03.11.24 POP MinutesBoulder Police Oversight Panel (BPOP)
March 11th 2024
Meeting Minutes
In attendance:
Panelists: Victor King, Soledad Diaz, Mylene Vialard, Bwembya Chikolwa, Lizzie Friend, Bill de la
Cruz, Madelyn Woodley, Abigail Franke, Luna Rosal and Jason Savela.
City staff: Sherry Daun (IPM). Selena Duenas (CMO). Erin Poe (CAO).
BPD: Sergeant Sterling Ekwo.
I. [02:05 – 06:20] Approval February 14, 2024, BPOP Meeting Minutes
a. Mr. Chikolwa motioned to approved, Mr. Savela seconded.
i. Ms. Vialard requested changes to the previous month’s minutes due to
inaccuracy. Mr. King asks what the procedures are and whether changes can
be made now. Ms. Vialard made one change to the minutes and the rest of
her suggestions regarding ‘Committee Updates’ will be taken offscreen.
ii. Ms. Poe shared that what she has seen other board and commissions have
whatever the suggested changes are to be submitted to staff and they can
be changed in the next month’s minutes for the rest of the panel to review
and vote on the next month’s meeting.
II. [06:25 – 7:55] Clarification
a. Mr. King addressed the confusion from last month’s meeting. He addressed that
there was no illegal conduct, or any type of violation occurred by Ms. Diaz or Ms.
Vialard in upholding their duties as community engagement and communications
co-chairs. He acknowledged the pain he caused which they both experienced
during the meeting and afterwards. He apologized for implying their actions were a
violation and sought to make amends. He apologized to the Boulder Chapter of the
NAACP for any impact this may have had on them and affirmed that he values the
organization in that has been instrumental in creating the panel. He reaffirmed that
there have been conversations in review of state laws, ordinance bylaws, a
consultation with the City Attorney’s office and internal conversations have taken
place and reassures that there was no violation or misconduct of any kind were
found. He hopes that together they can move forward respectfully and productively
with the understanding that through different lenses and experiences they are all
working towards the common goal of keeping police accountable for all the
communities they serve.
b. [13:44 – 15:31] Ms. Woodley added some clarification regarding in terms of the
selection on the panel as to whether the panelists represent certain organizations.
Ms. Vialard and herself are both members of the NAACP and they do not represent
the organizations and were selected based on their individual experiences and
qualifications.
III. [8:00 – 13:32] Introductions
a. Ms. Franke is a second-year student at CU Boulder and is getting her JD with a
certificate in Civil Rights and Racial Justice. She will be working for the Denver
Public Defenders this summer and is currently working for the Denver Appellate
Public Defenders. This type of work means a lot to her as she is in this space quite
frequently and is excited to work with the panel as it is important to the world.
b. Mr. De la Cruz has been in Boulder County for about 40 years and lived in Boulder for
about 36 years. He has raised his kids here and served on the school board for
about six years. He has been in and out of this conversation about policing and the
justice system in Boulder and Boulder County for a long period of time. He is excited
that he was picked so he can dive deeper into the elements of policing and how they
impact all the communities that they represent.
c. Mx. Rosal is a third-year undergraduate at Naropa University. They study Religion
and Environmental Justice and work for the university as a work study under their
office for Mission, Culture, and Inclusive Community. They are also an officer for
restorative community chapter helping student support their conflicts. This type of
work is meaningful to them and acknowledges that this is a national conversation
around policing. They are excited to get their hands dirty. They have worked directly
with Zayd Atkinson doing some events in town and are aware he is connected in this
panel as well/
d. Ms. Daun expressed her excitement at having all the new panelists to begin their
journey and hopes that the new panelists get to know the group better. She shared
that the City Manager, Nuria Vandermyde-Rivera, was not able to attend the meeting
and hopes that she can come to the next meeting and introduce herself. She read
this message from Nuria,
“In welcoming our newest members to serve the Police Oversight Panel, I appreciate that they have
already met the training modules required by Ordinance 8609, 2-11-14(a)(1) and (3). I understand
the final training required under 2-11-14(a)(2) will occur in April 2024.
In accordance with 2-11-14(c), I formally excuse Bill de la Cruz, Abigail Franke, and Luna Rosal
from receiving this training until the Boulder Police Department provides the April 2024 training.
Each of our new Panel members will be able to vote on Panel business during this time period.
Note this does not extend to the ability to vote during a case review until completion of the 2-11-
14(a)(2) training requirements.”
e. Current panelists welcomed new panelists.
IV. [15:46 – 32:30] Co-Chair Elections
a. Ms. Daun informed the Panel of Section 2.1 from the bylaws, “the Panel will elect
two Co-Chairs from among the Panelists. Co -Chairs may be re-elected to serve a
total of two, one-year terms. Co-Chairs will be responsible for:
a. co-development of agenda and leading each Panel meeting.
b. communicating the needs of the Panel to the Monitor and attending a closed
monthly meeting between Co-Chairs and Monitor.
c. engaging with the community and assisting with outreach efforts.
d. ensuring the oversight Panel’s annual report is completed and published in a
timely manner.
e. helping to maintain Panelists’ participation and morale as well as mediating
conflict as needed between Panelists.
Election of the Co-Chairs will take place annually each February. The Monitor will
facilitate the Co -Chair election by collecting secret ballots from each Panelist,
tallying votes, and announcing the two candidates who will serve together as Co -
Chairs.”
b. Ms. Daun asked whether the candidates wanted to give a little message prior to
voting. Mr. King reassured Ms. Daun that the panel asked for a pitch from each
candidate.
c. Mr. De la Cruz wanted to be a part of this group; he thinks it is a great opportunity
and is excited not only about the work that they can do in collaboration with the
police department. He is excited about the community engagement because he has
talked to numerous people over the years and knows that this is the conversation
that people are looking forward to and want to engage in and wants to be supportive
of that. As a mediator, he resolves a lot of conflict and has worked through that. He
has lots of skill in mediation and is excited to work through this group.
d. Ms. Diaz said that the past year has been interesting, they have learned a lot about
the kind of challenges and have been able to work through what she thinks was a
challenging year. She was involved in the development of the new ordinance, and
she felt like it was natural to be a Co-Chair candidate. She offers to serve this panel
and the community as a Co-Chair. She wants to be able to build bridges, trust, and
re-engage with the community members and partners that are traditionally
impacted by the work they do.
e. Mr. King shared that he is a founding member of the panel and has been a panelist
since the beginning. Through all his sacrifices he has seen a lot, has learned a lot,
and can share a lot from a historical perspective. His goal for the panel is to be
strong for the next 5 – 20 years as his son grows up in this town, and that there is
something in place that was not there before, and the legacy of this panel is
important to him. He wants to make sure that they are creating a strong foundation
for the future panels. He has seen a lot of work done and it is his last chance to do
something as he will be leaving the Panel next year but while he is here, he has
things to share and is willing to sacrifice more time because he believes in this work.
i. Ms. Duenas shared the poll with the panelists, however, Ms. Vialard and Mr.
De la Cruz shared that the poll was not available for them.
ii. Ms. Daun asked the panel how they voted for the co-chairs previously. Mr.
King shares that the panel can vote by sending Ms. Daun a direct message in
Zoom. The panel proceeded to do so.
iii. Ms. Daun shares the result, the new Co-Chairs are Soledad Diaz, and Victor
King. She thanks Mr. De la Cruz for showing a strong interest and dedication.
Mr. De la Cruz shares that he will be there to support the Co-Chairs and the
panel.
1. The tabulations for the Co-Chairs votes were Victor King, 9, Soledad
Diaz, 7, and Bill de la Cruz, 3.
iv. Mr. King shared his excitement of working alongside Ms. Diaz.
v. Ms. Diaz thanks the panel.
V. [32:35 – 46:25] Committee Updates
a. Community Engagement and Communications
i. Ms. Diaz shared the updates of this subcommittee. The first update was the
name of the subcommittee, they propose and ask for the panel to vote for
the name to be established as Community Engagement and
Communications Committee. Ms. Vialard and Ms. Woodley shared they
confirmed among each other to ask for panel members to vote. Ms. Woodley
motioned to approve; Mr. Chikolwa seconded.
ii. The second update was asking the panel a couple of questions, in terms of
the engagement and whether they want any authorization. She revisits the
topic that if two members of the panel are meeting with community
members that it does not constitute an open meeting. She shared that the
subcommittee needs to define who will be attending those meetings and
will try to communicate as much as possible in advance who they are
meeting with and opening the invite to the panel if they want to be apart of
the meeting or give feedback. She shares the main goal is to be able to move
forward with these meetings, have them happen and facilitate the work of
the subcommittee rather than pushing these meetings back.
1. Ms. Vialard added that she wants to clarify that instead of calling it a
meeting to call it a listening session where they are not talking about
panel business themselves, they will be there to listen and report
back to the panel then make decisions amongst the panel and the
subcommittee. She mentions that they plan to have informational
events to share documentation, answer questions and will be open
to the public to attend as well as the panel to participate.
iii. The third update was trust within the panel, building trust with the
community, trust between the panel and the subcommittee. She believes
they can speak regarding this topic at the retreat to lay foundations to start
building the trust that they need.
b. Governance
i. Ms. Woodley gave the update regarding this subcommittee that there is only
one member, and she plans to recruit the new panelists to volunteer. She
hopes that someone will join in on the work with her since they do have
some currently have open projects with the ordinance and bylaws.
1. Mx. Rosal asks where the scope of the subcommittee is. Mr. King
mentions the scope is in the bylaws and part of the work that needs
to be continued because some of the sections in the bylaws are
incomplete. He also mentions Mx. Rosal can find the bylaws on the
Panel’s website.
c. Legacy
i. Mr. Chikolwa gave the update regarding this subcommittee, they looked at
what was submitted from their previous meeting regarding data on juvenile
interactions and BPD. They resolved that they needed more granular data or
more information. He mentioned Ms. Daun had requested more information
or clarified their ask in greater detail. Ms. Daun added that she had received
responses from BPD Daniel Reinhardt, and he estimated that it would take
approximately 10 hours of work to obtain the data that they requested and
will follow up with him.
ii. Ms. Friend added that they started a document to start keeping track of
ideas for topics that they want to dig into which other panelists and this
subcommittee can add to. She mentioned that maintaining the list will be
talked through finer details within the subcommittee but will be brought
back with the panel to choose topics and prioritize with them all to finalize.
She planned to share a link to this document with the panel after this
meeting.
VI. [46:30 – 49:25] Committee Assignments
a. Mr. King opened the discussion regarding the openings of two subcommittees.
b. Mr. King added that since Ms. Diaz is the new Co-Chair and there is an open seat in
the Community Engagement & Communications subcommittee. Mr. King added
that Ms. Barlow had planned to join but was not present. Ms. Vialard asked whether
Ms. Diaz could be Co-Chair of the Community Engagement Committee and Mr. King
answered that would be her choice since it was a lot of work. Ms. Diaz would be
happy to stay until there is interest in a new member.
i. Mr. De la Cruz showed interest in the Community Engagement and
Communications Committee. He asks if there is another committee in the
bylaws, Education and Orientation, and whether that was still a committee.
Mr. King shares that the bylaws are incomplete, and the Governance
committee is a high priority.
c. Mr. King asked whether someone would like to join the Governance subcommittee,
Ms. Franke offered to join the subcommittee.
VII. [49:25 – 57:50] Co-Chair Expectations
a. Mr. King motivated the panel to present themselves at meetings that are planned,
and that has been causing impacts when the expected number of guests is not
shown. He understands that unknown situations occur, but the panel has agreed to
hold certain expectations as members of the panel. He adds that showing up
prepared, on time, giving prior notice if they are not able to attend, respectful
dialogue between panel members, treating others with respect, letting someone
finish their sentence and letting others talk.
i. Mr. Chikolwa added that by looking at the bylaws, there are implications for
low attendance. He adds that in terms of if a panelist does not attend
certain meetings, it has an impact on whether they return their membership
to the panel or not.
ii. Mr. King mentions that it is an automatic resignation, and the panelist would
be put on vote for removal. He asked for the panelists to check the
attendance sheets and if this applies to them to reach out to the Co-Chairs.
iii. Ms. Diaz added that they are also included in the new ordinance, specifically
attendance and the way attendance is excuses, whether a panelist cannot
make it to a meeting. She suggested looking into the new ordinance because
she thinks that it is not aligning with the current bylaws.
iv. Ms. Daun added that hopefully the panelists are motivated and will attend
because she doesn’t think anyone wants to be put in a position to remove
someone from the panel.
b. Ms. Diaz added that in the new ordinance they defined that the monthly meetings
are important, but the case reviews are the core of their work. She hopes that once a
panelist signs up for a case review, they have a quorum to be able to review a case.
Also, she adds that if the panel does not have three people to review the case, they
cannot review the case and must be rescheduled. She expresses how important it is
to attend and commit to showing up prepared. She mentioned at their training that
at times it requires the panelists to put in a lot of hours, so she advises them that as
soon as they are assigned to a case to look at the assigned folder and to plan their
time.
c. Mr. King includes responding to the polls that the city staff sends, because it is a
way for the panel to be more effective with the limited time they have.
i. Ms. Daun added that sending the polls puts the city staff in a scramble and it
leaves them a step behind with the actual events they are trying to schedule.
VIII. [57:58 – 58:20] Break
IX. [59:15 – 01:12:27] City Council Request/Priorities for Panel
a. Mr. King opens the discussion regarding the City Council’s requests for all boards &
commissions to submit a list of their top three priorities and their work plan. He
shares that they need to submit this feedback before March 22, 2024.
i. Top items discussed:
1. Mr. King shares that some items are completing the bylaws and
addressing the lack of complaints from historically marginalized
communities.
2. Ms. Vialard shares that the three subcommittees are their top
priorities,
a. Community Engagement to reach out to those communities
historically marginalized, listen to them, and understand why
they do not submit complaints.
b. Legacy with data analysis and getting the right data so they
can get the right numbers and trends.
c. Governance working with on the bylaws,
3. Mr. Chikolwa agrees with Ms. Vialard and thinks the most important
work is with Community Engagement & Communications as it ties in
with all their work and trickles down.
4. Mr. Savela agrees as he thinks that maybe some community
members are not aware of this panel, and those who do may not
trust the panel but the engagement with the community would help
with that.
5. Ms. Friend agrees, however, mentions that they should include more
of the panel’s core work as well as the case reviews and the backlog
they have due to the moratorium. She expresses the connection of
community trust, like working with the community on how to submit
complaints and moving quickly through their cases so they notice
the quick turnaround.
6. Mr. De la Cruz agrees with Mr. Savela’s point about community trust,
not as much as if they’ll trust them but how can they get the
community to open and share their stories, as well as the bylaws,
and he asks where the search of the Chief falls into this.
7. Mx. Rosal expresses that community engagement is important and
that they need to have a foundation of bylaws specifically as how the
subcommittees operate.
8. Ms. Diaz agrees with prioritizing Community Engagement, then the
bylaws with Governance. She mentions that if they are presenting
this as a priority then more resources for Community Engagement
should be easier to ask for.
9. Ms. Franke agrees with the three committees are important.
10. Ms. Woodley would like to move forward with the bylaws and the
ordinance up to par.
b. Mr. King will summarize the priorities and will send out to the Panel for approval.
X. [01:12:20 – 01:31:38] Scheduling Logistics
a. Q1 Chief of Police Meeting
i. Ms. Duenas proposes whether March 18th or April 1st for the next Interim
Chief of Police Meeting would be best. Mr. King mentioned that no questions
have been submitted and if they moved it to April, they would be prepared to
ask questions and give feedback. Ms. Chikolwa agreed, he would like to give
the new panelists an opportunity to be on board and fully engaged. Mr. De la
Cruz asks if the meeting is in the evening, Ms. Duenas responds that it is in
the evening (6 – 8PM).
ii. Mr. King opened the structure of the meeting, whether they have structured
time, questions that are submitted or not, how long is each response going
to be.
iii. Ms. Duenas asked the panel if they would like to have the meeting at BPD or
Penfield Tate. Ms. Vialard and Ms. Woodley prefer the Penfield Tate as it is a
more neutral environment. Mr. Savela would like to have it at BPD. Mr. King
agrees and would be a great experience for the new panelists to visit. Ms.
Vialard disagrees and wants to make sure maybe some panelists may be
asking for a lot. Ms. Woodley shares her experiences at BPD and would like
to prevent it.
b. April BPD Training: Use of Force, De-Escalation, Defensive Tactics, Crisis
Intervention
i. Ms. Daun shares that this training is mandatory for new panelists and
encouraged for current panelists as well. The dates she proposes are April
20th and April 27th and approximately three hours long.
1. New panelists and current panelists discuss their availability and
Ms. Daun will reach out to BPD for a new potential date.
c. Retreat
i. Ms. Vialard mentioned that Ms. Duenas is going to send a poll to the
panelists after the meeting and will plan with the subcommittee. She invites
the panelists to give an idea as to what they would like to see.
XI. [01:31:38 -01:39:47] IPM Report
a. Full case file review(s) completed in February 2024: 0
b. Full case file review(s) completed and pending BPD disposition: 1 (MI2023-11)
c. Cases awaiting Panel review: 6 (MI2023-034, MI2023-035, SM2024-001, MI2024-
001, MI2024-002, MI2024-003)
d. February 2024 Monthly Case Statistics
i. Number of complaints that IPM classified: 10
1. Misconduct: 7
2. Serious Misconduct: 0
3. Community Inquiries: 2
4. Conflict Facilitation Process: 1
ii. Interviews IPM observed:
iii. Critical Incident Scene response: 0
iv. BPD Investigations IPM deemed thorough and complete: 1
v. Case investigations BPD closed: 1
e. Open Docket
i. As of March 11, 2024, open IPM-BPOP docket: 20
ii. Classified Cases: 17
iii. Pending IPM Classification: 3
f. 2023 Open Cases: (x6)
i. MI2023-011, pending Chief’s final determinations, expected soon
ii. MI2023-018, IPM deemed thorough and complete in February 2024, pending
Chiefs final determinations
iii. MI2023-028, Interviews completed; IPM awaiting case to determine
thorough and completeness
iv. MI2023-033; accused officer returning from extended leave in March 2024,
interview needs to proceed
v. MI2023-034, interviews completed in February; IPM awaiting case to
determine thorough and completeness
vi. MI2023-035, IPM returned to BPD for additional investigative steps
g. IPM Updates
i. December 17, 2023: Fatal Officer-Involved Shooting
1. Ms. Daun provided the status of fatal officer involved shooting as of
the beginning of March, the District Attorney determined that the DA
determined were no criminal charges appropriate for the fatal
involved shooting and there will be a townhall for more information.
She mentioned that BPD received the digital file from the Boulder
County Investigative Team, they are working on uploading those files
on Evidence.com. Ms. Daun informed the panel that as she learns
more about developments and timelines for the panel’s review, she
will share with the panel.
2. Ms. Daun shared the community engagement, she attended multiple
events hosted by University of Colorado Center for African American
Studies and the Law School, she met with a representative for the
Center for People with Disabilities and met with Boulder County
Sheriff to speak with him and had an opportunity to tour the Boulder
County Jail.
XII. [01:39:56 – 01:59:13] Case Review Votes
a. Ms. Diaz asked for an executive session so the new panelists can discuss the cases.
Mr. King mentions that it might not be able to discuss that due to technological
issues. Ms. Duenas assures that they will not be able to do a webinar breakout room
but will be able to occur next panel meeting.
b. MI2024-004: NO, 4 – 5
c. MI2024-005: YES, 6 – 2
d. MI2024-006: NO, 2 – 7
e. MI2024-007: NO, 1 – 8
f. MI2024-008: YES, 9 – 0
g. MI2024-009: YES, 6 – 3
h. MI2024-010: NO, 4 -5
i. The panel has taken volunteering for cases offscreen due to the restriction on time.
XIII. [01:59:23 - 02:03:55] Public Comment
a. There was one community member present throughout the meeting. Lynn Segal
shares that she feels she hears just logistics, bylaws, engagement and does not feel
engaged. She expresses that she does not she can put input due to the two-minute
public comment. She is concerned about Zayd Atkinson, Samuel Lawrence, and
wants to hear the dimensions of these issues. She does not want to hear what
happens in cases, she wants to hear why and wants them to be resolved. She wants
restorative justice, and she does not seem like it will happen.
i. Ms. Vialard responds to Lynn Segal that they are trying to do better, and
logistics is a part of their work. She mentions that soon, they will be more
engaging with the community and thanks her for attending the meetings
consistently.
ii. Ms. Friend responds to Lynn Segal regarding public comment that they have
been listening to the time period and appreciates her feedback. She
mentions that this is in their bylaws and mentions that they plan to
reexamine those changes.