>>> THE JANUARY 25th MEETING OF
THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE IS
IN ORDER.
IT IS 9:30.
TERESA MOSQUEDA CANNOT COME, SO
SHE IS EXCUSED.
LET'S CALL THE ROLL.
>> ANDREW LEWIS.
SARA NELSON . ALL ARE PRESENT.
>> ON THE AGENDA, WE WILL HEAR
MORE ON A DECREE AND OUTREACH
MEETING.
WE WILL HEAR FROM THE MONITOR
OF THE CONSENT DECREE AND THEN
WE WILL HEAR FROM THE OFFICE OF
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.
AND HER STAFF OF THE
DISCIPLINARY SYSTEM FOR STDs
SWORN PERSONNEL -- AND THEN WE
WILL LOOK AT THE 2022 -- WITH
THAT, WE WILL APPROVE OUR
AGENDA FOR OUR COMMITTEE
MOVING.
IT WILL BE ADOPTED.
I AM HEARING NO OBJECTIONS.
WE WILL TRANSITION INTO PUBLIC
COMMENT LATER AND MODERATE THE
COMMENTS IN THE FOLLOWING
MANNER -- EACH SPEAKER IS GIVEN
TWO MINUTES TO SPEAK.
WE WILL CALL ON EACH SPEAKER BY
NAME AND IN THE ORDER IN WHICH
YOU ARE REGISTERED ON THE
WEBSITE.
IF YOU HAVE NOT REGISTERED TO
SPEAK, BUT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK,
YOU CAN SIGN UP BEFORE THE END
OF THE PUBLIC HEARING BY GOING
TO THE WEBSITE LISTED ON
TODAY'S AGENDA.
WHEN I CALL A SPEAKER'S NAME,
YOU WILL HEAR A PROMPT.
WHEN YOU HEAR IT, YOU MUST HIT
STAR SIX TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
STATE YOUR NAME AND THE ITEM
YOU ARE ADDRESSING.
WHEN THERE IS 10 SECONDS LEFT,
YOU WILL HEAR A CHIME.
ONCE YOU HEAR SET TIME, WE ASK
YOU TO WRAP UP YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENTS.
SPEAKERS DO NOT END THE
COMMENT.
THE SPEAKERS MICROPHONE WILL BE
MUTED AFTER 10 SECONDS TO ALLOW
US TO HEAR THE NEXT SPEAKER.
ONCE YOU HAVE COMPLETED YOUR
PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE
DISCONNECT FROM THE LINE AND IF
YOU CAN, WE ENCOURAGE YOU
FOLLOW THE MEETING VIA THE
SEATTLE CHANNEL OR THE
LISTENING OPTIONS THAT ARE
LISTED ON THE AGENDA.
THERE ARE THREE PEOPLE SIGNED
UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY.
WE WILL JUST MOVE RIGHT THROUGH
THAT.
I WILL CALL A NAME AND WITH
THAT, WE WILL BEGIN.
FIRST, WE HAVE HOWARD GALE,
FOLLOWED BY HILL SANDERS.
HOWARD?
>> GOOD MORNING.
THIS MORNING, YOU WILL DISCUSS
THE FEDERAL COURT MONITOR'S
REPORT ON SPD CRISIS
INTERVENTION.
THE REPORT IS BASED ON THE SELF-
SERVING STATISTICS PROVIDED BY
THE SPD.
I HAVE SAID ALL MEMBERS HAVE A
DETAILED LISTING OF THE FLOORS.
I CAN ONLY HIGHLIGHT THE MOST
SERIOUS FLAW IN ALL THE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS WILL TAKE A
MORE ACTIVE ROLE IN QUESTIONING
THE DATA PRESENTED.
THE REPORT ON CRISIS
INTERVENTION CLAIMING TO SHOW
SUCCESS WAS PRESENTE TO THE
PUBLIC ON JANUARY 11th, BARELY
6 DAYS AFTER THE SPD MURDERED
ANOTHER PERSON IN A MENTAL
HEALTH CRISIS.
THE 19th SUCH KILLING.
19 SINCE THEY BURIED JOHN C
WILLIAMS A DECADE AGO.
THEY WERE NOT INVESTIGATED BY
THE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM.
THE MOST SERIOUS THING IS THE
MONITOR REPACKAGES WITHOUT ANY
AUDIT OR INTERROGATION -- ALL
THOSE KILLED BY THE SPD WHILE
IN MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS ARE
MISSING, SIMPLY ABSENT FROM THE
DATA SET, ALONG WITH POSSIBLY
OTHER INSTANCES OF SERIOUS USE
OF FORCE.
THE MONITOR HAS ACCEPTED THE
SELF SERVING DATA AS IS.
FOR THIS AGENDA ITEM, AND THEIR
FIRST -- THE PATTERN OF
EXCESSIVE FORCE HAS BEEN
ELIMINATED, CITING THE JANUARY
10th 2018 RULING.
THIS STATEMENT IS FALSE.
THEY NOTED A REDUCTION IN THE
SPD'S USE OF FORCE, BUT NOT AN
ELIMINATION.
IN FACT, THE SEATTLE TIMES
REVEALED SIX MONTHS AGO THAT AN
IS PRETTY COMMISSIONED AT AN
INDEPENDENT AUDIT AND SHALL
CONTINUING DISPARITY WITH THE
USE OF FORCE AGAINST BLACK
PEOPLE 7.14 TIMES PER CAPITA
COMPARED TO WHITE PEOPLE.
ADDITIONALLY, THIS REPORT
REPEALS SOME OF THE MOST DEADLY
USES OF FORCE STRIKES -- MORE
COMMONLY MOVE AGAINST BLACK
FIELD COMPARED TO WHITES.
THESE REPORTS OF CORRUPTION --
THEY DEMONSTRATE WE CLEARLY
NEED --
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
OUR NECK SPEAKERS LISTED AS --
BILL SANDERS?
WE WILL CALL FOR BILL SANDERS.
STILL SEEING BILL AS NOT HERE.
DENNIS?
>> GOOD MORNING.
PART OF THE THING ABOUT
ADDRESSING SOMETHING IS TO
BRING ATTENTION TO IT.
IT IS EVIDENT FROM THE ACTIONS
OF THE HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT THAT IT IS BEING
USED TO RAISE MONEY IN THE NAME
OF ADDRESSING THE NEVER ENDING
HOMELESS CRISIS.
EXCUSE ME.
GIVE ME A SECOND.
WEIGHTED -- DO NOT HANG UP,
PLEASE.
ANYWAY, THE HOMELESS CRISIS --
THE NEVER ENDING HOMELESS
CRISIS IS BEING FURTHERED
BECAUSE HUMAN SERVICES IS
REDIRECTING THE MONEY AND
APPLYING IT IN RACES WAYS,
WHERE THE GOVERNMENT INTERIM
DIRECTOR IS JUDGING PEOPLE
BASED ON THEIR SKIN COLOR AND
PURPOSELY DISCRIMINATING
AGAINST INNOCENT HOMELESS
CITIZENS, WHILE PRIORITIZING
CRIMINALS FOR A HOTEL ROOM,
COMPARED TO A JAILHOUSE.
THEY GET EVERYTHING DELIVERED
TO THEM WHILE INNOCENT HOMELESS
SUFFER A THIRD WINTER OF COVID
WITH ABSOLUTELY NO SHELTER OR
HEALTH FROM THEIR RACIST HUMAN
SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
THE NUMBER ONE REASON WE NEVER
SAW THE HOMELESS CRISIS --
HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT --
TURNING AGAINST INNOCENT LOCAL
HOMELESS CITIZENS.
SEATTLE CRATES THE MOST -- A
BOYCOTT OF ALL THE BUSINESSES.
SECONDLY, THE POLICE CONSENT
DECREE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL WHEN
YOU EXEMPT CRACK, METH, AND
HEROIN PUSHERS FROM JAIL, WHO
DESTROYED LIVES AND GET LISTED
AS NONVIOLENT MISDEMEANORS
BASED ON THE DOLLAR AMOUNT,
INCLUDING SOCIETY.
IT IS TELLING THE PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMITTEE THAT THEY GO OUT OF
THE WAY TO UNDERMINE POLICE
REFORM WHILE BEING A DEVIL'S
ADVOCATE TO INTIMIDATE AND
SCARE COUNCIL MEMBERS TO
CAPITULATE TO THE ACTIVIST
DEMANDS OF EXEMPTING FROM JAIL
BLACK AND BROWN TRUCK PUSHERS,
WHILE DESTROYING THOSE --
>> OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS
ALEXANDER.
ALEXANDER IS ALSO SHOWING AS
NOT PRESENT.
GOING BACK UP TO BILL SANDERS,
ALSO SHOWING THEY ARE NOT
PRESENT.
CAN YOU CONFIRM THESE TWO
INDIVIDUALS AND FIND OUT -- HE
WAS HERE A MOMENT AGO.
IT IS STILL SHOWING THEY ARE
NOT PRESENT.
>> THERE ARE NO OTHER PUBLIC
COMMENT REGISTRANTS IN THE
QUEUE.
>> HOPEFULLY, THEY HAVE
COMMENTS FOR US.
THEY CAN SEND IT ON VIA EMAIL.
>> WE WILL START WITH THE FIRST
ITEM.
PLEASE READ THE AGENDA ITEM,
PLEASE.
>> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE.
CONSENT DECREE UPDATE OUTREACH
MEETINGS FOR BRIEFING AND
DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
WE ARE LOOKING AT THE MONITOR
FOR AN UPDATE ABOUT THE WORK
THAT THEY ARE DOING IN THEIR
ROLE AS A MONITOR FOR THE
CONSENT DECREE.
I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THEM
JOINING THE COMMITTEE TODAY.
BEFORE WE HAND IT OVER, WE ARE
GOING TO FIRST EQUIP OVERVIEW
AND PROVIDE SOME BACKGROUND OF
THE CONSENT DECREE.
IT HAS BEEN IN EFFECT IN
SEATTLE SINCE THE SUMMER OF
2012 AND IT HAS TAKEN PLACE IN
RECENT YEARS.
COULD YOU PROVIDE MORE WITH THE
OVERVIEW OF THE CONSENT DECREE?
>> YES, THANK YOU.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, GOOD
MORNING.
ALEX, IF YOU WOULD NOT MIND,
BUT IN MY PRESENTATION?
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
JUST TO GO THROUGH THIS REALLY
QUICKLY, TO TEE UP THE MONITOR
PRESENTATION, I THINK YOU ARE
FAIRLY FAMILIAR WITH THE
CONSENT DECREE.
A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND
THOUGH -- IN 2011, THE CITY AND
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
ENTERED INTO A SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT THAT REQUIRED SPD TO
WORK WITH A FEDERALLY APPOINTED
MONITOR TO REFORM ITS POLICIES
AND RETRAINED HIS OFFICERS IN
AN EFFORT TO ADDRESS A PATTERN
AND PRACTICE OF EXCESSIVE
FORCE.
IN JANUARY OF 2018, THE COURT
FOUND THAT SPD HAD REDUCED ITS
USE OF SERIOUS FORCE, REDUCED
TO THE INSTANCES OF
UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND
UNNECESSARY FORCE, AND
THEREFORE HAD ACHIEVED
COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONSENT
DECREE.
THAT MEANS, AS A LEGAL MANNER
ONLY, SPD HAD ELIMINATED THE
PRACTICE OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL
FORCE.
THE STAFF MAKES THIS
OBSERVATION AS A PURELY LEGAL
POINT AND IN NO WAY MEANS TO
DIMINISH THE STUDIES THAT HAVE
BEEN NOTED IN THE LAST COUPLE
OF YEARS THAT HAVE FOUND RACIAL
DISPARITIES IN, SAY, STOPS IN
DETENTION, WHEN PARTICULAR IN
2019.
AS A PURELY LEGAL MATTER, THE
COURT FOUND THAT SPD WAS IN
COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONSENT
DECREE IN 2018.
AFTER ACHIEVING COMPLIANCE, THE
CONSENT DECREE REQUIRES THAT
THEY SUSTAIN IT FOR A PERIOD OF
TWO YEARS AND THAT PERIOD WAS
EXPECTED TO RUN FROM 2018 TO
2020.
IT WOULD HAVE BEEN TERMINATED
AFTER.
HOWEVER, IT WAS NOT TERMINATED
BECAUSE OF TWO SIGNIFICANT
EVENTS.
THE FIRST WAS A NEW POLICE
UNION CONTRACT THAT WAS
FINALIZED IN NOVEMBER OF 2018.
THE COURT FOUND THAT THE
CONTRACT HAD CAUSED THE CITY TO
FALL OUT OF COMPLIANCE IN THE
AREA OF ACCOUNTABILITY.
THE COURT EXPRESSED CONCERNS
ABOUT DISCIPLINARY APPEALS,
SPECIFICALLY AN ARE BUT THERE
IS RULING THAT A REINSTATED
OFFICER THAT HAD BEEN FIRED FOR
EXCESSIVE FORCE WAS REINSTATED,
I THINK.
THEY ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE
DETAILS OF THE SHEPARD CASE.
I WILL NOT GO INTO IT.
THE JUDGE HAD SAID THAT HE WAS
NOT NECESSARILY DECIDING
WHETHER TO THE DECISION IN THE
CASE WAS RIGHT OR WRONG BUT
THAT THE ARBITRATION PROCESS
AND THE DEPARTMENT -- THEY HAD
WEAKENED THE SYSTEM TO THE
POINT OF VIOLATING THE CONSENT
DECREE.
ALSO, THERE WERE LIMITS OF OIG
AND OPA'S AUTHORITY, AND A
SUBPOENA OF 40 WAS ONE THAT WAS
CITED.
SINCE THEN, THE CITY HAS MADE
SOME CHANGES IN THE AREA OF
ACCOUNTABILITY IN AN EFFORT TO
ADDRESS THE COURT'S CONCERNS
AND COME BACK TO SUBPOENA
AUTHORITIES.
THEY HAVE PASSED AN ORDINANCE
ON SUBPOENA AUTHORITY THAT
WOULD ALLOW FOR THOSE WHO WERE
BEING SUBPOENAED TO BE AWARE OF
THEIR RIGHTS AND THE CITY HAS
ALSO MADE OTHER EFFORTS IN THE
AREA OF ACCOUNTABILITY
REGARDING TRANSPARENCY AND OPA
PUBLISHING THEIR CASE STATUSES.
SO THE CITY IS MAKING EFFORTS,
WHERE THEY CAN, WITHOUT HAVING
TO NEGOTIATE FURTHER STEPS,
THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS OF
NEGOTIATING FOR FURTHER STEPS
AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE
ABILITY TO SERVE SUBPOENAS AND
THEN THE SECOND EVENT WAS THE
MURDER OF GEORGE FLOYD IN
MINNEAPOLIS, WHICH INSPIRED THE
NATIONWIDE DEMONSTRATIONS
AGAINST POLICE BRUTALITY IN THE
SUMMER OF 2020.
CITY LEADERS AND THE PUBLIC
RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT PLASTICS
THAT SPD USED IN RESPONSE TO
THE PROTESTS.
PRIOR TO THAT, THE CITY AND DOJ
HAD FILED A MOTION TO TERMINATE
THE CONSENT DECREE.
DAYS INTO THE PROTEST, THE CITY
WITHDREW THAT MOTION TO ALLOW
FOR AN EXAMINATION OF SPD'S USE
OF FORCE DURING THE PROTESTS.
AFTER THE EVENTS OF 2020, THE
COURT APPROVED THE NEW
MONITORING PLAN TO REASSESS
SPD'S COMPLIANCE IN ALL AREAS
OF THE CONSENT DECREE,
INCLUDING CROWD MANAGEMENT, AND
TO BUILD THE CAPACITY OF THE
FLEECE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM.
SO, WITH THAT AS A HIGH-LEVEL
OVERVIEW, I WILL ASK IF THERE
ARE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE THIS
GETS PASSED OVER.
>> THANK YOU, GREG.
BEFORE WE MOVE TO ANOTHER
PRESENTATION, DO YOU HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS FOR GREG ON THE
BACKGROUND OF THE CONSENT
DECREE?
I AM SEEING NONE.
I DO HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION.
GREG, I RECALL WHEN WE PASSED
THE LAST CONTRACT, WE ALSO
PASSED A RESOLUTION THAT
HIGHLIGHTED THREE ISSUES THAT
THE COUNCIL FELT WAS IMPORTANT
TO RAISE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF
THE COURT'S CONSIDERATION OF
THE CONSENT DECREE.
IS THAT CORRECT AND DID YOU
COVER THOSE AREAS IN YOUR
PRESENTATION AND THE AREAS THAT
WERE SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT IN
THE RESOLUTION?
A
>> YOU ARE CORRECT.
THE COUNCIL DID DO THAT AND I
DID NOT COVER IT.
OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I DO
NOT REMEMBER WHAT THOSE THREE
WERE.
>> OKAY, MAYBE WE CAN COME BACK
TO IT.
WITH THAT, I THINK A GREAT
SEGUE INTO ANOTHER PRESENTATION
. WE WILL PASS THE BATON TO
YOU.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIRPERSON.
IT IS GREAT TO BE WITH YOU
TODAY.
I THINK THIS YEAR IS GOING TO
BE A VERY AFFABLE YEAR FOR
COMPLIANCE AND WORK -- WE ARE
LOOKING FORWARD TO A ROBUST AND
RIGOROUS PARTNERSHIP WITH ALL
OF YOU, TO BETTER CHARGE A
COURSE FOR THE FUTURE.
WITH THAT, I WILL SHARE A BRIEF
PRESENTATION THAT I WILL SHARE
ITH YOU ALL.
LET ME PULL THIS UP.
OKAY.
CAN YOU SEE THAT, CHAIRPERSON?
JUST ONE POINT OF -- THAT
WEBSITE, YOU CAN FIND THE
CURRENT IN PROCESS PRELIMINARY
ASSESSMENTS THAT WE WILL BE
TALKING ABOUT, AS WELL AS AREAS
FOR PUBLIC FEEDBACK, SO YOU CAN
FIND THAT DIRECTLY ON THE
SEATTLE POLICE MONITOR.ORG
WEBSITE.
THIS MORNING, THAT WEEK TO DO
AN OVERVIEW OF MONITORING
ACTIVITIES, PARTICULARLY
WORKING ON EARLY IN 2022.
WE HAD A COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
SESSION THAT WE DISCUSSED.
WE WILL TOUCH BASES ON SOME
HIGH LEVEL ACTION AND WHAT IS
YEAR MAY LOOK LIKE AS FAR AS
DELIVERABLES AND THEN
ADDRESSING ANY DISCUSSIONS OR
ANSWERING QUESTIONS.
WE DID DO A PUBLIC COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT SESSION, AS
MENTIONED EARLIER, AROUND THE
FIRST LIMITARY ASSESSMENT
CRISIS INTERVENTION.
THIS SESSION, WE WERE NOT
SETTING THIS UP TO TALK ONLY
ABOUT CRISIS INTERVENTION, BUT
TO PROVIDE A BROADER OVERVIEW
OF ACTIVITIES.
WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT CRISIS
INTERVENTION IF THAT IS NEEDED.
SOME OVERVIEW OF THE MONITORING
ACTIVITIES.
THE ROLE OF THE MONITOR, AS YOU
LIKELY KNOW, IS TO BE --
COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONSENT
DECREE'S.
IN MANY WAYS, MY ROLE IS TO ACT
AS A PERSON WHO CAN COME IN AND
WORK WITH ALL THE PARTIES WITH
ALIGNMENTS AND TO FIGURE OUT
WHAT WE ARE WORKING ON AND TO
DO SOMETHING WITH THAT PROCESS.
TO GET THEM IN COMPLIANCE AND
POTENTIAL CLOSER DOWNSTREAM OF
THE CONSENT DECREE'S.
ALL OF THE WORK AND THE
MONITORING TEAM IS GEARED
TOWARDS ELABORATIVE FLEET
WORKING WITH ALL THE PARTIES ON
THIS.
SO, YOU CAN DISREGARD THAT TOP
LINE.
THERE ARE FOUR AREAS OF THEIR
THAT MYSELF AND THE MONITORING
TEAM ARE WORKING ON.
ONE IS EVALUATING THE STATUS OF
COMPLIANCE.
ESSENTIALLY, LOOKING PROBABLY
AT THE CONSENT DECREE TO
MEASURE PROGRESS ON THAT.
TO DO THAT, WE DEVELOPED A
METHODOLOGY, MEETING THE SET OF
MEASURES, BOTH QUANTITATIVE AND
QUALITATIVE, TO UNDERSTAND
PROGRESS OF SPD AND WE DO AN
ASSESSMENT.
WE COLLECT DATA AND WE LOOK AT
MEASURES AND WE PACKAGE IT UP
AND PRODUCE THAT IN THE FORM OF
ASSESSMENTS THAT YOU HAVE
ACCESS TO.
THE SECOND MAJOR AREA THAT WE
HAVE IS AROUND ACCOUNTABILITY.
SO THEY ARE IN THE MONITORING
PLAN THAT WE DO YEAR AFTER
YEAR.
WE LOOK AT IT FROM THE
PERSPECTIVE OF FRONT END
ACCOUNTABILITY, WHICH MEANS
THINGS THE CITY AND SPD CAN DO
TO PREVENT BAD THINGS FROM
HAPPENING IN THE FIELD, AS WELL
AS BACK END ACCOUNTABILITY.
IF THERE IS SOMETHING AN
OFFICER THAT DOES THAT MIGHT
BREAK A RULE OR A POLICY, AN
ACTION TAKES PLACE.
WHAT HAPPENS WITH THAT
ACCOUNTABILITY AS FAR AS
DISCIPLINE AND REMEDIATION IN
LEARNING THAT TAKES PLACE GOING
FORWARD?
TAKING A DIRECT LOOK AT
ACCOUNTABILITY IN MANY FACETS
IS A BIG PERK.
THE THIRD MAJOR COMPONENT, THE
THIRD AND FOURTH ARE MORE
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.
IT IS RISK MANAGEMENT, LOOKING
AT THINGS THAT HELP THE CITY
AND SPD HAVE MORE CAPABILITIES
AROUND THINGS LIKE ANALYTICS
AND TO HELP IMPROVE OFFICER
WELLNESS AND TO LOOK AT AREAS
AROUND DATA AND INSIGHTS AND
THE TOOLS AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR
THAT.
ADVISING THE CITY ON HOW THAT
COULD WORK WITH THE CONSENT
DECREE IS ONE OF THE
COMPONENTS, AS WELL AS ADVISING
AND REIMAGINING PUBLIC SAFETY.
THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION,
AND WITH THE CITY COUNCIL
LOOKING AT HOW PUBLIC SAFETY
CAN BE REDESIGNED IN THE
FUTURE, THE ROLE OF THE TEAM IS
NOT TO GOVERN THAT, BUT IN
ORDER TO HELP THE CITY AND
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT, TO
FIGURE OUT HOW CAN THAT COME
FORWARD IN WAYS THAT ARE
PRODUCTIVE AND THAT MIGHT NOT
RUN COUNTER TO THE CONSENT
DECREE AND BUILDING UP THOSE
OVERALL CAPABILITIES.
THOSE ARE THE FOUR MAJOR
COMPONENTS OF WHAT WE DO
THROUGH THE COURSE OF THE YEAR.
IT IS MY ROLE, AS WELL AS THE
ASSOCIATE MONITORS THAT WORK
WITH ME.
AS FAR AS THE BASELINE OF OUR
WORK, AND LINE ITEMS UNDERNEATH
THESE FOUR, YOU CAN SEE THE
MONITORING PLAN.
AROUND COMPLIANCE, THIS IS THE
BIGGEST THING WE ARE LOOKING
AT.
WHEN WILL THE CONSENT DECREE,
WHAT KIND OF PROGRESS HAS BEEN
HAPPENING?
HOW DO WE LOOK AT THAT PROGRESS
AND MEASURE IT?
COMPLIANCE, OF COURSE, IT IS
DRIVEN BY THIS METHODOLOGY WE
TALKED ABOUT, WHICH WAS
ESTABLISHED THROUGH THE COURSE
OF LAST YEAR.
ON THE SECOND MONITOR FOR THE
CONSENT DECREE, AS YOU KNOW,
ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS WE DID
COMING IN, IN LATE 2019, LATE
2020 IS WORKING WITH ALL OF THE
PARTIES IN EARLY 2021 TO
DEVELOP A METHODOLOGY.
THAT INCLUDES THE ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE, THE PA, AND ALL THE
PARTIES.
THE CDC, ET CETERA.
WE ARE LOOKING AT FOUR MAJOR
AREAS TO ASSESS COMPLIANCE, TO
DO A CONFERENCE OF ASSESSMENT.
ONE IS AROUND CRISIS
INTERVENTION.
THE SECOND IS AROUND STOPS IN
DETENTIONS.
LOOKING AT HOW SPD PERFORMS
THAT WILL INCLUDE EXCESSIVE
MEASURES AROUND BIAS AND
IMPACT.
THE THIRD AREA IS AROUND USE OF
FORCE.
THAT WILL INCLUDE A DEEP DIVE,
LOOK INTO USE OF FORCE UNDER
CROWD MANAGEMENT SETTINGS.
THE FOURTH AREA IS AROUND
SUPERVISION.
SO LOOKING AT THE PROCESSES AND
OPERATIONS OF SPD.
AS WE BUILD THESE ASSESSMENTS,
THERE ARE THREE MAJOR
DOCUMENTS.
SUPERVISION WILL BE EMBEDDED IN
EACH ONE.
AS WE LOOK AT CRISIS
INTERVENTION, USE OF FORCE, WE
WILL TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE
RELATIVE TO HOW SUPERVISION
WORKS WITHIN THOSE.
THESE FOUR AREAS FORM THE BASIS
, THE CONSTITUTIONAL POLICING
AROUND THE PATTERN AND PRACTICE
OF THIS TYPE OF WORK.
WE WILL BE PRINTING THEM OUT TO
THE COMMUNITY, OF COURSE.
WE WILL HAVE A SESSION FOR EACH
ONE OF THESE SESSIONS.
WE HAVE ONE IN JANUARY THERE IS
úCRISIS INTERVENTION.
WE HAVE ONE COMING UP IN
FEBRUARY AND -- AND THE THIRD
ONE, USE OF FORCE IN MARCH, IN
WHICH WE WILL ENGAGE THE
COMMUNITY ON DIALOGUE.
FOR ALL THOSE, WE RELEASED A
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT, FIRST
PUBLICLY, SO EVERYONE CAN READ
IT BEFORE THEY COME INTO THOSE
MEETINGS.
IF THEY HAVE QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS, THEY CAN BE FULLY UP
TO SPEED.
THEN WE WILL TAKE THOSE
MEETINGS AND NETWORK AND WE
WILL BE LOOKING AT THREE MAJOR
QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMUNITY.
AS WE GET INTO EACH ONE OF
THOSE ASSESSMENT AREAS, WE WILL
ASK THEM AND ALL OF YOU AS WELL
IF THERE ARE SPECIFIC IDEAS,
BASED ON THESE FINDINGS IN
THESE ASSESSMENTS, WHERE WE CAN
SEE IMPROVEMENTS.
FOR EXAMPLE, CRISIS
INTERVENTION IN SEATTLE.
THE CITY CAN DO IT ON THEIR
OWN.
BIG IDEAS, INNOVATION, CHANGES
THAT CAN TAKE PLACE BASED ON
THOSE FINDINGS.
THE SECOND QUESTION WOULD BE IS
THERE ANY RESEARCH OR ADVOCACY
WITH CRISIS INTERVENTION, FOR
EXAMPLE, AS WE GET TO STOP
DETENTIONS AND USE OF FORCE,
THAT THE SEATTLE COMMUNITY
LEASING COMMISSION SHOULD
PURSUE IN 2022.
WE ARE TAKING VERY INTENTIONAL
LOOKS TO SAY ARE THERE THINGS
THE CITY CAN BE DOING, THE
PUBLIC CAN BE DOING, THE
COMMITTEE CAN BE DOING BASED ON
THIS RESEARCH?
THIRD, WE WILL ASK, BASED ON
THESE FINDINGS, IS THERE ANY
THING -- ARE THERE CERTAIN
ITEMS THAT THE FEDERAL MONITOR
SHOULD CONTINUE TO OVERSEE IN
2022 AND WORK ON WITH ALL THE
PARTIES?
WE WILL DO A RIGOROUS PROCESS
AND BRING THESE MEASURES
FORWARD.
WE WILL TALK TO THE COMMUNITY
AND CITY COUNCIL AND THE
PROGRESS, TRYING TO GAIN AS
MANY IDEAS AS POSSIBLE.
THAT WAY, WE CAN MOVE FORWARD
IN A WAY, FOR THE CITY TO HAVE
MORE COMPLIANCE, BETTER
COMPLIANCE, AND EFFECTIVE
CLOSURE OF SOME OF THESE
CATEGORIES AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
ALL OF THIS -- WE REALLY NEED
THE CITY COUNCIL'S INPUT AND
IDEAS AND ENGAGEMENT ON THIS,
TO NOT ONLY REACH OUT TO THE
COMMUNITY BUT ALSO TO HAVE YOUR
IDEAS ON HOW WE MOVE FORWARD
WITH THESE AREAS.
SO, THAT IS A BROAD STROKE
OVERVIEW OF WHAT WE ARE WORKING
ARE PUTTING IN PLACE. ESS WE
I SHOULD MENTION ONE OF THE
THINGS WE ARE DOING WITH THESE
ACTION STEPS IN 2022 IS WE ARE
FINALIZING THE COMMUNITY
FEEDBACK AND IDEAS FROM ALL THE
PARTIES AND FILING THOSE
ASSESSMENTS WITH THE COURT.
WE ARE WORKING, THINKING
THROUGH HOW WE DO THAT, IF WE
DO THAT SEQUENTIALLY, WHERE WE
FILE CRISIS INTERVENTION AND
THEN STOP DETENTIONS AND USE OF
FORCE INDIVIDUALLY, AS WE
FINISH WITH THEM AND WORK WITH
THE COMMUNITY, OR WE DO THEM
ALL AT ONCE.
THERE IS SOME DELIBERATION ON
THAT, THAT PARTICULAR ITEM.
YOUR FEEDBACK WOULD BE
IMPORTANT AS WELL.
FROM THAT, WE WILL ALSO DEVELOP
THE MONITORING PLAN FOR 2022.
THERE WILL BE SOME CARRYOVER
ITEMS THAT ARE PART OF THAT
MONITORING PLAN.
THERE ARE ONGOING THINGS.
THERE ARE OTHER AREAS LIKE THIS
WHILE ALSO HAVING ONGOING
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND THINGS
WITH ACCOUNTABILITY THAT WE ARE
CURRENTLY WORKING ON.
FROM THE COMMUNITY AND
COMMUNITY FEEDBACK, WE WILL
PULL IN IDEAS, POTENTIALLY FOR
THE CITY OR THE MONITORING TEAM
TO BE WORKING ON THIS YEAR.
IN TOTAL, I THINK WE HAVE A
GOOD PLAN FOR HOW TO NOT ONLY
ASSESS COMPLIANCE FOR SPD, BUT
TO ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY ON WHAT
COMES NEXT.
WE ARE AT A CRITICAL TIME WITH
CONSENT DECREE'S.
YOU CAN SEE AN INFLECTION POINT
AND IT HAS BEEN ROUGHLY 10
YEARS SINCE 2020.
THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE COME
INTO THIS ARENA, SO TO SAY, AND
THEY HAVE -- THEY ARE TAKING IN
THEIR INTEREST IN POLICING.
THERE ARE A LOT OF NEW PEOPLE
THAT ARE ENGAGED IN THIS
PROCESS AS WELL AND THAT IS A
GOOD THING.
WE WANT THEM TO BE ENGAGED AND
WE NEED THIS YEAR TO BE
SOMEWHAT OF A LEVEL SET OF
WHERE WE ARE AT WITH THIS.
WHERE ARE WE GOING NEXT?
CAN WE HAVE LEGITIMACY?
WE CAN ALL COLLECTIVELY SAY
HERE IS WHERE WE ARE AND WHERE
WE NEED TO GO.
HERE IS WHERE THE FINISH LINE
IS.
SO WITH THAT, I GUESS WE CAN GO
TO THE Q&A, IF YOU WOULD LIKE,
OR WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE
QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP EARLIER
OR CRISIS INTERVENTION
QUESTIONS.
>> CAN YOU GET THE SLIDES UP?
THANKS.
ON PAGE -- SORRY, SLIDE FOUR,
THERE ARE A FEW QUESTIONS THAT
I WILL BE WATCHING.
WHY DON'T I JUST GET A LITTLE
BIT OF A SENSE FIRST -- YOU
EXPLAINED THE ROLE OF THE
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.
I AM -- FIRST, I SHOULD
PROBABLY LET FOLKS KNOW THAT
THAT IS OUT NOW FOR THE
PRELIMINARY IS ISIS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ARE, YOU
KNOW, PART OF THE PROCESS,
SOLICITING COMMENTS.
YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT YOU
ENCOURAGE COMMENTS FROM THE
PUBLIC AND FROM FOLKS IN YOUR
MEETINGS AND FROM THE COUNCIL
AS WELL.
I'M WONDERING, IS THERE A
TIMELINE THAT YOU ARE
CONSIDERING FOR ACCEPTING
COMMENT ON THAT PRELIMINARY
ASSESSMENT ON THE CRISIS
INTERVENTION, WHICH IS OUT?
I THINK IT IS ON YOUR WEBSITE,
CORRECT?
YOUR NEW LAUNCH WEBSITE.
>> YES.
WE DO NOT HAVE A DEADLINE AS OF
YET.
WE WANT TO KEEP IT OPEN.
THE DIMING IS DRIVEN BY WHEN WE
FILE WITH THE COURT.
WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING
TO GAIN FEEDBACK FROM THE
COMMUNITY, GETTING FEEDBACK
FROM THE PARTIES, THE CITY AS A
WHOLE TO, YOU KNOW, ASK CERTAIN
QUESTIONS AND MAYBE REFINANCE
CERTAIN THINGS, YOU KNOW, IF
THERE ARE NEW MEASURES THEY
MIGHT HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT,
ET CETERA.
ONCE WE COLLECT ALL THAT, WE
WILL PATCH THIS UP AND
SUBMITTED TO THE COURT.
AGAIN, YOU CAN FOLLOW ME
SEQUENTIALLY -- IF WE FOLLOW
THEM ALL AT ONCE, WE ARE
LOOKING AT A FILING WITH THE
COURT SOMETIME IN EARLY APRIL
OR SO.
THAT WOULD BE A BROAD TARGET.
IF WE DO IT SEQUENTIALLY,
CRISIS INTERVENTION WILL BE
MUCH SOONER.
WE CAN DEFINITELY RELATE TIMING
IF WE NEED TO CLOSE OUT TIMING
FOR THAT.
>> THANK YOU.
AS IT RELATES TO THE
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT REPORT,
IT DOES SAY AND I APPRECIATE
THIS IS HIGHLIGHTED -- THERE IS
SOME SUNSHINE ON THIS ISSUE.
THEY SAY THE MONITORING TEAM
AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAVE
SHOWN SOME INSTANCES WHERE USE
OF FORCE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN
HAPPILY IMPLEMENTED AS A CRISIS
CONTACT.
THEY HAVE RECEIVED A
CONSTITUENT EMAIL THAT RAISES
THREE QUESTIONS.
ONE, HAS DATA BEEN EXCLUDED,
WHERE PEOPLE WERE KILLED IN
CRISIS INSTANCES?
HAVE POLICE CONTEXT IMPROPERLY
CATALOGED AS A CRISIS CONTACT,
AND IS THERE A CLEAR DEFINITION
FOR WHAT CONSTITUTES CRISIS
CONTACT?
>> YES, STARTING WITH ONE,
THERE IS -- IT HAS BEEN
STANDARDIZED IN POLICY AND
PRACTICE.
I SHOULD MENTION AS WELL, TO
THOSE QUESTIONS, ONE OF THE
PUBLIC COMMENTS RAISED THE
QUESTION OF, YOU KNOW, IS THE
MONITOR JUST ESSENTIALLY USING
SPD DATA AND REPACKAGING IT OR
WHAT NOT?
THE ANSWER -- THAT IS A
FASCINATING QUESTION.
IF YOU LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, HOW
INDEPENDENT THE MONITORING IS.
THAT IS ANOTHER WAY TO LOOK AT
THIS.
THIS IS DESIGNED TO BE AN
INDEPENDENT EVALUATION.
THE LAST SIX OR SEVEN YEARS OF
THE MONITORING OF THE CONSENT
DECREE, THE MONITOR OF THE
PREVIOUS -- THEY HAVE WORKED
WITH THE CITY TO DEVELOP ONE OF
THE NATION'S LEADING ANALYTICS
CAPABILITIES IN POLICING,
RIGHT?
SO THE CITY OF SEATTLE, THE
COUNCIL, WE HAVE PUT A LOT OF
TIME AND ENERGY INTO DEVELOPING
THE DATA AND THE ANALYTICS AND
THE CAPACITY OF THE SEATTLE
POLICE DEPARTMENT.
MUCH OF THAT, PRETTY MUCH ALL
OF IT IS TRANSPARENT.
IT IS ON THE PUBLIC DASHBOARDS
FOR THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT, ET CETERA.
WE DO USE THAT DATA AND WE LOOK
AT IT FOR OUR OWN MINDS AND
EVALUATED.
SOME PEOPLE RAISED THE QUESTION
OF, WELL, SHOULD WE HAVE A
COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT LOOK AT
THE DATA?
THIS IS AN INDEPENDENT LOOK.
IF YOU ARE SAYING WE NEED NEW
DATA, NO, WE NEED A NEW DATA
ARCHITECTURE.
WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME BUILDING
THIS ALREADY.
SO THE ACCURACY OF THE DATA IS
REALLY SOLID.
AS FAR AS ANYONE IN CRISIS THAT
-- WERE THERE WAS A LEVEL OF
FORCE, THAT IS DOCUMENTED.
THERE IS NO ONE EXCLUDED FROM
THAT.
THERE ARE SOME RARE INSTANCES,
WHERE THERE WAS USE OF FORCE
AND INITIALLY THAT WAS NOT
CLASSIFIED AS A CRISIS CALL.
AS THAT WORKED THROUGH THE
SYSTEM, YOU CAN RETROACTIVELY
PUT THAT ON A CERTAIN CALL,
RIGHT?
SOMETIMES THEY HAVE RARE
CIRCUMSTANCES, WHERE THERE IS A
USE OF FORCE, WHERE THOSE GO
INTO INVESTIGATIONS AND THE
PAPERWORK AND SUCH, WHERE THERE
IS A BIT OF A LAG AND WE SAY,
GUESS, LOOK AT THAT SITUATION.
THAT PERSON WAS IN A CRISIS
SITUATION.
THAT IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE
HAVE SEEN AND LOOKED AT AND
HAVE CATALOGED WITH ALL THIS
DATA.
>> I WANT TO MOVE.
I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW-UP.
SO THE STATEMENT THAT THE
MODERATING TEAM AND SPD HAVE
IDENTIFIED SOME INSTANCES WHERE
USE OF FORCE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN
PROPERLY DOCUMENTED AS A CRISIS
CONTACT.
ARE YOU SAYING THAT INITIALLY
IT WAS NOT PROPERLY DOCUMENT IT
AS A CRISIS CONTACT AND THEN AT
DOCUMENTED? WAS PROPERLY
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
IT WAS DOCUMENTED, RIGHT?
IT IS ALMOST LIKE A QUALITATIVE
TYPE OF A REVIEW.
IT DID NOT IMPACT THE DATA OR
THE NUMBERS BUT WE ARE SAYING
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
PROCESS IS SOUND, WHERE IF
THERE IS A CRISIS, THAT IT IS
DOCUMENTED AT THE APPROPRIATE
TIME.
THERE ARE A FEW RARE EXAMPLES,
WHERE, JUST IN THE NATURE OF
POLICING, THE SPEED OF WORK AND
THINGS HAPPENING, THAT THE
CRISIS CONTACT FORM WAS NOT
COMPLETED AT THE VERY
BEGINNING.
SO MAKING SURE THAT PROCESS WAS
SOLID.
YOU KNOW, THE QUALITATIVE
FINDING, YOU COULD SAY, IS
SOMETHING BEING ADDRESSED.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
SARA NELSON?
>> HE SAID SOMETHING THAT
RAISES ANOTHER POINT.
WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT QUALITATIVE
ASSESSMENT, IS THAT BECAUSE --
COULD IT BE BECAUSE USE OF
FORCE OR -- IS IT BECAUSE IT
WAS UNCLEAR OR WHAT?
>> CAN YOU TRY THAT ONE MORE
TIME?
>> WHEN THE CONTACTED -- WHAT
WAS BEING ASKED WAS IF THESE
CASES, THE CRISIS FORM WAS NOT
FILLED OUT.
DID THAT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO
WITH UNDERSTANDING OF CHANGING
OF LAWS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT?
>> NO, NO.
AGAIN, I CAN COME BACK WITH
EXACT NUMBERS, BUT A VERY
SMALL, VERY SMALL NUMBER OF
INSTANCES WHERE -- NOT BASED ON
CHANGES IN POLICY, BUT THE
PROCESS THAT PLAYED OUT IN THAT
PARTICULAR DAY AND THAT
PARTICULAR INCIDENT, THAT AN
OFFICER MAY HAVE FORGOTTEN OR
WAITED FOR A WHILE OR, AS THEY
LOOKED BACKWARDS, POTENTIALLY
HAD A SITUATION.
THAT PERSON WAS IN CRISIS, SO
WE SHOULD DOCUMENTED.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, WE HAVE ANOTHER
QUESTION ABOUT THIS.
YOU ARE INCLUDING, UNDER THIS A
BULLET, BIAS IMPACT, EVEN
THOUGH MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT
DOING THE FINDING FOR POLICING.
NEVERTHELESS, IT IS AN AREA OF
GREAT CONCERN FOR RESIDENTS OF
THE CITY, CONSIDERING THAT EVEN
IN INSTANCES WHERE WE HAVE SEEN
A REDUCTION IN USE OF FORCE, A
REDUCTION OF -- I SHOULD SAY A
REDUCTION IN INSTANCES OF THE
USE OF FORCE AND A REDUCTION OF
INSTANCES IN THE USE OF FORCE
AGAINST PEOPLE IN CRISIS.
THE RACIAL DISPARITY IN
POLICING CONTINUES AND -- SOME
PERIOD OF YEARS, IT HAS
ACTUALLY INCREASED.
SO, JUST GIVEN THAT THIS WAS
NOT A TECHNICAL FINDING OF THE
COURT, AND WE ARE UNDER THAT
ISSUE, WHAT I REALLY APPRECIATE
-- THE CITY ATTORNEY IN THE
CITY'S FIGHT LINK, EVEN AS WE
REPORT ON PRODUCTIONS OF USE OF
FORCE, WE ARE STILL IDENTIFYING
PROACTIVELY, EVEN THOUGH WE MAY
NOT LEGALLY HAVE TO.
I THINK IT IS THE RIGHT THING
TO DO, TO I TO FIGHT AND CALL
OUT THE CONTINUED DISPARITY IN
POLICING.
I AM JUST INTERESTED TO KNOW,
FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, HOW YOU
WILL CONSIDER THAT INFORMATION
AS PART OF YOUR ASSESSMENT OF
THE CITY'S COMPLIANCE?
>> RIGHT.
THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.
FIRST, YOU'RE CORRECT.
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND
OUR INITIAL INVESTIGATION
FLAGGED THIS.
THEY DID NOT INCLUDE IT IN THE
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AS A CORE
AREA FOR MONITORING AND THE
CONSENT DECREE.
THAT BEING SAID, IT IS SO
EMBEDDED WITHIN THESE AREAS,
PARTICULARLY STOPS AND
DETENTIONS, THAT WHEN YOU DO
THE ASSESSMENT, YOU FIND DATA
AND INSIGHTS THAT HIGHLIGHT
AREAS OF BIAS AND ANY IMPACT.
THE RATIONALE FOR INCLUDING IT
WITHIN THE METHODOLOGY IS NOT
TO SAY THAT THE MONITORING TEAM
WAS GOING TO DIRECTLY WORK ON
THIS ISSUE, BUT TO SAY, OKAY,
LET'S LEARN AS A CITY WHAT THE
STATE OF THIS IS, SO -- GOING
BACK TO THOSE INITIAL QUESTIONS
I HAD ON THE SLIDE, WHAT IS IT
THAT THE CITY CAN DO PROPERLY,
GOING FORWARD, TO WORK ON THIS?
HOW DO WE, IN PARTICULAR, HOW
DO WE LOOK ACROSS THE AGENCIES
AND ACROSS PLANS TO GET TO THE
ROOT CAUSE OF DISPARITY AND
IMPACT?
ARE THERE NEW THINGS THE CITY
TO BE DOING ACROSS HUMAN
SERVICES AND HOUSING AND MENTAL
HEALTH AND POLICING AND ALL
THESE OTHER SERVICES THAT
CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE
THERE IS DISPARITY?
ARE THERE CERTAIN PRACTICES OR
POLICIES THAT ARE IN PLACE THAT
SHOULD BE CHANGED AT SPD, IN
ORDER TO REDUCE ANY BIAS AND
DISPARITY -- TRAINING POLICIES,
PRACTICE CHANGES IN ORDER TO
REDUCE THAT AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE.
REALLY, THERE IS ARGUMENT TO
HELP THE CITY, TO HELP -- THEY
CAN TAKE CARE OF IT.
IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT THE
CITY SAYS, HEY, WE NEED FEDERAL
OVERSIGHT TO MAKE SURE
SOMETHING STICKS, THAT WE CAN
WORK WITH YOU ON THAT.
>> THANK YOU.
AS IT RELATES SPECIFICALLY TO
THE DATA COLLECTION PIECE, THE
DATA THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH
RIGHT NOW, SPD HAS DONE UNDER
ITS OWN ANALYSIS -- THAT WAS
TRUTH TESTED BY THE CENTER FOR
POLICING AND EQUITY.
IT COVERED A PERIOD BETWEEN
AROUND 2014 TO 2019, WHEREAS,
YOU KNOW, IT IS 2022 AND, YOU
KNOW, THE CONSENT DECREE
PROCESS IS A PROCESS MOVING
THROUGH TIME AND MEASURING
IMPROVEMENT, HOPEFULLY, OVER A
PERIOD OF TIME.
THERE IS GOING TO BE, I THINK,
AN INTEREST IN COLLECTING NEW
DATA BUT I AM CONCERNED OVER
2021 -- IT MIGHT NOT BE A GOOD
MEASURE OF THOSE INTERACTIONS,
OF COVID AND REDUCED POLICE
CONTACT DURING 2021., SO, THERE
IS A SORT OF INTENTION THERE OF
WANTING TO COLLECT NEW DATA IN
ORDER TO LOOK TO SEE WHETHER OR
NOT THERE HAVE BEEN
IMPROVEMENTS OR NOT AND THE
RECOGNITION THAT WE HAVE
DIFFERENT SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES
IN 2021.
COMPARED TO 2020, WHEN USE OF
FORCE WAS AN A NORMALLY
ASSOCIATED WITH THE CROWD
CONTROL ACTIVITIES OF THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT.
IN THE WAKE OF THE GEORGE FLOYD
PROTESTS.
SO, I AM JUST WONDERING, HOW DO
WE WALK THAT LINE WHILE BEING
ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE SORT OF
RIGOROUS ANALYSIS OF THE DATA
WHILE RECOGNIZING THAT THEY ARE
ANOMALIES?
>> I THINK THAT IS AN IMPORTANT
QUESTION TO BE THINKING ABOUT,
AS FAR AS COMPLIANCE AND
ENCLOSURE OF THE CONSENT
DECREE, AND WHAT DOES SUCCESS
LOOK LIKE, REALLY?
OVER WHAT PERIOD OF TIME AND
WHEN IS IT LEGITIMATE TO SAY WE
HAVE ACCOMPLISHED WHAT THE
CONSENT DECREE IS SET UP FOR.
GO BACK AND THERE ARE OTHER
ASSESSMENTS FROM PREVIOUS
YEARS, THAT WE BUILD ON.
WE BUILT COMPLAINTS IN 2016 AND
2019, ET CETERA.
IT UNCOVERS IS A COUPLE YEARS
WORTH OF DATA.
WE NEED TO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, I
GUESS IT IS A BIG QUESTION FOR
CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY.
IS THAT ENOUGH?
WE DO HAVE A METHODOLOGY IN
PLACE, SO WE CAN RERUN DATER
LATER ON THIS YEAR, THAT IS THE
DIRECTION THE CITY WANTED TO
GO.
THE MONITORING TEAM OR THE CITY
COULD -- I MENTIONED MOST OF
THE DATA IS ON THE DASHBOARD
AND IT IS ACCESSIBLE.
THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS PEOPLE
CAN ANALYZE IT TO GET INSIDE.
I WOULD LOOK TO YOU AND YOUR
GUIDANCE, WHERE YOU WANT THE
MONITORING TEAM TO WEIGH IN, IF
WE SHOULD DO THESE ASSESSMENTS
ANOTHER TIME, ADDITIONAL TIME
THIS YEAR OR A PORTION OF IT,
TO GET TO -- YOU KNOW, TO FEEL
COMFORTABLE WITH WHERE WE ARE.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM
COUNCIL MEMBERS?
BEFORE WE CLOSE OUT?
GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE?
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR BEING WITH US TODAY.
FOR THE PUBLIC -- THERE IS A
MEETING ON FEBRUARY 8th, 2022.
IF YOU WANT INFORMATION ABOUT
THAT, YOU CAN CONTACT MY OFFICE
-- YOU CAN CONTACT THE CPC.
THEY ARE DOING THESE IN
COLLABORATION WITH THE POLICE
COMMISSION.
YOU CAN ALSO CONTACT THE
MONITOR AT THE WEBSITE.
I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU, EVERYONE.
>> GOODBYE.
>> WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ
ITEM 2?
>> AUDIT OF DISCIPLINARY SYSTEM
FOR SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
PERSONNEL, FOR BRIEFING AND
DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US, WHERE
WE ARE JOINED BY THE OFFICE
INSPECTOR, LISA JUDGE, FOR
PERSONNEL.
COULD PRESENTERS WITH US TODAY
PLEASE START OFF WITH A QUICK
ROUND OF INTRODUCTION AND THEN
WE WILL PROCEED WITH THE
PRESENTATION?
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIRPERSON
HERBOLD AND CHARTER MEMBERS.
IT IS GREAT FOR ME TO BE HERE.
MY NAME IS LISA JUDGE AND I AM
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR
PUBLIC SAFETY.
I WILL LET MY AUDITOR
INTRODUCED HIMSELF.
>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING US.
MY NAME IS DAN PITTS AND I AM
ONE OF THE LEADERS AND I WILL
DO MOST OF THE PRESENTATION
TODAY.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
INSPECTOR GENERAL JUDGE AND
DAN, WE ARE LIVING APPRECIATE
YOU SPENDING TIME WITH ME.
THIS AUDIT WAS HOT OFF THE
PRESSES AND THEY ARE VERY
IMPRESSED WITH THE ANALYSIS AND
I THINK SOME VERY SIGNIFICANT
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU ARE
MAKING WITH THIS AUDIT.
SO, WITH THAT, I HAND IT OVER
TO YOU.
>> OKAY.
>> GO AHEAD.
>> SORRY, DAN.
I WAS GOING TO TAKE A COUPLE
SECONDS.
I KNOW YOU ARE SHORT ON TIME
AND THIS IS PACKED WITH
INFORMATION.
I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THIS IS A
BODY OF ONGOING WORK.
WE FIRST STARTED WITH A PROJECT
TO UNDERSTAND THE DISCIPLINE
SYSTEM AND THAT WAS A FAIRLY
EXPENSIVE SUBWAY MAP, A PROCESS
MAP.
THIS THEN BUILDS ON THAT
INITIAL WORK OF TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND THE DISCIPLINE
SYSTEM WITH A FORAY INTO
ANALYSIS.
WITH THAT, I WILL LET DAN TAKE
IT AWAY, TO DESCRIBE HIS
EXCELLENT WORK.
THANK YOU.
>> CAN I SHARE THE SCREEN HERE?
OKAY, SO THANKS AGAIN FOR THIS
AFTERNOON.
THIS IS -- THIS WAS A VERY
LARGE AUDIT AND WE COVERED A
LOT OF GROUND AND A LOT OF
FINDINGS AND MATTERS FOR
CONSIDERATION.
WE WILL DO OUR BEST TO PACK AS
MUCH DETAIL AS QUICK AS WE CAN.
WE ARE GOING TO COVER, NOT
NECESSARILY ALL OF THE
FINDINGS, BUT SOME OF THE ONES
WE FEEL ARE KEY. HOPEFULLY, WE
HAVE TIME.
COUNCIL MEMBERS CAN FEEL FREE
TO STOP ME AT ANY POINT, IF YOU
NEED TO ASK QUESTIONS.
OTHERWISE, WE WILL HOPEFULLY
HAVE TIME AT THE END TO ASK
QUESTIONS.
WITHOUT FURTHER DELAY -- WE
WILL TALK ABOUT WHAT THE AUDIT
WAS.
WE WERE LOOKING AT ASSESSING
THE TIMELINESS, FAIRNESS,
CONSISTENCY, AND MORE FOR SPD
SWORN PERSONNEL.
THESE ADJECTIVES ARE USED IN
THE ACCOUNTABILITY TO DESCRIBE
WHAT THE DISCIPLINARY SYSTEM
SHOULD BE.
THE SCOPE OF OUR AUDIT WAS
FROM DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS THAT
TOOK PLACE IN JANUARY 1st,
2018, THROUGH MUCH OF MARCH
2021.
THAT IS THE DAY WE STARTED
FIELD WORK AND THAT IS WHEN
THEY CUT OFF OUR DATA.
THE FOCUS OF IT WAS ON THE LAST
HALF OF THE DISCIPLINARY
PROCESS.
WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THE DIRECTOR
RECOMMENDS THE SAME FINDING FOR
THE FORMATION OF DISCIPLINE AND
THE DETERMINATION OF DISCIPLINE
AND WE ALSO TOOK A LOOK AT THE
ENFORCEMENT OF THE DISCIPLINE,
THE RECORDING OF IT, AND ANY
RELEVANT THINGS THAT HAPPENED
AFTERWARDS.
WE BROKE IT DOWN TO FIVE OR SIX
CATEGORIES AND EACH ONE WILL
HAVE A SLIDE IN THIS
PRESENTATION THAT WE WILL TALK
ABOUT.
THE CHART HERE ON THE RIGHT IS
KIND OF REPRESENTING ALL THE
DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS THAT
HAPPENED WITHIN THE SCOPE OF
OUR AUDIT.
WE HAVE A BRIEF SUMMARY HERE OF
THESE THINGS WE CAME UP WITH.
WE NOTED THAT THERE WERE THESE
REALLY ADVERSE CIRCUMSTANCES
THAT I THINK ARE THE GREATEST
CONCERNS TO THE COMMITTEE, SUCH
AS A PATTERN OF ARBITRATORS
OVERTURNING THE CHIEF COLORS
DISCIPLINARY FINDINGS AND PART
OF THAT IS OWED -- AS IS
REPRESENTED IN THE CHART, A LOT
OF CASES, SOME ARE BEING FOUGHT
FOR ARBITRATION, BUT NOT MANY
ARE BEING READ BY THE
ARBITRATOR OR BY ARBITRATORS.
THERE IS A BACKLOG THAT IS
GROWING.
IT IS A LITTLE INCONCLUSIVE ON
THE IMPACT.
THE OTHER PART THAT WE NOTED IS
THERE IS NOT A PATTERN OF
REPEAT OFFENDERS -- REPEAT
OFFENDERS OF MISCONDUCT,
ESSENTIALLY THAT THEY ARE ABLE
TO ESCALATE DISCIPLINE AND
APPLY FOR PROGRESSIVE
DISCIPLINE IN MOST CASES, IF
THERE IS A REPEAT OF
MISCONDUCT.
THAT SAID, OUR AUDIT DID FIND
PROCESSES, ALONG WITH SOME OF
THE CONTRACT POSITIONS, TO
CREATE SOME DISPARITIES IN THE
SYSTEM.
THERE IS A WIDE VARIETY OF
FINDINGS.
ANYONE OF THEM ON THEIR OWN DO
NOT NECESSARILY BREAK THE
SYSTEM, BUT I THINK TAKEN
COLLECTIVELY, THEY CREATE A
PICTURE OF A SYSTEM THAT IS IN
NEED OF SOME IMPROVEMENT OR HAS
A LOT OF ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT.
THEY MAY NOT NECESSARILY LIVE
UP TO THE TIMELINESS OR
FAIRNESS OR CONSISTENCY.
SO NOW WE WILL GET INTO THE
ACTUAL FINDINGS.
FIRST, WE START WITH A PROPOSAL
AND DETERMINATION OF DISCIPLINE
FOR THOSE WHO MIGHT NOT BE
FAMILIAR WITH HOW THE PROCESS
WORKS.
THE BASIC RUN OF IT IS IF THE
OPA DIRECTOR RECOMMENDS SOME
TIMING, THAT HAS BEEN PUT FORTH
TO THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE,
WHICH IS COMPRISED OF THE
EMPLOYMENT COUNSEL AND THE
CHAIN OF COMMAND.
úTHEY COME TO THE CONSENSUS
WHERE THEY WIND UP COMING TO
WHETHER IT SHOULD BE SUSTAINED
OR REVERTED BACK TO NOT
SUSTAINED.
THERE IS A PROCESS IF THEY DO
NOT AGREE BUT IT IS SELDOM USED
AND IT SEEMS TO WORK.
IF IT DOES WIND UP AS A
SUSTAINED FINDING, THEN THERE
IS A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT
THE RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF
DISCIPLINE SHOULD BE.
SOMETIMES, IT WINDS UP AS A
DIRECT RECOMMENDATION, LIKE A
REPRIMAND OR A DETERMINATION.
SOMETIMES THERE IS A RANGE AND
THAT IS OFTEN THE CASE WITH
SUSPENSION, LIKE A 1 TO 5 DAY
SUSPENSION RANGE, OR A RANGE OF
30 DAY SUSPENSION OR
TERMINATION.
WHAT WE SHOW ON THIS GRAPH ON
THE RIGHT IS WHERE THERE IS A
RANGE TO ACHIEVE, THERE IS,
MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, OF
REFERENCE FOR MINIMUM RANGES.
ABOUT HALF THE TIME, IT WINDS
UP BEING THE MINIMUM OF THE
RANGE.
IF IT IS A 125 DAY SUSPENSION,
IT WILL BE A ONE-DAY
SUSPENSION.
IF IT IS BETWEEN SUSPENSION OR
TERMINATION, VERY RARELY HAS
THE CHIEF EVER CHOSEN
TERMINATION IN THAT CASE,
WITHIN THE DAY WE HAVE.
THAT SAID, THE DATA WE HAD WAS
PREDOMINANTLY -- THAT IS ONE
CAVEAT TO IT.
HOWEVER, THEY HAVE NOT
NECESSARILY BUCKED THE TREND,
AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE CHART.
AS FAR AS WHAT GOES INTO THIS,
I THINK IT IS DIFFICULT TO SAY
-- I THINK IT IS A FAIR
ASSESSMENT THAT THERE IS SOME
ROLE, WHERE EMPLOYEES HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH THE
CHIEF BEFORE DISCIPLINE IS
DECIDED AND EITHER REFUTE ANY
ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THEM OR
ACKNOWLEDGE AND APOLOGIZE IN
SOME CASES, AND THAT CAN WORK
TO LOWER THE DISCIPLINARY
PENALTY AS WELL.
WE DO NOT HAVE A COMMENT TO
MAKE ON THE MEETINGS
THEMSELVES.
THOSE ARE GUARANTEED THROUGH
THE LABOR LAW, HOWEVER, WHERE
WE DO MAKE A POINT IN THE AUDIT
THEY ARE NOT GIVEN THE SAME
OPPORTUNITY AND THAT MIGHT LEAD
TO SOME OF THIS KIND OF TILT
TOWARDS THE BOTTOM OF THE
RANGE.
THERE IS A PROVISION IN THE
COUNTY ORDINANCE IN WHICH THE
DIRECTOR MIGHT MAKE A
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE CHIEF
MEET WITH COMPLAINTS TO LOOK AT
THE VALIDATION OR VICTIM IMPACT
STATEMENT, TO ASSESS THE
SEVERITY OF THE POTENTIAL
MISCONDUCT.
HOWEVER, THIS MECHANISM HAS NOT
BEEN APPLIED IN THE SCOPE OF
OUR AUDIT.
THIS IS PRIMARILY BECAUSE THE
DIRECTOR HAD A FAIRLY NARROW
HINT INTERPRETATION OF WHEN IT
IS USEFUL AND APPLICABLE.
TALKING WITH THE DIRECTOR, WE
REACHED AN UNDERSTANDING THIS
COULD BE MORE PROPERLY APPLIED
THAT IT HAS BEEN, SO WE MADE A
RECOMMENDATION WITH THE OPA
DIRECTOR TO WORK WITH THE CHIEF
AND HAVE CRITERIA -- NOT EVERY
COMPLAINANT CAN MEET WITH THE
CHIEF.
LOGISTICALLY, THAT WOULD BE
IMPOSSIBLE, BUT THERE ARE
INSTANCES WHERE IT COULD BE
USEFUL FOR THE CHIEF TO MEET
WITH COMPLAINANTS AND HEAR
ABOUT THE IMPACT MISCONDUCT HAS
HAD ON THEM.
>> I RECALL THE REPORT -- THERE
WAS A CASE -- OKAY, WE'RE GOING
TO MEET BEFORE THE END OF 2021,
TO CONSISTENTLY IDENTIFY
OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMPLAINANTS
TO SPEAK , AS PROVIDED IN THE
ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE -- DO
YOU KNOW IF THAT HAS HAPPENED
YET?
>> I DO NOT KNOW THAT HAS
HAPPENED YET.
I HAVE NOT CHECKED IN YET.
WE HAVE NOT GONE THROUGH -- FOR
ALL OF OUR RECOMMENDATIONS,
GENERALLY, WE HAVE NOT GONE
THROUGH A FORMAL CHECK IN YET.
>> A QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THE
NUMBER OF DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS
REPRESENTED BY THIS PARTICULAR
ANALYSIS, 49 DISCIPLINARY
ACTIONS? I THOUGHT I REMEMBER
SEEING ON THE PREVIOUS PAGE
THAT YOU WERE LOOKING AT ABOUT
UPWARDS OF 200 DISCIPLINARY
ACTIONS.
MAYBE I MISREAD THAT NUMBER BUT
IF NOT, I'M WONDERING WHY, FOR
THIS EXERCISE, YOU HAVE ONLY
DONE A SUBSET.
>> THE 268 WAS THE TOTAL
POPULATION.
WE DID TESTING ON, I THINK, A
STATISTICALLY VALID SAMPLE OF
159 OF THOSE CASES FOR ACTUAL
TESTING, MULTIPLE TEST FOR THE
AUDIT.
WITHIN THAT 159, THERE WERE 49
IN WHICH THERE WERE A
RECOMMENDED RANGE.
NOW, THAT MEANS THE REST OF
THEM CAME OUT AS JUST A
STRAIGHTFORWARD
RECOMMENDATIONS.
A LOT OF TIMES, THOSE WERE
REPRIMANDS.
THEY USUALLY DO NOT COUNT AS
RANGES.
THIS IS WHAT THE CHIEF WAS
PRESENTED WITH.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ANOTHER PART THAT WE TALKED
ABOUT IN THE AUDIT IS THE ROLE
OF PROMOTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
ON THE FORMATION OF DISCIPLINE.
IN SOME CASES, WE OBSERVED THE
FOLKS WHO WERE COMING UP WITH A
RECOMMENDATION WOULD GIVE SOME
CONSIDERATION TO WHETHER, IF IT
IS SUSTAINED, IF THEY SUSTAIN
ON A ALLEGATION OF MISCONDUCT,
WOULD THIS IMPACT THE OFFICER'S
FACE FUTURE PROMOTION
POTENTIAL?
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT SERIOUS
MISCONDUCT.
THAT WOULD AFFECT SOMEONE'S
PROMOTION AND SHOULD.
THIS IS FOR SOMETHING WHERE WE
ARE STRADDLING THE LINE IF IT
WILL BE SUSTAINED OR NOT.
SOMETIMES -- IF WE GIVE THIS
PERSON A REPRIMAND, IS THIS
GOING TO DERAIL THEIR FUTURE AND
IS IT WORTH DOING THAT TO THEM?
SO WE TOOK THAT CONCERN AND WE
LOOKED BACK AT THE PROMOTIONAL
ROSTERS, GOING FROM 2010
FORWARD AND FOUND THERE WAS NOT
ANY EVIDENCE THAT EMPLOYEES
WITH MINOR MISCONDUCT,
REPRIMANDS, OR EVEN -- THAT
THEY WERE BEING PASSED OVER ON
THE PROMOTIONAL ROSTER.
SO THAT IS NOT SOMETHING WE ARE
MAKING A JUDGMENT ON, TO WHAT
LEVEL DISCIPLINE SHOULD BE
CONSIDERED IN THE CHIEF'S
PROMOTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS.
THAT WAS OUTSIDE OF WHAT OUR
AUDIT , WHAT OUR BALLPARK IS.
WHAT WE DID WANT TO DO IS NOTE
FOR THOSE PERFORMING THE
DISCIPLINARY RECOMMENDATION
THAT THERE IS SOMETHING FOR THE
POTENTIAL IMPACT IT MIGHT HAVE
WHEN IT DOES NOT MANIFEST SO
MUCH FOR THE MINOR MISCONDUCT.
>> THERE YOU TAKE A LOOK AT
THAT QUESTION.
I APPRECIATE THAT WAS OUT OF
THE SCOPE OF THIS AUDIT.
THEY HAVE DONE A PRETTY DEEP
DIVE INTO THE DISCIPLINARY
HISTORY, COMPLAINT HISTORY OF
101 POLICE OFFICERS AND THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT, THAT HAVE A
HISTORY OF MULTIPLE COMPLAINTS.
I AM JUST WONDERING -- HOW
MIGHT WE TAKE A LOOK AT THAT
QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT
PRIOR DISCIPLINE SHOULD BE A
FACTOR IN PROMOTIONS?
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS,
LISA?
>> YEAH, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO
WEIGH IN.
THIS IS REALLY OUR FIRST
ATTEMPTED TO GO INTO SPD
DISCIPLINE SYSTEMS AND START
TURNING ROCKS OVER AND,
COUNCILMEMBER, WHAT YOU
IDENTIFYING IS THIS IS NOT THE
END OF THIS WORK, AND HIS WORK
DOES NECESSARILY RAISE
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT NEED
TO BE LOOKED AT AND I THINK THE
ONE YOU ARE RAISING IS PROBABLY
-- IT IS IMPORTANT TO THE
COMMUNITY AND SOMETHING THAT IS
ON OUR RADAR AS WELL.
THE QUESTION THAT YOU ARE
ASKING IS ONE WE NEED TO SIT
DOWN AND TALK ABOUT HOW WE
WOULD APPROACH THAT PROBLEM,
HOW WE WOULD SCOPE IT OUT.
I THINK WHAT YOU'RE IDENTIFYING
IS YOUR FUTURE WORK.
I HOPE THAT HELPS YOU.
>> IT DOES.
I APPRECIATE THAT.
>> AND THEN THE LAST PART OF
THE SLIDE IS WHAT I WOULD START
IN WITH THE SUMMARY FINDINGS.
THE DEPARTMENT DOES GENERALLY
ACCOUNT FOR REPEAT MISCONDUCT
FOR INDIVIDUAL OFFICERS, WERE
THERE IS REPEATED MISCONDUCT
AND THEY WILL TYPICALLY NOTE
THAT REPEATED MISCONDUCT IS AN
AGGREGATING FINDER -- NOW, WE
DO ALSO NO LIMITATIONS EXIST IN
THIS, PRIMARILY BECAUSE OPA
INVESTIGATIONS CAN TAKE SO
LONG, AND THE DISCIPLINARY
PROCESS CAN TAKE SOME TIME,
TOO.
IF YOU HAVE AN INSTANCE WHERE --
THE FIRST MISCONDUCT HAPPENS
AND DISCIPLINE IN THAT CASE IS
NOT AWARDED AT THE TIME, THAT
THE SECOND MISCONDUCT HAPPENS
-- THERE IS A LITTLE OVERLAP,
AND THERE CAN BE --
ESSENTIALLY, IT IT MIGHT BE A
JUDGMENT CALL BY THE CHIEF ON
WHETHER OR NOT TO RAISE THE
DISCIPLINARY PENALTY AT THAT
POINT, EVEN THOUGH DISCIPLINE
IN THE FIRST CASE HAS NOT BEEN
FINALLY AWARDED.
THAT HAS SOME HAZARD WHEN IT
COMES TO APPEALS.
IT IS NOT A HARD AND FAST RULE
THAT THEY CANNOT DO IT.
WE HAVE SEEN WERE THE SECOND
INSTANCE OF MISCONDUCT WAS
EGREGIOUS ENOUGH THAT THEY DID
ELEVATE THE DISCIPLINE, EVEN
WHEN THE FIRST CASE HAD NOT YET
BEEN AWARDED.
THAT WAS ONE LIMITATION WE
WANTED TO NOTE THAT POPPED UP
WITH SOME FREQUENCY.
NEXT UP IS -- ACCOUNTABILITY
FOR MINOR VIOLATIONS.
THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THE USE OF
NONSUSTAINED TRAINING REFERRALS
AND WHAT HAPPENS WITH THOSE.
THEY ARE WITHIN THE AUDIT AND
THERE WERE MORE OF THEM.
WITHIN THIS GROUP OF OUR AUDIT
-- THESE RULES ARE TYPICALLY
MINOR, TECHNICAL VIOLATIONS AND
OFTENTIMES THEY ARE THINGS
THAT ARE EITHER UNDISPUTED, OR
THEY WERE FOUND WITH EVIDENCE
THEY HAD.
THE CHART REPRESENTS A KIND OF
WHERE THESE COME FROM.
OFTENTIMES, IT IS
PROFESSIONALISM.
IN CAR BODY VIDEO IS ALSO
SOMETHING, WERE THE OFFICER
FORGETS TO ACTIVATE THE VIDEO
AND MAYBE THEY NOTED IT
THEMSELVES AND SELF-REPORT AND
TRY TO REMEDY IT.
WE DO NOT NECESSARILY IN OPA'S
EYES MEET A PENALTY, BUT NEED
TO BE ADDRESSED IN SOME WAY.
SO, WE FELT THIS WAS CONFUSING
IN SOME REGARD, TO HAVE A LARGE
QUESTION OF VIOLATIONS OF
POLICY THAT ARE FOUND TO HAVE
HAPPENED, BUT YOUR CALLING THEM
NOT SUSTAINED.
TYPICALLY, SUSTAINED MEANS YOU
PROVE IT HAPPENED AND NOT
SUSTAINED MEANS TO VARYING
DEGREES YOU COULD NOT PROVE IT
HAPPENED.
WE TOOK A LOOK AT OTHER
AGENCIES.
WE DID A SMALL SURVEY OF EIGHT
OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
AND FOUND THEY ALL COME TO SOME
EXTENT, FOR THESE KIND OF MINOR
VIOLATION POLICY, IT HAD A
CATEGORIZATION THAT WAS
SUSTAINED WITH NO DISCIPLINE OR
SUSTAINED TRAINING REFERRAL OR
SUSTAINED ADMONISHMENT.
THEY ARE ALL SUSTAINED.
SO SPD AND OPA USED IT TO USE
THAT KIND OF A DESIGNATION
UNTIL ABOUT 2018 AND THEN,
ACCORDING TO THE OPA DIRECTOR
AND HE IS PLENTY COUNSEL, THEY
RECEIVED A SERIES OF GRIEVANCES
FROM SPOG, ESSENTIALLY IN
THEIR ACCOUNTING OF IT, IT WAS
PRINCIPLE OF NOT WANTING THIS
PARTICULAR RUN OF THE
DISCIPLINARY LADDER TO BE USED.
SO THEY SAID, OKAY, WE WILL
STOP USING THAT AND INSTEAD
WILL MAKE THESE MINOR
VIOLATIONS A SUSTAINED
REPRIMAND OR DROP IT DOWN INTO
A NOT SUSTAINED TRAINING
REFERRAL.
NOW, THAT CREATES THE ISSUE
THAT I TALKED ABOUT, WITH IT IT
HAPPENED, YOUR CALLING IT
NONSUSTAINED, BUT ANOTHER WAY
WE TOOK THIS, THAT WE ALSO HAD
CONCERNED WITH WAS THE
REPORTING OF THOSE VIOLATIONS
BY VIRTUE OF BEING NOT
SUSTAINED.
THEY ARE REPORTED DIFFERENTLY
THAN ANOTHER FINDING.
THEY DO IT AT THE CDA.
THE NONSUSTAINED FINDINGS THAT
FOLLOW OFF OF THOSE CANNOT BE
PUT IN THE EMPLOY'S APPRAISAL.
IT DOES NOT ROLL INTO THE YEAR
END PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL.
THAT IS WHERE ALL THE OTHER
CONVERSATIONS HAPPENED.
INSTEAD, THESE CONVERSATIONS
ARE RECORDED IN THE CASE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, WHICH IS
FINE FOR THE ROUTING OF THESE
TRAINING REFERRALS AND THE
TRAINING OF COMPLETION, BUT IT
IS A BLACK BOX, AS IT CONCERNS
THE DISCIPLINE AND THE
VISIBILITY OF FUTURE
SUPERVISORS WHO MIGHT NEED TO
KNOW IF THERE IS A PATTERN OF
MINOR MISCONDUCT.
SO, GENERALLY, IT WAS
INCONSISTENT RECORDING
PRACTICES THAT WE NOTED AS
WELL, WITH THESE TRAINING
REFERRALS.
THAT SAID, WE DID NOTE RECENTLY
THAT THERE WAS A SUSTAINED
FINDING WITH NO DISCIPLINE.
I THINK IN NOVEMBER, IT WAS
ISSUED, THE FIRST ONE WE HAVE
SEEN SINCE 2018.
THAT MAY SIGNAL A CHANGE IN
POSTURE, THAT THESE MIGHT BE
BACK IN USE AGAIN.
I DO NOT HAVE A CONCLUSION ON
THAT.
YOU ARE IDENTIFYING IT AS A KE
MATTER FOR CONSIDERATION BUT DO
NOT HAVE A SPECIFIC
RECOMMENDATION ON IT?
I THOUGHT I REMEMBERED HEARING
EITHER FROM INSPECTOR GENERAL
JUDGE OR OUTGOING OPA DIRECTOR
MEYER THAT THERE IS AN
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THIS ISSUE
AND INTENTION TO MAKE A CHANGE,
BUT I MIGHT BE REMEMBERING
INCORRECTLY.
EVEN IF I AM, I WOULD LIKE TO
UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR
EXPECTATIONS ARE WHEN YOU
IDENTIFY SOMETHING, REMEDIAL
ACTION, SOMETHING AS A MATTER
FOR CONSIDERATION.
>> YEAH.
SO IN MAKING SOMETHING A MATTER
FOR CONSIDERATION, GENERALLY,
THOSE ARE -- WE HAVE A DECENT
AMOUNT OF THOSE IN THE REPORT.
THEY ARE TYPICALLY THINGS THAT
MIGHT BE MATTERS THAT ARE
SUBJECT TO COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING OR MATTERS FOR WHICH
THERE HAS TO BE A DECISION BY A
POLICYMAKER THAT IS NOT
SOMETHING THAT WE NECESSARILY
FEEL COMFORTABLE IN PROPOSING
OUR RECOMMENDATION ON HOW TO
FIX IT.
WE DO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON
THIS, THIS GROUP, A COLLECTION
OF FINDINGS, IS IN THE
RECORDING OF THE TRAINING
REFERRALS, THAT THEY NEED TO BE
BROUGHT INTO THE SAME PLACE AS
OTHER CONVERSATIONS, IN A
MATTER THAT IS TRANSPARENT AND
VIEWABLE TO EVERYBODY WHO NEEDS
TO SEE IT.
THEY ARE KIND OF SEGMENTED FOR
NO GOOD REASON RIGHT NOW.
SO, IN THAT AREA, WHERE THERE
IS AN OPERATIONAL
RECOMMENDATION THAT MAKES SENSE
AND IS SUPPORTED BY OUR
FINDINGS , WILL MAKE A
RECOMMENDATION, HOWEVER, WHERE
THERE IS AN AREAS SUCH AS --
HOW DO YOU BEST ADDRESS THESE
MINOR VIOLATIONS OF POLICY THAT
ARE KIND OF DROPPING, DROPPING
DOWN THE LADDER RIGHT NOW AND
NOT BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR
DISCIPLINE OR PERFORMANCE
APPRAISALS.
I THINK THAT IS A QUESTION FOR
THE CITY AND FOR OPA, AND
POSSIBLY COLLECTIVE BARGAINING,
DEPENDING ON WHAT -- HOW THEY
WANT TO HANDLE THE GRIEVANCES
THAT THEY FOLLOW FROM.
>> I THOUGHT I REMEMBERED
HEARING SOME SPECULATION AS
WELL, THAT THE USE OF THE
SUSTAINED -- I AM SORRY, NOT
SUSTAINED TRAINING REFERRAL
FINDING IN INSTANCES WHERE
THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT THE
VIOLATION ACTUALLY OCCURRED,
THAT THE USE OF THAT FINDING
EITHER THROUGH INTENT OR BY
ACCIDENT, RESULTS IN WHAT YOU
MENTIONED EARLIER, DAN, RESULTS
IN A PATTERN OF REDUCED
ARBITRATIONS BECAUSE IT IS NOT
SOMETHING THAT CAN BE APPEALED,
AND WE HAVE SEEN, I THINK, A
REDUCED NUMBER OF THINGS BEING
APPEALED.
SINCE THE USE OF THIS FINDING,
IT IS COMPARED TO UNDER
PREVIOUS DIRECTORS WHO MIGHT
HAVE BEEN MORE WILLING TO MAKE
DISCIPLINARY FINDINGS THAT WERE
APPEALED.
I AM SORT OF FLAGGING THAT AS
ANOTHER POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCE
OF THE USE OF THE FINDING, AND
JUST LASTLY, THE REASON WHY I
AM ASKING WHAT THE SIGNIFICANCE
IS OR WHAT THE EXPECTATION IS
OF THE OAG WHEN THEY IDENTIFY
SOMETHING AS A MATTER OF
CONSIDERATIONS, I AM WONDERING
HOW YOU TREAT IT IN YOUR
TRACKER FOR LOOKING BACK, TO
SEE WHETHER OR NOT THERE HAS
BEEN ACTION.
AND THAT DEPARTMENT OR OPA JUST
SAY, WE CONSIDERED IT AND
DECIDED TO DO NOTHING?
>> YEAH, LISA, DO YOU WANT TO
TAKE THIS?
>> I TELL YOU WHAT.
WHY DON'T YOU START AND I WILL
FILL IN ANY GAPS.
>> TYPICALLY, MATTERS FOR
CONSIDERATION ARE NOT SOMETHING
THAT ARE -- THAT HAVE THE SAME
FOLLOW-UP AS A RECOMMENDATION
DOES.
I AM NOT CERTAIN WITH OUR
OFFICE, I AM NOT CERTAIN IF WE
HAVE AN ESTABLISHED PRACTICE
FOR TRACKING THE MATTERS FOR
CONSIDERATION.
I THINK THIS AUDIT IS A LITTLE
BIT NOVEL IN THE VOLUME OF
MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION THAT
WE HAVE IN IT, BUT TYPICALLY
THERE IS NOT THE SAME FOLLOW-UP
AND VALIDATION TESTING.
THAT IS REALLY KEY FOR THE
RECOMMENDATIONS, THAT WE GO
BACK AND WE VALIDATE WHAT
ACTIONS THEY TOOK.
SO THERE WOULD NOT BE THAT
PIECE AT THE VERY LEAST.
>> THANKS.
I THINK I WOULD JUST ADD TO
THAT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE NEW
AND SOME OF THESE, AS DAN SAID,
ARE NOVEL FOR US.
WE ARE STILL ESTABLISHING HOW
WILL WILL DO FOLLOW UP ON
THINGS THAT ARE HARD AUDIT
RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THIS
HIGHLIGHTS A BIT OF A CHALLENGE
OF HAVING A HYBRID OFFICE THAT
USES, FOR SOME OF HIS WORK, THE
STANDARDS WITH THE R
RECOMMENDATION SUPPORTED BY
QUALITY CONTROLLED DATA, WHICH
IS SOMETHING THAT IS WITHIN OUR
REALM OF AUTHORITY TO MAKE
RECOMMENDATIONS ON AND THESE
ISSUES WE THINK ARE POTENTIALLY
SIGNIFICANT, SOME WE KNOW ARE
SIGNIFICANT, BUT ARE KIND OF
OUTSIDE OF THAT SCOPE OF OUR
AUTHORITY.
WE ARE HIGHLIGHTING THESE
POLICYMAKERS THAT HAVE ALLUDED
TO THAT.
NO, THERE IS NOT FOLLOW UP IN
THE HARD GOVERNMENT YELLOW BOOK
SENSE BUT THERE IS AN
ACCOUNTABILITY TRACKER THAT IS
MAINTAINED BY THE PARTNERS AND
BY CPC.
WE ALSO MAINTAIN A LIST OF ALL
OF THE THINGS WE DO.
YOU KNOW, THERE CAN BE FOLLOW
UP BUT THE FOLLOW-UP THAT WE DO
ON THIS, AS MENTIONED, SOME OF
IT IS LARGELY RELATED TO SOME
BARGAINING ISSUES AND SOME
POLICY ISSUES THAT MIGHT NEED
TO BE MADE ON THE PART OF THE
COUNSELOR OF THE APARTMENT
DIRECTOR.
THAT WAY WE CAN FOLLOW UP.
BUT THE MAGNITUDE OF THESE
KINDS OF THINGS, THE IMPORT OF
THESE MATTERS FOR
CONSIDERATION, IS WILLING TO
PUT A FLAG ON THEM FOR
POLICYMAKERS.
I HOPE THAT HELPS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU.
THE NEXT AREA IS THE
ENFORCEMENT OF DISCIPLINE.
WE FOUND THAT SUSPENSIONS WERE
NOT SERVED TIMELY OR
CONSISTENTLY.
SO, IN MOST WORKPLACES, IF YOU
HAVE A SUSPENSION FOR 30 DAYS,
THEN YOU ARE JUST OUT THE NEXT
30 WORKDAYS.
HOWEVER, IT IS NOT SO SIMPLE
WITH SPD.
DUE TO SOME PRACTICAL
CONSIDERATIONS, SUCH AS MINIMUM
STAFFING LEVELS, BUT THEN THERE
IS ALSO A CLAUSE THAT
POTENTIALLY SAYS YOU CANNOT
DROP SOMEBODY BELOW HALF-TIME
IN A GIVEN PAY PERIOD OR IN A
MONTH BECAUSE OF THEIR
HEALTHCARE AND PENSION
BENEFITS, BECAUSE THOSE WOULD
BE NEGATIVELY AFFECTED.
BECAUSE OF THOSE, THERE IS THIS
NEED TO CHUNK UP SUSPENSIONS,
SOME LONGER SUSPENSIONS
SOMETIMES.
THE APARTMENT DEPARTMENT SAYS,
ON SUSPENSION ORDERS, YOU HAVE
TO SERVE A SUSPENSION WITHIN
TWO PAY PERIODS FROM THE TIME
IT IS ORDERED
IF YOU HAVE TO CHUNK IT UP,
MAKE IT BETWEEN TWO PAY
PERIODS.
OTHERWISE, IT NEEDS TO BE
AUTHORIZED BY THE DIRECTOR OF H
HR.
WE FOUND COME IN OUR AUDIT,
THAT IT WAS NOT HAPPENING AND
THE CONTROLS ARE GENERALLY
AROUND THE ASSIGNMENT OF
SUSPENSION DATES WAS A FAIRLY
LAX AND THIS LED TO SOME
SUSPENSIONS BEING EXTENDED FAR
BEYOND THAT TWO PAY PERIOD
THRESHOLD, WHERE WE FOUND A FEW
SUSPENSIONS THAT WERE SPREAD TO
AS MUCH AS 10 PAY PERIODS.
THERE ARE A COUPLE THAT WERE 30
DAY SUSPENSIONS AND THAT WOULD
EQUAL THREE DAYS SERVED EVERY
TWO WEEKS.
SO, THIS WAS -- THIS CREATES A
CONSIDERATION ABOUT TIMELINESS
OF THE SERVICE OF SUSPENSION,
AS WELL AS KIND OF -- WHAT IS
THE ACCOUNTABILITY IF YOU WERE
ABLE TO SPREAD OUT THE PENALTY
OF THAT SUSPENSION?
ADDING ON TO THAT, AND THIS IS
WHAT YOU SEE -- WHILE EMPLOYEES
ARE NOT ALLOWED TO WORK
OVERTIME OR TAKE VOLUNTARY
OVERTIME SHIFTS, ON THE DAYS
WHEN THEY ARE SUSPENDED, THERE
IS NOTHING STOPPING THEM FROM
TAKING OVERTIME SHIFTS ON ALL
THE OTHER DAYS OF THE PAY
PERIOD.
IF YOU ARE SUSPENDED THREE DAYS
IN A PAY PERIOD, YOU CAN FIND
OVERTIME SHIFTS ON THE OTHER
SEVEN DAYS AND, TO SOME EXTENT,
OFFSET THAT PENALTY.
IF YOU HAVE A TWO DAY
SUSPENSION, IT IS ONE THING.
YOU COULD PROBABLY PICK UP
OVERTIME SHIFTS IN YOUR NEXT
PAY PERIOD OR OFFSET IT TO SOME
EXTENT.
WHEN YOU LINE UP THE 30 DAY
SUSPENSION THAT IS SPREAD OVER
10 PAY PERIODS, YOU WIND UP --
IT IS A LOT EASIER TO OFFSET
THOSE SUSPENSION DAYS WITH
OVERTIME THE FURTHER THAT YOU
EXTENDED OUT.
THAT IS KIND OF DEMONSTRATED
THAT THESE ARE ALL INDIVIDUALS
SUSPENSIONS ON THIS CHART.
THERE IS H, J, AND K THAT POP
UP, INSTANCES WHERE THE
SUSPENSION WAS SERVED ALMOST,
FACTORED IN AS AN OVERTIME
RATE.
THEY WERE ABLE TO MAKE UP THE
HOURS.
SO I -- THIS IS NOT QUITE WHAT
YOU IMAGINE THE ACCOUNTABILITY
MIGHT LOOK LIKE WITH A
SUSPENSION.
IT MIGHT NOT MEET THE PUBLIC'S
EXPECTATION OF WHAT A
SUSPENSION SHALL LOOK LIKE AND
WOULD BE IN MOST OTHER
PROFESSIONS, I BELIEVE.
WE MADE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT
THE DEPARTMENT TIGHTEN UP THEIR
CONTROLS RELATED TO THE
AUTHORIZATION OF THESE
SUSPENSIONS, SO YOU DO NOT HAVE
THIS SUSPENSIONS THAT ARE
EXTENDED FAR BEYOND WHAT IT
NEEDS TO BE, AND THEN WE ALSO
RECOMMENDED THAT THEY PROHIBIT
THE ACCRUAL OF OVERTIME -- THE
ROLE OF UNTIL THAT SUSPENSION
IS COMPLETED.
BUT THE DEPARTMENT FELT THAT
LATTER RECOMMENDATION WAS
SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT
TO COLLECTIVE DARKENING.
THE NEXT AREA WE LOOKED AT WAS
DISCIPLINARY RECORDS.
IN SHORT, THERE WERE 23% OF
DISCIPLINARY ACTION REPORTS IN
THE SCOPE OF OUR AUDIT.
WE ARE NOT IN PERSONNEL FILES.
THIS WAS MOST PRONOUNCED WITH
THE GROUP OF EMPLOYEES THAT
RETIRED PRIOR TO DISCIPLINE.
THAT IS UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE
THEY ARE MOST LIKELY TO HAVE A
SECOND UNEMPLOYMENT CHECK, IF
THEY WENT TO ANOTHER
DEPARTMENT.
SO THIS HAS A NEGATIVE CHECK ON
EMPLOYMENT OF ANYONE SEEKING
EMPLOYMENT ON DISCIPLINARY
ACTION ACTIONS IN A PERSONNEL
FILE, WHERE YOU MIGHT EXPECT TO
SEE DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS AND
THE PERSONAL FILE. HISTORY OF
THIS ALSO HAS AN IMPACT ON
PUBLIC DISCLOSURE REQUEST AS
WELL.
IF SOMEONE IS NOT SEEKING THIS
THROUGH OPA, THEN IT COULD
POTENTIALLY BE MISSING IN THE
PERSONAL FILE.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT
THEY HAVE THE RECORDS OF THESE
DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS THAT WERE
MISSING.
WE ARE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE
PERSONNEL FILE.
THIS WAS A PROCESS FROM AS FAR
AS WE CAN TELL -- WE
RECOMMENDED THAT THE DEPARTMENT
úGO BACK INTO A MORE
COMPREHENSIVE AUDIT OF ALL
ACTIONS THAT HAPPENED FROM
2018, MOVING FORWARD.
SORRY, I UNMUTED --
>> THE RECOMMENDATION TO
ADDRESS THIS FINDING -- CAN
THIS BE DONE AFTER THE FACT?
CAN THEY GO BACK AND PUT THINGS
IN THE DISCIPLINARY FILES OF
PEOPLE WHO HAVE ALREADY LEFT,
IF THEY IDENTIFY THAT BEING
MISSING?
>> I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY REASON
WHY THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO
GO BACK IN AND INSERT THE
FILES, WITH SPEAKING WITH THE
HR DIRECTOR.
IT SEEMS LIKE THEY WERE GOING
BACK AND REMEDYING THE FILES
THAT WE FOUND MISSING.
>> IT SHOULD BE IN THERE.
IT JUST WAS NOT FILED IN THE
FOLDER.
YEAH.
>> THANK YOU.
WOULD IT BE REASONABLE TO
EXPECT THE DEPARTMENT TO
CONTACT INDIVIDUALS WHO HAD
SOUGHT PERSONNEL EVALUATIONS OR
RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE HIRING
PROCESS, TO LET THEM KNOW THAT
THERE IS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
THAT WAS NOT PROVIDED WHEN
ASKED?
OR WOULD THAT BE CUMBERSOME FOR
SOMEONE AT SPD TO UNDERTAKE?
>> RED.
I WAS GOING TO SAY I THINK THAT
IS PROBABLY A QUESTION FOR SPD
TO ANSWER ABOUT WHAT THAT LOOKS
LIKE AND WHAT RECORD-KEEPING
THEY HAVE OF AGENCIES THAT HAVE
KIND COME IN AND ON THE CHECKS.
WE CAN CERTAINLY FIND OUT FOR
YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
ANOTHER PIECE ON THIS SLIDE,
THERE WAS A GAP, SOMEWHAT --
OUT.
THERE WAS A GAP IN THE
DEPARTMENT SUBMITTING
NOTIFICATIONS OF DISQUALIFYING
CONDUCT FROM THE CTJC.
USUALLY, IT THERE WAS
DISQUALIFYING BEHAVIOR. TO THE
DEPARTMENT'S CREDIT, THEY DID
FIND THIS EXISTED BEFORE THE
START OF OUR ART IT AND THEY
REFILED REVISED NOTIFICATIONS
TO THE CJTC.
GOING IN LATE 2020 AND 2021, IT
SEEMS THE PROCESS IS WORKING
INITIALLY AS IT SHOULD.
FOR THE FOLKS WHO WERE NOT
INITIALLY -- THEY WERE DELAYED
WITH NOTIFICATIONS, WE CHECKED
WITH CJTC AND THEY WERE PENDING
REVIEW AND NONE OF THEM,
ACCORDING TO CJTC RECORDS ,
NONE OF THEM WERE EMPLOYED AS
POLICE OFFICERS AT THE TIME.
>> THAT IS HELPFUL.
THANK YOU.
>> COMMUNICATION WAS ANOTHER
BIG AREA WE LOOKED AT.
FOR THOSE OF YOU UNFAMILIAR
úWITH WHOSE GOAL IT IS, IT IS
OPA TO CONTACT COMPLAINANTS AND
LET THEM KNOW THAT CASE STATUS
AND THE APPEALS HAPPEN.
IT WAS, I THINK, DUE TO SOME
PROCESS AND MAYBE A LACK OF
EMPHASIS WHEN OPA STARTED TO
GET OVERLOADED WITH SOME CASES,
THAT THERE WAS A FEW -- THEY
DID NOT QUITE MAKE EXPECTATIONS
ON A LOT OF IT., -- COMPLAINTS
WERE KNOWING ABOUT -- TWO OR
THREE MONTHS AFTER THE CASE WAS
FINALIZED, AFTER THE CHIEF HAD
ISSUED DISCIPLINE.
THEY WERE NOT NOTIFYING
COMPLAINANTS FROM 2016 TO 220
20.
THERE WERE NO APPEALS ACTION.
THEY ALSO DID NOT HAVE A
PROCESS FOR IDENTIFYING
COMPLAINANTS , IDENTIFYING
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE THE SUBJECT
OF POLICE MISCONDUCT, BUT ARE
NOT COMPLAINANTS.
THIS MIGHT LOOK LIKE A
SUPERVISOR OR A REVIEW BOARD,
SING AN INSTANCE OF MISCONDUCT.
OPA WOULD THEN CODE THOSE AS
THE COMPLAINANT AND THE PERSON
THAT WAS SUBJECT TO THE
MISCONDUCT WOULD NOT BE
CLASSIFIED AS THE COMPLAINANTS
IN MOST CASES AND WOULD NOT
RECEIVE THE RESULTING
COMMUNICATIONS THAT THEY
USUALLY DO.
IN SOME CASES, THEY MIGHT NOT
EVEN BE AWARE THE CASE
INVOLVING THEM EXISTS AT ALL.
WE MADE RECOMMENDATIONS TO OPA
ON ALL THREE OF THESE AND THEY
WERE VERY RECEPTIVE AND ARE
HOPEFULLY GOING TO REMEDY ALL
OF THOSE IN VERY SHORT ORDER.
AND THEN THE LAST AREA WE GET
INTO WITH THE AUDIT IS
ARBITRATION AND APPEALS.
AS WE SAID AT THE START, WITH
THAT DIAGRAM, THERE HAVE NOT
BEEN A LOT OF APPEALS ACTION.
YOU MUST KNOW CASES HAVE GONE
THERE IN THE LAST FEW YEARS.
THIS IS DUE TO A COUPLE OF
LEGITIMATE REASONS.
THEY TOOK SOME TIME AND THEY
CASES HAD TO BE REASSIGNED TO
ARBITRATORS AND THEN
ARBITRATORS WITH THE CITY AND
SPOG DID NOT FEEL LIKE SOME OF
THE CASES WERE CONDUCIVE TO
VIRTUAL HEARINGS.
SO THERE HAS BEEN SOME DELAYS
ON THAT END.
HOWEVER, WHAT WE DISCUSSED IN
THE AUDIT AS UNDERLYING IT ALL
IS THE CONTROLS FOR TIMELINESS
HAS A GAP IN IT.
THERE IS A TIMELINE FOR WHEN
THEY MUST BE SELECTED AND AFTER
THE ARBITRATORS NOTIFIED -- YOU
CAN HAVE CASES SIT FOR AN
INDETERMINATE AMOUNT OF TIME,
WHERE THE ARBITRATOR HAS BEEN
SELECTED, BUT NOT NOTIFIED OF
THEIR SELECTION AND THEY HAVE
NO IDEA THEY HAVE BEEN
SELECTED.
THIS DESCRIBES ALMOST ALL OF
THE CASES THAT ARE ON THE
BACKLOG OF CASES RATING FOR
ARBITRATION.
THERE IS ABOUT 80 SOME CASES,
PART OF 80 CASES OF
DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS THAT ARE
CURRENTLY PENDING.
BOTH THE CITY AND -- THEY CAN
KICK OFF THE SCHEDULING, BUT
THE CIT SEES IT AS SPOG'S
RESPONSIBILITY BECAUSE THE
GRIEVANCES ARE OWNED BY SPOG
AND THE DISCIPLINE HAS ALREADY
BEEN ENFORCED . SO THE CITY, IN
MOST CASES, DOES NOT REASON TO
INITIATE THESE ARBITRATION
HEARINGS.
WE DID SPEAK WITH SOME SPOG
REPRESENTATIVES AND THEY DID
NOT ARTICULATE ANY REAL REASON
WHY THESE ARBITRATORS HAVE NOT
BEEN CONTACTED BUT THEY DID
EXPRESS THEIR MEMBERS DO ASK
SOMETIMES, WHAT IS ASKING WITH
MY CASE?
CAN WE GET THIS CLEARED?
I THINK THERE IS FAIRNESS AND
TIMELINESS ISSUES FOR
COMPLAINANTS AND EMPLOYEES.
THEY SHOULD NOT BE LANGUISHING
FOR YEARS BEFORE THEY ARE
RESOLVED.
I THINK THAT IS IN EVERYBODY'S
INTEREST TO HAVE A TIMELY
RESOLUTION.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING WE ARE
FLAGGING, AGAIN, NOT MAKING A
RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE IT IS
SUBJECT TO COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING, BUT WE ARE FLACKING
FOR NEGOTIATIONS AND HOPEFULLY
THEY CAN BE TIGHTER IN THE
FUTURE, IN THE FUTURE CONTRACT.
ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WE ARE
FLAGGING IS THE ARBITRATOR
SELECTION PROCESS.
IT IS NOT NECESSARILY --
ESPECIALLY IN THE SPOG
AGREEMENT . I WILL BE CAREFUL
IN SAYING WE DID NOT OBSERVE
ANY KIND OF MANIPULATION OF THE
ROSTER OR SPECIFIC GAMING OF
IT.
THERE HAS NOT BEEN ENOUGH CASES
THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH THE
STANDARD SELECTION PROCESS TO
REALLY DRAW THAT CONCLUSION,
HOWEVER, IN LOOKING IN THE
PROCESS ITSELF, THE MAIN ISSUE
IS THERE IS NOT RANDOMIZATION
OF THE ROSTER AFTER EACH
SELECTION.
BECAUSE THERE IS ELIMINATED
PROCESSES AND CASES ARE HEARD
ON THE FIRST COME, FIRST SERVE
BASIS, TO A LIMITED EXTENT, YOU
CAN MAKE SELECTIONS IN ONE CASE
WITH AN I TO WHICH PERSON WILL
MAKE THE NEXT CASE.
THAT IS SOMETHING WE WOULD HOPE
WOULD ALSO BE TIGHTENED UP IN
THE NEXT CONTRACT.
AND THEN THE LAST PIECE THAT WE
HAD HERE IS WE TOOK A LOOK AT
THE SAFETY COMMISSION.
THEY WERE SPECIFIED AS -- THAT
WAS ROLLED BACK AFTER
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING.
WE WANTED TO POINT OUT WHILE
THEY ARE PREFERABLE TO LABOR
ARBITRATION FOR TRANSPARENCY
AND PERHAPS EVEN TIMELINESS AND
MAYBE EVEN DEMOCRATIC
ACCOUNTABILITY, THEY -- THERE
IS NOTHING IN THE RULES THAT
NECESSARILY MAKES THEM GIVE A
DIFFERENT STANDARD OF REVIEW
FROM AN ARBITRATOR SELECTED
THROUGH THE PROCESS.
WE CONCLUDED THAT THE THREE
COMMISSIONERS THAT MAKE UP THAT
GROUP ARE EQUALLY CAPABLE,
MAYBE NOT AS LIKELY, BUT
EQUALLY CAPABLE OF APPLYING
THEIR OWN, THEIR OWN
INTERPRETATION ON THE REVIEWS
THAT THEY CONDUCT AS AN
INDIVIDUAL ARBITRATOR COULD DO
THEMSELVES.
THAT IS THE BURDEN OF PROOF --
WHETHER IT IS AND YOU IS, WHAT
EVIDENCE CAN BE HEARD DURING
THOSE HEARINGS, AND MORE.
THERE MIGHT BE SOME LIGHT
PRACTICE OF GIVING DEFERENCE TO
THE CHIEF ON THAT SITE, BUT
THERE IS NOT REALLY ANYTHING
THAT LOCKS THEM INTO, SAY, NOT
BEING ABLE TO LOOK AT THE
DISCIPLINE AND FEEL LIKE THAT
WAS TOO STRICT AND WE WOULD
LIKE TO ROLL THAT BACK IN THE
SAME WAY YOU SAW HAPPEN WITH
THE SHEPARD CASE.
AND THEN THERE IS ALSO ISSUES
WITH CAPACITY.
IF THEY WERE EVER TO HEAR ALL
OF THE BACKLOG OF APPEALS, THEY
WOULD HAVE ISSUES WITH HOW TO
DO THAT.
SO THAT CONCLUDES THE MAIN
FINDINGS THAT WE ARE GOING TO
DISCUSS, AND THE SLIDE WAS
OTHER FINDINGS THAT WERE IN THE
REPORT, THAT IT FELT LIKE WE DO
NOT HAVE TIME FOR.
IF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE
REVIEWED THE MATERIALS BEFORE
HAND OR SEE ANYTHING ON THIS
LIST HERE THAT IS OF INTEREST,
I AM HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT THEM
AS WELL OR WE CAN DOUBLE BACK
TO ANYTHING WE MENTIONED IN THE
PRESENTATION.
>> THANK YOU.
>> LOOKING TO SEE WHETHER OR
NOT THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS
FROM COUNSEL COLLEAGUES.
I AM RECOGNIZING THAT A
PRESIDENT MORRIS HAS JOINED US.
I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU BEING
WITH US.
>> I'M NOT SEEING ANY
ADDITIONAL RAISED HANDS OR
QUESTIONS.
I DO WANT TO GO BACK ON ONE --
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU INSPECTOR
GENERALS, DAN FETES, FOR YOUR
APPROACH.
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT WORK AND
LOOKING AT THE DATA, AS YOU
HAVE DONE, IT IS REALLY
IMPORTANT TO SUPPORT YOUR
CONCLUSIONS.
I THINK FOR THE PUBLIC, THE
PUBLIC THAT IS LISTENING TO
THIS, YOU DO HAVE A 47 PAGE
REPORT AND I WANT TO READ A
LITTLE BIT OF YOUR CONCLUSION
FROM THAT BECAUSE I THINK IT IS
IMPORTANT, WHERE YOU SAY THIS
AUDIT FOUND CURRENT PROCESSES
AND PRACTICES COME ALONGSIDE
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AND SPOG
HAVE CREATED GAPS IN THE
DISCIPLINE SYSTEM.
THIS IMPACTED THE TIMELINESS
AND CONSISTENCY AND
TRANSPARENCY OF DISCIPLINE FOR
INDIVIDUAL OFFICERS AND
DIMINISHED TRANSPARENCY AND
FAIRNESS FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS
AFFECTED BY POLICE MISCONDUCT.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, I SUPPORT
HIRING MORE COMMUNITY POLICEMAN
OFFICERS.
I THINK THEY ARE UNDERSTAFFED.
AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK
CONSISTENT -- THERE IS A CAUSE
FOR A STRONGER COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING AGREEMENT THAT
IMPLEMENTS THE TWENTYSOMETHING
ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE.
I FEEL THAT SOME OF THE
FINDINGS THAT YOU MADE COULD BE
IMPLEMENTED BY SPD MANAGEMENT
RIGHT AWAY.
I THINK THERE IS GOOD
INFORMATION IN HERE THAT
MANAGEMENT COULD USE TO ENHANCE
HOW THEY WORK WITH EMPLOYEES
THAT ARE SUBJECT TO MISCONDUCT,
AND I HOPE THEY USE THIS AS A
GUIDEBOOK IMMEDIATELY, AND THEN
THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENT EXPIRED A YEAR AND A
HALF AGO
>> THE NEWLY FORMED COMMITTEE
HAS NOT MET YET.
I WAS RECENTLY APPOINTED TO
THAT, SO I LOOK FORWARD TO
BEING ON THE INSIDE OF THAT
NEGOTIATION.
THAT WAY, WE CAN GET A PRODUCT
THAT IS TIMELY, FAIR,
CONSISTENT, AND TRANSPARENT.
WE TALKED ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY,
THE HEART OF IT REALLY LIES IN
THE CONTRACT.
I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT AND
I APPRECIATE THESE AUDIT
FINDINGS TO HELP GUIDE THAT
BOOK.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
ALEX PEDERSEN.
TO THAT POINT, I WANTED TO SAY
TWO THINGS.
ONE, AS IT RELATES, LOOKING
BACK AT THIS QUESTION OF
MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION
VERSUS A FINDING, I THINK I
HEARD YOU SAY THAT THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE A TOPIC
OF ONGOING CONVERSATION ABOUT
HOW YOU CLASSIFY THESE THINGS.
THAT IS A CONVERSATION I WOULD
LIKE TO HAVE.
I DO NOT KNOW THAT THE FACT
SOMETHING HAS TO BE BARGAINED,
OR THE FACT THAT IT IS UP TO
POLICYMAKERS TO MAKE A POLICY
CHANGE WOULD NECESSITATE NOT
ISSUING A FINDING.
IF YOU LOOK AT, FOR INSTANCE,
THE CITY AUDITORS WEBSITE,
THERE ARE PLENTY OF FINDINGS
THAT ARE FINDINGS FOR COUNSEL
TO ACT ON AND THEY TRACK THEM.
I THINK WE ALL WANT TO BE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE AS WELL, TO ACTING
ON THINGS THAT ARE
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POLICY
CHANGES AND AS IT RELATED
SPECIFICALLY TO THE BARGAINING
PROCESS, I KNOW THE PUBLIC
WANTS THE FOLKS WHO ARE
INVOLVED IN THE BARGAINING
PROCESS TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE
FOR ADDRESSING ITEMS NOT JUST
IN THE TWENTYSOMETHING
ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE, BUT
COMING UP THROUGH ONGOING
ANALYSIS AND REVIEW, LIKE YOUR
AUDITS.
FOR THE VIEWING PUBLIC,
COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN
MENTIONED THE ROLE OF THE
GROUP MADE A FIVE COUNCIL
MEMBERS AND THE EXECUTIVE, BUT
WE ALSO HAVE A ROLE CARVED OUT
AS ADVISERS FOR THE OIG, THE
OPA, AND THE CPC, TO HELP US
MAKE SURE WE ARE BRINGING THESE
VERY ITEMS TO THE TABLE.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE ARE CREATING ALL OF THESE
MECHANISMS FOR ACCOUNTABILITY.
THERE IS A VERY, VERY, VERY
LARGE MENU OF ITEMS, BOTH
LEGISLATIVE ITEMS, ALONG WITH
DARKENING ITEMS, THAT I THINK
ARE REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT TO
KEEP TRACK OF.
I THINK THIS IS A REALLY
FANTASTIC BODY OF WORK YEAR AND
I DO NOT WANT TO LOSE TRACK OF
THE IMPORTANT RECOMMENDATIONS,
REGARDLESS OF THE VENUE OR
METHOD THAT IT TAKES TO
IMPLEMENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIRPERSON
HERBOLD.
THANK YOU , COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
THOSE ARE ALL THE POINTS WELL
TAKEN.
SOME OF THE MATTERS FOR
CONSIDERATION, THE BASIS FOR
DESIGNATING IT THAT IS THERE IS
NOT NECESSARILY A FACTUAL BASIS
TO SUPPORT A BELIEF THERE IS A
DEFICIENCY OR A PROBLEM, BUT WE
ARE FLAGGING THERE IS A FAIRLY
HIGH POTENTIAL FOR AN ISSUE.
REASONS FOR THIS.
I TOTALLY AM IN COMPLETE
AGREEMENT WITH YOUR CONCERNS
AND WITH MAKING SURE THAT WE
TRACK THESE IN SOME WAY, WHERE
THERE IS MEANINGFUL
ACCOUNTABILITY AS WE MOVE
FORWARD.
DAN, DO YOU WANT TO SAY
ANYTHING IN SORT OF JUST TO
FILL IN SOME INFORMATION FOR
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN AND THE
PUBLIC AND THE COMMITTEE ON
SPD'S RESPONSES?
I THINK THEY -- THEY SUBMIT
RESPONSES TO OUR AUDIT
FINDINGS.
IT WOULD BE INTERESTING FOR THE
COMMITTEE AND THE PUBLIC TO
HEAR A BIT ABOUT THAT, IF WE
HAVE TIME.
>> YEAH, THE RESPONSES TO THE
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM SPD --
THEY CONCURRED WITH ALL THE
RECOMMENDATIONS WE MADE TO
THEM, EXCEPT FOR THE ONE ABOUT
OVERTIME.
THEY NEITHER CONCURRED OR NOT
CONCURRED BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT
IT WAS A MATTER FOR COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING.
HOWEVER, ON ALL THE ACCOUNTS,
WITH IMPLEMENTATION PLANS, WITH
THE DATE THEY WOULD HAVE TO
TARGET, DATES FOR COMPLETION OF
THAT IMPLEMENTATION AND ONCE WE
REACH THOSE DATES, WE DO NOT
HAVE QUITE ENOUGH TIME AT THIS
POINT AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF
THE ITEM -- MIGHT SLOW THINGS
DOWN A BIT IN TERMS OF WANTING
TO GIVE PEOPLE A CHANCE TO
BREATHE.
SOMETIME EARLIER THIS YEAR, BY
QUARTER ONE, WE WILL TO FOLLOW
UP AND WE INTEND TO DO FORMAL
úFOLLOW-UP WITH SPD AND OPA AND
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OTHERS.
WITH ALL OF THOSE ENTITIES TO
TRY AND UNDERSTAND IF THEIR
PLANS HAVE GONE AS THEY HAD
EXPECTED THEM TO AND IF SO, WE
WILL CONDUCT VALIDATION TESTING
ON THAT.
IF NOT, WE CAN DISCUSS FURTHER.
SOMETIMES, RECOMMENDATIONS
CANNOT BE TAKEN THE WAY THEY
WERE EXACTLY INTENDED, SO YOU
TRY TO BE VERY PRESCRIPTIVE IN
THE WAY YOU WRITE A
RECOMMENDATION BUT IT ALWAYS
HELPS TO HAVE THAT KIND OF
FOLLOW-UP CONVERSATION, WHICH
HAS NOT BEEN HAD YET, TO MAKE
SURE WE ARE ON THE SAME PAGE
AND THAT WE ARE ACHIEVING WHAT
WE SET OUT TO.
>> THANK YOU.
WE HAVE THAT BACKGROUND MOVING
FORWARD.
ALL RIGHT, LOOKING TO SEE IF
THERE ARE ANY FINAL THOUGHTS OR
QUESTIONS.
I AM NOT SEEING ANY.
REALLY, AGAIN, I AM VERY
APPRECIATIVE OF YOUR WORK AND
LOOKING FORWARD TO OUR ONGOING
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS
ONGOING BODY OF WORK.
THANKS AGAIN FOR BEING WITH US.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANKS, DAN.
YOU DID A GOOD JOB.
>> NOW AGENDA ITEM 3.
>> IT IS THE 2022 NOTICE OF
FUNDING AVAILABILITY FOR
BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU.
BEFORE WE DO A QUICK ROUND OF
INTRODUCTIONS, I WANT TO SAY
SOME OPENING WORDS.
MANY INVESTMENTS THAT HSD HAS
ANNOUNCED FOR 2022 ARE SPECIFIC
TO ADDRESS THE IMPACT OF THE
PANDEMIC ON OUR MENTAL HEALTH,
WHICH I HAVE OFTEN REFERRED TO
AS THE SHADOW PANDEMIC.
WE HAVE THE FEAR AND PAIN AND
ISOLATION OF THE COVID PANDEMIC
-- THEY ARE LEADING TO NEGATIVE
MENTAL HEALTH IMPACTS FOR MANY
OF US.
ALL THAT POINTS TO THE PANDEMIC
HAVING A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON
OUR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AND,
ANECDOTALLY, VIOLENCE, SELF-
HARM, ABUSE, ASSAULT, AND OTHER
FORMS OF VIOLENCE.
ALTHOUGH PRIMARY SUPPORT FOR
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES REST
WITH THE COUNTY AND STATE, HSD
-- THEY WILL HAVE RESIDENTS
WITH THESE PANDEMIC ISSUES,
INCLUDING SUPPORT FOR SURVIVORS
OF GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE, PAPAL
COURT FOR YOUNG PEOPLE, WE
REALLY APPRECIATE THE ONGOING
WORK IN LEADERSHIP IN THESE
AREAS.
WITH THAT, I WILL HAND IT OVER
TO OUR FRIENDS FROM HSD.
>> THANK YOU.
FOR THE RECORD, I AM THE ACTING
DIRECTOR OF THE SEATTLE HUMAN
SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
>> I AM NATALIE THOMSON.
IN THE PLANNING MANAGER FOR THE
YOUTH AND VALLEY --
>> GOOD MORNING, AND THE
LONGTIME MANAGER OF -- SO,
TODAY, GOOD MORNING.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING US HERE IN
FOR THE OPENING REMARKS.
GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL MEMBERS.
TODAY, WE ARE HERE TO TALK
ABOUT THE HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT AND WE ARE GOING TO
DO AN OVERVIEW OF OUR
INVESTMENTS AND DO SOME LEVEL
SETTING AND TO REMIND THE
PUBLIC WHAT WE INVEST IN AND WE
ARE GOING TO DISCUSS AT A VERY
HIGH LEVEL OUR NOTICE OF
FUNDING AVAILABILITY, AND HOW
WERE NOFA INTERVIEW, WHAT
INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE, THEN
WE WILL GET TO THE GOAL OF THE
PRESENTATION, WHERE NATALIE AND
OTHERS ARE GOING TO REALLY DO A
LITTLE BIT OF A DEEPER DIVE
WITHIN OUR 15 MINUTES.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE?
>> THE INVESTMENTS FOR FOLKS
TO BECOME FAMILIAR WITH OUR
DEPARTMENT, THE HUMAN SERVICES
úDEPARTMENT CONNECTS PEOPLE WIT
RESOURCES AND SOLUTION DURING
TIMES OF NEED.
AND WE ARE ONE OF THE LARGEST
CONTRIBUTORS TO THE SEATTLE
SAFETY NET.
EACH YEAR, HSD INVEST HUNDREDS
OF MILLIONS OF DAUGHTERS
DOLLARS THROUGH THE
ORGANIZATIONAL DEPARTMENTS AND
WE SERVE CURRENT AND EMERGING
HUMAN SERVICE NEEDS AS
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD JUST
MENTIONED.
WE NEED TO DEMONSTRATE HSD'S
TOTAL 2021 BUDGET.
IT WAS $393 MILLION.
THE CONTRACTS ALONE MADE UP 76%
OF THAT TOTAL.
I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW THE
TRUE INVESTMENT AREA.
SO WE HAVE CONTRACTS THAT GO OUT
FOR PROPOSALS.
WE ARE GOING TO DISCUSS THE
NOFA RIGHT NOW AND WHILE WE DO
THAT EVERY YEAR, THEY ARE
TYPICALLY ON A FOUR YEAR CYCLE.
SO TODAY, WE WILL TALK ABOUT
THOSE 420 22, BUT JUST KNOW WE
HAVE ALL THESE OTHER CONTRACTS
THAT ARE IN MOTION.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
WE SERVE THE RANGE.
WE SERVE THE COMMUNITY.
SO YOU CAN SEE THESE ARE
INVESTMENT AREAS AND SOME
OUTCOMES THAT WE ARE STRIVING
FOR.
TODAY, WE WILL DO A DEEPER DIVE
ON THOSE INVESTMENTS WITH THE
EMPOWERMENT DIVISION.
NEXT SLIDE?
WITH OUR NOFA, IN DECEMBER,
USUALLY AT THE END OF THE YEAR,
EVERY YEAR, WE POST OUR NOFA.
LAST YEAR, HSD ISSUED OUR 2022
NOTICE OF FUNDING AVAILABILITY.
THINK OF IT AS THIS IS A HEADS
UP OF WHAT IS TO COME THE
FOLLOWING YEAR TO Q
ORGANIZATIONS UP.
THERE IS A CAVEAT HERE.
WHEN WE RECEIVE ADS OR
ADDITIONAL DOLLARS THROUGHOUT
THE YEAR, WE SOMETIMES IT JUST
THEN NOFA AND ADD COMPETITIVE
PROCESSES.
WE WILL TALK ABOUT THE ONES
THAT ARE PLANNED AT THIS POINT
IN TIME, BUT THINGS HAVE BEEN
SHIFTING, AS THEY HAVE THE PAST
COUPLE OF YEARS, OF COURSE,
BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC AND
EMERGING ISSUES.
WE HAVE $13.8 MILLION THAT WE
ARE PLANNING FOR.
AGAIN, IT COULD BE MORE.
I WANTED TO NOTE THAT THE NOFA
ITSELF IS VERY HIGH LEVEL AND
WE WILL OFFER SOME LINKS.
YOU CAN GO TO OUR WEBSITE.
IT IS A PREVIEW OF WHAT IS TO
COME.
IT TALKS ABOUT THE SERVICE
AREA, THE BUDGET AMOUNTS, AND
THE KEY DATES TO CONSIDER.
WHEN THE ACTUAL REQUEST FOR A
PROPOSAL OR QUALIFICATION IS
RELEASED WITH A FULL DETAIL
APPLICATION AND GUIDELINES, AS
WELL AS THE ANTICIPATED
CONTRACT START DATES -- THOSE
ARE REALLY IMPORTANT FOR
PLANNING PURPOSES.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
A LOT OF FOLKS ARE LOOKING FOR
THIS INFORMATION AND WE ARE
GETTING BETTER AT IT, BUT
CERTAINLY WE ARE IMPROVING EACH
YEAR.
I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THE
VARIOUS WAYS IN WHICH WE WANT
THE GENERAL PUBLIC, AS WELL AS
OUR COMMUNITY BASED PROVIDERS
AND FUNDERS, FRANKLY, TO WATCH
AND NO HOW WE ARE ALLOCATING
OUR FUNDS AND WHEN THEY ARE
AVAILABLE.
SO, HERE IS A LISTING OF
VARIOUS SOURCES.
WE HAVE GOT BLOGS AND
NWSLETTERS AND WE ARE INDEED
ON SOCIAL MEDIA, AND SO YOU CAN
FIND US THERE.
WE ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO SIGN UP
AND WE ARE GOING TO INCLUDE OUR
COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATIONS
THAT ARE CURRENTLY CONTRACTED
WITH US TO RECEIVE THAT
NOTIFICATION.
WE ARE GOING TO MAKE SURE WE ARE
LOOKING AT THAT A COUPLE TIMES
A YEAR TO MAKE SURE WE CATCH
FOLKS.
THERE IS TRANSITION, SO WE
ENCOURAGE OUR PROVIDERS TO
PLEASE ALSO UPDATE THEIR
CONTACT INFORMATION AS WELL.
LOTS OF INFORMATION ON THE
WEBSITE.
NEXT SLIDE?
THE OTHER THAT IS REALLY
IMPORTANT, AND I ENCOURAGE OUR
COMMUNITY BASED PARTNERS TO
TAKE A LOOK AT OUR WEBSITE.
EVEN IN ADVANCE OF A REQUEST
FOR PROPOSAL BEING POSTED.
WE SHARE A LOT OF RESOURCES AND
WE HAVE A LIBRARY OF
INFORMATION.
WE EVEN HAVE INFORMATION FROM
THE PREVIOUS REQUEST FOR
PROPOSALS.
I THINK WE ALWAYS ENCOURAGE OUR
PROVIDERS TO GO TO OUR WEBSITE
úAND LOOK AT ALL OF THESE
RESOURCES THAT ARE AVAILABLE.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, IT
IS IMPORTANT.
NATALIE WILL GET INTO THIS.
WITH EACH RFP OR OPPORTUNITY,
WE DO THESE INFO SESSIONS AND
WE WALK THROUGH A LOT OF THESE
AND OFFER TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.
WE HAVE BEEN IMPROVING IT
THROUGHOUT THE YEARS AS WELL.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE?
SO WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT
TODAY?
NATALIE WILL GO UPSTREAM.
WE HEARD SOME PRESENTATIONS
ABOUT OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT AND
THINGS HAPPENING THERE.
THE HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT
IS INVESTING, TYPICALLY COME IN
OUR COMMUNITY BASED
ORGANIZATIONS TO OFFER
PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION
SERVICES.
NATALIE WILL START HIS OFF WITH
SOME GOOD OPPORTUNITY, AS WELL
AS BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, AND THEN
WE WILL GET FINISHED OFF WITH
THREE DIFFERENT INVESTMENT
AREAS AROUND VETERAN
INFORMATION AND OTHER TWO
GENDER BASED VIOLENCE AND
SERVICES.
THERE WE GO.
NATALIE, YOU ARE UP NEXT.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
GOOD MORNING.
THE FARM TO TABLE SUPPORT
SERVICES REQUEST PROPOSALS.
THIS IS ONE OF OUR INVESTMENT
PROCESSES THAT IS FULLY FUNDED
BY SEATTLE'S BEVERAGE TAX.
IT IS A ROBUST PORTFOLIO.
I WILL PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF
THIS INVESTMENT.
WE HAVE ROUGHLY $840,000, 839 --
THIS INVESTMENT IS THE NEXUS OF
THE SUITE AND BEVERAGE TAX
COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD.
PRIORITIES OF FOOD ACCESS IN
EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION --
THEY PARTNER WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND
EARLY LEARNING AND COMMUNITY-
BASED PARTNERS TO PROVIDE
NUTRITION EDUCATION, FARM TO
FAMILY -- EARLY CHILDHOOD
EDUCATION AND ASSISTANCE
PROGRAMS. SINCE COVID,
NUTRITION, EDUCATION HAS
PIVOTED TO ONLINE LEARNING.
FARM TO FAMILY FOOD BAGS
CONTINUE TO BE DELIVERED, EVEN
DURING COVID AND ACTUALLY
INCREASED.
THE BAGS WERE DELIVERED
BIWEEKLY TO PRESCHOOL PROGRAMS,
SITES WERE CLOSED.
PROGRAMS GOT CREATIVE AND HAD
PEOPLE PICK UP FOOD ON A
DIFFERENT SCHEDULE.
FOR THOSE A BLACK, CONDITIONAL,
OR BIPOC AND IMMIGRANT REFUGEE
FARMERS, THEY REMAIN PRIORITIES
AND ARE CONTRACTED
DELIVERABLES.
THE SUPPORT SERVICES ARE RFP IF
IT IS COUPLED WITH THE FARM TO
TABLE PROCUREMENT RFP, WHICH
FINDS AND SUPPORTS PRESCHOOL
KITCHENS TO PURCHASE LOCAL FOOD
FROM FARMERS.
THESE RFPs WILL BE COMBINED IN
THE NEXT CYCLE.
I COULD NOT HELP BUT NOTICE
COUNSEL -- THE QUALITY SEATTLE
PRESCHOOL SIGN. I AM HAPPY TO
NOTE THAT THE THREE COMPONENTS
OF THE RFP, THE TWO SUPPORT
SERVICES COMPONENTS, WHICH IS
NUTRITION AND EDUCATION AND
FAMILY SUPPORT, AS WELL AS THE
INSTITUTION OF FOOD PROCUREMENT
RFP TO FOLLOW NATIONAL BEST
PRACTICE FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD
EDUCATION.
HSD HAS PARTNERED WITH THE
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON AND
THE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND
THEY CAN DOCUMENT THE RESEARCH
AND PROGRAM EVALUATION OF THIS
PROGRAM.
SO THIS RFP IS EXPECTED TO BE
RELEASED ON MARCH 28th.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE?
SO NEXT, WE HAVE THE 2022 YOUTH
AND ADULT BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
REQUEST PUZZLES.
THIS RFP WILL FOCUS ON
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES FOR
BLACK INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF
COLOR, YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS.
AND AS MENTIONED EARLIER, THE
NEED FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH IS
ACUTE AND INCREASING AS A
RESULT OF COVID.
WE KNOW THIS FUNDING LEVEL IS
NOT NEARLY ENOUGH TO FILL THE
GAP IN SERVICES, SO WE ARE
PARTNERING WITH PUBLIC HEALTH
SEATTLE IN KING COUNTY AND THE
RECOVERY DIVISION AND THE
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH TO REALIGN FUNDING
EFFORTS AND PRIORITIZE THE
GENERAL FUND DOLLARS AND --
THREE PROVIDER STAKEHOLDER
EVENTS WERE HELD IN DECEMBER
AND JANUARY TO INFORM THIS
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS.
THE FIRST WAS WITH EXISTING
PROVIDERS AND THE LATTER TWO
OUR WITH PROVIDERS AT LARGE.
WE HEARD EMERGING THEMES,
INCLUDING THE ACUTE NEEDS FOR
YOUNGER AND YOUNGER PEOPLE.
YOU HAD FOCUS GROUPS THAT WILL
BE CONVENED, STARTING IN
JANUARY.
TOGETHER, ALL THESE EVENTS WILL
INFORM THOSE REQUESTS FOR
PROPOSALS, WHICH WILL BE
RELEASED ON 2022.
SO NOW, I WILL HAND IT OVER.
>> THANKS.
GOOD MORNING.
I AM EXCITED TO SHARE MORE.
IT WILL BE RELEASING CLOSE TO
12 MILLION IN FUNDING FOR
GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE.
$10.8 MILLION WILL BE RELEASED
TO SPECIFICALLY FOCUS ON GENDER
BASED VIOLENCE, INCLUDING
MOBILE ADVOCACY, SHELTER AND
HOUSING, THERAPEUTIC SERVICES,
PREVENTION, OUTREACH AND
EDUCATION, AND OTHER WRAPAROUND
RESPONSE SERVICES.
THE COMBINATION OF THESE
STRATEGIES IS TO OPERATIONALIZE
OUR VISION OF THE APPROACH TO
VICTIM SERVICES AND RESPONSE
AND SUPPORT CROSS COLLABORATION
AND PARTNERSHIP AMONG SERVICE
PROVIDERS.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE?
WE WILL ALSO BE RELEASING OVER
230,004 VETERAN INTERVENTION,
COURT -- A LITTLE MORE ABOUT
THE PROJECT.
IT IS A COLLABORATIVE THING FOR
PARTNERS AND IT IS AIMED AT
INCREASING SAFETY THROUGH THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF A NATIONAL
AND BEST PRACTICE MODEL WITH
COURT MANDATED INTERVENTION.
ONE THING THAT IS NOTED IS MOST
RECENTLY, THEY WERE AWARDED 1.5
MILLION FOR FOUR YEARS FOR THIS
PROJECT, SO THE TOTAL AMOUNT
FOR THIS FUNDING ANNUALLY IS
147 229, WHICH WILL COME FROM
THE FUND AND THE OTHER COMES
FROM THE FEDERAL FUND.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE?
LAST BUT NOT LEAST IS OUR
GENDER-BASED LEGAL SERVICES.
WE ARE RELEASING $976,000 IN
LEGAL SERVICES.
THIS FUNDING WILL FOCUS ON
INCREASING ACCESS FOR SURVIVORS
OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, SEXUAL
ASSAULT, AND COMMERCIAL SEXUAL
EXPLOITATION.
THESE SERVICES UNDER THIS RFQ
HAVE LEGAL REPRESENTATION,
CONSULTATION, LEGAL CLINICS,
AND ASSISTANCE WITH NAVIGATION.
ALL THE PRIOR RFP AND RFQ THAT
I MENTIONED ARE FOCUS ON
SERVICES PROVIDED BY SOCIAL
WORKERS.
THIS PARTICULAR RFQ IS GEARED
TOWARDS ATTORNEYS WORKING WITH
NONPROFIT LEGAL PROGRAMS AND
ORGANIZATIONS.
SO THAT IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE
HAVE IN TERMS OF GENDER-BASED
VIOLENCE FOR 2023.
>> ONE QUICK THING BEFORE WE
MOVE ON.
THE TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE IS
FOR ABOUT $967,000, ACCORDING
TO THE SLIDE.
I AM GUESSING FROM THE SCOPE,
AS DESCRIBED HERE, AND THE
AMOUNT, THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE
THE 1.5 MILLION FROM ADVOCACY
SERVICES?
NOT FOR SURVIVORS OF GENDER-
BASED VIOLENCE.
SO HOW AND WHEN CAN WE EXPECT
THAT TO GET OUT THE DOOR?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
THE $1.5 MILLION IS FROM SLIDE
NUMBER ONE.
THE VICTIM SERVICES INCLUDES
MFA.
WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF DOING
CONTRACT AMENDMENTS FOR 2022
AND IN 2023, IT WILL BE PART OF
THIS RFP THAT IS GOING OUT.
>> YOU ARE NOT GOING TO SPEND
THE FULL AMOUNT IN 2022?
IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING?
>> WE HOPE TO SPEND IT OUT.
WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF
DRAFTING AMENDMENTS RIGHT NOW
FOR 2022.
>> FOR CONTRACTS THAT ARE IN
PLACE FOR SERVICES TO BE
PROVIDED IN 2022?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> I WAS CONFUSED BY YOUR
REFERENCE TO 2023.
>> IN 2022, THEY WILL BE HAVING
RENEWAL CONTRACTS.
WE ARE ADDING TO EXISTING
CONTRACTS BUT MOST OF OUR
VOTERS WILL BE -- THIS FUNDING
WILL BE RELEASED IN 2022 FOR
2023.
THE RFP AND THE RFQ'S THAT ARE
GOING TO BE RELEASED IN MAY,
THEY ARE FOR 2023 CONTRACTS.
SORRY IF --
>> INCLUDING THE $1.5 MILLION
THAT THE COUNCIL ALLOCATED FOR
ADVOCACY SERVICES?
THEY WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE
UNTIL 2023?
>> SO, THAT AMOUNT IS AVAILABLE
IN 2022, IN THE FORM OF
CONTRACT AMENDMENTS AND ALL OF
OUR FUNDING, PRETTY MUCH ALL OF
IT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE
STRATEGY WILL BE RE-RELEASED IN
2022 FOR 2023.
THEY WILL BE PART OF THIS
PACKET OF 10.8 MILLION THAT
WILL BE RELEASED IN 2023.
>> MIGHT I SAY IT IN A
DIFFERENT WAY?
SOMETIMES, CORRECT ME IF I AM
WRONG, BUT JUST IN GENERAL,
WHEN WE RECEIVE CANCEL ADS THAT
ARE ONGOING AND IT DOES NOT
NEATLY LINED UP WITH AN RFQ OR
RFT, WHAT WE WILL DO TO MAKE
SURE WE GET THE FUNDS OUT THE
DOOR QUICKLY IS WE WILL DO A
DIRECT ADD TO EXISTING
INVESTMENTS AND THEN LINE IT UP
TO THE ART OF TEA, SO IT CAN BE
COMPETITIVELY BID AND THE
RESULTS OF THAT WILL RESULT IN
CONTRACTS.
SO, WHAT WE TYPICALLY DO --
THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS.
WE HAVE AN RFP IN ONE YEAR BUT
IT IMPACTS THE CONTRACTS FOR
THE FOLLOWING YEAR.
IN ORDER TO UTILIZE THE ADS
THAT ARE GIVEN IN 2022, WHAT I
THINK I'M HEARING THEM SAY IS
TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF 2022
AND AVAILABLE FUNDING, WE WILL
DO THE CONTRACT ADS THROUGH THE
EXISTING CONTRACTS AND ALSO
LINE IT UP WITHIN THIS RFP THAT
WE ARE ABOUT TO RELEASE, WHICH
WILL THEN IMPACT A NEW SLATE OF
CONTRACTS, WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT
PROVIDE OTHER PROVIDERS IN
2023.
IS THAT RIGHT?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> THANK YOU.
THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE
COUNCIL'S EXPECTATION.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THE COMMUNITY IS INTERESTED
AND THERE IS A NEED TO GET THE
MONEY OUT THE DOOR.
>> THE REASON WHY IT IS IN THE
AMENDMENT IS BECAUSE WE WANT TO
TAKE THE TIME TO LOOK AT THE
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACTS IN
2020 AND IF FOLKS ARE READY AND
ARE IN THIS CAPACITY TO UTILIZE
THAT FUNDING IN 2022.
THAT IS IN PROCESS.
>> I JUST -- THIS IS A PROCESS
QUESTION.
BASICALLY, WHEN THE COUNCIL
PASSES THE BUDGET AND IF THERE
ARE ADS, THEY ARE SOMEHOW
REFLECTED IN THE NOFA WE ARE
LOOKING AT.
ARE YOU SAYING IF THERE IS NOT
A NEW NOTE OR A NEW RFP,
SOMEHOW THAT WORK THAT HAS BEEN
FUNDED HAS BEEN STUCK ONTO SOME
OTHER PROVIDERS THAT ARE DOING
WORKS?
IF THERE IS WORK THAT CANNOT BE
DONE, THAT WOULD BE A SEPARATE
CONTRACT AND IT WOULD BE
REFLECTED HERE, RIGHT?
YOU HAVE TO SCRAMBLE BETWEEN
BUDGET AND THINGS TO MAKE SURE
THE COUNCIL'S PRIORITIES ARE
REFLECTED IN THE FUNDING FOR
THE NEXT YEAR AND FOR NOFA.
IS THAT PRETTY MUCH --
>> YES.
>> YES AND NO.
THE COUNCIL ADDS ARE REALLY
IMPORTANT TO US.
SOMETIMES, AS YOU PROBABLY
KNOW, THE ADS ARE VERY
SPECIFIC, AND SO WHEN THERE IS
SPECIFIC, WE HAVE AN IDEA OF
WHETHER OR NOT IT IS FOR AN
EXISTING PROGRAM AND IT REALLY
IS MORE ABOUT DOING AN
AMENDMENT AND NOT FOR A REQUEST
FOR A PROPOSAL.
GENERALLY, THE BEST PRACTICES
FOR US TO HAVE ARE
QUALIFICATIONS, SO WE ARE
ALLOWING AN ORGANIZATION TO
COMPETE, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE
KNOW IT IS NOT SO SPECIALIZED
THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE ENTITY
THAT IS QUALIFIED TO PROVIDE
THAT SERVICE.
WE KNOW THERE ARE TWO OR MORE
THAT IDEALLY ARE MIRRORED,
DOING COMPETITIVE PROCESS.
THERE ARE TIMES WHERE WE HAVE
ADS AND, AGAIN, DOES NOT ALIGN
WITH OUR SCHEDULED RFPs THAT WE
NEED TO REVIEW AND SEE HOW WE
ARE GOING TO IMPLEMENT THEM.
OUR PROCESS IS, WE GET THE ADS
AND IT IS IN THE BUDGET.
WE INTERNALLY WILL ASSESS -- IS
THIS A DIRECT ADD, WHICH IT
RARELY IS.
DO WE FOLDED INTO AN RFP AND
DOESN'T LINED UP NEATLY?
WE WILL MITIGATE YEAR ONE, SO I
CAN NEATLY TIE INTO AN RFP THAT
WAS PLANNED.
WE DO NOT WANT TO OVERBURDEN
ORGANIZATIONS TO WRITE MULTIPLE
RFPs FOR THE SAME SERVICE AREA.
SOMETIMES WE HAVE NEW SOURCES
OF FUNDS THAT DO NOT LINE UP,
THAT REQUIRES ANOTHER REQUEST
PROPOSAL OR A QUALIFICATION.
THAT IS THE CAVEAT I GAVE
EARLIER, WHICH IS, RIGHT NOW,
WHAT WE ARE PRESENTING TO YOU,
THE ONES WE HAVE PLANT IN OUR
BUDGET.
IT IS POSSIBLE THAT WE HAVE
SOME ADS WITH FURTHER ANALYSIS.
FOR EXAMPLE, I WILL THROW OUT
ONE.
WE HAVE A STUDY THAT IS PRETTY
SIGNIFICANT WITH THE DOLLAR
AMOUNT.
WE NEED TO DO SOME KIND OF
BIDDING PROCESS FOR THAT.
THAT IS NOT NOTED HERE BECAUSE
NATALIE AND HER TEAM ARE LIKELY
TO TAKE THAT ON AFTER SOME
PLANNING.
THEY WILL DETERMINE WHAT IS THE
APPROPRIATE PATH FORWARD AND
WILL ADD IT TO THE NOFA AND
THEN WE WILL DISCUSS THE
APPROPRIATE WAY IN WHICH WE DO
THE BIDS, AND THAT WILL BE IN
ITS OWN.
THAT CONTRACT WILL LIKELY START
THIS YEAR, AND NOT WAIT UNTIL
THE FOLLOWING YEAR.
SOMETIMES, YES AND NO, IT
DEPENDS.
>> AND THEN FOR A FOLLOW-UP,
YOU MENTIONED THAT THIS CAN
CHANGE OVER THE YEAR AND IF
THERE ARE NEW FUNDS THAT COULD
BECOME AVAILABLE.
IT SEEMS LIKE THE FUNDING WAS
IN FUNDING RIGHT AWAY AND IF
BUILD BACK BETTER PASSES AND WE
KNOW -- THERE WILL BE A LOT OF
OTHER WORK FOR YOU TO DO AND
YOU WILL ASSIGN THAT ACROSS THE
SERVICE AREA.
DO YOU HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE TO BE
-- THAT YOU KEEP UP WITH THESE
SURGES?
DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT BEING AN
ISSUE?
ARE YOU PLANNING FOR A BIG
CHUNK OF WORK IN ANTICIPATION
FOR THESE EXTERNAL SOURCES OF
FUNDING BECOMING AVAILABLE?
>> I THANK YOU FOR THAT
QUESTION.
THAT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN BETTER
TIMES.
IF -- WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED
THROUGHOUT COVID AND IN YEARS
PAST WITH EMERGING ISSUES, WE
ARE THE DEPARTMENT WITH EARLY
SUPPORT TO PROVIDE THESE
OPPORTUNITIES, BUT AS WE KNOW,
WE ARE ALSO AN ORGANIZATION
THAT ARE, FRANKLY, COMMUNITY --
WE ARE ORGANIZERS AND SOCIAL
WORKERS, PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN
DOING THIS IN THE FIELD AND WE
ARE ALSO AN ORGANIZATION THAT
NEEDS TO HAVE CAPACITY IN ORDER
TO DO THIS WELL.
WE APPRECIATE THE PARTNERSHIP
WITH NOT ONLY CBO AND COUNSEL
-- WE ARE ABLE TO PRUDENTLY
IDENTIFY WITH THE
ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS ARE, AND
THEY ALSO INCLUDE OUR FINANCIAL
OPERATION SYSTEMS.
WHAT DOES IT TAKE FOR NATALIE
TO DO AN RFP?
WHAT DOES IT TAKE FOR US TO
PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
AND REALLY SUPPORT
ORGANIZATIONS?
WE DO ENCOURAGE A LOT OF
EMERGING ORGANIZATIONS AND SOME
THAT HAVE WONDERFUL
INFRASTRUCTURE AND SOME THAT DO
NOT.
WE WILL PROVIDE THAT TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE WITH OUR GRANTS AND
CONTRACTS.
WE ARE PRETTY CONSERVATIVE.
WE HAVE A COMMITTEE OF US THAT
ARE A NONPROFIT BUT WE NEED TO
SHIFT GETTING OUT OF THIS
REALLY SUPER LIEN, WHERE WE ARE
NOT OFFERING THE BEST SERVICES.
WE ARE COMING UP WITH THE
RIGHT, THINK, FORMULA AND
DISCUSSION TO SEE WHAT IT TAKES
TO RESPONSIBLY BE GOOD STEWARDS
OF PUBLIC DOLLARS, AND HOW MUCH
CAN WE PASS TO THE COMMUNITY
BECAUSE WE WANT TO MAKE SURE
THE MONEY IS OUT THE DOOR,
WHERE IT BELONGS.
WE HAVE NEGOTIATED THAT FOR
SOME ADMINISTRATIVE CASTES.
I THINK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.
>> SO THE LAST SLIDE -- THANK
YOU, KEVIN, FOR REMINDING ME --
ALSO ON THE NOFA , AND THE TOP,
WE REALLY DESCRIBED WHAT THE
FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES ARE.
WE ARE GIVING FOLKS NOTICE THAT
THE REQUEST PROPOSALS, THE FULL
ON APPLICATION AND GUIDE WILL
BE PUBLISHED BY CERTAIN DATES
AND WE DO ALSO OFFER A PREVIEW
OF THE NEXT YEAR.
OF COURSE, WE ARE IN
COMMUNICATION WITH OUR
PROVIDERS, AS WELL AS THE
GENERAL PUBLIC ABOUT WHAT IS TO
COME.
ORGANIZATIONS CAN PREPARE , AND
SO WE HAVE GOT QUEUED UP IN
2023, AGAIN, THIS IS OUR BASE
BUDGET AND WHAT WE KNOW TODAY.
OUR SENIORS CENTERS AND
REGISTERED DIETITIAN SERVICES
FOR OLDER ADULTS AND CONGREGATE
MEALS FOR OLDER ADULTS AND
FAMILY SUPPORT BACK IN YOUTH
AND FAMILY EMPOWERMENT.
THESE ARE BEING QUEUED UP FOR
THE FOLLOWING YEAR.
YES?
>> A COUPLE OF THINGS ON THE
LAST SLIDE.
I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT I
BELIEVE HST IS STILL CONDUCTING
AN ANALYSIS OF THE BE ABLE
HEALTH NEEDS AVAILABLE TO LGBTQ
YOUNG PEOPLE AND IT IS POSSIBLE
THAT FUNDING MIGHT BE AVAILABLE
SOMETIME THIS YEAR FOR THAT
PURPOSE, DEPENDING ON THE
RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS.
IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO
UNDERSTAND WHAT THE EXPECTED
TIMELINE IS FOR THAT WORK.
ALSO, ON THE THIRD PROGRAM
FUNDING, I KNOW MANY OF THE
EXPECTED 2023 INVESTMENTS ARE
IN THE AREA OF FOOD PROGRAMS.
I WANT TO ALSO NOTE THAT AS
PART OF THE 2022 BUDGET
COUNSEL.
DTE REQUESTED REPORTS ON THE
AVAILABILITY OF ADDITIONAL
FUNDING FOR FOOD AND NUTRITION
PROGRAMS.
THAT IS FROM THE STATE
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE THIS
YEAR.
THAT INCLUDES A PROPOSAL FOR
HOW THESE FUNDS WILL BE SPENT.
THE REPORT IS REQUESTED TO BE
PRESENTED IN THE COMMITTEE BY
JUNE 1st OR BEFORE THE
TRANSMITTAL OF THE MEDICARE
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET
LEGISLATION, WHATEVER OCCURS
FIRST.
WE DID INCREASE FUNDING IN THE
2022 BUDGET FOR PROGRAMS.
I WANTED TO AVOID A CLIFF
ASSOCIATED WITH ANTICIPATED
REDUCTION IN FUNDING AND
AVOIDING -- WE MIGHT BE LOOKING
AT ONE THAT STARTS IN MIDYEAR
BUT IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT AND
HELPFUL TO KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT
IN THAT AREA.
>> THANK YOU.
WE ARE PREPARED TO RESPOND IN
WRITING, OF COURSE, NATALIE, I
SEE YOU ARE OFF MUTE.
ARE YOU READY TO SHARE?
>> BOTH OF THE ANALYSES WERE
PULLED FOR THE LGBTQ YOUTH
LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS, AS WELL AS
THE FOOD, CLIP ANALYSIS AND WE
ARE PREPARED TO HAVE A RESPONSE
ON OR BELOW JUNE 4th FOR -- FOR
THE YOUTH ANALYSIS, WE WILL BE
DONE WITH THAT BEFORE QUARTER
ONE.
WE HAVE DONE A NATIONAL BEST
PRACTICE ANALYSIS AND WE HAVE
TALKED TO LOCAL PROVIDERS AND
WE HAVE DONE A PRETTY IN-DEPTH
SCAN OF OUR CURRENT LGBTQ
CONTRACTS, SO WE WILL PROVIDE
OVER PORT IN WRITING BUT
INTEGRALLY SNEAK PEEK, WE ARE
SEEING SOME REAL HIGH NEEDS IN
THE AREAS OF USE, AGING OUT OF
FOSTER CARE, YOUTH, BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH, NOT A SURPRISE.
LGBTQ YOUTH BEHAVIORAL HEALTH,
AS WELL AS SPECIFIC NEEDS FOR
TRANSIT YOUTH.
WE ARE PRETTY EXCITED TO
PROVIDE THE RESULTS OF THAT
ANALYSIS WHICH WE ARE BETTING
INTERNALLY AND WITH A FEW KEY
SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS IN THE
COMMUNITY BEFORE WE PRESENTED
TO THE COUNCIL.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
I REALLY APPRECIATE THE
IDENTIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL
FUNDS TO POTENTIALLY SUPPORT
THIS WELL DOCUMENTED BUT ALSO
EMERGING GREATER NEED THAT WE
ARE SEEING AND THE COMMUNITY.
WE ARE SEEING QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS -- WHILE I AM
SCROLLING, I AM GOING BACK TO
SLIDE 12, WHICH WE WERE NOT
OVER WITH QUICKLY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
I JUST WANT TO NOTE TO THE
VIEWING PUBLIC -- THIS IS A
UNIQUE CLIENT CENTERED APPROACH
THAT PROVIDES A TREATMENT FOR
VIOLENCE CHARGES.
IT IS ONE OF ONLY THREE
PROGRAMS LIKE IT IN THE
COUNTRY.
I UNDERSTAND RFP THROUGH HSD
WILL EXPAND THE NUMBER OF
PROVIDERS WHO ARE ASSOCIATED
WITH THE PROGRAM, WHICH WILL
THEN CONSERVE MORE PEOPLE.
I WANT TO FLAG ALSO THAT THERE
IS REALLY STRONG COMMUNITY
INTERESTS IN ENSURING THIS
PROGRAM IS NOT FOCUSED ON --
THAT IT ALSO INCLUDES A
COMPONENT WHERE SAME GENDER
COUPLES ARE ELIGIBLE.
I KNOW THAT IS SOMETHING WE ARE
LOOKING AT IN THE FUTURE.
IT MIGHT NOT BE SOMETHING WE
CAN DO IMMEDIATELY, BUT I WANT
TO LIFT THE COMMUNITY INTERESTS
IN DOING SO, AND ALSO I BELIEVE
THERE WERE -- THERE WAS A
COUNCIL ACTION ASSOCIATED WITH
THIS FUNDING AS WELL.
I AM NOT REMEMBERING WHAT IT
WAS.
MAYBE -- WAS THERE A STATEMENT
OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS FUNDING?
>> THERE WAS NOT.
IT WAS JUST FLAT.
IT WAS SOMETHING THAT THEY WILL
BE WATCHING.
>> A STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE
INTENT IS NOT FUNDING.
IT IS ASKING THE DEPARTMENT TO
DO SOME WORK, WHETHER IT IS A
REPORT OR DOING ENGAGEMENT.
I THOUGHT THERE WAS A REQUEST
TO WORK WITH -- THE OFFICE OF
CIVIL RIGHTS, DOING A COMMUNITY-
BASED ENGAGEMENT AROUND THIS
PROGRAM.
I WILL CHECK MY RECORDS.
IT IS NOT RINGING ANY BELLS.
>> WE HAVE NOTED IT AND WE WILL
FOLLOW UP.
I REMEMBER READING ABOUT IT.
I DO NOT RECALL AN ASK.
THAT IS WHERE MY BRAIN IS.
WE WILL FOLLOW UP.
THANK YOU.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS FROM COUNSEL
COLLEAGUES?
WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
MEETING AND HIGHLIGHTING THE
IMPORTANT WORK THAT HUMAN
SERVICES DEPARTMENT IS DOING,
WITH MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY
WHO ARE FACED WITH REALLY
UNIQUE CHALLENGES AND I REALLY
APPRECIATE THE PARTNER IS DOING
THAT WORK IN THE MIDST OF ALL
LOT OF CHANGE WITHIN THE
DEPARTMENT AND ALSO, SOME OF
THE SAME TYPES OF CHALLENGES
THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THESE
SERVICES FUNDING.
I KNOW OUR INDIVIDUAL CITY
WORKERS , HOW ARE PUBLIC
SERVANTS, ARE ALSO EXPERIENCING
THE SAME CHALLENGES.
REALLY, I AM HUMBLED AND
HONORED TO HAVE YOU COMMENT AND
TALK TO US ABOUT HOW, DESPITE
ALL OF THAT, YOU ARE STILL
GETTING THESE DOLLARS OUT THE
DOOR TO SERVE THE PUBLIC.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY.
>> THANK YOU.
AND, WITH THAT, ARE THERE ANY
OTHER COMMENTS FROM COLLEAGUES?
THE NEXT ONE IS SCHEDULED FOR
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8th, 2022, AT
9:30 IN THE MORNING.
I AM SEEING NO MORE ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS FOR QUESTIONS.
IT IS 11:45 A.M.
AND WE ARE GOOD.