Public safety committee order.

Our first item is a uh briefing on uh the canine policy and uh Mr.

Davis is coming up to the microphone to take it away.

Um, good afternoon.

Let's see.

Okay, again, good afternoon.

Uh I'm Brandon Davis.

I have the privilege of leading our office of oversight and public accountability and our office of equity and engagement.

And today I'll be giving the benchmarking analysis and review of GRPD's K9 program policy 6-8.1.

Now, this uh is a benchmarking analysis.

Um, and this report compares GRPD's program and policies to peer organizations and thus that type of evaluation.

This is not an evaluation of GRPD's actual processes or uh those types of things.

We're looking at the actual language in the policy and comparing that as a benchmarking analysis.

So the way this will work today is uh we have this agenda.

Obviously, we'll do the introduction, then we'll talk about the three-part framework and benchmarking factors.

We'll give a summary of that three-part analysis, and then there are some recommendations that'll come along with that.

Then there'll be time for questions as well.

So the objective of this was uh in response to the city commission's request, the city demand uh the city manager directed OPA to engage in this benchmarking analysis of pure jurisdictions and national professional associations related to GRPD's canine policy.

So what we did was we evaluated GRPD's written canine policy and identify areas it could be clarified or strengthened to better align with pure city practices and nationally recognized guidance.

Uh, the review is based on GRPD's written policy, and I keep stressing that, as well as the canine handler manual, because that is what we were directed to look at.

That was the scope of this.

Um, now we do note some practices that are not reflected in a written policy, and we'll talk about that.

Um, but the the core of the evaluation was based on that written analysis.

So when we talk about the scope, it's important that we state uh that this is not a legal analysis.

Uh the goal of this was not to give a legal opinion.

Um we don't conclude that GRPD's canine deployment or incidents were unreasonable or unconstitutional or anything like that.

That is not what this process was about.

It was a benchmarking analysis.

Um, this analysis uh did not evaluate individual incidents or cases or anything like that.

So after completing his written uh the review of the written policy, we did have conversation with the police department interim chief Trigg has been amazing to work with throughout this process, and we had conversation with him and other leaders in the police department who are also uh helpful, and we were able to identify practices that uh may not be encapsulated in the policy, uh that are encapsulated in this report in some ways.

It's important to note that that uh the information we have based on that is based on what was provided to us uh by GRPD.

So we did not independently verify practices.

So, in order to have a good understanding of this report, it's important that we have some common language.

Uh so definitions.

Let's start with canine apprehension.

When we talk about apprehension in this uh report, we're talking about uh incident where uh uh suspect surrenders or is otherwise brought into custody at the res as a result of a canine deployment, right?

So this may be because the canine was used as trained or because the suspect surrendered after becoming aware of a canine being a part of it.

Um apprehension does not necessarily mean that there was a uh bite or some type of uh force used by the dog in that way.

Um what it does mean though is what we've uh stated here.

A canine handler is a sworn law enforcement officer trained and certified to work with a police canine, and then we talk about use of force and the use of force is the application of physical tactics or tools by law enforcement to gain compliance or control.

So when we look at the benchmarking factors, uh there's some important considerations that we have to have as we navigate this.

The first thing that's important for you to know is there is no single universally adopted standard for governing uh police canine programs in the United States.

So when you look at different jurisdictions across the country, you will see different things.

Uh, the way in which they navigate, uh, what their thresholds are, all of those types of things are different.

Um so what we have to do in this case, of course, is then look, of course, across several factors and and several different sources to try to determine what are those best practices.

What are those national uh recommendations that we can look at in order to put together a benchmarking analysis?

And through that process, 10 benchmarking factors were used in this study.

Again, they were not developed by OPA, they were derived from the recurring requirements and recommendations found across independent nationally recognized sources such as the International Association for the Chiefs of Police, the Police Executive Research Forum, and the Canine policy of peer agencies, and we'll talk more about those peer agencies as we go forward.

These factors also reflect operational categories around which law enforcement agencies routinely structure their canine policies.

So our three-part benchmarking framework included these things.

Cross policy analysis, best practices from nationally recognized sources, and then selected peer city comparison.

So when we talk about that cross-policy analysis, we'll talk about exactly what policies we looked at.

We're talking about GRPD policies.

We'll also talk about the national recognized sources we got to, and then we'll give you some more information about those peer cities that were selected and why they were selected.

So from the uh review, 10 benchmarking factors arose to the top.

The first is force classifications.

When you look at force classification, the question is, does the policy classify canine vice or apprehension as a use of force option?

When we look at apprehension threshold, the question is, is physical apprehension limited to serious violent felonies, armed suspects, or high risk situations.

Number three looks at supervisor approval.

The question there is does the policy require supervisory approval before bike risk deployments or situations where a bike could happen.

The next one looks at warning requirements.

What warnings must be given and is documentation required when warnings are waived?

The by incident review.

The question there is who conducts the primary review and is it independent of the canine unit?

The next one is vulnerable population protections.

The question is, are there restrictions for juveniles, elderly persons, and mental health crisis, or impaired individuals?

The next asks about transparency and reporting.

The question is, is public reporting of deployments, bytes, demographics, or bite ratios required.

The training methodology looks at uh whether the policy, uh the sub policy the policy specify bite and hold, bark and hole, or another approach.

And we'll talk about this a little more.

But bite and hold and bark and hold are the most common types of methodology methodologies used in these types of uh spaces with bite and hope being the most common.

Then there's demographic training, uh tracking.

Is demographic data collected and analyzed for canine deployments?

And lastly, we have recall and control.

Is the handler required to recall the canine once the suspect is in the custody or the threat has ended?

So those are the 10 uh parts, and now we'll talk about some of the sources we use to get to that place.

So there's the GRPD cross-policy analysis.

So let's do an overview of GRPD's canine program policy for everyone.

So there are uh we talk about nine major spaces.

So GRPD authorizes canine use across a broad operational range.

It can be used for the following purposes tracking suspects and potential evidence during or after criminal offenses.

It can also be used for missing incidents where the person may be in danger.

It can be used for evidence searches for stolen or abandoned property.

Uh canines can be used for building searches where burglary or felony suspects are believed to be hiding.

Uh, it can also be used for narcotic searches, uh, and that's in a home or a vehicle or open area when legal requirements are met, of course.

And then there's physical apprehensions based on a totality of circumstances, area searches to locate and apprehend hidden felony suspects.

It can also be used for off-lead apprehensions after verbal warnings and a totality of the circumstances review, and then tactical uh deployments under SRT supervisor direction.

So uh the other policies we looked at in consideration of this review was the de-escalation response policy, so that uh MLP 9 1.1, uh de-escalation response to resistance and use of force.

We looked at the vehicle pursuit policy, the youth interactions policy, the deaf and hard of hearing policy, the custody of incapacitated persons policy, and responding to persons with mental disorders as well.

So then we looked at best practices from nationally recognized sources.

So we looked at that, we looked at the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

We also looked at the police executive research forum.

We looked at the National Association for the Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement and the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission model as well.

So then for peer cities, we were fortunate to get some peer cities from GRPD as well.

So what we did was uh GRPD selected a number of these peer cities and OPA selected others.

So we looked at West Cavina in California, which many of you may have heard former city attorney Hitchcock talk about being a model that should be looked at.

We also looked at uh the city of Detroit, Madison, Wisconsin, Warchester, Massachusetts, Fort Collins.

We looked at the King County Sheriff's Department, Travis City, Salt Lake City, Utah, and Spokane, Washington.

And we have populations here, so you can see some of them were population based because of them being comparative to where we are, and some of them uh were based on other factors, recommendations from GRPD or ones that OPA was aware of and selected.

So as a result of that, we then have the summary of this three-part benchmarking analysis.

So when we look at the summary of uh part one, that is the GRPD cross policy analysis.

There are a few things uh that rose to the top uh during that part of the benchmarking analysis.

First is uh under the de-escalation response resistance and use of force.

So canine apprehension is not expressly described as a use of force option within the uh MOP 91.1.

The force continuum covers compliance controls, impact weapons, strikes, and more, but it does not include canine apprehension or bites.

And again, I want to specify we're talking about the written policy.

Uh, uh, and what's written in that policy directly later on you'll hear that a lot of this is happening in practice, but again, our analysis was about that written policy.

Uh, we looked at youth interactions under which is manual of procedures 8 16, uh, and we learned that GRPD's youth interactions policy contains protections that are not currently expressly extended to canine encounters in the written policy.

So GRPD requires supervisor notification when a child has been handcuffed and restricts firearm display against youth, yet the canine policy uh permits physical apprehension without that age-based restriction.

We look at the deaf and hard of hearing policy.

Canine warnings are entirely verbal.

Uh the deaf and hard of hearing policy warrants that failure to respond to commands may indicate hearing loss and not defiance.

That's not expressly written into the canine policy, although it is written obviously in this other policy.

We also looked at incapacitated persons and mental health.

Uh, these protective frameworks exist for intoxicated, incapacitated and persons with mental illness, but they're not explicitly reflected in the canine operations, despite these being, you know, those types of situations where that would be uh pretty critical.

So when we look at uh the summary of part two, this is best practices from nationally recognized sources.

Um so we look at the benchmark, you'll see several columns.

Uh, you see benchmarking factors, you see best practices from the nationally recognized sources, and then you'll see GRPD's current status.

And we'll go through these.

So when we look at force classification, the best practice is to classify uh canine apprehensions bites as use of force, the use of force option on that force continuum, and we have some sources here of where that comes from.

Again, in our GRPD's current status, canine is not classified as a use of force in the policy, although you'll see later that it is treated that way in practice.

When we look at apprehension threshold, the best practice is to limit apprehension to serious violent felonies with enumerated conditions and to require probable causes, a predicate.

Um, when we look at GRPD's current status, it does prohibit apprehension in non serious offenses when no danger exists.

So in some ways it is reflected there.

When we look at vulnerable population protections, the best practice is to restrict or prohibit canine deployment against known juveniles, elderly persons, and mental health crisis and hearing impaired persons.

And uh, but when we look at GRPD's current status, there are not these uh restrictions for juveniles, elderly mentally ill, deaf, intoxicated or pregnant persons during canine encounters.

I want to be clear though, these protections exist in other GRPD policies, but we're talking about the written policy as it relates to the canine policy.

Transparency and reporting, the best practice is to put is to publish annual canine data that would include deployments, bytes, by ratios, injuries, demographics, and things of that nature.

In the handler manual, deployment reports, there it does require the every use, monthly stats, quarterly review training logs are reported, but there is not a public reporting portion that's required by policy.

GRPD does publish annual canine force count on this dashboard.

So we look at warning requirements.

This is standardized warning language.

Multiple announcements being required, multilingual considerations being a part of that.

And when that doesn't happen, there being some type of documented justification.

We look at supervisor approval.

The best practice is to require supervisor authorization before any deployment where a bite is foreseeable.

GRPD's current status, we look at section D1 authorizes most functions without prior supervisory approval.

A supervisor is required for certain special circumstances.

When we look at bite incident review, the best practice is to root canine bytes into the same review process as other use of force incidents that either being internal affairs or external body that conducts that primary review.

And GRPD's current status is multilayered.

There is a use of force report and canine supervisor review and copies to IA, the chief service area commander, and IA, so IA is a part of all of those parts of that practice.

That use of force component is a part of what uh happens here, but that's a practice not written into the actual canine policy.

The training methodology, specifying the training methodology, that means bite and hole versus bark and hole in the policy, is what is uh the best practice in the handler uh manual section.

Um, the byte methodology is not named specifically in GRPD's current policy.

Demographic tracking, the best practice is to require demographic data collection for all canine deployments and analyze that for patterns or disparities.

There's no tracking of race, age, or gender of canine subjects or individuals who have interactions with canines and under GRPD's current policy.

GRPD does already track demographics for other use of force categories via its internal affairs annual statistical analysis.

We look at recall and control, the best practices to require immediate recall and restraint once a suspect is in custody.

Um GRPD's current status does uh require a handler to recall the dog once the suspect is in custody.

So that aligns directly with the language we see under the best practice, which is a very positive thing.

Okay, so I've talked a lot about some practices that were not in the written policy.

So again, I'm I am grateful to be able to navigate well with interim chief trig.

Uh, and because we're able to do that, we're able to have some of these conversations, which I think is helpful to Gramma Pity.

And so I thank you to him for stepping up in this way.

Um, and through that conversation, we were able to identify some practices that happen that are not a part of the written policy.

That includes under the force classification.

So GRPD does report that canine apprehensions are treated at the use of force event in practice, and that a use of for uh report is required for those apprehensions.

So these are things we see in practice that we don't see in a written policy.

There are the apprehension threshold, GRPD states that it adheres their apprehension policy to the U.S.

Supreme Court case of Graham V.

Connor, which sets the minimum standard for canine apprehension.

So when we talk about again the apprehension, there is a minimum standard in the law for the way things are supposed to work.

Nothing in this report is suggesting the GRPD is not complying with that minimum standard.

We're talking about national.

Our recommendations are related to national practices of where we think there can be uh added growth.

Warning requirements, GRPD has stated that standardized warnings are taught through their training and that any omission must be documented in a use of force report.

You may have uh recalled that on earlier slides.

I've talked about the fact that if there was an omission and needed to be in writing somewhere, that was the nationally best standard.

And although we don't see that written in GRPD's policy, they have indicated that it is a part of their practice.

A bite review independence.

Again, GRPD has stated that the internal affairs department reviews all use of force reports, including those involving those canine apprehensions that result in bites.

Vulnerable population protections, GRPD reports that officers are trained to weigh a person's status as a vulnerable uh in a vulnerable population as part of that totality of the circumstances review in which they are involved.

Training and methodology, GRPD indicates that bite and hold is the default for any canine program, which is why it is not documented in their policy.

And then demographic tracking.

So here's that uh a summary of part three, and this is a comparison between other mid-sized peer cities.

And what you see here is you see two columns for GRPD.

You see a written policy column that looks just at what's written in the canine policy, and then you see the practice column, which are the additional information we were able to gain from GRPD that adds more clarity to what's actually happening there at the police department that goes beyond what's in that written policy.

Uh and I won't go line by line uh based on each of these cities, but you can see the comparison there uh where GRPD stands as it relates to the other cities involved here.

Okay, so that brings us to our recommendations.

And our recommendations essentially are to align uh with with the language that you heard me talk through as we talked about uh best practices here.

And um I because I've already stated all of them, I won't go through each one of them and read them again, but I will just highlight some of those spaces.

One is to classify canine apprehension as a use of force.

It's one of the strongest recommendations we're making.

Again, that's in the written policy.

We recognize the practice says some other things.

Uh, we recommend the narrowing of the canine apprehension threshold, establishing vulnerable population protections, expanding transparency and reporting, and standardized warning language, all of that being standardized in the canine use of force policy.

We recognize that other policies exist in other spaces where that language may be included, but it is our position that for the benefit of community and others who may be reading this policy when they go to a policy, they look at that policy and are looking for some of that information.

Same uh thing for when we have our uh other recommendations, which is to require supervisor approval before deployment, uh to mandate uh bite review reporting in IA and that being a part of the actual policy to clarify that training methodology in policy and include demographic tracking and reporting.

Uh aligned with each of these things, you will see the source, right?

So, what pure cities we saw that had those things and also uh the uh nationally recognized sources that recommended or uh supported that type of action.

Uh that brings us to questions, but before we do that, I do want to recognize all the people who've been involved in doing this work.

This has been a uh laborious lift, um, and it's been some really good work done by staff across the city.

Um, so I want to thank Albert Gasaki who did a big part of this lift.

I believe he's in here today.

I also want to thank Nick DeRich, who was uh very involved in this.

Uh, and both Harrison and Nicholas uh were uh the you know uh we we we say the twins often, right?

But they were extremely involved in space who did a major lift, and I just want to appreciate all of them for all of their work going into this.

With that, we have to say I'll turn it up to the manager.

Mayor, before uh we get questions from the committee, I want to thank Mr.

Davis for his work, but just to punctuate uh the process.

So today is his findings, and certainly he's available to answer any questions.

Uh we have uh several command staff that might be able to answer some preliminary questions today, but I have asked the chief to come back at a future meeting in more detail to respond to some of the recommendations as to which uh they believe that they will be able to uh um act on.

Greg, um so uh yeah, and and let me echo those sentiments.

So thank you for this work.

I think it's uh, you know, uh very uh a good methodology, um, certainly thought provoking.

Um, and uh, I was really impressed to see frankly the your the strongest column when you did the comparative tick marks obviously are um practices so what uh what we're actually doing with our canines um seems to be maybe the strongest category there even compared to pure cities so that was great to see um I think that you know we'll have to have a conversation and the commission will have to have a conversation about um you know we are as a city committed to transparency and we also want our citizens to be able to know uh know what they can expect and what are and and that our you know our policies reflect our goals so um there's always uh um you know there's always that struggle in government if do you do things if things happen by practice then it's tough to have accountability if if the answer is oh we always we always do that um but but it's not written down um you know if everyone in the city went 25 miles an hour on the highway and then somebody goes 40 and we don't have speed limits um we can't say well we always go 25 um and there's no accountability for going 40 so um I think it's a great conversation I'm glad um I'm uh certainly glad this is as you said city manager the first step here and um you know I'm glad that you did uh really robust engagement with our police department and I'm looking forward to to the next step which is conversations about um what are the what are what makes sense and and whether there are opportunities and I think it's clear to me from the presentation that our biggest opportunity is to essentially document what we're already doing and so that's that's great to hear so uh pastor yes uh thank you so much uh for for the report and thank you for the conversations that were that were had I mean it's good to get all this information but 62 minutes before our time here uh to receive it is uh a little bit unacceptable however we understand things happen uh and we're looking forward to the review that will be taking place is there a timeline associated based upon when we would actually be able to discuss these next as a result of we don't want any other incidences to occur uh because they've been happening you know as of late so just just curious I'm not exactly sure what you're referring to with the 62 minutes part of it um but as it relates to the timeline I will defer to the manager.

I think you you you're talking about the getting the copy of the presentation correct an hour before the meeting right public safety committee and I'm a quick read and I did read and I did and I did study because I could I could tell you about the 10 benchmarks I can tell you about the nine cities I can tell you about the seven practices and policies.

Thank you Dr.

So and that's the reason why I again I said we're we're not expected to have the entire conversation today.

So this is an introduction to it and we will continue it uh next month um at the next public safety committee the chief will be up here next so I hope to have uh him have some initial response to it but this will be an ongoing conversation uh and in the interim if you have any questions please feel free to reach out uh to um director davis or the chief or myself commissioner cover thank you mayor uh and Davis for this presentation uh I make I I too am excited to hear from interim chief trigg uh on his initial response to uh these it looks like we're leading in many categories um demographic tracking uh for example the comparable cities that's not happening so I think um I am hopeful to see all of these recommendations be adopted um I have had continued conversations with constituents all over the third ward from wealthy street all the way to 44th um on this very topic and a note uh for the city manager and Mr.

Davis I'm wondering uh since this took a good chunk of time if we could consider also zooming out and looking at the foot chase policy period.

So this pursuit policies um in addition is what my constituents are communicating about.

So of course, this is good.

I'm happy to see this.

I'm hopeful that all of these are adopted, and then in addition, can we have this same really comprehensive overview of foot chase itself.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Um we prioritize this based on the urgency back in April, I believe, and really move pretty fast.

And we have another component I think that we prioritize was a review of our cab policy that we so we've looked at the um use of uh officer involved shootings.

Uh we said we would then analyze the um canine and uh pursuit policy, then CAP.

There's one other um matter I think that we um had committed to prior to this review, and that was um the traffic study.

So if if we want to elevate that over the traffic study, then certainly we can do that, but I think that's worth discussing.

Wonderful and city manager, but that can we maybe bring this back for the full commission to uh see where that prioritization is.

Yeah, certainly we can schedule a more comprehensive briefing for the entire city commission on on an update on some of the reviews that are going on in OPA and uh the police department.

I think this was really comprehensive, and I think this is a good part of it.

Um, but uh if you fall if you're following trends, some of those challenges that we've seen within community um have included a pursuit of chase itself.

Uh and so it's with speaking with hundreds of community members throughout my tenure as I go on my second year on commission.

I think it's a call from community, and as we did with K9, starting with this, um I think it's imperative that we continue to listen to community.

So um I'll raise that with my colleagues going further to see uh if that will also be on the list of um of reviews going further.

And I really appreciate the work from both the GRPD and from OPA on this.

Thank you.

Go right ahead, Brent.

Uh thank you.

I was gonna indicate that as the manager educated, we we do have a current order of prioritization.

I want to be clear about so the one was our K9 study, the manager committed tests to and the the cab analysis as well.

While we're doing the cab analysis, we're also at the same time working on a traffic stop study simultaneously that relates to foot pursuit based on current direction where we currently stand, that was to occur after those things.

Um, if we if I receive obviously direction from the manager to do something different after he hear from you all, we will, but that's the current prioritization and how we're navigating.

So it is in the prioritize.

It is in the list of things to for us to evaluate, uh, but is not next on the list to advise you.

Thank you so much, Mr.

Davis.

Thanks.

Thanks.

Uh Commissioner Stasi.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, thank you, Mr.

Davis, and thank you, everyone who's a part of this.

I agree.

This is very comprehensive.

I'm I'm this is uh must have been a lot of work.

I don't know how many hours, so even just knowing that and the amount of resources.

I don't think it's just you know it's this much, and we'll do it or not do it, but I think that's also the transparency piece in that as well.

Uh, mayor and colleagues, um, just to know how much time this takes because you want to do it right, you want to have it hopefully the relationships in those pieces that were discussed.

Because it's not just about the evaluation, but it's how do we collectively um you know recognize how do we uh you know change change different practices.

Um so I wanted to highlight that, so thank you.

Um I want to highlight one thing that you just said, Commissioner Kilgore, and then I have a specific question for either now or as we have the further conversation.

You know, we're gonna have we just talked at committee of the whole about the public trade public safety trust fund money, and we would be going through a uh a grant process.

The timeline is unsure as the money, we're not we're not sure when the money will come in, but some of it will go internally to um different uh we said like programmatic pieces.

I think, you know, I can't speak for the entire safe task force, but in particular, I think I'm very um, you know, if I were prioritize the prioritization of what to focus on to me, you know, it'd be like those in the vulnerable populations, as particularly young people, and how that is applied and how do we, as you said, mayor, you know, really getting in writing that is where the accountability lies.

Um, so wonder how we might be able to, you know, do all the things we said we're gonna do for public safety trust fund, but also recognize the policy implications and you know, what are we doing in the future?

So that's in the that's in the future.

I would say these are all sort of tied.

We talked about the traffic stop study, foot pursuit.

I would also say just surveillance overall continues to be a big, you know, uh question that I get with a lot of my constituents.

Um I appreciate um uh uh the department, DC Baker for responding to individuals with not just a paragraph but a very long sentence recognizing their concerns talking to them about how long you know we've been using things like license plate writers but anyways I digress my question is um and maybe manager tell me if this is for for for chief trig but what happens when like say the canine makes a mistake um say they don't follow the command or I don't know if there is like a certain area where people where they are trained to do the bite or the bite and hold um you know some of this was from quite honestly I know for me seeing a picture of somebody who had been app in impacted by the use of force of a canine so um just wondering that question what is that what does that follow up look like um and are there certain areas where they're not allowed to make contact with um someone that is a question I would defer to the police.

That's why yeah okay thank you.

Well do we want the chief to come and respond to that now or come forward chief thank you.

Okay.

Excuse my voice my my voice is going a bad timing right but uh this is what you get for now but um yeah obviously our our dogs are trained to uh impact certain areas you know and if if um there's several factors that could um uh affect you know a dog missing its its bite I think you might be referring to uh the one recently we had of where uh gentleman got it in the face um obviously I know deputy chief baker uh was a former uh canine handler for for 10 years and he's our uh uh coordinator he he supervises the program but he could speak to another depth but basically um you know the dogs can you know they're uh they're animals they can miss their spot but it goes to just hours and hours of training um you know in that specific incidence I know the dog was was trying to target the arm uh due to the movement and and where the gentleman was seated in the car and the adjustment that it it got to the face but that's that's not the target we can I know we plan on doing a uh presentation in here with our for our canine program to show uh just like director davis uh uh explained during his presentation which was uh very good um explanation by the way or presentation of all the times we use it and actually come in here and actually dissect it and maybe we can even show video um that shows our officers training with the canine and the work that they're doing in the bike suits where the face isn't covered because it's not a point of uh of contact so I don't know if that answers it to a degree yeah I think so I mean I think that is um you know it like you said um commissioner and I know mayor you've had conversations with constituents as well about you know the questions and concerns and I think what are those what are those pieces and practices and um as you said it's it's you know there's there's consequences say you know f not following procedures and practices for all of us or you know those that are in uniform but what does that look like or just to understand the psychology I mean I I have uh I've been bitten by my own dog on the face back in the day and it was it was a very shocking thing that happened and it happened and it happens really quickly.

So there's a lot of different factors um but I appreciate it and I don't know um if there's anything else um to you know I mean again I know this is not the one conversation I think we've said this cont consistently I think that's also what we're hearing is how do we regularly have conversations about you know these these use of forces yeah and our canine handlers train monthly and um I put hours and hours in and that's stuff that we could definitely speak to more depth when we come back with with our response I think would be appropriate and because I know it's an important topic.

Okay.

I appreciate that thank you thank you both.

I got some questions.

Yeah and actually before I could for both of you uh you didn't actually review standards on training frequency.

So the chief just brought up an interesting question.

Like, what is best practices?

Are we training?

You know, at this, is there a standard in I I mean, I assume there is an answer to that question, but if either one of you want to speak to that, like, is there the fact that we train monthly?

Is that something we just decided to do ourselves, or is that a sort of standardized?

No, there's a national standard um that we follow.

Um, and we're always obviously trying to um, and we can go more than that too.

We always want to exceed any type of standard we can at GRPD, at least through my my history, we're always trying to exceed the standards.

Mayor, let me follow up on that.

So when Calia reviews our accreditation, is our canine program reviewed by CLIA?

I'll say I'm very proud that we've got CLEA accreditation.

I was I was trying to think back of of how long we've had it now.

I think 2018, but that that puts us um, and not ages, not every agency in Michigan has it.

There's there's not many.

Michigan State Police is is one of them, but it puts us among the uh as far as our policies among the elite um organizations, not in the country, but in the in the world, right?

So I think that's something to to highlight.

We have and Kalia comes in, it's it's like 21 uh members of it's it's attorneys, it's it's it's lawyers, it's prosecutors, it's just uh full of smart individuals that uh come through our policies with a fine tooth comb and tell us where we're we're lacking, if we're lacking, and um we've had that certification I think since 2018, like I said, so um I feel very confident in our policies that they are strong.

But that being said, there's always um an opportunity to get stronger, right?

With anything in life, I think if you can continue to build and no one wants to be stagnant, and with our policies, I don't want to be stagnant either.

And I know uh director Davis highlighted a few recommendations that I know uh Deputy Chief Baker um uh is is very open to and we're open to as an agency of improving, and I I appreciate his work on it.

Thank you.

Uh I'll ask Mr.

Davis to come to the podium.

Um I really appreciate the thoroughness of the review.

I'll I'll just reiterate everyone else here um how you're very thoroughly comparing the best practices uh with what the national organizations recommend and other um similar departments um and also just working so closely uh across different departments uh within the city.

Um I I think that uh focusing more on evidence and um being able to take insight from different stakeholders um and how you've been able to do that is is really impressive.

And um even if things have been a little rushed in uh getting out this uh recommendation to us here, I'm I'm still very grateful uh that you're able to do all this work.

I think it was uh fantastic.

Uh that being said, I I do have two questions.

Um first is um under the recommendations that you have, and forgive me, I might not understand um like how departments document things, um, but if there is a canine apprehension where a suspect surrenders, but there's not a contact where a suspect is um uh actually contacted by that canine, uh, would the GRPD still classify that as a use of force?

Tell me a little bit more about like what we document when it comes to use of force.

Our recommendation is that it that in the exact circumstances you describe, it should be classified under a use of force uh space.

Now that again, that's something that's in practice that's not in written policy.

So as to what actually occurs, I'll have to defer to the chief for now.

But the recommendation is if a canine is used in the course of apprehension that it should be it should fall under the use of forces continuum and therefore be documented.

Yeah.

So is that similar to say where an officer um draws a weapon in a situation with would that also be classified as a use of force?

That's the way we would describe it.

That is okay, interesting.

Um, and then second question is um how you're considering exigent circumstances that in which uh the life of a bystander or suspect uh or an officer is at danger.

Um, how would a officer kind of categorize that um in terms of making a decision to uh deploy a canine on a suspect?

And um is is there such an exception uh when it comes to say vulnerable population protections if there is an exigent circumstance, and what would be the um criteria for that determination?

So exigent circumstances are uh and I'm not a lawyer for the city, but uh I am a lawyer, right?

So I without going too far, I'll say exigent circumstances are very specific, has a very specific legal meaning, but I I think I understand the question you're asking, which is if something's going on, and officers need to move fast, is there something that would policy allow for?

Nothing we're recommending is saying if someone's life is in danger, officers shouldn't take the action necessary to move forward.

Uh but we do believe that all of those things should be in policy.

Right.

So the point is to make sure that policy clearly defines what those type of things look for, but there's always space, especially in emergency situations, where you might not have every word on the paper, and that's why when you have good working relationships like uh the one I I truly believe we're developing with the police department, we can have those type of conversation and work through those type of scenarios, but that only comes when you have uh leaders in both departments who are willing to do it.

And the good thing is I will say, um, since Interim Chief Traeg has been in place, there has been a willingness to do that.

Um and because I've said stuff previously, I want to say this now.

If I can't, I take a second of privilege to say, and I'm grateful for the ability to navigate that space in a better way.

Great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Mr.

Fryn.

Thank you.

I really appreciate the report and how you report it you came to us.

It was really a lot of work done and analyzing other um organizations, etc.

Um, you know, just based on some experiences earlier in life.

Um, you know, I've seen dogs go at each other pretty it's uh it's almost impossible to call them off once they've engaged in the fight.

And so I'd like to have us, you know, give us the opportunity at least to go through and and see some of the uh training and uh go in a little more depth because in some ways we have to be defenders of this policy once it becomes you know uh public and I I think it's in the best interest of how do we tell the story, and I think the public has a right to know how to act.

Um, just referencing uh being a witness to a situation, what do you do?

How do you how do you respond?

So I think there's some depth in this issue, and I wouldn't want to sacrifice the effectiveness that dogs can have in terms of apprehending people or following the track.

So um appreciate the work that's been done.

I think you know we can afford to do it just a little more.

So yeah, I don't want to put the chief on the spot, but like I know there's a standing offer for right alongs for anybody on this committee, but if you're training dogs monthly, presumably, and you've offered this for use of force stuff and grappling things and all kinds of things that people on this committee could come observe your your training protocol.

So, Deputy Chief Baker, let me know I messed up.

It's actually train we train weekly, okay.

Which I should know obviously, I was a watch commander, and you know, I would help prepare the lineup, and that that's something our men and women do uh do with a lot of training, and I'm definitely open to ride alongs.

I want to see, I want to see more because I want to actually see boots on the ground and see uh what our men and women doing because I think the narrative is quite uh different of the work that they're uh doing out there in the uh the community that appreciates the work they're doing out there.

So I'm uh well, open to it.

Okay, great.

And just a clear that wasn't a commitment, that was an openness, but logistically it should be possible.

But just to clarify, is that uh open ride along with a canine officer?

Well absolutely, it's it's it's it doesn't it's not just restricted to uh normal patrol, but uh potential for a canine handler, absolutely.

But if you're doing training, probably a little more exciting, like you could ride along with the canine all day and the canine never gets deployed.

So, that's why I think it's a name, but it's gonna be beneficial to when we do that presentation of our canine program and maybe some some videos to show some of the work they do and maybe even organize uh um you know getting some community members to a training, right?

Seeing the work that they do firsthand.

And many of us have participated in those those endeavors.

Uh also um how frequent is the K9 training though?

I know the other aspects of training is weekly.

Weekly, yes.

K9 training is weekly?

Yes, okay, all right.

All right, thank you so much.

Great.

Okay.

Uh Chief Trig, you can stay uh stay up.

Uh Mr.

Davis, you're you're cut loose.

Thank you.

Uh, we're gonna talk about crime statistics.

There it is.

Thank you, sir.

All right, um, and just to finish, you know, like I said, uh appreciate uh Director Davis' work that he done with the K9 press presentation.

I really do welcome the oversight.

I think it's uh um it's something that um is gonna help break down some some trust barriers.

Uh I'm open to it, and uh my passion for this for this job and this career, and I I've said before, I don't know, um conversations Mr.

Davis and I have had, I'd like to open up everything if I could and let you see what we do, why we do it, and have those tough conversations uh to anything that's uh you know whether it's criticism, constructive criticism or not.

So um and I believe with our relationship that's forming that's something we're gonna be able to do.

So all right, let's get started.

Um here's our auto theft uh numbers.

Uh as you see, we're still uh trending down uh from two thousand twenty-five, which is a a good thing, and the next slide just shows the monthly comparisons as we move forward and move pretty quickly here.

Uh the robbery totals, uh again trending down and not a not a huge jump, but it's it's it's going down.

I think a lot of this is contributed attributed to uh our staffing numbers are getting strong again.

I one of the things I think doesn't get the uh respect, I think that it uh deserves is officer presence is huge.

Uh having men and women out there and from the community to see that the cars rolling around, the the officers are getting out on bike again uh as we staff up is is important.

Um it it has a sense of safety that comes with it and uh for those that are thinking about doing some things they shouldn't be doing, it also maybe uh gets them to reconsider.

So seeing the robbery numbers there down.

Moving on to uh obviously the person shot.

Um you see eleven in two thousand twenty-five, see our numbers there in two thousand twenty-six.

Um obviously with uh the amount of guns you'll see we'll go to the uh to the next slide of a couple slides from now, but men and women are continuing to get guns off the street, which is important, trying to get the um the legally cessed guns out of the hands of those uh that have them.

This is just showing where our the person shot, uh newer slide that we've had for several months now, but to show you know by ward by service area kind of where uh these incidents are occurring.

Uh homicides.

Obviously, we're sitting at nine right now.

You see eight on the on the graph here, uh just because we had one on June 1st, so that's not reflected in this slide here.

Next slide.

Uh these are the names, you know, and and obviously we talk about nine homicides and we talk we show these names.

Uh these names just aren't a number and it's just not a name.

Each one of them have a story.

Um I know we have the uh the triple homicide that we have that we all remember from the uh violent domestic that we had, and when I look at this, uh these names, uh knowing that seven out of the uh these nine incidents happened just on three days of violence, which uh which is sad, you know.

Like I said, each one of these has a story, and we have dedicated men and women that um you know seek accountability and seek justice for um the family of these victims.

Um and I'm proud to say that you know, with this next slide, uh, as far as our clearance rate, we always seem to be above 20 percent above the national average.

You see that we have solved uh uh we've cleared seven of the nine homicides in two thousand twenty-six have been cleared by arrest, and that that eighth one is forthcoming.

I'm pretty confident uh with that one.

And C C 14 recorded overdoses year to date, and as I as I spoke to 160 illegally possessed guns recovered through May.

Um this is a slide we we recently uh added, obviously showing our our crime is down 8.9% over the last 10 years.

That's a that's a good thing.

And I want to see that continue to go down.

I want to continue to be the place that uh the best of the best want to come.

We we uh continue to staff up and have men and women that are uh committed to this job in this city.

Um we have a beautiful city, uh, wonderful police department, and um, you know, I'm looking forward to um being able to provide a service to the the community of of one of the best police departments in the country that's willing to uh accountability is key.

And what's not on this slide is just kind of an update on the amphitheater.

Obviously, the amphitheater uh kind of took all the news last month in the grand opening, and we've had seven events to date.

Uh I know we had talked previously about um you know the amount of officers that it was going to take the staff and how that was going to draw uh from our patrol or from our uh our uh our staffing in general.

Um but we thought we would be able to, once we got a little history with it, a little reps with it, that we'd be able to scale it back, and we've already done that.

So we started with 22 bodies, 22 officers that were working the it's um the amphitheater.

Now we're already down to 12.

So uh everything's working pretty smoothly.

Um the ingress is a little bit better than uh the you know post-incident.

We've learned that unlike the Van Andel, people clear out of the amphitheater pretty quickly.

So that uh there's only so many people that could stand on the sidewalk waiting to cross, but we've got great men and women at the department, and they're uh they're problem solving that, and that's a uh smaller problem to to deal with, but so some vehicle traffic that's maybe getting backed up a little bit, but something we're gonna continue to problem solve and make sure that uh when people come to visit the city and go to event at the amphitheater that they have a enjoyable experience.

So uh that's my presentation, quick and simple, and I'll open up for any questions.

Thanks, Chief.

Um, you know, I'm always when I'm looking at this, I'm always sort of looking for ways to maybe fine-tune the data to tell the story a little better.

So we we uh it was asked your predecessor to start uh including shootings and not just homicides, which is I think great.

Um one thing I also think that maybe we could tell our the story a little your success story a little better on clearance.

Um you know and I know, and probably a lot of people can figure out that those numbers, those prior year numbers tick up, and they tick up because of what we used to call cold cases, which is you've got a you've got a team looking at um homicides that are that have been unsolved, but I I know we never give up on them because I remember back at what you know I've I there have been cases that are decades old that I was involved in um in my other life um that you know we're still trying to figure out who did what in 1995 on a on a corner or a drive by or whatever.

Um so those numbers from 22, 23, 24, and 25 sort of tick up, but unless you got a photographic memory, you don't see that progress in the way we present it, right?

So I'm wondering if maybe in the future we could include like uh, you know, older cases cleared this year to date.

Like that'd be great because you may have that number in your head, but of those if we and and I know they don't happen like every week or every month, but like there's a non-zero number of older cases that we're clearing this year.

Um and so when I look at those seven or nine homicides, well, if it didn't clear that number eight with an arrest until January one, it it wouldn't it wouldn't show up quite we you wouldn't quite be able to see that we're not we're not letting go of those 2025 on uncleared, we're not letting go of the 2024's 2023.

We're also not letting go of like two thousand and one.

So um so showing that that work on this slide might be a way to like show that success a little better.

Just a thought.

Yeah, no mandate, just a thought, right?

And and like I said, our our men and women to uh take pride in uh putting in the work for these cases and and solving them.

Um I know uh you know a lot of people saw that the documentary uh and stuff, and that's a true example, true display of how our men and women get invested in these cases.

Uh because they build these bonds with the victims, uh families, and want to um bring some type of justice to them.

They almost take it personal and it's it's something so yeah.

Any case we could I don't care if it's 50 years.

Right.

You know, it's it's it's it's worth our time if we have uh people to investigate it.

So mayor.

Thank you, Chief.

And uh I wanted to say this uh if you go to last slide, I specifically ask the chief to include that because past few weeks there's been a narrative around the safety of our community, and are we safe?

And I would still argue we are, if not the safest mid-sized city, one of the safest mid-sized cities in the country.

Uh and part of that is the fact that we can still talk about unfortunate homicide victims by names and remember the names of those who unfortunately were lost.

There are cities where they can't do that.

They are statistics.

There are too many names to number.

But we can always get better.

And what I wanted to do is commend um our community because it's not just uh law enforcement responses, all the things around prevention and design and engagement that I think uh helps us with this narrative.

The numbers do speak for themselves.

And the crime has gone down uh by nine percent over the past 10 years, and uh since 2022, we've had a reduction, as you can see in that chart, and I think this is a very, very telling.

So this is not anecdotal, this is not um askewed narrative, it's the data.

And so um now we know we can always do better.

I'm looking forward to to improving that, but I just wanted to share that.

Yes, and I think and just want to add, um, as you stated, city manager, a lot goes into it.

It's just not the police department, it's it's the accountability piece from you know uh community leaders, city departments, um you name it.

It's a collective effort, it's a um it's it's it's a message citywide that you know if you commit a crime, especially a heinous crime, that uh you're you're going to get caught because it affects everyone in the community, and uh you're going to have to be accountable for that that choice.

So, yeah, appreciate it.

Commissioner Kilgore and then Commissioner Sasi and then uh Mr.

Fine.

Yeah, thank you, Mayor.

Uh I just want to thank you, Andrum Shreve.

Uh the sentiment and the energy of this committee to me has lightened and changed by you being here.

Um I think uh a part of that is from you being very receptive and open to just doing your part and and saying that we we aren't perfect, but I think striving for excellence also means accepting some change.

So to hear that from you was very inspiring, and um we'll be communicating that with community.

I also think when we think of some of the violence, I just want to lift up for community.

Uh Commissioner Purdue and I set aside $250,000 for youth uh and violence prevention through the Third Water Equity Fund uh that will help with some of these challenges and in addition, a new pilot that we don't have a timeline for just yet, but it's 150,000 for a psychological, so it's like a trauma emergency response pilot.

So Commissioner Purdue has been studying very hard on this topic.

Uh, and I'm excited to work with I know the GRPD and just community partners on what this could look like when we have shootings or domestic violence challenges in our community.

How do we as city hall respond even further?

I know we offer resources currently, but I'm looking forward to more of these innovative ways and leading on responding to some of the challenges uh that we've had um and then again to um to say to the public and to you, I am hopeful to see that all of the recommendations that we're given today are accepted.

Um, but I do love to hear your sentiment of, you know, you can go forward, you can add more on to the good work that you're already doing.

So thank you so much.

Thank you.

And and I just want to point out, since I've got colleagues from the first ward and the second ward up here, uh, third world equity fund actually gets to gets uh decided on by the whole commission.

So it's not a it's not something that one ward decides on.

It's it's for focused work.

But yes, thank you for our colleagues, yes.

Uh but Commissioner Sasi.

Thank you.

Um thanks for this overview.

Yeah, I I too appreciate um, yeah, sharing the story because I think it's people can always pull apart, you know, different narratives and pieces, and I'm glad that we talked quite a bit about, and I hate even saying cold cases, because um, you know, I I have a family member that was murdered here in the city of Grand Rapids in 2022, and I can tell you the amount of effort that I know this department has spent in trying to resolve that case.

Um, had a lot of different narratives, you know, it was experiencing um homeless homelessness, um, we're unhoused, but really not, and just kind of the the reality of what that looks like with somebody, and I would say past department officials and and current ones knew his name, um, but is it it's so important that those cases get solved, and so when that happens, it's a piece of closure.

And so, you know, my heart goes out to those that are also still waiting for closure on cases, but I I'm glad that we highlighted it because my family has seen that.

You know, the calls, the connection points.

You might not, you know, you're not hearing from them every day, but you know that those things are being worked on, and that's a really important piece.

And as you said, like something's going on every single day.

So it doesn't stop.

You know, we don't can't put a little line in the sand and say, oh, we're just gonna work on these ones that have not been solved.

But um, you know, I'm glad that it's the Grand Apps Police Department.

Is that it's worked for me and my family.

So thank you very much.

No, and I've said before, um, I've lost a friend of gun violence in the city.

Um, so and I don't want anybody to forget his name.

So I can easily tap into um, you know, relating to a family member that wants either closure or doesn't want uh their family or whoever their loved ones name forgotten.

So that's that's easy one for me, right?

So and our men and women are have that same feeling.

So it's that you get tremendous pride from from helping somebody just on the basic call, let alone you know something as huge as you know, uh a crime like that that is forever impactful.

Thank you.

Mr.

Fine.

Oh, I just want to make a quick comment.

Thank you.

Uh about um uh quick comment about um Mr.

Washington, bring it up with the names, and we're just talking about here.

I think that's profound because um, you know, knowing some of those stories, it it informs what we should be doing in the future, and um I think it's a way of honoring the things that that happened so without putting more words on it.

I hope we come back to that and see creative ways that we can have these stories told.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Earlier this month, the mayor and commission um issued the proclamation about gun violence awareness month.

We had several community collaborators and know the safe task force has really focused on um the victims of violent crimes, and we'll have more to report in the future.

Hopefully, with uh Safe Task Force help on how we can continue to uh remember those who who were unfortunately killed, and we look forward to the memorial as well.

Okay, thank you, Chief.

Um I see we've got some almost firefighters in the room.

So Commissioner Kilgore, thank you for the cough drop.

Appreciate it, appreciate it.

She frowned well, good afternoon, everyone.

Uh I have with me today uh Deputy Chief Borison in charge of support services, and five years in the making, our first official lieutenant of training and recruitment, Lieutenant Hartwell, so progress in city government is a slow march, and we're always moving forward.

Uh, we recognized about five years ago under the previous leadership of Chief Layman and Deputy Chief Freeman, we needed to do a better job of getting the right firefighters into our community.

We are a statistical anomaly.

We do not have problems recruiting firefighters.

What we have a problem with is recruiting the right firefighters.

And what is the right firefighter?

That is someone that will care for this community like it's their own, that has lived experiences that can relate in every part of our district and take care of our community, and that's who we look for.

We recruit good people and train them to be good firefighters.

So five years in the making, we now have our first official full-time lieutenant of recruitment.

Uh, excited for Chief Borison to walk us through all the programs that we've been doing.

And uh maybe at the end, if we have time, you can meet our new fire cadets.

Keith, good afternoon.

So working with HR, the fire department engages the community to share what public service and especially public safety has to offer the workforce of Grand Rapids.

So we have three different pathways that we're gonna highlight today.

Um those pathways are, as Chief Brown mentioned, uh, the way that we try to engage the community, ultimately to find firefighters, but also I guess just uh inform our community of what we have to offer.

Lieutenant Hartwell.

Good afternoon, everybody.

So our summer youth academy is a summer camp environment, kind of to show our community's youth the core of the fire service.

And the whole point to this is an exposure to our youth so that they don't just see us in responding to emergency scenes, but they can come down to our training center and kind of get the atmosphere that we are a lighthearted group of individuals and allow them to see the teamwork, the self-efficacy and the excellence that it takes to kind of be a part of this department and the hard work that goes into it, you know, and not just see us in the light of responding to emergencies and understand that we're only there when things are going wrong, but we can also have a good time when things are just as is.

Click here.

And our fire cadet program, as you currently see the individual sitting right here.

Uh, it's a paid internship, it's a 16-week program that allows kids that are 18 and older uh to get a real life experience of what it's like to be in a fire academy.

And as you can see here, uh we like to have a community connection with Grand Rapids, whether they were born here, still living here, that they have some type of connection to Grand Rapids, and so they hold this place close to their heart.

Um, and their fire service curious as if they're not necessarily sure this is something that they want to do.

Um, they understand what the job is and they kind of want to take another step forward and toward the fire service and learn a little more about it and be a part of the Grand Rapids Fire Department for 16 weeks.

And the refinement piece is about this as an individual that if they were to enter our hiring process currently, they probably wouldn't have the best shot again hire.

But it's it's my job to bring them along and kind of introduce them to the hiring process, what it's gonna take to pass the written exam, what is it gonna take to get through our physical agility test, and then kind of practice on some oral interview things and let them know what they will be expected to give to our interview panels and what's the best things and answers to say, so to kind of help them along.

So those are the programs that we offer, and um I'll give it back to you for us.

And the third and final pathway is hiring firefighters.

So when we hire a firefighter, they become one of our recruits.

The Grand Rapids Fire Department Recruit Academy is a six-month-long intensive program where we take great people and we train them to become great firefighters.

I up the game a little bit, Chief.

Uh, he referenced good people.

Um I'm striving for a higher bar, even.

Before each academy begins, though, there is the hiring process that an applicant for a recruit firefighter has to go through.

That process starts in March with the application opening.

March through May, individuals are able to apply for this firefighter position.

During that time, we host open houses.

The goal of these open houses is to show the applicants what the process entails, the details of that, and the expectations of the process and also of the Grand Rapids Fire Department.

Um candidates, once they uh the application period is closed, candidates take a written test, then they take a physical agility test, then they sit for a panel interview.

That panel interview involves community members.

Dr.

Golson is well aware of that, as he has been one many times.

After the panel interview, they sit for a fire chief interview, and only after passing through all of those steps and all of those lenses looking at them, they move on, and we uh basically say we would like to hire you, and now they sit for a very intensive medical evaluation.

That all happens before the class begins in January.

And as I mentioned at the beginning, the application period opens in March, and then the next class will start this coming January.

The minimum requirements to become a Grand Rapids Firefighter are pretty simple.

You just have to have a high school diploma or a GED, be over 18 years of age, and have a valid driver's license.

Our goal is to identify people with strong character, commitment to service, specifically the citizens of Grand Rapids, and identify people that are willing to work hard.

Again, we're just looking for great people, and we will train them to become great firefighters.

That is all we have for you today.

Any questions?

I was a little worried that was going to be an archived picture of my roof when you showed them hacking through the roof.

Wasn't my house.

So thanks for the presentation, city manager.

If you could either Chief Brown or Chief Morrison, we were talking uh last weekend, you were sharing the uh success of us hiring cadets into firefighters.

Do you remember that stat?

I do.

Uh so this group here brings us to 41 people that have been hired as a cadet.

Thus far, we have hired five who are currently working as Grand Rapids firefighters.

That number, though, keep in mind this group here just started.

Um we have multiple others that I know of that are applied this year that are in the process to be hired.

So that number of the 41 will continue to increase.

But put it in context, I believe you said this year for, I don't know, 1340.

How many of our firefighters are we we're hiring?

We have over 700 applic applicants thus far.

Is that accurate?

Yeah, 703 people have applied thus far.

Right.

So it just to me shows you um the opportunity to better understand the fire service and to familiarize yourself with fire.

Um, uh with fire with fire industry by being a cadet that could help your application process.

Thanks.

Um Mr.

Fine, one more comment.

Go ahead.

Um, I'm very excited, appreciate your uh introduction to both these uh groups.

I think it's a fantastic way uh not only to learn but to get excited about a career because it is um a profession that you can take a long look at, and we're still learning every day, um, even you know, um, with very sophisticated stuff going on.

And uh you can see that I'm sure when we look at the new uh fire stations.

Um I can't be strong enough about this is an awesome opportunity for a lot of guys that are it'll be a fit.

I didn't need the uh PhD or anything, but uh we need their services in the community, and I think uh okay.

Um the uh it's great career.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Thank you.

I just wanted to highlight that today.

We have our civil service board meeting at three.

Um, and I want to make sure that we talk about this in our civil service body, so that really is like the oversight of our positions and job descriptions and talk quite a bit about recruitment and retention in there.

And I just want to say um, thank you that we have a number, and I'm thinking about the water department and the you know programs that they have, and quite honestly, you know, we know that people are retiring every single day, and you know, people are deciding different things about how they want to work and live, and so just a reminder to us that um I mean it was great to highlight this.

The interest I remember at the last, I think it was actually the um at the neighborhood um summit where there was somebody who was like, I'm here because I want to talk to the fire department about a career.

Um, but just a reminder that we're really doing this across the entire city and other departments, and just how impactful uh programs like this have been.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, Mr.

Davis.

So good.

I'm waiting until the presentation's over.

Okay, one announcement.

Go ahead.

I just wanted to uh remind uh the public and the committee of our process tomorrow to meet the finalists for police chief.

We have four outstanding candidates who include our own uh interim chief uh Trig, and it would invite you to come to City Hall at 545.

You can interact and ask your questions directly to the candidates at 5 45.

Then at seven o'clock, we'll have a more formal traditional conversation that will be facilitated by the uh third party consultant that will uh be streamed live.

So seven o'clock, you can see it online on um online.

Uh 5 45, you can interact in person.

Great.

Okay, uh Mr.

Davis.

Yep.

I just wanted to recognize uh my colleagues.

Mr.

Fein mentioned earlier that as a member of this body, you know, to whatever appearances we feel like as citizen members, we are defending the work of our public safety sector, and it's an honor to be seated here.

You heard Pastor Golston mention that some of the content that we are going to see today came to us in just minutes before this meeting.

I know that there's a lot happening at City Hall, but uh I think I can speak for all of the citizen members that we're grateful to serve in this capacity, but the more information we have in advance to be able to come to this table with appropriate questions and feedback would be helpful.

And so I just wanted to reiterate that and lift up both of those comments that were made earlier.

Thank you for that.

And we'll uh Mr.

Kane is here, and I can assure you that the next meeting he will get it to you first thing in the morning when he sends the information out to uh all of the city commission gets packet that that day.

Do you have anything to add?

Uh just to say that uh historically we didn't provide uh the presentations to the committee at all in advance.

We have done that.

Um today they were out a little bit later, but um as you know, uh as you might not know, some of these presentations are tweaked to the very end.

Uh so um I can't guarantee that you're going to get it um first thing at 8 a.m.

We got some other uh people that need to see it uh at the um before it's sent out, even to the city commission.

But as soon as possible, I'll send them out to you.

And I know that there's complicated um discussions that need to be had, but um you'll get the materials as soon as we can release them.

I appreciate you responding to that.

I I know that we aren't elected officials.

Uh I am grateful for the ones who are here, but our names are on the dais, and people do come up to us in an unexpected amount of time to ask questions about public safety.

So the more information we have, the more we can prepare, the more that we can bring back the better.

And I I do appreciate you.

And as a liaison, if you have any questions or um some of the opportunities that might be afforded through uh the police department or fire department as far as training opportunities or ride-alongs or whatever, just feel free and I can facilitate that when possible.

Thank you.

Yeah, but let me let me let me clarify on behalf of um the staff, we will ensure that whatever information we have that morning, you will get it.

Now there may be some revisions and changes and things that are not available.

Well, whatever we have, you'll have it uh when we send it out.

Right on, okay.

Thank you, everyone.

Uh adjourn the meeting.