Berkeley City Council Special Meeting: 2024 Police Accountability Board Annual Report Presentation

On November 18, 2025, the Berkeley City Council held a special meeting to receive and discuss the 2024 Annual Report from the Police Accountability Board (PAB) and the Office of the Director of Police Accountability (ODPA). The presentation covered complaint data, policy work, stop and use-of-force trends, and operational challenges. No formal votes were taken.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Carol: Expressed concerns about the proposed vexatious complainant policy, warning it could deter valid complaints from persons with mental health issues or others. She also questioned whether complaints against a particular Black resident were based on bias.
• Maria: Thanked the council and oversight bodies for their work, praised an instance of de-escalation by a Berkeley police officer, and urged the city to avoid excessive surveillance and drones, advocating for community care over policing.
• Leah Wilson (Vice Chair, PAB): Commented online, emphasizing that Appendix One of the Fair & Impartial Policing (FIP) report details concerns with the at-fault collision, yield rate, and veil of darkness tests. She encouraged the council to establish joint metrics for both the PAB and BPD.

Discussion Items

• Presentation by ODPA and PAB: Director Hansu Aguilar, Chair Joshua Caetano, and Policy Analyst Jose Murillo presented the 2024 annual report. Key points included:
  • 53 complaints received, leading to 459 allegations; 51 complaints were closed. Of 97 allegations reviewed by the chief, 6 were sustained (16.67% agreement with PAB findings). Seven disagreements were elevated to the city manager, who sustained 3 (42.86% agreement rate).
  • 4,773 stops in 2024, with racial disparities persisting. Use-of-force incidents: 294 total, with Black/African American individuals involved in 57.83% of incidents.
  • Policy work: the PAB used subpoena power for the first time on the texting offenses report, contributed to the FIP report (resulting in an early intervention system), engaged in prolonged regulation negotiations, and revised BPD vehicle pursuit policy (recommending a deadly-force standard for forcible intervention techniques).
  • Challenges: incomplete charter implementation, scope disputes, understaffing, IT delays (e.g., no shared drive access), and lack of dedicated board staff. Recommendations included finalizing regulations, addressing racial disparities, enhancing community engagement, and strengthening oversight of surveillance.
• Council Questions and Discussion:
  • Councilmember Lunapara asked about PAB involvement in BPD policy and the distinction between internal/external complaints. Chair Caetano explained the board can initiate reviews; BPD handles internal complaints separately.
  • Councilmember Blackaby discussed low sustained complaint rates (6%) and suggested triage mechanisms (e.g., vexatious complainant regulation, direct body-worn camera access to speed dismissals). Director Aguilar cautioned against using sustain rates as the sole metric, noting that complaints serve as a constitutional grievance channel.
  • Councilmember Taplin queried about the early warning system audits; Caetano confirmed the new system will evaluate 80 factors across all sworn officers, replacing random four-officer audits.
  • Councilmember Trigum asked for definitions of complaint outcomes (unfounded, exonerated, sustained) and for recommendations to reduce racial disparities. Caetano cited the profiling-by-proxy policy as an unaddressed recommendation from the FIP report.
  • Councilmember Humbert focused on vexatious complainants and the widening gap between allegations and sustained findings, noting that a few individuals drove many complaints. He also questioned the value of analyzing discourtesy allegations (only 1 sustained out of 107).
  • Councilmember Bartlett raised questions about stop data (resident vs. non-resident) and reasonable suspicion. Chair Caetano noted that for Black Berkeley residents, the disparity ratio was 6.55 times that of white residents.
  • Mayor Arreguín asked about subcommittee priorities (Caetano said they were consolidating into a policy committee), community engagement metrics (Aguilar noted they track sign-ups and inquiries, but lack systematic data), and the IT laptop issue (still unresolved after years).

Key Outcomes

• No formal decisions or votes were taken; the council accepted the presentation and received the report with thanks.
• Next steps identified:
  • The PAB aims to finalize oversight regulations and present them for council action soon.
  • The ODPA will continue to pursue IT infrastructure improvements and dedicated staffing for community engagement.
  • Several council members expressed interest in joint metrics with BPD, a follow-up on the FIP report’s profiling-by-proxy recommendation, and earlier presentation of next year’s report (aligned with BPD’s annual report).
• Mayor’s closing remarks: Clarified that the charter requires the ODPA to draft the report and the PAB to approve it, and she sees no need for separate reports. She also urged the PAB to adopt more quantitative community engagement metrics.