This is the July 16, 2026 executive meeting of the Fire and Police Commission.

Present our Commissioners Burgos, Evans, Fung, Schneider, myself, Commissioner Horowitz.

Commissioner World Patterson will be joining shortly.

Also present our FPC Executive Director Leon Todd and Deputy Director Jay Pusek.

The board may receive a motion to convene in closed session pursuant to section 19.85 sub-1 sub-C of the Wisconsin statutes to consider demotions from the emergency communications manager position and pursuant to section 19.85 sub one sub G to confer with a representative of the city attorney's office who will render oral or written advice concerning strategy to be adopted by the board with respect to litigation in which it is or is likely to become involved.

Following the executive session, the board may then reconvene an open session during its regular meeting concerning the demotions.

Do I have such a motion?

So move.

Second.

Second.

Okay.

Anticipating no discussion, I will take a voice vote.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries.

We are now in closed session.

This is the July 16, 2026 regular meeting of the Fire and Police Commission.

Present are Commissioners Burgos, Evans, Fung, Schneider, myself, Commissioner Horwitz, Commissioner World Patterson, Commissioner Spence, and Commissioner Ramey are excused.

Also present are FBC Executive Director Leon Todd and Deputy Director Jay Pusick.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We will begin with item one, FPC 212621.

Resolution to elect chair of the Fire and Police Commission Board.

And pursuant to FPC Rule 3, Section 3, the chair is elected at the last regular meeting in July for a term of one year.

Nominations are now open for the position of chair.

Are there any nominations?

Madam Chair, I would like to nominate you to be reappointed to the position of chairperson.

Thank you.

Second motion.

Second.

Second, third fourth.

Thank you.

So, but I have to ask, are there any other nominations?

Are there any other nominations?

Are there any other nominations?

I ask that nominations be closed by unanimous consent.

Hearing no objection, we will now proceed to a vote.

Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans.

Aye.

Commissioner Fung.

Aye.

Commissioner Snyder.

Aye.

Commissioner World Patterson.

Aye.

And the chair votes aye.

So Commissioner Horwitz is elected chair.

Congratulations.

And thank you for being willing to do this.

Yeah, well.

They have not a lot of competition, so okay.

Now we have uh to move on to the election of vice chair.

Yes.

So item two, FPC 212622 resolution to elect the vice chair of the fire and police commission board.

And again, pursuant to rule three, section three, the vice chair is elected at the last regular meeting in July for a term of one year.

Nominations are now open for the position of vice chair.

Madam Chair.

Yes.

I would like to nominate Commissioner Chrissy Fung to the position of Vice Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any other nominations?

Are there any other nominations?

Are there any other nominations?

I ask that nominations be closed by unanimous consent.

Hearing no objection, we will now proceed to a vote.

And I will take a roll call vote in alphabetical order.

Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans.

Aye.

Commissioner Fun.

Aye.

Commissioner Horwitz, that's me.

I.

Commissioner Snyder.

I.

Commissioner World Patterson.

Aye.

And uh that is uh the chair votes I, as I already did.

Commissioner Fung is elected vice chair.

Congratulations.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Item three, public comment.

Uh, 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 in advance to speak, please use the raise my hand feature in the webinar tools and unmute yourself when called upon to speak.

Each person will be given up to five minutes to speak, and we will begin with uh the individuals here in person, starting with Tiffany Stark.

Good evening.

Hello, for twice a month meeting.

I've been coming here for 10 months straight.

Um, first I want to start off by saying my name is Tiffany Stark.

I'm a community activist, a member of Milwaukee Alliance Against Racial Political Repression, an acute mental health social worker, and someone that's been personally impacted by the vehicle police pursuits.

You guys all know that.

But um, I want to start off today by saying today is July 16th, and Samuel Sharp was murdered two years ago um today, during the RNC by all the state police from Ohio, which was totally preventable.

This Saturday on a 14th and Velete by the King Center, there'll be a celebration, and there'll also be a ceremony for a bench that will be uh there for the public to access and remember him.

And actually, tomorrow, where we made history will be the two-year anniversary of 575, which we started fighting for in 2022.

It was approved in April of 2023 and then stuck in court for a year, and then it was released the week of the RNC after Samuel Sharp died the next day.

So that's a big win for our city, I believe.

And I think it's a good thing that we have that.

Um, on Monday, we held our rally on 35th invalid regarding our um campaign regarding the vehicle police pursuits, and we're the mother of two children um died, and we're victims to the the vehicle police pursuit.

And while we were waiting for the rally to start, actually a vehicle pursuit by the police took place in that intersection.

I mean, you can't make it up.

We're there for a rally for this, and it happened.

I mean, it was just like two telling that this is something that's very important that we need to continue to address.

Um, so hopefully, um, we'll be ready to go by July 31st.

I heard from Aldermore today, and they're making some finalizations with the city attorney, and hopefully that will be ready soon, and that we can finally get this going so we can move forward.

Um, I am requesting to include today's report from the alders to the elders regarding uh the report we'll be getting for MPD regarding the data for the last six months.

As a social worker, I'm all about data and research, but when it comes to human life, it's a non it's non-negotiable, period.

Um as we should be waiting for more data when we can make a decision um regarding saving people's life, it's uncomprehensible.

I mean, data is important, but we can save lives, and we're gonna wait for more data.

That's what I've been hearing is a big concern.

But when it comes to people's lives, um I just don't agree with that.

Um research is there.

There's been research.

We had NYU, we had the DOJ.

You know, I wish they would really read into those reports.

Um, as it was said, DOJ said stopping vehicle police pursuits has no correlation to increased crime, and we are not asking for all of the chases to stop.

We want to make sure our community is safe if there's a violent crime happening.

We just don't want people dying over petty things that they should still be here for.

Or like the example of the license plate being expired.

So I just think right now, and this is just my opinion.

I think Chief Norman is standing really tough on this because he's had a lot of L's lately, you know, regarding um the Israel trip, the facial recognition, the flat cameras, etc.

And he's lost some control, and I feel like this is what he does have control over because we're not asking for all the chases to stop.

We could meet in the middle.

I just don't get it.

Why innocent people are dying for something dumb?

You know, it's just makes me upset.

My daughter will never have her father again for something stupid that wasn't even a violent crime.

So what happens in the city of Milwaukee affects all of the residents in the city of Milwaukee, just not in someone's district.

It affects all districts, and we really need to start listening to the residents because we, the taxpayers, are going to be paying for these lawsuits.

As when I sat at the June 11th meeting, it was reported.

There is numerous lawsuits pending right now.

That's gonna cost millions and millions of dollars on something we could put that money into something else to help with driver's ed or help with mental health, which is the biggest problem that everybody wants to avoid because we want to talk about everything that happens after the incident.

People are angry and they cannot regulate their emotions.

That's where the money needs to be.

And we keep being reactive instead of proactive.

And we're gonna continue to have these problems in our city, not just vehicle police pursuits, but the stuff downtown, all the stuff that's happening, it's mental health.

We need to help our young people.

There's trauma.

You are people.

So if you could briefly conclude.

So basically, that is it.

I just hope that we hear this report and we can move forward on the 31st.

And I do support, thank you for all the support that you guys have offered and have done in the last 10 months.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Shannon Fry.

Good evening.

And hello, um, my name is Shannon Fry.

Obviously, I'm a resident of Milwaukee.

Um, I'm here today, as some of you know, maybe the email went further than I know about, but because I had an unfortunate and really totally unnecessary interaction with the city of Waukesha police uh officer, ostensibly, uh in District Three of Milwaukee.

Um to run right through that.

Uh I observed and then decided to intervene when it looked like a man in a sport or silver, unmarked sedan, was following a woman on West Wisconsin Avenue who was on foot on the sidewalk, but he could not gesture her to get into his vehicle.

He then decided to try to pull a fun little vehicular maneuver in front of the car uh that I was in at no notice with no warning to block the sidewalk, thinking that I that I was intervening during an attempted abduction.

I was shocked to learn that the man that was in that car was a cop.

Asked him several times, is this woman a person of interest?

Is this woman being detained?

Had to play interpreter, got threatened with uh obstructing traffic because I followed somebody who looked like a predator and was doing creditor shit, like harassing women down the street, following them on foot.

Uh when I went to go report this to MPD, not only was there any kind of lack of urgency to this, and I did do this later after I made sure this woman got to where she needed to be safely.

But when I reported this later, there was no urgency.

I checked back in for over a week to get a response from MPD.

I did what the MPD dispatch suggested and decided to start calling City of Walkership PD.

Made it all the way up, spoke to with several sergeants, one of whom of note, possibly my favorite, who basically accused me of trying to file a false report.

That didn't seem like the safest option to complain to.

I'm not going to Waukesha when they're already considering what I'm telling them.

What I have photo evidence of them doing was not something that actually occurred.

This happened in District 3.

I expect District 3 to call me back.

I expect District 3 to follow up, make it possible for me to report these things, make it possible for me to send the images of what I saw and get back to me.

Now, me personally, I don't have much, if any faith in these uh systems, supposedly these, you know, sort of systems, much like FPC dealing with accountability.

But of the people on FPC that did respond to me initially, what I got was a series of responses that were essentially either, uh, which was basically what I got from the MPD officers that came to my house to take my statement.

And or did you try making a complaint?

Yeah, for like a week.

As you can see, I have mobility issues.

I need to have access to certain things.

And it would be nice if we actually have something that made this complaint process a little bit easier.

I do also want to point out that on y'all's own website on the city of Milwaukee's website, emailing you is a report.

It is forming a complaint.

It took a week of emails bouncing back and forth and back and forth before somebody picked up the phone that called district three to send me, not resend me, to send me for the first time the ability to go ahead and actually submit the information that I had.

It shouldn't have taken a week.

If it took that much and there were that many shrugs, I mean, oh, I don't know what to tell you.

Well, have you tried this?

Yeah, I did.

But I don't get paid to do that.

I'm not one of the people that get paid to do that.

If it took that long, and if, in the words of at least one commissioner, FPC holds no sway over MPD.

Um, then what productive function does the FPC actually have?

Why do we show it to these meetings?

Why do people show up?

Why do people need to call you in the first place?

Because honestly, from the position I'm in, it looks like another bureaucratic hurdle between or buffer between the people and the police.

It was something very interesting though.

Actually, uh, Mr.

Todd, in your response email that I received about two and a half hours before I got here today.

You said MPD did inform you that the incident was logged and documented in its computer-aided dispatch system or CAT system.

It was not documented in an incident report because, as reported, the facts here did do not rise to the level of criminality.

Stalking is criminality, harassment is criminality.

And as a person who spent most of their life either working with LGBTQIA kids who were trafficked, and also my time as a Catholic worker.

Housing, advocating for and working with on a daily basis for almost four and a half years, women who were often in domestic violence situations, having to de-escalate that myself, because that's where I live.

You are at time, so if you could briefly it is important because that's where I'm at to figure out not just your preferred way of being contacted, but what's the only way of being contacted?

And I need y'all to write down, put it, make it public, you know, what actually constitutes a crime.

Because by your own by the statutes that you pointed me to, the stuff that I witnessed and the stuff that I tried to give to MPD and to this board, that means that more than meets the equation.

Their discretionary powers don't equal a JB.

And I'm sure you know that.

Well, that's uh I'm sure you understand that.

So I will expect to hear from y'all about the things that I sent you emails for if you don't need them or if you don't have them, ask any of these folks because they were CC'd and not.

Thank you.

Amanda Merquay.

Good evening.

Good evening.

Uh, my name is Amanda Merkway, and I'm the policy and advocacy director at the ACLU of Wisconsin.

I'm here to talk about why flock safety continues to make Milwaukee residents less safe.

It's critically important that the common council, mayor, and the FPC stay vigilant and not treat the talking points or soothing assurances of surveillance tech PR teams that are handed to law enforcement agencies as unquestioned truth.

Despite countless assurances to the contrary, we've seen how ALPRs have caused harm across the country.

ICE and CBP have repeatedly used flock to go after immigrants without warrants.

Can't Kansas police use them to pursue a man who wrote a critical op-ed about their department.

A Colorado color Colorado police officer wrongfully accused a woman of theft based on a flock hit in Arkansas.

A mother and her children were held at gunpoint because ALPR cameras wrongly flagged their car is stolen.

Here are some things that have happened in just the past seven days alone.

On July 8th, criminal charges were filed against MPD internal affairs detective Chapman, who allegedly used Flock's ALPR system to track two individuals' locations a total of 20 times over the course of one year.

As you know, uh outrageously, this uh detective was entrusted with investigating former officer Josue Ayala for using Flock to stalk a romantic partner and her ex nearly 200 times.

On July 11th, the Los Angeles Police Department, the third largest police force in the United States, allowed its contract with Flock to expire, and the LAPD deactivated all 138 of its Flock cameras.

This decision followed an internal audit by the LAPD Office of the Inspector General, which revealed that over just a two-month period, the LAPD had investigated 161 car owners whose vehicles were wrongfully identified as stolen by Flock system.

City leaders stated that they walked away due to serious concerns over civil liberties, data ownership, and sharing protocols.

This MPD's new flock audit process flag wrongfully identified hot lists that are uh registered Zahit.

On July 14th, reporting revealed that two officers with the Racine Police Department and a Racine County Sheriff's Deputy are actively under criminal investigation for misusing Flock yesterday.

Um former MPD officer Ayala was sentenced uh to a year of probation after pleading guilty last month.

This morning, reporting revealed that police departments around the country have used flock cameras at least hundreds of times to search for specific people, not cars, using searches such as quote, heavy set mail with a black and white hat, or person on a skateboard and person wearing orange vest and construction hat, according to data reviewed by 404 Media.

Sometimes searches referenced a target's race or signs of their political affiliation.

I understand that MPD has 31 flock cameras, but how many other cameras does MPD and the Fusion Center have access to with AL ALPR capabilities?

MPD's no bid to contract with Flock Group Inc.

was increased to 182,900 back in February without finance and personnel committee approval and runs through January 2027.

Maybe MPD would say we don't use Flock cameras for AI-powered image recognition searches like person on a skateboard.

But my question is, isn't that exactly what you do with FUCSIS?

The Axon product premised on integrating private surveillance cameras, drones, um, ALPRs, and other feeds into a single police accessible interface.

I've seen Axon representatives demonstrate a fusis search with keywords and drop-down menus for AI image searches.

It's terrifying.

I believe MPD's contract with FUSIS is sole source, um, because I have the sole source justification letter from FUCS from 2022 and MPD's request a DOA for an exception to bidding to enter a contract with FUCS from 2023.

The Milwaukee Police Foundation privately funds FUSIS core devices for local businesses, organizations, and individuals to integrate their cameras into the FUCS network through the Community Connect program.

Community Connect website says there are 1,225 cameras MPD integrates with this software across the city to access in real time.

To my knowledge, there is no SOP specifically governing the use of FUCS and its AI-powered search functions.

How many MPD officers have access to warrantless fusis searches?

Is there any audit process in place to know how many searches are done, by whom, and for what reason?

What do we know about these AI image recognition algorithms?

With no SOP, no transparent audit trail.

You know, if I leave here and summon searches FUCS for woman, black frame glasses, jaywalking to St.

Kate, um, I guess I'll have no way of knowing.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Good evening.

Uh good evening, all.

Uh thank you.

Always thank you for being here.

Uh it's gonna be hard to uh be more eloquent than previous speakers.

But uh it's interesting to me that uh the chief, Norman, suddenly, after I've been coming here for 10 years asking for an audit of anything.

Now the chief of police is going to audit flock cameras and FRT.

I asked for an audit of the guns that are leaving the station.

Many years ago.

Do we have a gun audit?

Do we know an inventory?

Do we know what happens to them?

Are they destroyed?

Are they passed along?

Are they sold on the street?

We don't know.

It's just an audit.

It's not that big a deal.

Not just that.

A while back I said, why are we?

Why do we have two cops in patrol cars when they're out on traffic safety?

Would it not be more logical to utilize the nine some of the 900 vehicles that the people of Milwaukee have provided and let each officer have a vehicle?

I drive by the Leet Street and the traffic safety unit vehicles are parked out there day and night.

Very six, seven cars often.

Those cars are immaculate and parked.

I don't know why we don't have two cops in two patrol cars on traffic safety.

Now we just had an incident, four injured cops in two cars.

But now the real insidious part of this whole thing starts.

These the cops are eligible, and and I don't know if they're if they deserve a 25,000 claim against the city of Milwaukee each time that they're injured in a injured in a vehicle accident.

25,000 claim.

How many of these have there been?

And now you have an alderman Jackson that has changed the format of his judicial committee so that the people of Milwaukee cannot see when a 25,000 claim is occurring from a police officer.

I don't know.

That just doesn't make sense to me.

And lastly, and I I took a lot of time last time, and I appreciate it, but it's been a long day.

But lastly, if anybody, some commissioner, could please inquire about a clause in the police contract that allows a police officer to call injured.

I've never heard of this.

Check uh check the tape from uh January 30th, 2025, spikers committee.

And spikers, and that I think uh shortly after that, there was a call for the chief and the sheriff to appear before the safety committee.

They both refused.

They were called to appear before the county safety committee, they both refused, but now when it's with regard to FRT, they're out in public on the radio with the the media from the suburbs.

When it's about the flock cameras, we have to have the flock cameras, they can speak all day long about the flock cameras, but we cannot get information about these outstanding investigations about these clauses in the contracts.

Oh a lot of stuff is going on underneath the surface, and the previous speakers are are pointing it to better better than I am, but there's a lot of stuff going on.

So I I would appreciate if some commissioner would just inquire about this, calling in injured, and uh, and I hate to even say this and think this, but I wonder if if this had anything to do with officer quarters' death.

Thank you.

Thank you.

They were on blue flu at the time, so it maybe it was justified.

Yes, director, we have uh Julie first, followed by Kay.

Good evening.

Good evening, thanks, Bridget.

Hello, commissioners, directors, neighbors.

Happy commemoration of Asada's birthday to all who celebrate.

Chaplain Julie Kirchy, I'm Milwaukee County resident.

I'd like to share a story that has relevance to this commission.

Travel back in time with me, won't you?

About 10 police chiefs ago.

Big powerful dude, Joseph Klucheski, Milwaukee chief of police in the 30s and 40s.

Let's say he has an idea.

He gets this idea in his head.

He's heard about this enforcement group, this military overseas called the Schutzstaffel, and he decides he'd like to travel to Germany to train with them.

See, Schutzstaffel means protection squadron.

And he'd like to go train with them so he can provide protection for the citizens of Milwaukee.

And he can just go.

He has carte blanche authority over his training as the chief of police in Milwaukee.

So he goes, comes back.

A bunch of citizens of Milwaukee discover that he did this.

And these citizens know about the Schutzstaffel.

Their families have been living under this protection squadron and their actions for years.

See, Schutztaffel was also known as the SS, the Nazis.

These citizens go to the commission overseeing the police department with their concerns.

The oversight body doesn't want to hear their concerns.

The commission has decided that it was not improper.

This is not a concern.

Some on the Oversight Commission say that the citizens raising these concerns are merely strongly opinionated.

But you know what?

History tells us differently.

Thankfully, to my knowledge, this scenario with Chief Klucheski didn't actually happen, but flash forward about 10 police chiefs to Chief Jeffrey Norman.

Is he with us today?

Is he there in person?

We're not able to view it, and I don't see him on the call.

Well, anyway, Chief Norman did this.

Well, he didn't train with the SS, but he trained with the internationally condemned racist genocidal, apartheid Zionist regime, some call Israel, that is currently occupying Palestine.

Different genocide.

Same egregious action.

This commission has the chance to do something about it, to recognize it for the disgusting thing that it is, and to try to do everything in its power to ensure that such a thing never happens again.

Never again for anyone.

Instead of ignoring those people who are bringing it to light, instead of being complicit with the lack of accountability and the lack of transparency.

So I ask again for it to be added to this commission's meeting agenda.

We've been asking to do a presentation by citizens who are concerned about the chief's training trip to the SS, I mean Israel, the regime occupying Palestine.

Not five minutes here and there from individuals, a more adequate time, specifically devoted to this topic and the concerns.

I would love for this commission to give feedback on this story too.

This brutally uncomfortable and accurate analogy.

Also a slap on the wrist for Ayala.

Thank you.

And Bridget, I apologize who is up next.

Hey.

Hello.

Um, I second everything Julie said.

Um, I'm coming to you again with some reporting I've been doing in between the meetings.

Um, and I will again be talking about surveillance.

Um, before I start talking about that specifically, though, I just want to say I'm coming to this meeting with a really, really heavy heart.

Um around the smoke in the air, around um approvals for oil tunnels in my home state of Michigan, um, and just around climate change generally.

And I want to remind everybody here that surveillance and the climate are very connected.

Um corporations are responsible for like a massively large percentage of the world's emissions.

Um, and war creates a lot of carbon.

Um just wanted to put that out there.

More specifically, I recently um obtained a list of all of the Milwaukee police officers who have access to flock system.

Um the first thing I want to say is that I thought that we were down to like maybe a hundred users based on um recent interviews with the MPD that I've seen.

Maybe I didn't read or like watch correctly, that's possible, but I was just shocked at the sheer number of people.

Um, the other thing I want to point out is that three of those officers also were as of fall 2025 on the Brady list, meaning that they have a history of some kind of misconduct or credibility issues.

So I continue to be deeply concerned about um the use of flock in the city.

Um I can't believe that probation and a 500 fine were considered appropriate consequences for somebody literally terrorizing victims with state surveillance technology.

Um yeah, I think that's pretty much all I wanted to say.

Free Palestine.

Oh, and land back to the tribal nations, I mean.

Okay.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Bridget, is there anyone else appearing virtually for public comment?

I do not believe so.

Um, we do have Linda on the line.

Linda, did you uh plan to speak at all?

I do not believe so.

So I think we are done with uh virtual public comment, Director.

There being no further uh public comments, this concludes the public comment uh portion of the meeting.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

It will now read the items on the consent agenda.

After I do so, any commissioner may remove any of these items to the regular agenda for discussion or appropriate action.

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

Item four, FPC 212623, resolution relating to the July 2nd, 2026 meeting minutes.

Item five, FPC 212624.

Resolution relating to the request to re-exempt the administrative specialist senior position within the department of emergency communications.

Item six, FPC 212625.

Resolution relating to the eligible list for the youth fleet apprentice position within the Milwaukee Fire Department.

Item seven, FPC 212626.

Resolution relating to the request to refer to the Department of Employee Relations, a request for a classification study for the youth carpenter apprentice positions within the Milwaukee Fire Department.

Item 8, FPC 212627.

Resolution relating to the appointment to the management account senior position within the Department of Emergency Communications.

Item 9, FPC 212628.

Resolution relating to the appointment to the building maintenance supervisor position within the Milwaukee Police Department.

Item 10, FPC 212629.

Resolution relating to the appointments to the crime analyst one position within the Milwaukee Police Department, two appointments.

Item 11, FPC 212630.

Resolution relating to the appointment to the elect electronic technician three position within the Milwaukee Police Department.

Item 12, FPC 212631.

Resolution relating to the appointment to the electronic technician one position within the Milwaukee Police Department.

Item 13, FPC 212632.

Resolution relating to the appointment to the HVAC maintenance technician three position within the Milwaukee Police Department.

Item 14, FPC 212633.

Resolution relating to the promotions to the office assistant to position within the Milwaukee Police Department to promotions.

Item 15, FPC 212634.

Resolution relating to the appointments to the police district administrative assistant position within the Milwaukee Police Department for appointments and item 16, FPC 212635.

Resolution relating to the appointment to the police services specialist investigator position within 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.

It's my understanding that before taking up the uh items under examinations, we will be taking items picking up items 31 and 32 under the Department of Emergency Communications, starting with item 31, FPC 212660.

Resolution relating to the demotion on probation of the emergency communications manager within the Department of Emergency Communications.

And just as a procedural note, pursuant to FPC rule 11 section 7B.

In these types of situations, upon request of the infected affected individual, the board shall interview the individual in closed session and thereafter in open session determine whether or not to affirm the demotion.

Very good.

The board met earlier today in closed session to consider this item.

I think that we had a good opportunity to hear from both the employees and management.

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

Is there well?

How would we frame this?

I would recommend either substantively either a motion to affirm the demotion or a motion to overturn the demotion.

Okay.

Do we have a motion on this matter?

Madam Chair, I uh move that we overturn the demo.

Second.

Is there any further discussion?

I'll take a roll call vote.

Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans.

Aye.

Commissioner Fong.

Aye.

Commissioner Snyder.

Aye.

Commissioner World Patterson.

Aye.

And the chair votes aye.

Motion carries.

That is to say that the motion in question uh will not occur.

Correct?

Yes.

Right.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Item 32, FPC 212661.

Resolution relating to the demotion on probation of an emergency communications manager within the Department of Emergency Communications.

The board also met in closed session to consider this item.

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

Is there a motion on this matter?

Madam Chair, I move that we overturn this to motion.

Second.

Second.

Second.

Any discussion?

I'll take a roll call vote in alphabetical order.

Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans.

Aye.

Commissioner Fong.

Aye.

Commissioner Schneider.

Aye.

Commissioner World Patterson.

Aye.

And the chair votes aye.

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Right.

And then moving back to the items under examination.

Starting with item 17, FPC 212636.

Resolution relating to the fire cadet, excuse me, fire cadet job announcement bulletin for the Milwaukee Fire Department.

Oh, catching up with this.

Okay, so this is relating to a fire cadet job announcement bulletin.

Does any of the commissioners have any comments or questions regarding this item?

Is there a motion?

So move.

Second.

Any discussion?

I will take a voice vote on this item.

All in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Item 18, FPC 212637, resolution relating to the police aid job announcement bulletin for the Milwaukee Police Department.

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

Okay.

Then it's time for a motion.

Move to accept.

Second.

Any discussion?

I'll take a voice vote on this item.

All in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Next item is item 19, FPC 212659.

Resolution relating to the police officer eligible list for the Milwaukee police department.

This is the eligible list for the class that will start in December of this year, class three of 2026.

And I just wanted to point out, Madam Chair, if you'll indulge me that uh for the past uh you know five or six uh eligible lists that we've had, we've been averaging you know around you know 62 or so uh candidates on the eligible list.

We have 101 on this list, uh, including eight who are um contingent passes uh based on the the new modified uh uh uh uh PRT that we're doing, uh which I think is a decent number.

Uh and also um this is in the file as well, the eligible list uh almost exactly mirrors the demographics of the city of Milwaukee.

So I think this is uh a significant improvement.

Uh and I think it's in large part due to the excellent work that our uh staffing services and uh team and recruiting team do and uh just wanted to give them a shout out for great work.

Okay, that's very very good news.

Uh any questions or comments from commissioners.

Okay, uh who will move?

Who will give me a motion?

Move approval.

Second.

Thank you.

Any discussion?

I will take a voice vote on this item.

All in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed.

We will now read the items under new business starting with item 20, FPC 212639.

Communication from the Department of Emergency Communications relating to recent changes to DEC operational policies.

Ma'am, Deputy Director Dumarant speaking on behalf of the B DEC.

I I know we have an extensive list of policies there.

And that has been the result of many months of collaboration with our MFD uh partners in making sure that our response plans are exactly what they would like.

And we just wanted to make sure that we codified any call types or any situations or policies, procedures, all those types of things.

Um, so it's just uh it would a matter of consistency on all three shifts, and that way, you know, and it serves as a reference for all of our employees and also for MFD employees if they have any questions.

Okay.

Well in the file, there's a uh 20.

Oh, yeah, yeah.

Okay.

There's uh information in the file about this.

It consists of several communications.

Um is this I have a question.

Is this the first compilation of policies that we're seeing from DEC?

No, that is not sorry, I'll let you go.

Go ahead.

Sorry.

We have had previous policies that were reviewed by your board, but these are uh newer fire-related policies that we've been working on this year.

Okay.

So they're not uh a change of uh any policies already approved.

Is that correct?

That is correct, ma'am.

Any questions?

Just a brief question.

Um, do you anticipate, I guess, significant additional policies being added in the near future?

Perhaps in the future, as result of the Calia accreditation.

Because as I mentioned um earlier in the executive briefing, um, there's over 200 standards that we need to show that we're adhering to, and a lot of those would involve creating policies which would note how we um manage whatever uh issues that the accreditation is looking at.

Okay, thank you.

Are they ones being submitted uh uh related to request uh or requirements of the accreditation?

This is more about making sure that we are on the same page as the fire department and ensuring that our response plans match their expectations.

Okay.

Uh any further questions or comments from commissioners.

Okay, any motions?

Move for approval.

Oh, we don't need uh a motion.

It's oh it's just a communication.

Oh, that's right.

I forgot.

We don't get to review policy anymore.

But you could if you wanted to.

Well, at a subsequent meeting.

That's okay.

Okay.

Communications then please proceed.

Yes.

Item 21, FPC 2126 floor zero communication from the Milwaukee Police Department relating to vehicle pursuit data during 2026 year two date.

And for this item, we have uh assistant chief Craig Sarna with us.

Thank you, Assistant Chief.

Good evening.

Thank you.

I had uh forwarded my presentation to uh Bridget uh yesterday, so I hope you all had a chance to get it.

Uh, I understand if you haven't had a chance to review it, but I did forward her the PowerPoint today uh so she could bring it up for me.

I'd appreciate Mr.

Wall left, but uh with regards to what he said about what I had said about 59 people calling in, um, that is not accurate.

I was presenting along with the chief of staff a staffing uh update to the uh public safety and health committee, and what I said was we had 59 people members, excuse me, on limited duty.

So that's different than 59 people calling in.

Yeah, that's a big difference.

Well, I appreciate the time, Madam Chair Commissioners, um, to um share with you and the public uh six-month overview where we stand on our efforts to reduce traffic violence.

Last month I had the privilege of being part of the 2026 Vision Zero Summit.

I was part of a three-person panel along with uh city attorney uh Alex Mueller and uh former chief judge, now uh Professor, excuse me, uh Mary Triggiano.

Um, each of us had a different area that we talked about.

Professor Triziano focused on restorative justice, uh Alex Mueller, City Attorney Mueller focused on uh prosecution and I focused on accountability.

Based on my experience um at the summit, along with um something I heard in public comment two sessions ago um from someone who said who didn't believe the police were involved enough when it comes to traffic enforcement and reducing reckless driving.

I felt the need to expand what I had presented previously to what you have before you know accountability on the road and our role in reducing reckless driving, um, to now kind of see what the entire spectrum of our enforcement activity looks like.

Uh so you can go to the next slide, Bridget.

So reckless driving continues to be one of the most serious threats to our roadway safety.

You will see.

So the top part of this uh slide reflects a full year's worth of reckless driving, uh, CAD calls, the calls for service we get related to reckless driving arrests, the citations issued just for reckless driving, and then reckless driving citations, um uh all the other uh citations that um are in the universe of reckless driving.

And you'll see that although we um in 2020, we uh was the high water mark for um CAD calls, 2175, and they progressively gone down over the years um to 2025, where we did see though a 1% increase, uh which is why it's highlighted in red from the year before, going from 975 to 985 calls, people calling in, complaints for reckless driving, arrests um increased quite a bit, uh, 43 percent.

Um, I do believe that's a direct reflection of the proactive enforcement and some of our targeted initiatives that we have to combat reckless driving as a result.

Uh citations though uh have gone down uh for the entire year of 25, uh gone down 12%, and then there is no statistical difference between the other universe of citations, 12,543 to 12,587.

The bottom part of this slide just reflects uh comparison of six months worth of data because this is a six-month update.

So comparatively six months for each of the respective years, and you'll see a 33% decrease in the number of reckless or calls for reckless driving.

You'll see decreases for the number of arrests we had compared to last year, decreases for the reckless driving citations themselves.

Um, and reckless driving citations includes those for the first offense, which are municipal violations, and the second offense, which are criminal violations that results in the mandatory arrest.

Overall, it's a 2% decrease.

I wish I could tell you that that 36% decrease in total calls is a result of our um collective efforts out there because we are not alone.

We are in this with uh DPW and um all the efforts they're making to ensure these uh roadways are designed differently to kind of reduce some of this reckless driving.

I would like to think that we are um um assisting and bringing that number down, but I can't say for sure.

This is one of those qualitative data points, and this is one of my action items I had for you, executive director.

Um, this is something that I believe should be reflected in the next community or customer satisfaction survey.

I know the last one in 2024 reflected people were overly concerned with reckless driving, they did not feel we did enough.

So I do feel that now or whenever the next one is, I think it would be a good time to revisit that issue to see how they feel now about it, or is this a sign that people are just becoming numb to reckless driving out there?

That was one of the thoughts that went through my head when I was putting to this gather together.

We shouldn't go down the road.

I don't want to believe that we're normalizing traffic violence and reckless driving, but it is something I do think that we need to kind of dig into a little bit more.

Um, and I think that that survey would be the best way to go about doing it.

Agreed.

And we are doing another iteration of the survey this year.

Uh quick question.

Uh, the last category, reckless driving citations with speeding, does that mean they're given two different citations, or is it a different category?

That uh that includes um a universe of 34 possible other citations.

So you have 18 um municipal citations, and some of those include failure to obey.

I just wrote some of these down, failure to obey traffic sign or signal, um, deviating from laner traffic, unreasonable and imprudent speed, driving too fast for conditions, etc.

The criminal statutes though that are associated with that that result in an arrest.

Um, you still have to write the traffic citation, though, as a matter of course, because that's what gets referred to circuit court.

Those include reckless driving causing bodily harm, reckless driving causing great bodily harm, reckless driving and endangering safety, et cetera.

Okay.

I hope that answered your question.

And so, based on um, I had the pleasure of attending your vision zero presentation, and based on uh the city attorney's portion of the presentation, even though we see a decrease in reckless driving citations.

I think I guess I'm saying it was probably fair to assume that the results of the citations are perhaps different than they would have been in the past, with sort of like a different level of follow-through with the city attorney's office.

Is that correct?

Yeah, I think that that's uh that's a fair statement.

Yes.

Uh next slide, Bridget.

So um toes, as I said, toes are a big part of our um of our overall strategy.

Um this is essentially we're essentially taking the weapon out of the hands of those that have shown um they are irresponsible when it comes to um operating a vehicle behind the wheel.

Uh and since 2022, we have towed a total of 920 cars.

Um, there are three different categories of tows that are reflected here.

And for the longest period of time, you'll see May 1st of 2022.

We only had the ability to tow for unregistered motor vehicle.

That means any vehicle that did not have proper registration, we had the ability to tow it as long as we issued one of the following three citations, um, fleeing from officer, um, racing on the highway, exceeding um speed that was posted more than 25 miles an hour.

So we had the ability to tow the vehicle, issue them one of those tickets along with the unregistered vehicle, and the car was towed.

Um, that changed on June 2nd of 2023, when the law added reckless driving repeat offender, uh that was from June of 23 through 25.

That, as you can see by the numbers, really wasn't issued as much.

It wasn't until um the advocacy of Alderman Westmoreland and uh which uh led to the change, because you'll see the end date for reckless driving repeat offender, then became um the reckless driving ordinance as we know it now.

That's ordinance 101-24.9, which gives us the authority uh to impound vehicles when someone engages in a uh reckless driving um uh incident.

And um, this uh once we take the car and tow it to the city tow lot, um, that um owner is responsible for paying all the towing fees, the storage fees, the transportation fees, in addition to any outstanding fines they have on the vehicle.

So parking tickets or any other um on the other municipal traffic tickets they may have on the record, they cannot get their car out till they actually pay those off and show proof of payment.

So uh that uh to date has um really like um increased um the numbers as you see there uh to uh we have uh 102 uh year to date this year already.

Are we seeing an increase in vehicles that are sort of effectively abandoned because owners are not willing or able to pay that off?

Unfortunately, no, Commissioner Fung.

I've been told um since the toll lot falls under um uh Inspector Grant and I and the administration bureaus under property control.

What I was told by Manager Menzo is that these cars, because that was one of our concerns, right?

When we first went down this path of towing these cars, we are going to because we do have limited space out there.

Um we were concerned that we are gonna have the the we're gonna be presented with the issue that you you know you brought up, but that is not the case.

We are finding that people um are coming to the lot and paying what they need to pay to get their cars out, they're not being held for any um uh extreme length of time.

I have a question.

Um if the uh car was stolen and is involved and is then towed, is it's the owner's responsibility then to retrieve the to pay for everything, or is there no the um the SOP um does reflect um in the SOP as SLP 610 towing of vehicles that um it outlines what we need to do, the questions we need to ask if the vehicles in fact reported stolen because we do have people, individuals that do try to you know get around this by reporting the vehicles um stolen to get around paying whatever the fines are and the um fees that are associated with this, that's where a good uh solid investigation comes into uh play um to kind of um discern what that is, if that's factual or not.

Okay.

Thank you.

Uh Bridget, next slide.

Uh vehicle pursuits 2009 to year to date 2026.

And what you see here is um two decades worth of pursuit data.

I've showed this before, but you'll see the drop from 970, that's the total number of pursuits, and I'm focused on the top right now.

We had 970 pursuits.

Um, and currently, as we uh as it stands right now, we are at um uh 397 pursuits year to date.

That's about 66 pursuits per month, which puts us on track if that um average holds uh holds to 794 pursuits for the year, which would be an 18% decrease from what we saw last year.

The bottom uh part of this slide reflects the non-pursuits we have per month.

Um granted, that's uh the the top blue line is for the entire year of 25, where only through the end of June.

Uh and as it stands right now, um we had 300, we have 347 non-pursuits here to date to 661 this time last year.

So it's almost uh almost a 50% decrease from where we were last year.

Again, a non-pursuit is where we do have the factors to initiate uh pursuit, but due to the speed, due to the distance between the um squad car and the suspect vehicle of pursuit um is not initiated.

Yet it is still the officers still go out with it, and that's why it's tracked in the CAD, just so we can keep track of those numbers.

Sorry, what day is this through?

Uh, this is through.

So all the data you see are six months is January 1st through June 31st, or is it June 30th?

38.

Yeah, end of June.

And what would you say are the main contributors for the decrease?

Um, it's hard to say right now.

Um the uh changes we made to our pursuit policy went into effect in February, and I was gonna kind of address some of that as I get to the end, Commissioner World Patterson.

Okay, that sounds good.

Uh next slide, please.

Uh reason or outcomes.

So um we had a total of like again, 397 pursuits, uh down 24% of them on the bottom of the first on the left-handed column here, down 24%.

We're down uh pretty much across the board in all categories, with the exception of drug offense law, a slight uptick in uh pursuits related to substantial uh drug investigations.

Again, it went from eight to 10, uh, but you're dealing with such a small number, that's why it reflects a little bit larger than what you might think 25%.

Uh traffic offense for reckless vehicles, 388 last year compared to 309 this year down 20%.

But um, and although that decreases 20% compared to 2025, pursuits associated with reckless driving offenses still account for 78% of all of our vehicle pursuits year to date.

When you're talking about um outcome, again, uh just uh kind of a uh or I'm sorry, when you're talking about the additional reasons, you'll see wanted felony crime zero last year, 59 this year, and then violent felony 105 to 10.

It's not that we didn't have any uh wanted uh individuals for felony crime.

That's uh last year.

We just had it issued, or we just had it um coded in the CAD as violent felony, and when we went to the new benchmark system, it um broke it down for wanted felony crime.

That refers to something um a felony that happened um previously, uh in which uh, for instance, wanted in connection with an armed robbery, wanted in connection with a homicide or a non-fatal shooting, and then a chase would um be initiated for that.

Violent felony refers to something that is a little bit more recent, a little bit more fresh, something that's in progress.

Um, outcomes on the right, um, again, terminated by law enforcement.

This would indicate, and again, all of these um have decreased for a total of 24%.

Um turn it by law enforcement forcement would indicate that the pursuing squad terminated the pursuit for any number of reasons.

That could be weather, it could be traffic, it could be speed, um, etc.

It could also mean not just the officer, but the supervisor cancel it as well.

Terminator uh violators uh violator stopped, um, that refers to if the driver stopped on their own or if some type of tire deflation device was used.

Terminated by crash, unfortunately crash is exactly what it says and means.

Violator escaped means that uh the pursuing squad does not have any more visual contact with the violator, and thus the um squad itself, uh the squad self-canceled as a result of that.

Vehicle failure is um just that the um vehicle that were chasing or pursuing um stopped because of some kind of mechanical issue.

Uh next slide, please.

Uh arrest charges.

Um, so we have seen um uh this ref uh this reflects uh total of the number on the bottom is the total number of individuals that um have been arrested, and that includes both drivers and passengers.

Um again, all these categories are down, but if you were to add up all the numbers um that are shown within there, resisting obstructing all the way down through paration and parole, that averages out to uh 920.

So we had 300 300 subjects, drivers and passengers were arrested for a total of 992, excuse me, criminal offenses.

Again, and I've said this before, there's a level of criminality commissioners and to members of the public that go far beyond just the act of reckless driving itself.

What a lot of people don't really take into account because they get so focused on the pursuit, and I understand why is all the other element, all the other criminality that comes as a result of that.

And these charges reflect that.

Uh the weapons that are recovered, um, the drugs that are recovered, et cetera.

Uh next slide, please.

Uh crashes and fatalities.

Um, this represents a uh full year's worth of uh data on the top again.

Again, we're seeing really good uh numbers.

Green is good, things are decreasing, fatal injuries gone from 66, and these are full year numbers again on the top through 25, um, 66 to 55.

So we're down 17%.

Uh I added a category in here.

So of the fatal crashes and the fatal injuries that we've had, how many of those are related to reckless driving?

You'll see that line right below that.

So we had 42 of the 66 were related to reckless driving in 24, and then we had 28 out of the 55 were uh were related um to reckless driving in 2025.

If you look at the bottom, now we're looking at six months' worth of data again.

Um, we're seeing noticeable decreases uh as far as fatal injuries, reckless fatal injuries and crashes go.

Hit and runs um still tend to be a little bit stubborn as uh that goes.

Um I don't see how and why people feel uh that it's okay to get into an accident uh and then just take off.

But given the level of criminality that I had previously um highlighted, I do think that that's um uh a reason why overall crashes though um still um have um increased 6850 to 7,475 um January 1st through June 31st, last year to this year.

In the subcategory um in the reckless subcategory is that both that the pursuit occurred and those are just the fatalities that happen outside the world of police pursuits.

Correct.

So it's excluding pursuit.

Okay, thanks.

Uh next slide, please.

Pursuit crashes and injuries, 2026 year to date.

So one third of all pursuits have resulted in a crash.

Approximately 134 incidents.

Four percent of all those pursuits involved third uh party injuries.

Other uh 64% or nine incidents were tied to a reckless driving pursuit.

Um we had eight officers that were injured in um pursuit related incidents.

We did not have any fatalities to suspects or third parties during the first six months of um 2026.

Next slide, please.

Um I've shown this previously.

So this reflects the total number of fatalities.

Um, and then the highlighted number in yellow um reflects the number of pursuit related fatalities.

So in 2026 year to date, we have had 15 uh fatalities uh related to um driving.

Um none of those uh we haven't had any though that have um been as a result of a police pursuit um year to date.

Last year we had six incidents that resulted in nine deaths.

So we had, you know, as you'll see there, 46, and then we have the nine, which gives us a total of 55.

Um since uh 2016 through now, we've had a total of 58 uh pursuit related fatalities, 58 out of 646, which account for about nine percent.

The biggest change that I've made to this, and I've spoken about this previously is in 2024.

Um it used to say one out of 67.

Now it's uh reflects two out of 67 to reflect the uh death of Mr.

Andrew Higgins, uh Tiffany Stark's husband, and I'm truly sorry for that.

Sorry.

Uh that was the uh biggest um change um since the last time I presented the commission.

Uh next slide, please.

Uh summary of findings, um, the average age of the pursuit driver has actually gone up since the last time I was here.

Um we're now looking at individuals who are 27 years old.

Uh five subjects were involved in two or more vehicle pursuit incidents for a total of 11 incidents.

Uh there was only one subject um who was 17 years of age or younger.

And of the incidents, there were seven.

64% were for reckless driving, and 36% or four were for um a wanted felony crime.

Uh the pursuit characteristics, um, no real statistical change as far as the distance of these pursuits.

Uh the uh we're talking 3.58 to um in 26 compared to uh uh 4.04 in 2025.

The average pursuit speed, I'm sorry, I got that mixed up.

The uh the time uh the length of this chase, four minutes and thirty-five seconds compared to four minutes and 45 seconds in 25, the distance um decreased um significantly, four miles to almost three and a half, and the pursuit speed decreased from um roughly um almost 86 miles an hour to um 80 miles an hour in 26 compared to uh 25.

Next slide, please.

Um I talked about this also as part of our commitment to transparency with the community.

We will begin to feature the following dashboards on our website.

I have not um talked to um our office of management and analysis and planning as of yet, they're the ones that created this, but this is what we plan to feature on our website.

Uh reason for the pursuit, um pursuit outcome.

Uh and then uh if you go to the next slide, Bridget.

I put it on two, I'm sorry, uh vehicle pursuit injuries and crashes.

And then there's a little box that's right below that, um, in between pursuit crashes and injuries and what the current pursuit policy is that will reflect um uh uh fatalities if there are any.

So this uh as I reported this um for the first six months of this year, we haven't had any as opposed to last year, which we had one incident at this time that resulted in two fatalities, and that was two passengers in the suspect vehicle.

Uh next slide, please.

Um, I did do um when I was putting this together, commissioners, and I don't believe that this was included in what I had sent to you, but I did a what if um because I was asked at public safety and health committee that if the FPC rule changes have been in place last year, would this have affected the six incidents that resulted in nine deaths?

And what I had told them was in looking at um the six incidents, there were two that kind of stuck out to me, in which um they attempted the officer attempted to pull the vehicle over for something else, and the reckless driving occurred after the fact.

Um so there were two that would have resulted um that I believe wouldn't have happened if the policy would have been in place.

So that's three deaths.

Uh in taking a look at the second one, though, I'm not quite sure.

They were attempting to stop the vehicle for registration violation, and um the vehicle took off and wounded up um killing a third-party pedestrian in a bus stop.

The reason why I say I'm not sure is because even if the um the officers had um activated their emergency lights and sirens and then turned them off and didn't engage, it was 21 seconds from the time that the pursuit was initiated to the time the crash happened.

So even if we didn't chase uh or actively engage in a pursuit, that vehicle still traveling at the speed to get away, um, the accident may or may not have still happened.

I can't say for sure.

But I did look, um I did um so I did I took it one step further though, commissioners.

I I said, well, what if the FPC changes were in place at the beginning of this year?

And what would that look like for our pursuit numbers this year?

And so I looked at that specifically the reckless driving pursuits.

So we're talking about 309 total pursuits, and I know, executive director, this is something that you and I have talked about, and we kind of know what that percentage looked like.

If I were to ask you, what do you think the percentage of pursuits would be that would have happened as a result of or wouldn't have happened as a result of the rule changes?

What do you think it would be?

10 to 15 percent.

Higher.

Um, so when we looked at the numbers and uh we had to look at each one individually, so we looked at 300 nine different reports, 158 of the pursuits.

So 51% um show that the officers observed the reckless driving uh and attempted to stop the vehicle for the offense.

So they observed it beforehand.

49%, 151.

The pursuits showed that the officers attempted to stop the vehicle for another reason, and then the vehicle fled in a reckless manner after the fact.

So with that, um the number is significantly higher if the FPC rules our interpretation of them anyway showed that the number is closer to 49%.

It's actually kind of even if you look at it.

I don't think I understand.

If the changes had been implemented last year, then out of the total data of pursuits, you're saying that about 50% would not have would not have happened because of the policy.

And I it's not last year, it's the I just went to beginning of this year for the data that I'm presenting this time.

So out of 397, slightly less than half 309.

I just looked at the reckless driving pursuits because that's really what the spirit and intent behind the policy change goes to is the reckless driving.

So it's 49% of that would not have correct.

That means that we attempted to stop the vehicle for let's say a registration violation or equipment violation.

Um, any number of other things, uh, and it took off then in a reckless manner.

The way that I and um internal affairs read the changes, those pursuits would not have happened.

Interesting.

So it was just an exercise just to see what um what that policy change could look like because that would alter the landscape of uh our enforcement in the city of Milwaukee.

Um I believe that's the end of my presentation.

Um I do uh appreciate the time that um you guys that everyone's given me to share six months worth of data with you.

We are still, I didn't put it in here, but the uh purchasing contracts for the um pursuit alternatives have gone through, and we're we're actively working to get the Star Chase technology uh put on 16 of our vehicles as well as the Haas digital alert on uh 80 plus of our vehicles.

Um that will have the responder-to-responder alert capability as well as um being able to alert members of the community who download the app either to their phone or to their infotainment system if they're in the area of of um of a vehicle, not just engage in a pursuit, but just engage in emergency vehicle operations.

It's something that the sheriff's department has, something the fire department has, and that's something that um I think is um long overdue.

You have an advertising or social media campaign to get folks to download that.

We will um have a very uh strategic and aggressive marketing campaign when that technology is um when we're ready to roll it out.

That probably won't happen conservatively till the fall.

Okay, and do you have a way to track um so like when Star Chase, for example, is being used.

Do you have a way that you can track which pursuits that's used?

Yes.

Um the both technologies will be able to get um data from both companies to kind of show exactly what you're um what you're getting at.

So yeah, I would love for that to be included once we're using it.

Yes.

Uh with that though, I'm happy to answer any other questions uh you may have to your question, Commissioner Will Patterson.

It's hard to say um what's driving the numbers down.

Um I do believe that it is uh in part of our uh collaborative efforts with all of our system partners that are involved, but um uh dare I say that I do need uh we do I I would like to see another um I'd like to see some more data um to say that we've kind of beginning to turn the corner on this along with what I shared about the um satisfaction survey.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Commissioners, any further comments or questions?

I think I got to ask all night.

Okay.

Based on your based on your answer, um AC Sarno, how are you are you all do you have a goal for 2026?

And how are you going to track that as you all are seeking more data?

Or you I think we're we're kind of aligned.

If you're talking about um fatalities, we're aligned with vision zero.

We don't want to see any fatalities.

That's the overall goal.

So you know, that's that's I think what we're all trying to get to.

Um as you're trying as we're trending down.

Yes, as we're trending down, uh, yes, we want to see we want to see less crashes.

We want to see these um pursuits come to an end quicker.

Um that's the reason why we're going towards um some of the mitigation technologies that we're going to.

We're looking at other ways too.

Um, I know that um for years uh the pit maneuver isn't something that the Milwaukee police department does, nor channeling or boxing in, other departments do that.

Exploring what that might look like in the urban environment here.

Uh, I can't say for sure that that's something we would go to.

But the goal is is to um still maintain a level of enforcement, but bring these pursuits to an end um uh a lot quicker and a lot more um safer.

Okay.

Are you saying that it's then difficult to have a goal to for instance another 15%, another 20%?

Is it difficult to have that goal?

I don't think it's difficult to have the goal.

I would just be a little reluctant to put a number on um what that uh might look like yet.

So thank you.

I have uh one last oh uh no uh commissioner Evans, I had a question um in my notes.

So it was a 50% decrease in non-pursuits.

Is that accurate?

Yes.

And what do you attribute that to?

Um, well, I mean, I I think when you look at our overall numbers, our overall numbers for pursuits are down considerably um compared to where they were this time last year.

So that's just the correlating effect as uh you know, non-pursuits have gone down along with uh pursuits as well.

Okay, and I want to thank you guys uh uh for the dashboard, that transparency uh I think is something that the city of Milwaukee citizens that would love to see that transparency.

So thank you for adding that uh dashboard to the website when you do.

And then on the flip side, uh Commissioner Ward Patterson asked about the decrease, but I want to know why the increase or what do you think the increase is over the last decade?

Because that was a a huge jump from like 2016 to current with with the fatalities.

And I'm just wondering like what do you think that increase because that was a huge increase over the last decade?

Um are you talking about uh which uh slide are you talking about?

The uh I said uh the increase.

I think it was in chases.

It was either in chases or the fatalities that there was a huge increase over the decade.

And I'm just thinking, like I'm just asking.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

There's nearly not a huge increase in the number of um fatalities, but with respect to chases, you'll see little red asterisks on the um I'm looking at slide number four.

Uh you'll see red asterisk by different um years in time, and what that reflects is changes to the pursuit policy itself, either making it more restrictive or where you see the largest increases is where it makes it where it became less restrictive and it opened it up for reckless driving and mobile drug dealing.

Okay, that makes sense.

And then um how is in how is the training like with the chase?

How is that impacting uh the reduction?

The fatalities.

I'm sure we we're constantly renewing the different PD that officers take.

Um how is the training impact in this?

Or what does it mean?

Yeah, the training, um yeah, we're just getting um to uh is so we have to be recertified in um emergency vehicle operations every two years.

So that's going to be happening again this fall.

Um, so we'll be out at uh State Fair Park on the track.

I mean, you can only simulate so much in a static environment, Commissioner.

Um, you can't take away from what um officers are going to experience in a real urban environment.

We do the best job we can with uh the conditions we have in the track and cones um to the level that we can do it, but you'll never be able to um uh simulate what they're gonna experience in real in the in the real urban environment, nor are you going to be able to replicate um the experience that um you know some of the more experienced officers have had and who are now starting to retire as the department is starting to get younger and younger.

So a lot of what you're talking about, you know, the education piece, you know, that happens from the supervisors at the district level, and it's uh should be happening uh each and every day when they start their shifts.

These constant reminders about safety, not only for themselves but for the public.

Absolutely, absolutely.

Thank you.

Commissioner Fung.

Oh, I was just gonna ask if you can also when you're looking at um other technology data, can you also add um the use of drones for vehicle pursuits?

Yeah, um, so that's something that um is uh we're actively looking into.

Uh it's just that um the drone uh we're we're hoping to be uh a test city for a drone that has the speed to keep up with these kinds of status.

Yes.

So uh the that's what's kind of keeping us from kind of going down that path right now, but we're hopeful that we're going to be um kind of a test city for this technology once it gets to the level that it needs to get to.

Okay.

Is the plan for that to be out of the asset forfeiture funds in the future?

We have a couple of different funding sources that we're trying to develop the drone program to um to get it to where you know we want it or the chief wants it to be um the way that it's reflected in other cities, the drone first responder program.

This would be kind of a specialty um aspect of the drone program as a whole, a drone that's specifically used for um that can monitor vehicle pursuits.

And then the drone flights that are like tagged as pursuit related in the SkyDio dashboard right now, are those responding after the fact.

Yes, those are responding after the fact when we have a pursuit that ends and somebody flees, and you need the drone to provide that um extra officer safety layer that can go into the yards and um kind of um see where this individual might be hiding.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, impressed by the questions and the answers.

Quick question is it the department's endeavor then to have the drones in every car.

No, this uh the drone that I'm talking about would be uh it would be at a uh uh a fixed location, uh, and then it would be deployed to um to go to the area of the vehicle pursuit.

But because of the uh you know the speeds that I'm talking about here, um again, that technology is still in its uh infancy, and again, we're hoping to get it as a uh as part of a pilot program.

It's starting when I don't have a date on that, Commissioner.

Okay, thank you.

Well, thank you again.

Uh director, please proceed with the agenda.

Next item is item 22 FPC 212641 communication from the Milwaukee Police Department relating to recent changes to MPD standard operating procedures and instructions.

And we have five uh changes, uh SOP 113, crimes against children, SOP 400, off-duty, extra duty, and special event employment, 460, use of force, 480, uh military courtesy and honor guard and uh traffic safety SOI.

I would note that the uh changes to 460 uh did not originate from MPD, but they were part of the uh common council's motion to modify it to add the duty to intervene uh both state and local.

I'm sorry, state, local, and federal law enforcement.

Thank you.

And I think we have someone from the department to provide an overview.

Yes, good evening, Inspector Sharonda Grant and uh admin division.

And so as it relates to standard operating procedure 400 off duty, extra duty, and special events employments.

The recommendations that our agency is making is to add IFMLA to the list of leaves of absence where members must return to regular full duty status and work their next scheduled regular off day or the regular duty shift prior to working any special duty assignment.

The second recommendation is changing the notification period for a member to cancel any extra duty or special event from 72 hours to five days to ensure that the specialized patrol division can find a replacement in time for that event.

And then the third recommendation to the standard operating procedure is updating if a member cancels after the five-day requirement that the six week ban from working extra duty employment be waived if the member has a justifiable reason.

Any questions regarding that?

Thank you.

I think it's just uh just grand that you still call these recommendations when you're talking to us.

Yeah, yeah.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh the next standard operating procedure is 480 military courtesy and honor guard.

All right, the first is removing of the required uh stand to attention when addressing a supervisory officer or upon entering an office of a commanding officer, as members are still required to salute commanding officers without standing at attention.

We'll also update the police rifle squad requirements for the honor guard for funerals as a sergeant is not always required to be there.

We'll also remove the number of required ceremonial detail staffing for honor guard to provide to provide them with a more flexible schedule when attending funerals, and then we'll also be changing the color of the piping of the honor guard and color guard uniform pants from gold to blue.

Next will be standard.

This is actually the standard operating instruction for the traffic safety unit.

And the only updates to this standard up standard operating instruction unit will be to remove the photokite camera as it's no longer used by the specialized patrol division and has not been used uh for several years.

As relates to standard operating procedure 113 crimes against children, the updates will be to follow uh the state of the safe haven law in Wisconsin, which was recently updated, and this allows parents to relinquish a child now within 30 days instead of 72 hours, which was something of the past.

In addition, this law also requires us to put out a QR code on the safe havens boxes and attempt to provide a brochure to the parents for leak requishing the child.

Okay, and that's all that I have.

Okay.

Um can you remind us what what uh what portion of the use of force change was is referenced here?

The uh definition to duty intervene.

Okay.

Um I'll just read it verbatim in this section to term another officer, which is in parentheses, or another law enforcement officer includes not only MPD officers, but additionally, any law enforcement officers defined by Wisconsin State Statute and any federal law enforcement officers decided defined in Wisconsin statute.

And then that also goes on to say um under intervening actions, um your report, their observations along with his or her his or her own intervening actions to a supervisor.

And this is the part that was added soon as practical after the occurrence of the use of force event.

Okay.

Thank you.

Commissioners any questions, comments?

I have a question.

Oh, go for it.

No, go ahead.

You had your hand up first.

Thank you.

Uh so you're saying that a mom can uh I think you use the word relinquish.

Her child now within seven days versus 72 hours.

No, ma'am, within 30 days instead of 72 hours.

30 days.

Wow.

So just dropping the child.

Yes.

Okay, I'm gonna read, I'm gonna read it.

Okay, so the recommendated the recommended update is that the safe haven law in Wisconsin, it was recently changed to allow parents to relinquish a child now within 30 days instead of 72 hours.

Previously it was 72 hours.

As they as state law, yes.

State law from birth.

You're saying parents have the child and they can relinquish within a month.

Yes, ma'am.

Still taking the child to the hospital without any questions asked.

Hospital, uh police department, and there are some other um locations inside of the state law, and that's uh chapter 48.

So it's a change in state law, and you've changed your standard operating instructions to comply with state law.

Yes, ma'am.

And then are they turned um the is the child does the child then go to protective services?

Yes, ma'am.

That child is then turned over to protective services.

Okay, and again, no questions asked.

Correct.

Okay, thank you.

Oh, uh, it was just a question about the function of the photo kite camera.

Is that work just being done by drones now?

So it's a different type of work.

Um, but our officers have not used it in several years, and also the members that are a part of the traffic safety unit, none of those members have even been trained in it.

So this technology is extremely outdated.

Okay, thank you.

Anything further?

Okay, thank you.

Thank you for all the information.

Thank you.

And uh, director, please proceed with the agenda.

Yes, the next item is item 23, FPC 212642 resolution relating to the to the classification report for the youth carpenter apprentice position for the Milwaukee Fire Department.

And I believe for this item we have uh DER staffing services manager, Andrea Nickerbacher with us.

Good evening.

Yes, this is Andrea Nickerbacher.

There are um there's going to be three reports.

This report is for the creation in the fire department of a youth carpenter apprentice.

You may be aware that this would be the second type of youth apprentice, the previous being a fleet apprentice.

And just to summarize, these these students are students in high school, either at their junior or senior level, and that is in collaboration with the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development Youth Apprentice Program.

And and just as an aside, I I want to say that these are popping up in many of the city departments, and it's a very, very positive trend.

We we have them in addition to the fleet apprentice that the fire has the construction laborer interns.

We have apprentices in the waterworks.

Uh, we have arborist youth apprentices, as well as of course the police aid and fire cadets.

Very good.

So it's a it's an expansion on um existing programs to cover another niche.

Is that correct?

Yes, all right.

Questions.

I think uh I don't see any hands up.

Okay.

Uh do we need action?

Yes, yes.

A motion.

Adam Chair, move approval.

Second.

Any discussion.

I'll take a voice vote on this.

All in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Item 24, FPC 212643, resolution relating to the classification study for new and changed positions for the Milwaukee Police Department and the Department of Emergency Communications.

Yes, thank you.

For the police department, there's a recommendation of a classification for a budget manager dash police.

This is a new position in the uh, I believe 26 budget, and that would be in pay range one LX.

Also repurposing the current uh 20 positions of police services specialists to instead go to the title of police services specialist investigator, and I believe that's in response to the need for additional uh investigators related to new hires as well as investigations, and then the third is a reclassification of a current accounting coordinator, one to an accounting coordinator, two based on higher level responsibilities in the department of employee relations.

The recommendation is to take one vacant position of an administrative support specialist instead to have an administrative specialist senior, which is a higher level, and will provide more support to leadership in the Department of Emergency Communications.

Any questions, comments?

I think this is uh you have a you have a big portfolio at DER and you keep uh providing us with excellent reports updating us.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh we have to take a motion on this matter.

Move for approval.

Second.

Any discussion.

I will take a voice vote.

All in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries director, please proceed with the agenda.

Item 25, FPC 212644.

Resolution relating to the job evaluation report for the crime scene analyst one, two, and three positions and the crime and intelligence manager position within the Milwaukee Police Department to evaluate minimum rates and FLSA designation.

Yes.

For the crime and intelligence manager pay range is actually recommended to be the same as well as the minimum minimum recruitment rate.

Um, but yes, this is going to change the position from an FLSA exempt to an FLSA non-exempt, thereby allowing the position based on the number of hours and amount of work to receive overtime.

And then also for the series of crime analyst one, two, and three.

So they're but you know, the the highest level is at the three, and you can underfill the pay ranges are recommended to be the same, but to assist with recruitment, there are higher recruitment rates recommended for each of those titles.

Okay.

This is uh I have one other comment to just let you know that that massive report or two that came to you over the last couple of meetings did go through and successfully get approved at uh finance and the council and because of the implementation of work day toward the end of this year.

We will not be doing classification reports until much later in the year.

Doesn't mean we're not working on them, but we can't take them forward because of the blackout.

She won't see us for a while.

Okay, commissioners.

Any questions, comments?

Yes, not move for approval.

Second.

Uh any further discussion.

I'll take a voice vote on this matter.

All in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Uh-huh.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Yes, item 26, FPC 212645 communication from the executive director relating to fire and police commission staffing and operations.

Uh, given the number of files and the hour, I will stand on my written report, which is in the in the file, but I'm happy to answer questions.

I don't have any any questions, commissioners.

I guess your your writing is clear crystal clear.

Off the hook today.

Yeah.

Um, all right.

I will now read the items under the Department of Emergency Communications starting with 27 FPC 212646.

Resolution relating to the promotion of Andrew Cochrane to the emergency communications manager position.

Do any commissioners have any questions regarding this matter?

I think what we have is a letter from Director Bruno.

Do you know?

Bueno, um advising as to what the um history is for this promotion.

Um questions, comments.

I'll take a motion.

So moved.

Second.

Thank you.

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

Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans.

Aye.

Commissioner Fong.

Aye.

Commissioner Snyder.

Aye.

Commissioner World Patterson.

Aye.

And the chair votes I motion carries.

Director, please proceed.

Item 28, FPC 212647.

Resolution relating to the promotions of Jason Powell, Matthew Munson, Kari Rising, Anja Groycich, and Kate Hanson to the emergency communications officer for position.

Okay.

Apparently this is contingent upon the individual's successful completion of all training requirements, which is rather vague, but we don't have the director available to give us more information.

I'm not sure if uh the is the deputy director still uh available.

I believe she is.

She is online, Dr.

Okay.

Uh is there anything uh you would like to offer in regard to this item?

These are UCTs who have completed their classroom training to be law enforcement dispatchers, but several of them are still doing on the job training.

So they have not all fully completed their classroom and on-the-job training.

But we don't know who's who from the list, do we?

Um is there a reason why you would they would be presented to us for promotion when they have not fully uh uh succeeded in their training requirements?

Are we a little premature on some of these folks?

Potentially, I I don't know if our HR director Anna Zizo can speak to that.

Sure, I I can chime in.

This is Anna Zizzo.

I'm the HR administrator with the Department of Emergency Communications as individuals are anticipated this week to complete um their on-the-job training, and given the timing of this meeting and the August hiatus since it was so close.

Um we did move this forward.

Obviously, if there was anyone who did not successfully meet those, we will be at the next meeting in September, you know, withdrawing those names or name.

We don't anticipate that, but um, if that would happen, we would do that.

Okay.

Um any questions, comments, Madam Chair move for approval.

Second.

All right, thank you.

Uh we will take are we are we starting a precedence by voting before a person has um finished the requirements for you know to come before us?

Is this starting a precedence?

Are we opening a can of worms?

Three days a week, you know, the next it's oh, just a little bit.

I I think it's premature.

Point taken.

Uh Director, do you think there's a precedent setting uh issue here?

I I don't think there's any any anything in the sense that it's it binds the commission to do anything it it doesn't want to do.

Uh your effective effectively you are the one that would set and and maintain the precedent, and if there's different circumstances, if it's you know a week or two, uh you could say that's just too much, uh or if it's you know not pending the August recess, that's a different circumstance.

So it's really up to the commission, and I don't think this uh boxes you in in the future.

I I I see your point, and I think it makes us um uh cautious uh because we don't want to have to reverse a decision after the fact.

Uh it's not good for the employee morale, and it's certainly not good for our agendas.

Um I think that they presented it as being a special circumstance in that um well.

Let me ask this from um the department.

Are the persons who have not yet completed training as you state?

Um, is there a reason?

Or is it just a question of man hours to get it all done?

This is Anna Zizo, the HR administrator.

It's just a matter of timing of when our um on-the-job training is ending.

Okay, but it but it's been completed for some of these candidates and not for others, or is it true for all of them?

I don't have that information with me at this time.

Okay, and what will happen when they complete everything and for those two weeks have to wait until we return.

What will happen to the candidates?

Um, with regards to the two weeks that you're speaking of, is that if somebody didn't make it?

Is that what you're inquiring about?

No, they passed successfully, but they are waiting.

We they would have to wait until September.

Yes, what would happen is is that um they uh would not be placed in that job title.

Uh they would continue to receive a certain percentage of pay for continuing in training, but they would not be up to the full salary amount that they could achieve if they were put into the echo four position.

Okay, well, madam chair question for me, Zizzo.

Um, so then you would not be able to utilize them.

Is that accurate?

Not in that full capacity, no.

They would need additional people to monitor and and mentor um and watch over what they're doing.

Thank you.

I will I will go with the team, but I still think that we're setting a precedence.

Okay, any other uh discussion?

Any other opinions?

Okay, you're not required to vote with the team.

You're required to vote according to how you perceive the uh best interest of the city to be served.

I understand that.

Oh, okay.

All right.

I just I know that we do tend to all uh agree on most things, but we don't have to.

Uh so the matter's been uh moved and seconded.

Are there any other is there any other discussion?

Then I will take a roll call vote.

Uh Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans?

Aye.

Commissioner Fong?

Aye.

Commissioner Schneider.

Aye.

Commissioner World Patterson.

Aye.

The chair votes aye.

The motion carries.

Item 29, FPC 212648.

Resolution relating to the promotions of Kimberley Pointer, Terea Johnson, Lena Ramirez, Bonnie Bozeman, Elizabeth House, Kaelin Jackson, Marjorie Kahn, Justice Platt, Nicole Spewer, and Yvonne Williams to the emergency communications officer two position.

Okay, so um as in the other one, the the letter from the director indicates that once training is successfully completed, they will be fully prepared.

Uh so we seem to have the same timing issue on these as the others.

Is that correct?

Department.

This is Anna Zizo, HR administrator.

Yes, that's correct.

Any uh other any questions from the commissioners?

Is there a motion on this matter?

Move approval.

Second, second.

Any discussion?

I'll take a roll call vote.

Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans?

Aye.

Commissioner Funk.

Aye.

Commissioner Snyder.

Aye.

Commissioner World Patterson.

I'm abstaining.

And the chair votes aye.

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Item 30 FPC 212649.

Resolution relating to the reappointment request to the business intelligence analyst position.

Are there any questions regarding this item?

Or on 30.

Trying to open up the letter.

So the department is in favor of the reappointment.

Any questions of the representatives from the department on this matter?

Okay.

I guess I'm gone.

I I'm a little uh confused.

Request for reinstatement.

Has he has severed his employment and he's asking you to come back?

Is that what this is?

Yes, it's technically a reappointment, not a reinstatement.

Yeah, yeah, that's what threw me.

And are we within our time limits?

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

Uh any other questions.

Any questions?

Uh take a motion.

Madam Chair, move for approval.

Second.

Second.

Okay.

Great.

Then I take a voice vote.

All in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries director.

Please proceed with the agenda.

All right.

We previously addressed items 31 and 32.

So moving to item 33, FPC 212650.

Resolution relating to the appointment to the emergency communications supervisor position.

I believe given the decision on item 31.

This item would be removed.

Ah, yes, it is moved.

Therefore, uh we would we move to click on file.

Move to put it on file.

Place it on file by unanimous consent.

Yes.

We will place it on file by unanimous consent.

Okay.

Item 34, FPC 212651 resolution relating to the appointment to the emergency communications records analyst senior position.

Is one individual involved?

Yes.

Is this a new this is not a promotion?

This is a new appointment.

This is um this is related.

This is similar to the other one, um, but it's not.

I believe this is the gentleman who chose to voluntarily demo.

Oh, did that or not appeal or not?

Oh, okay.

Wait, we're on 34.

Yes.

There's nothing about the motion in this.

Well, that's um, he he did not request a meeting.

So that the demo takes effect.

Oh, I see, I see.

So he is he is accepting the demotion.

He's not challenged, you're not challenging it, and therefore disappoints him to the uh alternative position.

Yes.

Okay.

Any questions?

I can take a motion.

So move.

Second.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed.

And then item 35, FPC 212652, resolution relating to the appointment to the emergency communications operation and operations analyst senior position.

Again, I believe this item would also become moot.

Okay, then by unanimous consent, we will place it on file.

I'll now read the items under the fire department, starting with item 36, FPC 212653, resolution relating to the appointments to the firefighter position, 49 appointments.

I would note that's 49 and not 50 because there is one person who's being reinstated who uh had a medical issue in the prior class and was held over.

Oh sort of like a workman's comp.

Oh okay.

Equivalent.

So it is effectively 50.

Okay.

Well, I think this is good news.

Um this is the result of uh competitive testing.

Yes.

Do uh any commissioners have any questions?

We'll take a motion.

Move approval.

Second.

Uh take a voice vote.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

All right.

Hang in there, everybody.

I hear some tired, some tired eyes.

We're almost there.

Item 37, FPC 212654, resolution relating to the contingent appointments to the firefighter position, six contingent appointments.

Now these are the backups.

Yes.

Okay.

Any questions?

Madam Chair, move for approval.

Second.

Second.

Okay, good.

All right.

I will take a voice vote.

All in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Item 38, FPC 212655.

Resolution relating to the appointments to the fire cut position, 28 appointments.

Okay.

And again, this is a matter of uh competitive testing.

Yes.

Uh any commissioners have any questions.

Is there a motion?

No move.

No move.

Second.

Okay, great.

I'll take a voice vote.

All in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Item 39, FPC 212656.

Resolution relating to the contingent appointments to the fire cadet position.

16 contingent appointments.

And again, this is uh kind of the backup group that can sell in.

Yes.

Uh any questions?

I'll take a motion.

So move.

So move.

Second.

Okay.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries.

Director, please proceed with the agenda.

Uh moving to the police department, item 40, FPC 212657.

Resolution relating to the promotion of Lucas Scaland Scotland to the crime analyst three position.

And this is a civilian position.

Yes.

And his commanding officer is recommending his promotion.

According to the letter from the chief.

Okay.

Are there any questions?

Do we have a motion?

So move.

Second.

Second.

Any discussion?

I'll take a roll call vote in alphabetical order.

Commissioner Burgos.

Aye.

Commissioner Evans.

Aye.

Commissioner Fung.

Aye.

Commissioner Schneider.

Aye.

Commissioner Royal Patterson.

Aye.

And the chair votes aye.

Motion carries.

Director, uh, please proceed.

Almost there.

Yes.

The last item is item 41, FPC 212658.

Resolution relating to the probation extension of a police officer.

And I thought we had a request to be heard.

And is he still here?

Check.

All right.

I guess he uh banded ship.

Yeah.

Okay.

Well, we have uh uh rationale stated in the letter.

Um just sticking around this elaborate point.

Speak into the mic, please.

Oh, yeah, I'm sorry.

Please come forward.

Uh assistant chief Sarno.

Uh Assistant Chief Sarno, uh, I was just um uh I and Inspector Graham were just um um going to remain here uh in the event that um you did speak with him in close session and you needed me to elaborate on any of the bullet points that um our human resource division provided you as to the reason why the work location was extending, wanted to extend his probation, but since that member is not here, um I don't feel the need to speak on it.

We stand by the request to extend the probation.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um questions?

Uh Madam Chair.

Yes.

So move.

So move.

Second.

Great.

Um that's a voice vote.

Okay.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye, aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

Motion carries.

That concludes the agenda, Madam Chair.