Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-29-2021 SPECIAL MEETING MINUTESAMSUMMARY MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY TASK FORCE ON DUBLI N EQUITY, DIVERSITY & INCLUSION C A L I F 0 R N I A SPECIAL MEETING —April 29, 2021 A special meeting of the Community Task Force on Equity, Diversity & Inclusion was held on April 29th, 2021, via Zoom telecommunications. The meeting commenced at 5:37 PM. Roll Call PRESENT: Natasha Tripplett, Rameet Kohli, Isabella Helene David, Clifford Brown Jr., Matthew Aini, Beatriz Ballesteros-Kogan, Kathy Avanzino, Martha Orozco (alt.), Brittany Jacobs (alt.) John Stefanski, Jordyn Bishop, Paul Hudson, Rodas Hailu. ABSENT: Eman Tai, Dyrell Foster 1. Call to Order Assistant to the City Manager John Stefanski called the meeting to order at 5:37 PM. 2. Public Comment Mr. Stefanski called for Public Comments. No comments were made. 3. Reports 3.1 Reviewing of Policing Recommendations Mr. Stefanski began a review of the Task Force's policing recommendations including providing an overview of the City identified areas of concern and recommended changes to address the concerns. A copy of the Recommendations, Concerns, and Recommended Changes to Address Concerns is attached to these minutes. Mr. Stefanski began a review of the Task Force's Policies and Procedures recommendations, with clarifying commentary and counsel from Assistant City Attorney Jordyn Bishop. For recommendation #1 on the Dublin City Council establishing a permanent commission to review law enforcement and community safety in Dublin, Ms. Bishop clarified that Dublin is a general law city, and as such, has limitations in the creation of a policing commission as defined by state law. Any commission created would be only in an advisory capacity to the City Council and could not exert any "control" over Dublin Police Services. Mr. Stefanski reviewed recommendation #2 on the City Manager hiring a consultant to enhance collaboration amongst the Dublin community, City Council, city staff, and Dublin Police Services, and shared adjusted language to be inclusive of Alameda County Sheriff's Office (ACSO) staff. For recommendation #3 regarding data collection and transparency on non-violent police interactions from DPS, Ms. Bishop stated that the Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2015 (RIPA) already requires that state law enforcement agencies collect and report this data. Mr. Stefanski shared that DPS would not have the ability to track the amount of time they spend on responding to noncriminal activity vs. minor and violent crime. Mr. Stefanski moved onto recommendation #4 on the enhancing of de-escalation data collection and reporting, and shared adjusted language. De-escalation data is not readily available and quantifiable for the purposes of analysis and publication, which would complicate the City's ability to complete this recommendation. Furthermore, the City would not have the authority to set goals regarding de-escalation under the current ACSO contract. In reviewing recommendation #5 on requiring DPS to provide comprehensive reporting on incidents involving Use of Force, Ms. Bishop clarified that AB 71 and SB 1421 are laws which have already established data collection and reporting requirements for law enforcement agencies. Mr. Stefanski added that some of the suggestions within recommendation #5 are already covered by AB 71 and SB 1421. Member Kohli asked a clarifying question on reviewing the Task Force's recommendations with legal counsel. Mr. Stefanski stated that it was important to examine recommendations with the City Attorney before presenting them to Dublin City Council. Member Kohli asked if there will be another opportunity to review the recommendations and edits. Mr. Stefanski said that recommendations can be further discussed in the ad -hoc groups. Alternate Member Jacobs posed a question on creating a community advocacy body. Ms. Bishop clarified the legality of creating advisory bodies. Member Brown asked how the recommendation could be modified to include information on publicizing data for Dublin specifically. Mr. Stefanski clarified that the data would be able to be published through the City's data platform. Member Tripplett made a comment on the City's comments and recommended changes to the recommendations. Mr. Stefanski clarified that there are limitations to what Dublin can and cannot do due to the City's contract with ACSO, as well as the limitations of being a general law city. Member Aini commented and clarified on the de-escalation target portion of recommendation #5. Mr. Stefanski and Ms. Bishop continued to Staff, Management and Accountability recommendations. On recommendation #6 regarding criteria to guide the Chief of DPS when hiring law enforcement personnel, Ms. Bishop stated that AB 846 provides some regulatory language and context on minimum standards in hiring evaluation processes. Mr. Stefanski reviewed recommendations #7-13, which discussed police procedures, communications, public engagement, and community relations, and provided any adjusted language. Regarding recommendation #14 on releasing to the public civilian complains against DPS, Ms. Bishop clarified that some complaint data is collected and sent over the Department of Justice, which is published annually. Ms. Bishop noted, however, there is some employee information that is considered confidential within their personnel file. Alternate Member Jacobs asked if there is anything that could made public in the file. Ms. Bishop explained the process of requesting access of a personnel file through filing a Pitchess motion. Mr. Stefanski commented on how to release general, unidentifiable information on complaints. Member Kohli posed a clarifying question for recommendation #10 on the City hosting annual DPS study session, and if the City can ask ACSO to attend. Mr. Stefanski stated that the City could ask ACSO to attend or participate in the study session. Mr. Stefanski reviewed the last set of recommendations on Training, Mental Health and Budget. Mr. Stefanski spoke on the minor changes to recommendations #15 and #16, and shared adjusted language. Regarding recommendations #17 and #18 on training and curriculum topics for DPS, Mr. Stefanski requested that the ad -hoc provide clarifying language, particularly around the frequency and modes of training. In reviewing recommendation #19 regarding forming a working group to determine training topics, Member Jacobs commented on considering a community commission in the conversations. Member Tripplett commented on the composition of recommendation #18. Member Ballesteros-Kogan asked about how to present recommendations at county level. Mr. Stefanski described the process and available options of presenting recommendation to county. Member Kohli commented on the inclusion of curriculum topics in the recommendation. Mr. Stefanski specified that the frequency of the trainings in the recommendation should be revaluated by the ad -hoc groups. At the conclusion of the policing recommendations review, recommendations #1, #6, #17, and #18 were identified to be revisited, modified, or edited by the respective ad -hoc groups. The remaining recommendations would be incorporated into the draft final report. 3.2 City-wide DEI Initiative Discussion, Questions, and Data Requests Mr. Hudson introduced a discussion on city-wide DEI initiatives. Member Kohli asked a clarifying question on city commission demographics. Mr. Stefanski referred Member Kohli back to the presentation on City Boards and Commissions. Member David asked where to find racial demographics of Dublin voters. Mr. Stefanski shared that the Alameda County Registrar of Voters would maintain information tied to voter registration and requested languages for ballots. Member David asked about city officials making communications with inmates at the women's prison in Dublin. Mr. Stefanski discussed the City's engagement with FCI Dublin pre-COVID. Member Tripplett presented an idea about establishing a DEI liaison within DPS and the City. Mr. Stefanski shared that the City had recently established a similar role for LGBTQ+ members of the community. 3.3 Review and Comment on the Proposed Agenda Planning Calendar Mr. Stefanski reviewed the agenda calendar. Alternate Member Jacobs asked about how the Task Force will preset final Task Force recommendations. Mr. Stefanski responded that he will find out more information on the official presentation. Mr. Hudson provided advice, counsel, and framing for the Task Force as they work through revising policing recommendations and drafting DEI recommendations. Member Tripplett commented on potential implementation strategies for the DEI proposals and recommendations. Mr. Stefanski clarified that final Task Force recommendations will go the City sometime in July or August. 4. Other Business Mr. Stefanski noted that he would be out the office next week but would provide support to the ad -hoc groups as they scheduled their meetings. 5. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:31 PM.