 is the city should work with the BP away to modify the retention period so the discipline records are maintained for far longer periods of time. It doesn't appear as though. Well, the BP away's response was on, was that that, you know was not opposed to having the conversation, but this can have an unintended side effect, which would hold back, which could hold back the department. So I mean, I mean not to say that they're in complete agreement that there is some level of agreement that there is that that conversation could can happen. The same thing with the working with the BP away to revise the promotion to senior officer to five years on the work with personnel to determine more appropriate compensation for FTO officers to ensure probationary officers receive our are receiving the informed training on the reviewing how many times the department has used the above delegation function assigning new officers with an officer who has had no FTO training. I mean these are not. These don't appear to be particularly controversial. I think that we could all agree. Is that fair to say, looking at all these little boxes and it doesn't appear as though anyone's disagreeing so I so that's a good that's good on. Why don't we, I mean I'm I guess what I'm just trying to do is focus our time on the things that are are are potentially where we might have disagreements. So to conclude, just to make sure that I put high priority on all of them I put a high priority for changing the contract as there seems to be a consensus to change. And then I noted on 1.36.1 BPA noted concerns for independent consequences and on 1.41.1 BPA disagrees. Yeah, well they just they. Yeah, I think it was also the fact and I don't know or in his on here so he can correct me but I think it was disagree this is more suitable topic for section seven so I'm not sure, or if you mean that you disagree with where it is you just disagree with it. I don't know if you have anything else you want to add to that. Just catch up just double check on the right one. This is line 50. Yeah, we, I at the minute I'm, I'm membership but would disagree with changing our schedule. Our, our schedule is one of the more attractive parts of being a Barnes and police are working for the department it's it's very predictable. And it's very attractive a lot of a lot of people are here, they say when we pulled them last year, you know, one of the reasons they stay at the department is because of the schedule. Yeah, we work one month we have weekends on one month we have weekends off. Once you get up in seniority you can really put you can foresee your schedule for a long time. It's a deeper schedule and in a retention crisis that we're in right now, it's, I'm not sure how beneficial will be to the city, apart from like deploying officers, whatever they want. The amount of officers you can potentially lose by changing the schedule could be could be pretty detrimental to an already struggling department. Okay, alright, thanks thanks for clarifying. So yeah, I mean I would, I would say that that I would say what you're what you're saying, Soraya is correct. Um, you know for for reasons of schedule it for for reasons that are in just listed that BP away is not is not in favor. As far as the, the only other items that are made are bargainable are lines 4243 and 44, and that would be a question of how important this working group feels those items are in a way of saying high priority. I don't know, moderate priority and low priority, perhaps. So Jane you had already said you thought that 33 on was a high priority or 34 I'm sorry 34. Yeah. Okay, were there any are there any other opinions about those three. Um, I guess, not knowing, I don't feel like I know enough about 35 to know if that's something that's necessary or not. But then I would say 33 is high priority. You know one thing that I would be interested in knowing is on item 33 on, I don't know either to either to the chief or, or and if you know, are there other police departments that do this kind of do this kind of work that that have these you know, random reviews by shift either at the end of a week or end of a month or at end of each shift on. Do you know if there are other departments that do that. I think Atlanta does it. There's a guy who left Atlanta PD and was here for a little bit of time, he mentioned it was in random audits it was like complete audits other videos are watched by supervised by a unit that was dedicated to us. They're much bigger department obviously. New York has something similar, but I again as as Detective burn mentions it has to do with, you know, New York City has a quality assurance division that I believe has a total of 150 staff. So is the reason that is part of the reason that you are, you know, I mean, what is part of the reason that you disagree, just simply the tremendous commitment of time. Or is that a significant reason that you, you would disagree with that. Don't know if there's an opinion about that or if you'd rather not say on which. Is that question for me. If you go ahead or for the chief either one. When the body cameras were first introduced, they were, you know, the purpose of them was to aid and I'm just reading this directed from the directive. Aiden documenting emergency response crime scenes evidence preservation and enhancing please transparent transparency. The supervisor has a very broad scope and they want to look at an officer's body camera, I believe the word is that they have cause to look at a body camera date they can do so. For us, the body cameras were never, you know, intended to be, you know, some sort of device that surveillance employees and monitor their performance to make sure that we're operating that. And if, yeah, so that's, that's kind of where, where we're at, we, yeah, we don't feel like we should be monitored. Randomly at all times to ensure ensure our, our performances is, you know, meeting the maximum standards if a supervisor suspects any sort of wrongdoing or there's a complaint or use of force. They can review our body cameras, which we don't object to, but yeah, the toss it just randomly being out of it. Just, you know, just to make sure we're performing to a standards, we're against. Um, can I just hop in real quick. Thank you for that, or and I feel like I wouldn't look at it like an audit by any means. And I'm not saying that maybe every shift needs to be like, looked at but I do like if we really believe that there is a this like quality and standard being followed through and throughout. I feel like it wouldn't be something that people should be worried about or just super conscious of so I don't know I'm just curious that curious about like what like why this isn't something to at least be considered. And maybe the chief could speak to that but you know, and maybe if I can just, if I can add a question to James, because I guess I hear the reason and that makes sense to me. How often do supervisors do, how often are supervisors paired with their direct reports in terms of like how often are they seeing them. I mean, I would say like in a typical job, you know, your supervisor isn't watching over you all the time but you know when your supervisor is with you and they're kind of watching you do your job. I guess how often are they paired and driving or riding with them or whatever. I don't think supervisors are ever paired with officers. I've never been a supervisor in seven years. They routinely respond to calls with officers, they observe officers in the field routinely, and they go, they respond to jobs to incidents together. So the idea of riding with them know, but the idea of getting to the scene at the same time being on the scene at the same time, working with one another in a give and take relationship where the supervisor has final supervisory authority but often defers to their areas of expertise that happens all the time every single day. And I, Orrin, please, you know, agree or disagree. Yeah, I'd say almost every time I've arrested somebody. Well, a lot of the time I've arrested somebody at the very least, a supervisor is present at the scene of any domestic, you know, by directive a supervisor has to respond. And in the way that the chief has put it out there, yeah, supervisors and officers work hand in hand constantly. But yeah, I misunderstood your point counselor when it comes like riding the vehicle, yeah, that really happens. But yeah, no, we're there, they're looking at, they're looking at work all the time whenever we have a problem. An affidavit of probable cause or anything when we arrest somebody supervisors review all that paperwork, every single bit of paperwork that we put up a supervisor reviews. Yeah, so there's, yeah, there, I would say that supervisors are, you know, monitoring our quality of work. And then I don't know if I mean not to I don't know. I don't know. I just know this I guess from like regular employment practices but you know the idea of maybe a random isn't the right word but maybe you know like, I'm not doing things with, if there's a review process in terms of like, oh like, today, we're going to look at, you know, one of your interactions and talk through it or something like that if that's something that happens regularly if it's not something that is already incorporated and some other way in the review process, because I see the random review it's just like we're just going to find a 10 minute period and evaluate you based on that that being an uncomfortable employee place to be. Yeah, I mean that would that would make sense to me I mean it's sort you know I and I don't know if in policing, and I would be interested to know like in policing I mean certainly in some fields on, you know, they'll take a case on, you know, medical case a legal case, a something, and they will review that and critique well what could they have done differently, what on, you know what changes could they have made to make that a better outcome, or just simply discussing it to learn from it does that does that happen. And certain circumstances it does, I am, I teach Taser, teach officers how to use the Taser properly and I would do my best every year we don't have a lot of Taser deployments in the first place but you know, when Taser deployments do occur, we would usually take the deployments, talk about what was good what could have been done better. And so that that happens when it comes to like those specific use of forces. Yeah, I if you know, I'm not supervisor so I don't know what happens. If an officer is as seen as I'm making a mistake or something like that if those are councils I I've been counseled before. For when I was, you know, more junior for a complaint that came in, you know, I didn't do anything wrong, but my supervisor, you know, looked at my video gave me advice and how it could be better in the future. So, you know, those conversations happened with me across the board I can't, I can't say with any certainty but I know some of those interactions to happen. Okay, thank you. Thanks for thanks for thanks for assisting us with with with your experience on Milo did you have something you wanted to add. Yes, I just want to say that with conversations that police commissions have with Nicole, and just some guest speakers that we've had and just my own research that this is certainly something that is done in police departments. One of the reasons that I would like to see our department of use this is because I think it's important to spot check interactions. I think, you know, it's hard because we don't have a strategy in place to address racial disparities. This is something that could be part of that strategy in terms of looking at data by officer, and if the supervisors of certain officers who have high discrepancies are reviewing some of their interactions they might be able to better coach them. So that's why I support this thank you. So, um, I mean I, I'll just speak for myself I think that I think there is a limit to what is what is reasonable that is random on and I, and I, so I'm not sure that I necessarily agree with random. I'm, I, I do, I would, I mean if, if I were going to like full wholeheartedly support this I would be interested in knowing what exactly we're talking about in terms of on the depth of the time that it would take. And, and if you're doing this certainly at the end of each shift, or at a minimum at the end of each week, given all the other on all the other demands on officers and supervisors time, how much would be involved with that. And so I'm not really sure. You know, I don't know enough on myself on, you know, and would probably say that this would be for me, you know, a moderate priority, and not a high one. I don't know how others feel. And we don't have to reach consensus we can say what what it is and that there was a mixed opinion here and some felt it was a high priority and some felt that it wasn't, which is fine. And I've tried to record in the notes. And it's like an alternative suggestion that there were mixed opinions Milo's I'm going back and putting in your notes what you just said is I'm trying to capture everybody's feedback but Thank you so much. Are there others who have, you know, have an opinion. You know, in terms of what you would feel, you know, and basically we're talking about 3334 and 35, but we'll start with 33. As far as that being a priority a high, moderate or low priority. And we know where Milo is. I've just said I think it's more of a moderate priority. I think Jane said it's more of a high priority. I don't know Jabu if you've got a, and then I think I think we may have lost Isaac. And Hannah's not here Jeff. If you have an opinion would be happy to hear it too. Otherwise we can, we can move on to 34. This was something that there was. This is this is for those who are maybe driving this is the BP, BPD should continue to follow the best practice operational procedures outlined in directive 14.1 and update the directive as new national best practices or release, continually reviewing new best practices added to the Bureau of Justice Assistance body worn camera toolkit. So I think there was. I know detective burn you did not have enough, you didn't have any notes on that I don't know if that's something that you tend to agree with or find disagreement with. Yeah was don't don't have anything we don't disagree with with that. Okay, so that could probably go into the same category as the other as the others. And then the last one would be the contractual detective minimum should be renegotiated on. I know just speaking for myself I am I am not. I don't know enough, I don't know enough to be able to have an opinion about that. Maybe others do. If that's the case, Zariah we should probably just simply say that that working group did not feel they were, you know, new enough to be able to have an opinion and be able to prioritize that. I can give why we would disagree with it if that's helpful. Sure. Yeah, I, I struggled with the report on this. Yeah, it was when I was reading report I don't really understand how CNA suggests you know when this was being a spoke about more detail and 7.3 one I don't understand how they suggest they acknowledged it didn't fully understand the amount of work that our detectives could do, but they still at the same time recommended that fewer detectives could probably do is even their their their breakdown, I didn't understand how they came up to that conclusion we have 10 detectives, but not all those detectives could investigate in the same type of crime. So when they're talking about the detectives could be reduced to as to as this was five. You know, we already we only have five detectives who investigate general crime, there's five of us that's already kind of happening. We have three, you know, two detectives dedicated to investigate and drug crimes and then we have two detectives dedicated to investigate and kind of crimes of a more sexual nature. So yeah, I'm not. Again, I don't really know if the I don't really know if the authors of the report actually spoke to a supervisor of the, you know detective bureau to understand the work that we do but I don't think we're already we're already working pretty hard over DSP we could do with more detectives, kind of cutting us down in numbers definitely wouldn't be a great idea and we we we deposit and contract negotiations. Lauren, could you advise what the current minimum threshold is. I believe it's 10. 1010 people in DSP we have nine at the minute one is on military leave. He's been away for a while but the minimum is 10. Great, so I agree with Karen's point then of maybe I would say referring this to HR and looking at workloads. Yeah, and I was just gonna. I was going to. Yeah. From an HR perspective, you know, especially given current conditions we wouldn't recommend that. That's not something my office would recommend reducing the staff and the detectives. Just from an eight purely from a staffing standpoint. And I think that I would agree. Based on some conversations that I had with former DC Saladin about the number of detectives in the department and the different things that various detectives did. So I guess I would I would agree with leaving this particular threshold where it is. Okay. So, um, we are going to need to go back and just, and just pick out the things that were union issues. I think at one point we were trying to get some of those in yellow, but it seems as though we sort of have gotten a little bit. I don't know. I'm not sure that we kept with that so we're probably going to have to go back we only have 2467 that are left in section one. And once we finish those on provided we and we should have time. I think it probably would make sense for us to try on while it's still reasonably fresh in our mind to go back and do just do that as a group and make sure that we haven't missed anything because I do agree with Milo that we want to make sure that it's certainly anything that is a bargainable action that we have, we have secured that in a place where we know where it is and can then move forward with that, as well as the training items and the, the last items in section one, going from line 51 to 57 are all training related on. And. Thank you very much to the chief for putting these into that kind of bucket so that we know exactly what we're looking at here on. There are three items that are on the in the very get the first three, there appear to be a fair amount of agreement with a couple of the others so on. Yeah. So, the first one is BPD should design a structured systematic curriculum with full lesson plans learning objectives and goals, as well as training aids and visual materials, such as PowerPoint slides and hands on activities among others on. Um, so I guess, I guess what I would be interested in knowing if there is someone who can offer an opinion about on that being largely in place on whether or not that on that is somehow documented on and is, and I think a few of us had also said this, whether or not that is something that can be materials that could be accessed and reviewed if somebody wanted to do so. Um, is that something that is available. And I guess, I don't know who there is that might want to be who could speak to whether or not that curriculum is, um, you know is a is is comprehensive and structured in a way that would meet with the, you know, the the wishes of people in Burlington. Go ahead, Zora. Yeah, I just wanted to note that for the some of the other training things. In our conclusion, we noted and I've referred back to it is next steps by August first BPD with review police commission creates a review of training availability priorities as foundation for strategic training plan. So, just want to note that that's where our discussions on other training things ended. Okay, well, I mean we, you know, I mean we could, we can if we wanted on put that into the other training programs that remain. I don't know if there are. I'm just looking ahead to see. There are others I mean I know like the chief and yours you had put you had gotten up to section three. I was just looking to see if in the sections that are much smaller, whether or not there are other training items. Maybe under the staffing under section seven, there might be I don't know. There might not appear to be training related. So maybe these are the training related items. So I guess the question would be if we were to do that for the people that are here that are members of the police commission if you could, you know, how you, how you feel about that I mean we, you know, obviously we could go and say the same thing on 51 through 57, and then also adding on the items that the BPD responses that they are done. The question would be to understand what done means. And, you know, whether or not that is something that needs to be reviewed, or if it's something that is done in the sense that you know it. Training doesn't isn't usually done training is something that you continue to do, and whether or not what your thoughts are is, you know, on the on the commission about how that could be on, you know, monitored, or reviewed on an other basis or whether or not it should be more how you would feel about those items 51 through 57. Basically being in that same training bucket that Soraya had referenced, or if we should prioritize them and we could, we could put those in the suggested timeline, particularly the ones that are not either not yet underway or underway. So for example the, there are a few. Let's see here, like item number 53 about the implicit bias training courses aligned with national best practices, that would be a consider by BP, the BPD response. The BPD is delivering the training in a few months I'm assuming that means, you know, shortly or now on, and then what those next steps would be on as an ongoing, as something ongoing, because that that would be where my concern would be is, what is the ongoing work that's being done. Okay, and I guess I would ask, I'm just a little bit confused about where you're thinking the police commission comes in. We have been recommending in the strongest possible terms that the department needs to work on the continued and increasing racial disparities in some areas, and needs to take a look at the training now we've never gotten the documentation. Despite you know we went through this before, we don't know what happened to the documentation we just know, we haven't seen what's done, been done in the past. What's done in the past doesn't look like it's been effective. So we definitely need to have a plan for the future. And I would love to see the police commission advise of what that plan is, and have some input in it based on the training that we're receiving from Nicole. We also had a speaker recently who spoke to the commission about failures of different types of bias training that has occurred in the past, and how, you know, now is the time that there are changes being made moving forward so what will happen moving forward, when will it happen, and who will be responsible to to make sure to verify that it indeed has happened so from outside the department. Is it going to be HR is it going to be the mayor's office because we we have this one major thing holding back the department on so many levels that we need to address. But we're going to need a follow up we're going to need some type of follow up that's not just going to be within the department it's going to be outside of the department for accountability purposes. Well, I guess my, my concern would also be item 1.42.3. I, you know, I, I am a little concerned about this being something that I think the vast majority of us agree with. I would like to see move forward, and yet, you know, it's put on as a consider, and I don't know if the. I'm just not sure I mean I don't know enough about the. I don't know enough about the training with our eib to know if that training would be meeting this require this this recommendation. I don't know if director green can respond to that or if there are others who feel they could respond to that. Can you counselor that should be an agree not to consider that's why it's a quick win. So it's a quick win there because I believe most of those things are already in play. Oh, okay, I'm sorry I, I, okay, all right so that should have been nothing for you to be sorry about that's how I mean yes this is the you know I know that nobody changed that column that's how that's how the column was sent it's an error on my part. Oh, okay, all right, okay so then I guess what we can do is for the master whatever the master is that's listed online. We changed it. Okay, wonderful. I don't know I got somebody who's like four steps ahead of me here. Okay, so that that that's great. I mean I think the. That is that is training that will address the racial disparities that on on that many have referenced on and I assume that that's that will also be speaking to that as well as that true chief. Um, I again I think actually director green would be a better answer for that I do what what our next steps are is what it says there that are a I be is currently delivering training to everybody in the city. And I believe that shift workers such as police officers firefighters and certain DBW staff are supposed to start getting it I thought, when I made this when I made this matrix in, I don't know, October. But after the CNA report was public. It was supposed to have started much sooner so I'm not quite certain what the status is of that. But that's one thing we had a meeting this morning about our benchmark system and the degree to which that's tracking our training and being able to actually do some of the components that it talks about with regard to. You know, ensuring that the training is updated etc. So that's the nature of that response. Okay, all right so that is on, let's say training curriculum schedules on. And, and, and just as long as I, as long as I have you chief on number 40 1.4 2.1, where it talks about reviewing training curriculum structure and scheduling and materials to yearly to ensure training. And our meeting national best practices on, was that something that you meant to say consider. For now, in particular instance I think I think I maybe met consider simply because where I felt we're already doing it so consider it in the sense of, do we dig farther into something that we're already doing for this. That's also why it's a two, and not a quick win, but I, I'm not certain what consider meant in that instance, especially since the note indicates that it's really already happening. Right, and it would win the same thing be true of 1.4 2.1 about the structure and systematic curriculum with full lesson plan etc. isn't it you say it's largely again. And I think that, for example, you know, Detective Bern, Detective Bern has been an instructor for a very long time, and I think he can attest to the degree to which these things are are in place already. Both, both row 51 and row 52. Yeah, I am. I teach taser I teach pro procedures, I do I teach them the use of left-leafing munitions, we am, we have lesson plans for all that, and we use force guys the same thing we develop our lesson plans we push the advisors to review and Yeah, we do our best to follow the lesson plans are created off curriculum push down by, you know, whatever export export to manufacturers where I'm this information where we're given to the officers. I don't know how available that is to the general public but the lesson plans everything else are created and stored on the department servers. All right, so on. Well, good. So my concerns would be and this is very difficult because I can't discuss anything that has been discussed in executive sessions. The police commissions had, but I'll just say in general, there have been some things that have come up recently, where we've had questions about how often the officer may have initially been trained on something, but how often a periodic reviews done, especially when it comes to certain directives. And then, coming back to some of the inconsistency where we really don't know what's going on with the bias training and I know I'm beaten. I know somebody don't like me still bringing it up but it's it's an issue that has continued to go on answered. And so it's a major thorn in the overall training. So I feel like that that kind of interferes with saying that these other pieces are already being done, because we have one piece that isn't as far as we know. It's like, because we've mentioned director green, a couple of times, I would like to direct director green to speak to what is scheduled for the department with regards to upcoming training, and what it would be comprised of. Is that possible. I think that would be, I think that would be great. Director green are you, are you, are you able to speak to that this would, I imagine what Milo is concerned, discussing specifically is line 53 about the insurer that the quality of implicit bias training courses aligned with all of us practices and continue to provide these trainings during basic officer training and annual in service training, and the BPA BPD should ensure that the entire organization receives annual in service training on implicit bias. I totally agree with that I think that the BPD definitely should do all of those things. I will say that I am not. As far as I understand the BPD will be trained by the city facilitators in trimester three, which would be probably like late summer, early fall. As of right now they are not being trained. And, and there's some scheduling stuff that has to go along with that. That will be worked through the chief of staff and the chief of police. So they are not being trained by based on specific course suggestions, or training suggestions by RAB. They will be, but they are not currently no, they will be trained on specific anti racism, which I believe that action chief moratus in right now with the rest of the department head group. So he is seeing firsthand what those trainings are like. The training to the police officers will be very similar, but there will be some additional focus on on police and anti racism practices within police departments. Is there a way to get access to the material that's being covered. I think we can do that. Director Murphy, can we. Is that something that we can do. You certainly are more than welcome to share it director green it's great material. Okay, well there you have it. I can share that material with with the group. And is there a reason that it's is it is it purely scheduling that is being pushed so far back, given the current concerns. It that is my understanding. But there was there was there was a pushback in general to the scheduling I'm not going to say that that was directly from the BPD but just overall throughout the city. So, but as far as I understand from the administration, the BPD should be trained last because of schedule. Last, because of scheduling. Yes. Okay, I just want to go on a record that I started to hear that, because I think they have one of the greatest needs. And regarding this other pushback you got my ears. My spidey sense is tingling my spidey sense has been tingling all day about things but I'm, you know, in this climate that we're, we're living in where there are laws that are being passed in certain states where you can't, you know, you can't hurt people's feelings and you can't say certain words and I hate to think that that's occurring here but it wouldn't, it wouldn't surprise me. And I would, I would just say to Director Durfee that I think that this is something that needs to be accelerated, if possible, because there is definitely. Yeah, let me, let me explain a couple things. Number one, the REIB is a ton missed from human resources. Taysha Director Reinsen a great job holding it down. And she, you know, this, this is, you know, what happened with it with the scheduling, you know, we could, we could all talk all day about scheduling. One thing I can assure you though, Commissioner Grant is that prior to this training and I think the committee will probably talk more about this. There was some anti-racist training done, actually a pretty, pretty significant module of anti-racist training done by a black facilitator, black female facilitator, which really kind of satisfied, you know, that, you know, I think I agree with you, Commissioner, is that that training is so important and has to be ongoing. It has to happen all the time. Director Green has been, you know, talking about that for a long time. It has to be done and done. So I guess my, my sort of, you know, I won't call it a spidey sense, but just sort of my desire to see anti-racism training in all police departments across the country. I was not satisfied because again it's ongoing, but I think the training that the department just had with this facilitator, I believe, I can't remember her name, but it was, it was significant and I have reviewed those materials. And have we reviewed who was able to attend that because I know there was some question in not being able to get documentation to show which officers were able to receive that training and who was not able to receive that training. The trainer's name was Trustee Loving and every single sworn officer in the department and went through that training and some civilians as well. The, she spent 25 years in the US Navy and work of law enforcement agencies and major corporations on racial equity, and rather than conducting one-off lectures, like previous trainings had been, she actually provided a series of 70 to 90 minute customizable training sessions over the course of six months. And she would do it with each group individually. So she did it with the day shift and then with the evening shift and then with the midnight shift. So each module was repeated and then with the detectives. Each module was repeated, I believe, a total of seven times in order to get both sides of the schedule for the three shifts and the detectives. And the modules were, you know, about bias about those who don't look like you about why are you in this part of town. They were interactive and conducted because of the pandemic via Zoom, but officers went in with the people they work with, which was very important and on their time schedules as well. But since, since 2005, we have conducted dozens of training modules around reducing bias and building cultural competency. These include diversity and cultural awareness and Arab and Muslim cultural awareness and bias free policing and cultural diversity and non bias police stops and racial data collection and transgender issues and a class even as early as 2007 on white privilege. And in 2008 community engagement and cross cultural communication. And again, you know, diversity and inclusion. And cultural competence. These are listed and have been presented to the public on a number of occasions. That is these lists, police minority relations, Nepali culture and language, anti bias training for law enforcement. Now not all of those were conducted by everybody or attended by everybody in the department but the training sessions that I implemented in 2021 were. One of the things that I've been curious for some time now in terms of because I have gotten list of trainings, but it's never been really clear as to who's attended them, and as we just spoke to the importance of certain trainings being ongoing and I guess that's what I'm trying to to get a handle on. I guess this is the issue that I, I really care a lot about just because of some of the things that I'm seeing that are occurring and some of the things that I'm hearing in the community and I, I guess I'll leave my concerns where there I won't go on anymore about it because I just feel that it might be better just to continue in another full police commission meeting just so we can continue to go through these, through these items but I, I would like to see because of all the issues about did we get documentation how are we tracking and making sure that we do have this ongoing and that we are consistently tracking who's attending and that the information is readily available to to the people that that need to see it because we've just had this back and forth about is the information available is it not available. And I just get concerned because I don't think that's a good look. Thank you. Um, so I have a I have a question. I guess for the chief and that is on when it comes to training. And I, I don't attend enough police commission meetings to know on, is there, is there a point in the year, you know, when, you know, in most commissions, there are certain things that are done once a year or one supporter, and they're just recurring items. Is there a discussion with the commission that on, or is it, yeah, is there is there a discussion that talks about training I mean to me, the items 51 through 57. I don't think that we can ever really put something is done. I think that you agree with it and it's ongoing on, but I think being able to show on. The commission and show the community that this work is being done on, not that it isn't but showing that it is being done. Is there some mechanism for being able to do that in a way that would on, you know, could be done on a, I don't know, annual or annual basis or so that these training items were reviewed publicly and you could say there's X number of officers and there's X number that have participated in each of these trainings. Is that something that could be done. So first, we, we track, pretty much every piece of training with sign in sheets and sign off sheets, every single piece of it is tracked we have a coordinator for that role. And again, as I mentioned earlier, we've implemented a new system called benchmark that is was designed at least in part to track use of force which we have not yet been able to transition our Valkor use of force to benchmark but we've already used benchmark to begin tracking training begin tracking different kinds of performance and also the reviews that supervisors do of officers. So in so far as our training, we do track that, and we could make that a, you know, a semi annual or annual part of a report to the police commission, it has been a component of previous presentations to the public, both to the hands of the council, but happy to make that something that we go back to and, you know, make a component of a given session, let's say June's session or May's session or whichever. Yeah, I mean I think you know once you once you institutionalize it in the sense that you're doing it twice a year or whatever then people expect it they know it on and it has, you know, as opposed to doing it when it gets done. So did you want to add something would respectfully disagree with the chief on when when we've tried to get the police commission straight to get certain information around training, especially in terms of who's trained when we haven't gotten a complete information I know because I personally been asking for this information going back to the committee to review policing policies and then it just got put on the back burner while CNA was being provided to CNA during their review. And then we have the, you know, whole mystery around missing documents but I do want to concentrate on going further forward. And the more information that we can get going forward will be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Yeah, I would agree with that we we need to we just need to move forward and and take what we have in front of us so I think I'm, I think Zariah when it comes to items 51 through 57 that you know it these are largely in place on at least on, you know, at least at least, according to next steps by by the chief. The question is, you know, ongoing ongoing monitoring. And so I think having having the having one commission meeting where or to commission meetings a year where I don't know in January and June or I guess we'll leave that to the commission on that that would be that that would be presented semi annually with a, you know, I mean we do this when we talk about commission appointments we ask for attendance records. And I think the same thing it sounds like the same thing could be done here so if that was added as a committee conclusion and then whatever you present chief to the to the commission, keeping in mind that counselors have a lot thrown at them. And it would be helpful if perhaps that was also done in terms of a communication perhaps once a year to the to the to the council so that we're also kept abreast of what the training trainings are that BPD officers are going through with that. Is that seem reasonable. Yes. Okay. Does that seem reasonable to the Commission and other members of the working group. Yes, that's fine with me. Thank you. Okay. Zariah, I don't know I didn't really say that very well do you have any idea what I just said. Yeah, so I think it took some of the other places where we had talked about like making a strategic plan and put it here just because at 1.4 2.1 because it's in the most relevant and then said see 1.4 2.1 on the other things and so I kept the slide. So let me know if this captures what folks are thinking by August 1st BPD will create a review. A review by PC and HR on availability priorities and attendance as a foundation for strategic training plan. There's a lot of disagreement on what is available and in place to the police commission CMA atc and what is easily available recommend twice annual meetings on training updates with attendance and a more to the police commission and more health summary once a year to counselors. That sounds great. You definitely said that better than I said that and I think I was the one that said it so that's pretty impressive on on. How does that sound to everyone. Okay, so I think what we should try to do on. We've reached a major milestone we have gotten to the end of section one. The question would be going on and let's see. I'm trying to find where there were. I feel like there were at the last meeting which would have started at around line 20 something that there are a few things that are also bargainable. And one of them. So one of them it seems like I don't know how to best do this. I don't know. Jerry you had suggested this or maybe we can just work off of this spreadsheet it looks like item on line 22. That that would be. That would be a bargain item. What do you think, because of the question is to me I mean, and chief may be better to answer this but in terms of creating this division of the department. Again it depends on what level of employee is going to fall within that division because not all employees, officers, etc. are BPOA members so Yeah, maybe we're in the wrong line. I'm talking about one with the one about the this is let me go by the recommendation this would be 1.18.2. Okay, sorry I was one down. Sorry. And I know there were there was a few things Milo you you had specifically spoken to a few not wanting to see those fall. You know, and I can't remember. We were going to go back and go through things that were on there was a couple right here let's see highlighted I have 1.18.2 1.18.3 1.33. You have those in yellow. I have those in yellow. Yes. Okay. All right. Great. 1.33.1 1.35.1 And then all these other ones. Oh, I don't have the other ones, but we just did those tonight. Yeah one I just didn't highlight them 1.36.1 to 1.41.1. Okay. Okay. All right so and then as far as the ones that were training related those I think actually the chief put those in as a either a director of review or training. And I don't let's see. And here's one that is 1.26.1. So I don't know if you want to maybe on that one use a different color. And Karen just so we don't get too far. I was a bit to boot is have his hand up to it. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sitting here so focused on the spreadsheet. Go ahead on. Thank you. It's all good. It was merely just to answer the question of the bargainable ones. Okay, 17.1 through 19.1 or possibly bargainable things. And then we've already touched on the other part of stuff. 33.1 and 35.1 through 41.1. Okay, sorry, you said 17.1. Yes. Yeah, the director of you. Okay. All right, so those are the others. And for the training one Karen, I don't so for the other training ones I didn't color code them although I can right now it just says to see 1.42.1. All right, so the one that I see that is, I think is 1.26.1 that's lying 35 on. And, and then the others, the ones that we just discussed tonight. Those are the items that are training related I thought I feel like there were more of them but maybe there weren't I thought there were but what about them. Let's see. I don't know I felt like there were more of them. Okay, maybe maybe not, maybe not I mean I'll look at this when I go offline and see if there were others that I'm here's one 1.6.2. Got that one. Yeah, and that might be maybe that's it. I'm in 1.1.1. Oh, okay. All right so would look as though there's two. There's three. There's actually 10 that are training related and then two, four, six, eight. 9, 10, 11, 12, about 12 of them that are bargaining related so maybe the way to approach the bargaining ones would be on. Maybe the one the way to do that would be to break those up into one spreadsheet themselves and on, you know, and have that as one separate group on that we would then be able to then then forward that as the opinion of the working group with input from the BPOA and BPD going forward. Is that, I don't know, Director Jervie you're on how would you how would you propose that we be able to bring that forward or what do you think is the best way for us to bring this forward. Just as you recited counselor that to me is the best way. I don't know if the chief for detective. Excuse me. Or if you have anything to say about that but I think just as just as it makes complete sense just as you recited you know I think that's it that outlines a good process for it and sorry. Oh, I'm I you caught me eating. I do eat. Yeah, I mean does that I'd be interested to hear what other folks think. Anybody police sounds like a good idea then. Okay, alright, we will do that because I know that was certainly a concern that those were. I want to make sure that those are just so I think I think actually Karen maybe we'll do that we'll get that to you. You know this week. It's done on there may be others that are involved in the CNA report we've only gotten through section one, but we say I mean as we get them. I think that's what we'll probably end up doing is, you know, as we find them, we will bring them forward and it's an ongoing process as you know anyway, so that's right. And I have a folder just for those things just for just for this report. Okay, oh wonderful. Okay. All right, it would seem as though we're probably in a good place it's 715 714 on just wanted to mention a couple of things for the public as well as for the members of the committee so next. Next week is. Next week is the 22nd Tuesday is the 22nd. I had tried very hard to lay out a timeline that would get us to the end of March, having finished this report and I know you have a police commission meeting that night and we had sort of tried to find the middle ground of when to meet. As it turns out, you're welcome to meet whenever you'd like, because we have a council meeting that night because of President's Day. So, you know, I apologize for not even realizing that at the time. And it means that we can't that the Public Safety Committee can't meet that evening. And we're assuming also that there's going to be a board of finance meeting that night so we can't meet earlier. That also brings us to the first of March, which we had agreed would not be a night that we could meet because it's town meeting day on. So, I think what we will try to do and actually if you can let it let me know is that is the police commission meeting in March is that also on the 22nd. I had, yes, we just they're kind of we always go for the port Tuesday of the month and I believe that is the 22nd so yeah, yes. All right, so we have we have the eighth to 15th to 22nd and 29 that gives us four meetings. So I'll try to get out a plan for how we can approach that, you know, getting the rest of the report done. Fortunately, we are through the most challenging section. So, the with the exception of the 22nd will work on the 22nd as far as the time, but we'll let's you know if we can continue on the eighth at 530, and then just for the working group and members of the POA as well as others. So between now and the, the 8th of March on, we can work on sections to on maybe two and three that will that should get us. You know, we, that should, that should probably put us in a pretty good place for the 8th of March on. All right, was there anything else that anyone wanted to mention before we we adjourn. I just wanted to point out clarification, would you be sending an email to the members who are not here tonight to, or would you like me to do that. In terms of to communicate that will be off for the next two weeks and that we're hoping to get to two and three by the 8th of March. So if they can get me their notes and yeah, what not. I'll do that. Okay. Yeah, sure. Yeah, that well section two is, is not that long in section three, not to get too far ahead but section three was covered to some degree in the resolution that the Public Safety Committee brought forward, you know, some time ago. So we can certainly still discuss it, but there are two for there are only six recommendations in section three so, and we probably can discuss a number of them together. So that shouldn't take too too long. But we'll see how we can how far we get on the 8th. So if there's nothing else, then we can, we can adjourn the meeting at 718 and thank you all so so very much for your, your attention and your time and your input. Thank you. Thank you everybody. Thanks so much. Bye.