Loading...
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.