This is the April 2nd, 2026 regular meeting of the Fire and Police Commission.

President Commissioner Burgos, Evans, Fung, World Patterson, and myself, Commissioner Ramey, Commissioner Horowitz, Spence Spencer, and Commissioner Snyder are excused.

In the absence of Chair Horowitz and Vice Chair Spencer this evening, I'll be chairing today's meeting.

Also present our FPC executive director Leon Todd and Deputy Director Jay Pusick.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

We will begin with item number one, public comment.

For those who would like to speak and are here in person, please come up and sit at the front table when your name is called.

If you are appearing virtually and have registered to uh speak in it, if you have registered in advance to speak, please use the raise my hand feature in the webinar tools and unmute yourself when called upon to speak.

Uh each person will be given up to five minutes to speak, and we will begin with people who are here in person, starting with Michelle Hilbert.

Good evening.

Hello.

Hi.

Uh uh I ask you uh what conditions would increase safety for as many people as possible.

Uh this I'm um speaking to uh 212429.

I'm part of the Milwaukee Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression.

I'm uh speaking to you because public safety should mean fewer people being harmed.

Not more explanations after harm has already happened.

MPD's policy acknowledges that no task is worth reckless danger, yet MPD still allows individual officers to decide if they will prefer pursue.

If chases are this dangerous, they should not be routine, causing harm to officers, community members, the city as a whole, and our tax dollars.

These chases need to be called what they are, critical incidents and must adhere to SOP 575, releasing video to families in the public as outlined in the policy.

As an a public institution must be more transparent by continuously providing the public with data on these dangerous pursuits.

We deserve to know where and how much of our tax dollars are being spent on them.

And at the least, be honest when answering what does safety look like for us and our community.

Thank you for considering these thoughts.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Freddie De Los Santos.

Good evening.

Good evening.

Um will be uh regarding the guest house on 13.

Is this are you intending to uh address the fire and police commission?

No.

Or the uh uh um the next voting and a so I am in the room very interesting.

Sorry, sorry.

That was 301A.

Okay, so that's what he said.

Okay, good.

Thank you.

Diego Garcia.

Good evening.

Good evening, Commissioners.

My name is Diego Garcia.

I'm a member of the Milwaukee Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression.

I uh I normally think it's bad form to come out swinging, you know, talking about you know, the FBC doesn't do this, they don't do that, you know, yada yada yada.

But I I I really need to, I guess, talk about you know the lackluster, you know, changes, I guess that were discussed at that uh committee meeting the other day.

What's being proposed lacks real power, you know, to keep our streets and community members safe.

We have been very clear on what our demands are, which was formed by families that have been affected by these reckless police cases, and this is nothing short of mild.

You know, I'm trying to keep it very politically correct here.

Well, one thing that you know was told to me is that you know there will have to be multiple SOPs uh needing to be changed, you know, if our demand regarding the footage and these critical incidents need to be for you know once be fulfilled.

But you know, like there's so many steps to this.

However, you know, I say so what?

You know, so what if it takes longer to have qualitative positive changes in our community, you know, and its well-being, it's it's a very small price to pay.

You know, if it takes like a few months, so the heck what, you know.

You know, we've heard commissioners of this board talk about you know, needing input from the public, which I'm still yet to see any sort of public-facing meeting, you know, talking about these car chases.

Yeah, the Milwaukee Alliance has been out since you know January late January, you know, collecting over 224 signatures, you know, in a few months here.

And what what goes across the board is that you know they want real changes to this policy, not not just you know, a single line of text being changed, you know, based off of what Minneapolis has.

You know, from here on out, you know, the alliance will be working with members of the common council, you know, to hopefully modify 660 into being something that can actually you know have like real parameters rather than having these you know chases, you know, to keep going and going.

I I personally respect this board still, but if things like you know, this lackluster recommendation continue to happen, it's gonna get a lot harder for me to keep defending this board.

So I'll also cede my time.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Gladyl Higgins.

Good evening.

Good evening.

How are you guys?

Good.

I'm here.

We got in uh Can you come to the mic just a little closer so we can hear thank you.

I'm here regarding the police chase.

Um that was my son, Anthony Higgins that was killed in the chase of Jalen Locks.

He was here in 2024, June.

He was sitting at a red light, police was high speed chasing the car.

And the car that they was has be chasing hit my son's work van.

And then knocked it 50 feet and severed his spine.

And he was paralyzed six for 16 months, and he died from his injuries.

And something really has to be done about this because innocent people are getting hurt.

That was my only son.

I've been here before, and the thing y'all came up with is just not working.

They still chasing people.

People are still dying.

Is it worth it?

Is it worth the chase?

But innocent people dying.

Nine times out of ten, half of them getting back out on the street anyways.

My son is gone.

He'll never come back.

I wear them every day.

All day.

The coat, yeah, his business hat.

Every day.

I'm never without it.

I'm sitting at the graveside.

I sit there the other day for like three hours, hoping talking to him, knowing he can't talk back.

But you know you hope and you pray.

But what can you do?

He's not here anymore.

So please come to some decision that will help the chasers.

And the other innocent people out here.

So we won't have no more death like this.

He suffer.

He suffered really bad.

So I thank you.

Thank you.

I have a good evening.

Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

Tiffany Stark.

Good evening.

I always have a problem with this thing.

Okay.

My name is Tiffany Stark.

I'm a Milwaukee Lince member, acute mental health social worker, and community advocate.

I'm very appreciative to each one of you commissioners for listening to us, the community, and trying to get SOP 660 right to save more innocent lives in the future, as those lost should it still be here with us.

During the FPC oversight and accountability committee meeting held on the 24th, I became emotional.

As I realized that was the day, the fifth month mark to the day of my daughter losing her father to a reckless and senseless vehicle police pursuit where I had to where he had to suffer 16 months prior to being paralyzed from the neck down from the chase crash on 6924.

I am so invested in this process that I watched the video of 324 FC Oversight and Accountability Committee meeting to make sure I did not miss anything that was discussed.

During this meeting, it was discussed that MPD will implement a dashboard on the website to update data every six months of vehicle police pursuits along with the regular reports to FPC every six months on these vehicle police pursuits, which is one of our demands.

Maybe with this data updates, MPD can finally update the vehicle police pursuit deaths from 2025 to reflect 10 as my daughter's father has still not been added to the death toll in his life matter.

This is very disrespectful, and I would like to know when MPD can update this or what needs to be done for this to happen.

As there seems to be some loose ends that need to be addressed before this can be recommended to the full con city common council for a vote.

So with our demands of changing the wording to exclude or about to commit a violent felony, as this relies on the individual officers' discretion from the FPC oversight meeting on the 24th, I understand that MPD has concerns with changing this wording.

But if it was also but it was also brought up that Minneapolis recently had changed this and had good examples for further reference.

Did this happen?

That this will not be addressed as more work is needed to resolve this issue.

Our demand for SOP 575 and any video of pursuits must be made available to families 48 and 15 days to the public.

As of now, I understand FPC Oversight Accountability Meeting said two SOPs would need to be changed for this to happen due to state law.

But is this this is my ultimate goal?

I do not trust MPD and would like to see videos in these vill vehicle police pursuits to actually know they are following SOP 660.

It was suggested by one of the commissioners to just add the requirement to share dash cam and body cam as a separate item if it doesn't conflict with state law.

I do believe this would be an easier go around than changing to other SOPs, but I do not trust MPD to do this as it wouldn't be written in the SOP.

In my world as a social worker, if it's not documented or written, it didn't happen.

So I'm worried about this.

And this would be addressed and would this be addressed today as part of the recommendation to the full common council.

I know this isn't easy, and there are many moving parts to make these changes, but our demands have not changed.

I am concerned that our demands will not be recommended today to the full city common council for a vote.

I know we do not want to sit idle and keep putting this on the agenda, but pushing it too quickly, important parts may get lost.

I again thank you all for being here and being committed, working with us to make 660 better policy that saves lives and not take more of them in the future.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And Ms.

Stark, MPD did inform me that uh they will update the statistics uh to reflect that that was a fatality that occurred.

It'll be reflected in the 2024 data when the incident occurred at as opposed to 25.

But that would be uh I appreciate that because every time I hear something on the news, it it triggers me and pisses me off.

So thank you.

I appreciate fixing that.

Thanks.

Brian Verdeen.

Good evening, sisters and brothers.

Um I want to say first of all, I really appreciate all of your service uh and I really appreciate uh the sincerity that I've felt uh coming to these meetings.

And thanks so much.

You know, I think I remarked that uh I hate to come to these meetings, but uh no, I think we ought to meet once a week.

Uh only because I do respect all your efforts and the research that is research that I know that you have all been doing.

Um and I think we need to take our time on this matter for that for that uh matter because um we want to get it right.

And I think it was you uh Mr.

Spencer that remarked about uh how well when the Kia Boys was going nuts and then the rules were full, and then people said we want chases, we want chases.

Well, that was then.

Now, thank goodness I think the Kia boys have settled down and people are getting killed in these streets needlessly because of these darn chases.

So that was then, this is now the and then the commission responded back then and it's reinstituted the chases.

Now it's time to hold back and pull back on these chases.

Uh and I think you would all agree if those of you that have been uh attending and listening uh virtually or in person, real I think dozens and dozens of people have come forward now and saying we need to uh figure out a better way to do this.

Um that was then, and uh it occurs to me as well uh that our cops really like chasing our young people.

Witness base shore.

I don't think any of them young people actually committed a crime, but I'd be damned they was chasing them, you know.

Let's let's catch these kids as if they're criminals.

They was out there trying to have fun.

I think that's what we used to do when I was a kid.

Uh I'll tell you about some old stories when we was down by the down by the lake in the fountain down there, and we gathered around there, and the police ended up chasing us and tear gassing us.

All we wanted to do was hang out and be together.

You know, that's what young people like to do.

But I when I saw the video, oh my god, look how they like chasing our kids and tackling them, and and now they've committed a crime because of resisting being tackled and thrown to the ground.

So it's not a good situation.

And again, you know, we we still don't trust the police.

So and then the other cop is hanging on to a hanging on to the side of a truck.

My God, is it that serious?

And he was a veteran cop is that is it that serious that you can't like maybe let go and and you know, you don't think you can catch a truck later on down the street.

So I think it has a lot to do with the culture and the mentality that still exists amongst MPD.

My God, we got to catch those people.

Uh whatever, you know, what uh at all costs.

So uh, so we do not.

I think we should take our time, get it right.

Uh we have uh um Milwaukee Alliance has been in the streets.

I'd like to present to you uh over 220 signatures that we've collected just recently in a few days uh that people want to bring an end to the police chases.

So the public is out here, the public is in support of us ending these stupid chases and coming up with a better way.

And the fact that uh chairperson Horwitz is not here, who I thought also kind of agreed with us that this is a critical incident if people die in as a matter of these things.

So something must be spoken to in the amended version or whatever that these are critical incidents when deaths occur because of this, it may or may not be the police's fault, but the public should have a right to have video within two days, uh within the families within two days, and the public within 15 days.

So lastly, I just want to say that we're a little upset.

This is totally unrelated, but our comrade uh Salah Sasur was apprehended by the ICE people yesterday.

You know, these are terrorist organizations.

This ICE outfit, and uh, so we're a little upset today.

Uh so excuse us for being despondent and pissed off because uh I mean I'm certain sure this is gonna come up again in the future, but uh again, um whatever you guys can do to help reel in uh those folks here in Milwaukee.

Hopefully, you know, we kind of thought maybe they're not around, but lo and behold, they're rounding up people anyway.

Y'all know that it was something that happened way back in Israel, or when he was uh in a police state, and then terrorists apartheid Israel, they're digging up something on that happened way back then.

Well, like they said in South Africa.

Uh, if you if you weren't arrested, if you weren't in jail, then you weren't really uh uh a freedom fighter or a man to begin with.

So uh anyway, that's it.

Again, I really appreciate uh your listening ears, your passion for this matter, and uh hopefully we won't have to keep be coming back here for this matter, and let's get it straight.

Um for and again it speaks to we got to get rid of Act 12.

You guys don't have the power you used to have.

You you could make policy.

Now we want you to we want you to make policy, you know.

We want you to make policy.

So let's tied your brilliant lawyer get with the what's his face upstairs, the uh city attorney, and let's sue these bastards.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Oh, something like that, probably.

Thank you.

Avillio Miranda Moranda.

Yeah, yeah.

Uh Oscar, and then the uh last name is uh hard to make out.

Starts with a C.

Oscar is there an Oscar C Milwaukee 7.

That might have been the same church.

Milwaukee's oh okay, yeah.

Pierce Nine House.

Good evening.

Good evening.

Um thank you for the opportunity to speak.

My name is Pierce.

I'm with the Milwaukee Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression.

I want to start out by saying I'm pleased that movement has been made on recommending changes to SOP 660 by this body now heading to the common council.

Uh but the current language still does not go far enough in the language or is about to commit a violent felon, it should be struck.

I think the scenario provided by the assistant chief in the last meeting of numerous people in masks and armed with guns taken off in a vehicle is so outlandish and frankly straight out of an action movie.

A cinematic hypothetical scenario does not justify the very real and awful consequences of this policy, including the 10 deaths it has caused over the last year.

I understand wanting the MPD to be agreeable to a change in SOP 660, but it doesn't sit well with me that Norman would simply like the policy to remain as is.

I think at this point that is unacceptable and careless.

Agreement from MPD shouldn't be the priority, but instead actually maximizing public safety and holding this department accountable.

Further, the Milwaukee public is, of course, already well aware of police chases because they've experienced it, but we demand more data for the community, including releasing footage of vehicular critical incidents, more regular publication of the number of pursuits and accents as well as costs stemming from lawsuits over pursuits by the MPD.

The community deserves to know the full cost of the current Chase policy beyond what they already know and have seen.

Um further, I think, in light of the recent arrest of our comrades Salah Sasor by ICE, it is beyond time that Norman give us an answer uh for what his department's concrete plan is for protecting the people of Milwaukee from ICE, and you should hold him to that as well.

Thank you for your time.

Avillio Miranda.

All right.

Uh Bridget, do we have anyone registered uh to speak virtually this evening?

Thank you, not able to anyone to speak virtually tonight.

Second there being no further comments.

This concludes the public comment portion of this meeting.

Are you gonna speak?

Pause.

No.

Okay.

Okay.

I will now read the items on the consent agenda.

After I do, any commissioner may remove any item to the regular agenda for discussion or appropriate action.

Items not removed may be adopted by general consent without debate.

Item two, FPC 212463.

Resolution relating to the March 19th, 2026 meeting minutes.

Item three, FPC 212464.

Resolution relating to the appointment date change of a maintenance assistant within the Milwaukee Police Department.

Item 4, FPC 212465.

Resolution relating to the appointment date changes for the police services specialist investigator positions within the Milwaukee Police Department.

Uh two appointment date changes.

Item five, FPC 212466.

Resolution relating to the forensic print examiner one eligible list for the Milwaukee Police Department.

Item seven, FPC 212467.

Resolution, excuse me, resolution relating to the HVAC maintenance technician three eligible list for the Milwaukee Police Department.

And item seven, FPC 212468.

Resolution relating to the police forensic services manager eligible list for the Milwaukee Police Department.

This concludes the consent agenda.

Would any of the commissioners like to remove any of these items from the consent agenda to the regular agenda?

If there are no objections, the items on the consent agenda will be adopted by general consent.

Are there any objections?

Hearing no objections, these items are adopted.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

I will now read the item under examinations, which is item 8, FPC 212469.

Resolution relating to the approval of the police officer, lateral or sorry.

Police officer transfer or lateral eligible list for the Milwaukee Police Department.

Do any commissioners have any comments or questions regarding this item?

Is there a motion on this matter?

Move approval.

Second.

Any discussion.

I will take a voice voice a voice vote on this item.

All in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any F sentence.

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

I will now read the items under old business, starting with item nine, FPC 212429.

Resolution recommending modification of Milwaukee Police Department Standard Operating Procedure 660.

Vehicle Pursuits and Emergency Vehicle Operations.

So at the this is the oversight and accountability committee did take up this matter at its last meeting in in late March.

Well, the the final action was to recommend adoption of this resolution as is.

One on SOP five the issue of video release, which could be addressed through other SOP changes.

Um I guess I'm one of the commissioners that would like to see um video release addressed.

Um I think it was maybe the last open session um that somebody sort of asked, like, do the SOPs talk to each other, and yes they do.

Um, and so I think that's the reason why um we want to pick the SOP that is most appropriate and like most closely already has that language in it um in order to make that change.

So that would be my reasoning for um wanting to recommend changes to a different SOP that's not 660 in order to accomplish the video release that I do want.

Um and then with regards to the language about is about to, um, I think there was some conversation with AC Sarnow about maybe having conversations with the chief about whether um uh language could be additional language could be adopted from the Minneapolis policy that specifies I guess sort of restrictions or clarification on what is about to means.

Um has that uh had a chance to happen yet.

AC Sarnow, did you hear Commissioner Fong's question?

Uh yes, I did.

Um sorry about that.

I was having some camera issues.

I did have uh the discussion with the chief about this and uh gave him an overview of the uh the discussions from uh the uh oversight and accountability meeting.

Um I can't speak to what uh Minnesota state law has and um you know has listed under their state law, but Wisconsin State Statute 16584 sub-7 specifically describes what a violent crime is and breaks down all those um uh respective felonies, so we will not be adding a list of felonies to our SOP.

Sorry, I think um I was asking about the language is about to commit a crime, and there is some I don't have it open right now, um, but there's some language in the Minneapolis SOP that describes sort of like uh having articulable reasons for um for thinking someone is about to commit a crime.

Um so it wasn't it wasn't a list of felonies that I was asking about.

Okay, then I must be confusing you with um uh your uh question with Commissioner Spence, but we did touch upon the language um has committed, is about to um uh has committed, is committing, or about to commit a felony, and we're gonna keep the language uh in as it is.

Okay, thank you.

Uh Mr.

Chair, can I follow up on that?

Um, just uh for for clarity's sake, um the language, um my understanding of the language or is about to commit a violent felony, uh that doesn't give officers discretion uh to stop people just because they have a hunch or you know, unspecified um uh feeling or intuition that they're gonna do something, they would need probable cause to establish essentially an intent crime, right?

That is correct.

Okay.

And how often, to your knowledge, if you know uh has someone you know, pursue how often does it does it happen that officers pursue uh vehicles because someone is about to commit a violent felony as opposed to has committed or is committing?

Do you know the answer?

I don't know the specifics, but it's uh the uh the the the vast majority of our violent felony pursuits are for individuals who have already committed the crime.

Um when I present data for um what will be the six-month set in June, I intend to break down all the felonies for this year so um into uh for those three specific related categories or three uh specific related justifications, excuse me.

Okay, thank you.

Other commissioners have questions, comments AC Sarno Yes, Commissioner Well Patterson.

Can you help us as a citizen?

I know that you're representing the police department, but as a citizen to add comfort in the concerns that you're hearing from the community.

Are you able to do that as it relates to the speed, the what um feels reckless, even though you know I know you're wearing both both hats because you're a citizen, but can you offer some sense of layman's terms to help us to understand and bring comfort to us citizens?

Um I'm I apologize, Commissioner, and I just don't quite understand the question.

Okay, they're coming week after week, wanting to understand the space around the and I'm trying to understand it too.

I'm wrapping my my brain around it as well.

But as a citizen wanting to understand the how important it is to have these chase.

Yes, we need to catch the person, but the space around what seems to be reckless.

I think that's why they're filling the the galley week after week.

Can you help us in terms of understanding that a little bit more with your citizen hat on as well?

Um still not understand?

I'm just I'm gonna have to uh I'm gonna have to think about that, and I can address that I think at a future meeting.

Uh let me get my head wrapped around it and um I will uh respond back.

Um if members of the public can please refrain from from making comments.

Thank you.

Um director and commissioners, that's the part that I am I mean we can understand the um 660 what it says, but I think the concern is the what appears to be reckless.

So are we able to move closer to that so that there's a space that brings us a little closer versus this is the law, this is what we're doing, versus the concerns of the community or and the concerns of the community versus the verses, and maybe burgos, I don't I don't know.

I think this is why the room continues to be full, just wanting to have some understanding of how can we come closer to um the concerns that are occurring in our neighborhoods with the high speed chasing.

Commissioner War Patterson, maybe I can ask it differently if I'm hearing you correctly.

Try.

Um so AC Sarno, maybe addressing how training would look different and aspect to now that we have the change in the rules and the rules are changing, how are we going to be communicating to reduce and hopefully eliminate um what we're seeing happening over the years?

Is there going to be a change potentially, let's say, in training to help make sure officers understand the rules in front of them?

Maybe that helps.

I don't know.

Yeah, whenever if the uh uh well, if this uh modification were to move forward to the common council and the common council adopts it, then yes, um it would come in uh two forms.

Um Chair Raimi and Commissioner World Patterson would come in the form of um of training and it would come in the form of messaging regarding the policy change.

Uh keep in mind too, we are um one of the other uh uh one of the other topics that has been brought up is pursuit mitigation technology.

Uh we are moving forward with uh Star Chase and we are moving forward with the Haas Mobile Alert.

I should have a uh better understanding of what the deployment for that looks like for us come June when uh I present uh six-month statistics.

Thank you.

Comment here, please.

Um again, referring back to that.

I was a police officer, I was involved in chases, I was detective and an alternative detectives involved in the investigation of incidences when chases became critical or accidents and uh people deaf, violent injury.

Um it's very difficult to understand what reckless is because every one of you and everyone us here have a different opinion of what reckless is.

Um that's that's the training issue that has to come through the the police department, what recklessness is.

I I really appreciate the the points from the alliance here on this paper.

Um I'm just not quite sure if you say no chases at all, or uh under what circumstances, because that's that's what we need to talk about, because are we going to outlaw all chases?

No, that's not good.

I I don't but I don't see it, you know, and we need to when can we chase?

So we can talk about this because the police have a different perspective.

The police are looking at catching the bad guy, right?

That's not the intent, and sorry it happens, but that's not the intent.

And so what what and when should the police be limited and allowed to?

That's the question we need to get to.

You know, yes, that are we saying no chases at all ever?

Then that's that's one point.

If we're saying under what circumstances, and then we need to train and and define because I think recklessness is one thing, you may think recklessness is another.

And I never chased a lot of people, but I did make some squat chases.

And uh I just under what circumstances and what because the police are gonna tell you what what they understand is recklessness according to the law.

Well, what's yours?

Every situation is different, every situation is different, right?

When I see when the police see something on the street, is that a reckless act?

Is that act need to be investigated?

And if I'm gonna have to go and chase, at what point does it become too reckless for me to keep driving, right?

There's a different everybody that's training situations, and I agree we need to have some discussion, definition, training, but the police are good.

I can give you a legal definition of recklessness is right, but that's not what your opinion is of recklessness, and what our opinion is reckless and what the fire and what the police department opinion of reckless is.

So we can talk about what do you want, what does the community want?

Because the police their goal is catching the aggressive act, the criminal acts, enforce the law, and their training is a little bit different, and maybe they think differently than we do.

Right?

I'm I'm I've been out 13 years out of the police department.

Um so I I get the point.

I understand the numbers here.

I really do, because I've I've investigated these kind of incidences.

I want the community to tell us, you know, we because the police not telling you what the what they want.

This is what we want the police chief Norman and his command staff have given us 660.

That's what that's what they think is the best policy that they can think of right now.

And we're trying to think about it from the civilian side of it, and you're thinking of it from the activist side of it, and I'm there's there's different perceptions here.

Let's sit down and talk about when can you, what is reckless, so that you understand what the police are saying is reckless.

Because I'm not sure if you understand what I when I when I say reckless, what's reckless to me, may not be reckless to you.

Especially, you know, when you've got some negative consequences, horrible consequences, right?

Then never nothing's reckless enough for that.

All right, I get it.

I totally get it.

And the the commission gets it.

We're just in the middle here trying to get the best policy, thinking about both sides of the situation here, the more the police side of it, the community side of it, because we're all community people too, right?

And we drive through the city, and I see the reckless driving out there.

You see the reckless driving out there.

What does how does that relate to enforcement?

All right, and that's that's what we got to sit down and talk about.

Because we I I see the points, I hear what you're saying.

The police department hears it, but the police department says this is the best policy for us.

And obviously, you don't agree with that.

That's true.

You don't agree.

Well, let's sit down and talk about what is reckless.

How can we define reckless?

All right, and when do we stop chasing?

When is it too reckless and when is it not enough?

That's the question.

I mean, we I I I as I see it.

I teach criminal justice.

I I ask my students, what is too reckless?

What is too much and what's too little?

When do we stop thinking about the victims?

Positive and negative.

And I'm just saying we need to talk more.

This is I think it's a good poly.

The police department thinks it's a good policy.

I think that we could have more restrictions, but um I'll tend to lean on what the police department says, but I also hear what you're saying, and I agree that we need some some changes.

So let's sit down and talk some more.

This is gonna go forward.

We can always keep adjusting.

That's all I have to say.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Any other commissioners have any comments or questions?

May I follow up?

Sure.

So based on it this, if this is approved, what's the later part?

Where do we uh how often can this continue to come forward so that we can have a more um malleable policy that the community is saying, yes, I understand, I get it, because we have changed.

We've gone from no chasing to chasing, and not that we want to go back to no chasing, but uh where's the later part?

How often can we continue to bring this forward?

So I don't think there is necessarily uh a right or wrong answer to that.

Uh I think generally speaking, you don't want uh flip-flop or move back and forth between different um extremes or polls on a policy between a restrictive and a permissive policy.

Um but that I mean I I I don't think that I I would say it like this.

I I think ideally um if you're gonna make a recommendation about the policy, you would take your time, be deliberate and include everything that you want to within that as opposed to doing having piecemeal recommendations.

I think that uh if the recommendations are related to other SOPs, that is a separate matter though.

But again, that this is just my personal opinion.

Mr.

Chair.

So sorry, go ahead, Commissioner World Patterson.

I think you didn't finish your thought.

Yeah, just are we are we close enough for vote today?

Um I'm not I don't think so.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

No, thank you, Commissioner Fall.

Um no, I'm I'm glad that you finished with that, Commissioner World Patterson.

I think I walked into this meeting, um, sort of like crushed by the moral urgency to prevent further harm, um, because I feel like this is taking a long time, and I guess I'll just be transparent that personally that makes me very fearful because the police obviously are continuing to be able to chase every day um sort of as is, and so that has certainly made me feel like changes are needed urgently.

Um at the same time hearing from the community, I think it's pretty clear that folks here today would rather us take our time and also perhaps be ready with other SOP adjustments at the same time, so that these are sort of ideally going through the common council process at the same time so that it's clear how they are related.

Um and so I definitely walked in here thinking that I just want some changes to prevent further harm now.

Um it really matters to me what the community says and hearing from the community that um it seems pretty consistent that folks would like us to take more time um is impactful for me and meaningful for me.

So um I guess while I originally had wanted to um sort of pass the recommendation as is, um I want to at least for me personally as a commissioner, uh I want to honor what the community is saying today, um, and perhaps Commissioner World Patterson to your point takes some more time to have more conversations.

Um I also want to note that uh as everyone is painfully aware, whatever it is that we try to pass still needs to go through the common council.

Uh so it still needs to be something that's sort of passable through the common council, and I'm trying to be cognizant of that as well as we have these discussions.

So I guess that's me saying personally I would like to take our time as the communities asked for and have more conversation.

Thank you.

Um Commissioner Evans, I see your hand, yes, sir.

Yeah, I would definitely agree with that.

Um, and I'm hearing the public testimony, and I understand uh I'm living in the city of Milwaukee over here on Burleigh for the last 30 years, so I know the crime, I know the cases, I hear the sirens, I understand uh the danger in in both ways.

And I heard a public uh one of the public testimonies said we gotta get this right.

We gotta get this right.

And and I'm hearing everybody's comment, and I'm hearing Commissioner Bur Burgos not totally get it.

Uh I get it to the end, because we all want uh uh the the the criminal or or the perpetrator to be caught, but where is the line drawn for recklessness?

And so I think that take the time to really get it right, and like Commissioner World Patterson said uh to Commissioner uh I'm sorry, uh Chief Sarno.

Like what language what what can we put in the SOP that would like show that humanistic side?

I guess and World Patterson, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but that is what it's about because we are citizens and we we want to protect everyone, and when we hear of the fatalities of the chases, that's heartbreaking.

Go slow to go fast.

Go slow to go fast.

And let's get it right.

Thank you.

Oh no.

The police department.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um thank you, Commissioner Evans.

Um any other questions or comments at this time.

Okay.

Um is there a motion on this matter?

Actually, I guess my question is what motion am I supposed to hold to hold it?

Yeah, if you want it, if you want more time to consider and deliberate, the the proper motion would be to hold to the call of the chair.

Okay, so moved.

I make a motion that we hold this item to the mo to the call of the chair.

Second.

A roll call or you can do a voice vote for that.

Can I have a voice vote in agreement with that?

All in favor, sound um would say an aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Those opposed abstentions.

So this item will be held to the call of Commissioner Hoare, which I am a substitute.

Uh no.

Um, and then we can move on.

So director Todd, please move to the next agenda item, please.

Next item is item 10, FPC 212450.

Resolution to amend FPC rules to add promotional preference points for volunteer service to be known as CoCroft points.

Uh so um this matter was originally considered uh at the last FPC meeting.

Uh so per FPC rules, it is now uh it would be appropriate for the commission to vote on the substance of the matter, although that's not required.

Uh I have uh uh just for the record, I want to note that I did make one change uh since the last meeting, and specifically uh the prior version uh said that the volunteer service points would have or volunteer service would have to be with a 501c3 registered nonprofit in good standing or a public school uh at the request of Commissioner Snyder.

I added language so it's uh a 501c3 or a public charter or private school.

Um, and I believe that was his intent.

Uh other than that, the changes are the same.

Um Mr.

Chair, I'll turn it back over to you.

Um thank you.

Um, I mean, just for understanding and and to the Cochroft family, thank you for being present.

Um, you know, we wanted to make sure that future leaders and um whether fire department, whether police department understood, respected, loved and passion to be of service outside of the job.

And of course, um Commissioner Cochroft to us, who is not only a part of the fire police commission, but a part of the fire department.

We know where his heart was and and and service and volunteer was a part of who he was, thus why the Co Croft Points um was named after the him and honoring who he was internally and what he truly truly believed in everyone.

And I have the fortunate opportunity when I joined the commission to work alongside of him, and so um this is an honor.

So I'm gonna get off my soapbox and and and open it up for any commissioners with questions or comments at all.

Just one procedural item, yes, sir.

Milwaukee police association did uh submit a letter to the commission um dated April 2nd.

Uh that letter is in the file.

Thank you.

Any questions?

Any comments?

Is there a motion on this matter?

Mr.

Chair, um, I guess a brief comment and then a motion.

Uh my brief comment is just that um acknowledging um the specific times at which promotional examinations come up, um, and acknowledging that some promotional examinations um have already passed for the police department this year.

I would like to move approval effective for jobs issued on or after June first.

And just to clarify, that would be uh job announcements issued on or after uh June 1st.

Thank you.

Uh second any discussion.

May I just offer a comment?

I just want to also say that I appreciate uh Commissioner Cochroft's service, and I think that this is um just fantastic to keep his memory to keep his memory uh amongst us.

So thank you for coming.

Thank you, Commissioner Royal Patterson.

As this matter involved a proposed rule change, I will take a roll call vote in alphabetical order.

Commissioner Burgos.

Hi.

Commissioner Evans.

Commissioner Follow.

Aye.

Commissioner World Patterson.

Aye.

And the chair votes aye.

Motion carries.

Thank you all very much for being here.

And his name will continue to live on here.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

Next item is item 11, FPC 212451 resolution to amend FPC rules relating to police aids.

This matter was also considered at the last FPC meeting and held over per FPC rules.

Effectively, this would reduce the maximum amount of time that a police aide.

I'm sorry, the minimum.

The minimum amount of time that a police aide would be required to serve from two years to one, provided that they reach the age of 21.

So once they reach 21 and have done at least one year within the police aid program, they would be eligible to move for uh and be promoted and go into the next police officer recruit class.

Thank you.

Do any commissioners have any comments or questions regarding this item?

Is there a motion on this matter?

So moved.

Second.

Any discussion?

Again, I will take a roll call vote in alphabetical order.

Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans.

Aye.

Commissioner Fong.

Aye.

Commissioner Morrill Patterson.

Aye.

And the chair votes aye.

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

I will now read the items under new business starting with item 12, FPC 212471.

Communication from the Milwaukee Police Department relating to recent changes to MPD standard operating procedures or instructions.

The first is the creation of a new policy, standard operating procedure.

Make sure I have the 100 foot pursuits.

And then there's an amendment to SOP 320 K9s.

Thank you.

Can a member of the department please provide an overview of these policy changes?

I would love to uh Mr.

Chair Assistant Chief Craig Center.

I'll start with SLP 320 canines, which uh adds language now for the uh ESD uh detection canine.

ESD stands for electronic storage and detective canine.

We were made aware of this in uh spring of uh last year, and through a grant through the National Computer Forensics Institute, the NCFI, um, we are able to um we were approved for the grant, and we got a canine um that um is able to detect and locate electronic storage devices.

Uh this uh dog whose name is Ellis, he's a black lab.

Uh he went through his training in December and he came to us in January, is assigned to the Sensitive Crimes Division Internet Crimes Against Children, and assists with the uh search and recovery of digital items from uh multitude of locations uh to locate evidence related to um some of the most uh significant and horrendous crimes against children.

Um the dog also serves as a secondary role, he's a therapy dog for the Census Crimes Division, um, as that unit deals with again some of the worst crimes against children cases, and it would be a great benefit to um um assisting with the stress of that unit.

Um I don't have any success stories yet because uh Ellis is still uh I consider to be a puppy and he's still uh learning and he's still um um uh uh he's still learning and uh we should have some success stories down the road to share with the commission, but uh looking forward to seeing the work that uh the dog does.

Uh the second SOP is a newly created SOP, SOP 100.

Uh this is the Department's uh foot pursuit policy.

It's hard to believe that after 27 and a half years, the department never had an SOP that covered for pursuits.

Other major city departments did, and the idea in the creation for it was born out of the use of force committee, which also has some civilian involvement.

Uh, this policy establishes essential guidelines to ensure that officers conduct foot pursuits in a manner that prioritizes safety, legality, and uh sound tactical judgment.

Uh we recognize that there is an inherent danger to the foot pursuits, and that's reflected in page one under purpose.

Uh as such, requiring officers to continuously balance the need to apprehend suspects with the risk post themselves, the public and the fleeing individual policy mandates that foot pursuits occur again only when supported by articulable or reasonable suspicion, and that's uh also listed front and center on page one and explicitly prohibits initiating pursuit based solely on a person's flight or avoidance from the police.

Uh this also enhances uh public safety through clear expectations, including maintaining situational awareness, avoiding ambush risks, and considering safer alternatives such as perimeter containment uh or delayed apprehension.

We also felt supervisory oversight was a key component and should be listed there, requiring supervisors to monitor, manage or terminate pursuits when the risks outweigh the need for immediate apprehension.

Also laid out the expectations for officers that they already do, uh providing radio uh timely radio communication, activation of body worn camera, the complete uh documentation to ensure accountability, transparency uh as such.

Uh overall, I'll just end this by saying that this policy strengthens um constitutional policing, it reduces uh and mitigates preventable injuries and risk and supports our coordinator response and aligns with best practices and standards and um uh promoting a uh well what what we consider to be what the what the use of force committee highlighted as a safe and more effective outcome for the community, the officers and those that um flee from us.

So happy to answer any questions about that or the canine SLP changes.

Thank you.

Um do any of the commissioners have questions or comments?

Mr.

Chair.

Yes.

Um allow me to indulge my inner copagandist, but AC Sarnow, if you're gonna talk about a dog next time, I need to see pictures of the dog.

I kind of figured somebody would ask, yeah.

Or bring the dog, either way.

Either way.

Um I did have a question um about uh the foot pursuit SOP or a couple of questions.

Um there is um there's a lot in this that I really like uh that I wanted to highlight.

Um so I guess my first question was um what uh are there any particular sources for the best practices or other policies that you all looked at when coming up with this?

Yeah, there was a number of departments.

I think Baltimore comes to mind that comes to mind, and there was I think at least three other departments that we looked at, uh, Commissioner, when we kind of went down the road to craft our policy, um, and then also, like as you said, policies speak to the to each other, at least our policies do.

So you'll see a lot of references to other policies within this policy.

You'll see similar language from other policies within this policy, but we felt that at this point in time that that all that needed be included.

I'm particularly uh I would take note of page two uh which uh I uh highlights the uh decision when to pursue.

And there's a footnote in bold that says, although foot pursuits are permissible under the above circumstances, members are expected, as I said before, to weigh the seriousness of the offense against the immediate need to apprehend and the consideration of the member uh and public safety.

For example, the need to immediately apprehend a curfew violator is minimal, while the need to apprehend an armed carjacking suspect is more significant given the danger that um uh they present to the the uh public.

So I believe that this uh captures the spirit and intent of what we're uh what the uh committee was trying to accomplish and it's reflected here.

Yes, thank you for that.

I I just also wanted to highlight um there are a number of things, I'll just pick a couple, um, but I appreciate the um the SOP's acknowledgement that um if the identity of the suspect is established or could be established at a later time um and there's no immediate threat that that affects things.

Um I feel like that feels common sense, but like that's a very good thing to have in here.

Um and I also wanted to highlight um I think it's on page 10.

Um, but I appreciated um under um discussing supervisor uh evaluation um that points B and C were included, whether during the pursuit any tactics used could have been improved, or whether any missteps were made, and if so, how those could be addressed or avoided in the future.

Um I just want to acknowledge, I think that's sort of exactly the type of thing that I'm looking for here.

We talk a lot about how we how important it is to be able to um take a look at the dynamic things that all of the departments that we're interacting with need to do on a daily basis, um, and how to include in the culture or in SOPs such as you have here this sort of continual process improvement.

Um so that's much appreciated.

Uh as you know, I also talk about boilerplate language a lot, so uh it's much appreciated that on page 11, um, there's a note to avoid broad boilerplate phrases such as high crime area in written reports.

Um I just wanted to take a moment to acknowledge some of the things that I appreciate in this SOP.

Um, and then I just had a clarifying question.

Um could you speak a little bit or explain um to me?

I understand that there's um certain specifications around a foot pursuit when a person in a location known for certain criminal activity runs.

Um and could you uh speak to that point and sort of explain what the parameters are around that?

Well, as it says um, I believe it's on page two, you know, again, you have to have articular reasonable suspicion to believe that the subject um again similar to what we just talked about in the pursuit policy, uh has committed his committing or is about to submit a crime, uh, and there has the member has the reason to believe that there is a valid law enforcement need to detain the suspect that outweighs to the safety posed by the pursuit.

So again, I'll just um hang my hat or the department's hat on that articulate reasonable suspicion, no matter where this occurs that you have to have that in order for a foot pursuit to occur.

Okay, thank you.

I appreciate that.

And I think with regards to that point, you know, there's just um that's that IORs, but also that training piece about making sure that in sort of in real life that that's um that that's happening.

Um but uh I guess overall I I just wanted to um I'm I'm not sure who the civilian members of the use of force committee are, but I think um this is a good example to me of um what can happen when there's there's more input um but there's also consideration of best practices or policies um in other jurisdictions.

Um so I I appreciate you including um the elements that I mentioned.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um any other commissioners, other questions, comments?

No.

As this is a communication file, no further action is necessary at this time.

Director, proceed with the agenda.

I will now read the items under the fire department starting with item 13, FPC 212473.

Resolution relating to the promotion of EMS supervisor Matthew J.

Walters to the EMS technical resources specialist position.

Would anybody from the department like to add anything at all?

If not, we can proceed.

Uh, if if you don't mind, Chief Lipsky here, Milwaukee Fire Department, Mr.

Chair.

Yes, sir.

Um just want to comment.

Extremely uh lucky to have uh Mr.

Walters came on in 2011, he's got a master's degree, he's been a paramedic since 2014.

And uh we poached him from the Milwaukee Health Department, so he's uh multi multiversal, and he's the right person for the job.

So thank you.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Do any commissioners have any comments or questions?

If not, is there a motion on this matter?

So moved.

Second.

Any discussion?

As this is a promotion, I will take a roll call vote in alphabetical order.

Commissioner Burgos, aye.

Commercial Fong.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans.

One other place.

Sorry, thank you, sir.

Commissioner World Patterson.

Aye.

And the chair votes aye.

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Item 14, FPC 212474.

Resolution relating to the promotion of fire lieutenant Chad E.

Shepherdson to the EMS supervisor position.

Do we need commissioners have any comments or questions?

Steve, would you like to make any comments regarding this promotion?

Absolutely, I would.

Very proud of our uh folks here.

Uh Chad Sharpardson on again since 2011, a paramedic since 2013.

He's stepping into a very crucial role.

Uh, as an EMS supervisor.

Uh it is also a rig that now will be uh delivering uh whole blood products to trauma patients uh throughout the region.

So another fantastic selection.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chief.

Is there a motion on this matter?

Move approval.

Second.

Any discussion?

I will take a roll call vote in alphabetical order.

Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans.

Aye.

Commissioner Fung.

Aye.

Commissioner World Patterson.

Aye.

And the chair votes aye.

Motion carries.

Director, proceed with the agenda.

The next item is item 15, FPC 212475 resolution relating to the promotion of fire lieutenant Alberto Uskonda.

To the Milwaukee overdose response initiative lead assistant position.

Do any commissioners have any comments or questions regarding this item?

Chief Livsky, you're back.

Mr.

Rusconga came out in 2019 as paramedic, has an associate's degree.

If you speak for even three minutes with him, uh you will experience somebody who absolutely loves Milwaukee and loves all the the various communities in Milwaukee, and he is out there doing uh yeoman's work uh with populations that others uh would just as soon forget and he deserves this.

Thank you.

No, thank you.

Is there a motion on this matter?

So moved.

Second.

Any discussion?

I will take a roll call vote in alphabetical order.

Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans.

Aye.

Commissioner Fong.

Aye.

Commissioner World Patterson.

Aye.

And the chair votes aye.

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Item 16, FPC 212476.

Resolution relating to the promotion of firefighter Thaddeus I.

Dowell to the Milwaukee Overdose Initiative Practitioner position.

Do any commissioners have any comments or questions regarding this item?

Chief.

Let's hear it.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thaddeus came on in 2022.

Uh I need to comment that that makes me feel all of a sudden extremely old.

Uh he has served in some very good busy firefighting companies, and he brings uh necessary sensitivity and care to this position.

Thank you.

No problem, thank you.

Is there a motion on this matter?

Move approval.

Second.

Any discussion?

I will take a roll call vote in alphabetical order.

Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans.

Aye.

Commissioner Fung.

Aye.

Commissioner World Patterson.

And then the chair both aye.

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Item 17, FPC 21247.

Resolution relating to the promotions of Jordan D.

Breznek and John R.

Cholstowski to the fire lieutenant position.

Do any commissioners have any comments or questions regarding this item?

Chief Livsky.

Thank you.

So a couple items here.

Uh Mr.

Bresnik came on in 2018.

He was a success third coming out of our cadet program.

He's also a member of the head of urban rescue team.

Mr.

Chestalski came on in 2009.

He's been a member of our dive team for many, many years.

Very, very busy, dangerous position.

They're both going to do wonderful.

Thank you, sir.

Is there a motion on this matter?

So move.

Second.

Any discussion?

I will take a roll call vote in alphabetical order.

Commissioner Burgos?

Aye.

Commissioner Evans.

Aye.

Commissioner Fong?

Aye.

Commissioner World Patterson.

Aye.

And the chair votes aye.

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Item 18, FPC 212478.

Resolution establishing the effective date for the reappointment of a former firefighter under rule 13 sections 1 and 2.

And this is a housekeeping matter.

The board on I believe it was back in February, reappointed a uh a former firefighter.

Um, and uh this is just to clarify that uh the reappointment uh is effective April 13th of this year and is pursuant to rule 13 section one and two, which does uh allow for uh the uh reinstatement of accrued sick time seniority and rate of earning paid off.

Right, thank you.

Do any commissioners have any comments or questions regarding this matter?

Is there a motion on this matter?

So move.

Second second.

Any discussion?

I will take a voice vote on this item.

All in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye, any opposed, any abstentions?

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Item 19, FPC 212479, resolution relating to the reappointment request of a former recruit firefighter.

Please from recruit firefighter, yeah.

So, do any commissioners have any comments or questions regarding this item?

Is there a motion on this matter?

So move.

Second, second, any discussion?

I will take a roll call vote in alphabetical order.

Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans, aye, commissioner Fong, aye.

Commissioner World Patterson, aye.

And the chair votes aye.

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

And finally, I will read the item under the police department, which is item 20, FPC 212472.

Resolution relating to the reappointment request of a former recruit police officer.

That should say that.

Yeah, thank you.

Yeah.

Have the board met earlier today in closed session to interview this former recruit and consider this item.

Do any of the commissioners have any additional comments or questions?

Is there a motion on this matter?

So the motion is that to deny it because that's what the chief says.

If you want to uh deny it as the chief recommended, I would recommend uh doing a motion to place the matter on file, which is effectively a denial.

Okay.

I would make the motion to place this uh item on file.

Second.

I will take a roll call vote in alphabetical order.

Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans?

Aye.

Commissioner Fung.

Aye.

Commissioner World Patterson.

Aye.

And the chair votes aye.

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

That concludes the agenda, Mr.

Chair.

Do I have a motion to adjourn?

So moved.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

We stand adjourned.