Good morning and welcome to the Thursday, March 12th meeting of the Public Safety and Health Committee.

It is 908.

I'm Alderman Scott Spiker, chair of the committee, joined to my right by Vice Chair Alderman Bergelis, joined on the big board by Alder Chambers.

We will be joined momentarily by Alders Taylor and more.

We have a very full agenda.

We'll get to item six momentarily, but first we'll dispense with the first five files.

So watch it go.

Items one through three.

Are there any objections from any of the three members?

If not, then so ordered.

Moving on to item four, file number two five one eight seven two.

This is an ordinance relating to parking controls.

Good morning, Mr.

Chair, members of the committee.

Scott Reinbacher here with the Department of Public Works.

Today we have a few changes to the city's parking regulations.

First is to remove the no parking anytime restriction on the north side of West Thurston Avenue from Tetonia West to the first alley.

This is to free up some parking for residents.

Second, we are proposing to install no parking anytime signage on the west side of North 97th Street from West Lisbon Avenue to a point 50 feet south, just to improve traffic flow for residents.

Third, we are proposing to implement a two-hour parking restriction from 7 a.m.

to 5 p.m.

Monday through Friday along the east side of South 10th Street from Greenfield to a point 150 feet north of that.

This is to create turnover for residents just because there are some vehicles being stored on the street long term.

Finally, we are proposing an exception to the city's alternate side parking regulations on South Allen Street for one block between Delaware and Connecticut.

All of these were coordinated with the local Alders.

Happy to answer any questions.

Very good.

Any questions?

If not, Alder Bergellis has moved to recommend passage.

Are there any objections?

Then so ordered.

Moving on to item five, file number 251873.

This is an ordinance relating to traffic controls.

Yes, there are a few changes to the city's regulatory traffic control devices.

First will be to install a stop sign for the westbound direction at Townsend and Pierce.

Secondly, this would install always stop signs at the intersection of Arthur and South 9th Street.

And finally, uh this file will install always stop controls at the intersection of Triple I and 78th.

Similarly, all of these were coordinated through the local Alders.

Happy to answer any questions.

Any questions?

Passage.

And hearing no objections, so ordered.

Thank you.

Thank you.

It is now 9 12.

So we are set to begin our 9-10 agenda items.

I will read in um change.

Please record me as an eye on that last passage.

Sure.

Um Alder Taylor has asked for reconsideration to be recorded as a yes.

Uh hearing no objections to either of those.

So ordered on items four and five.

Mr.

Chairs, um, can you add me for one through four as well, please?

Uh okay.

One through four.

Um you were here.

I no, no, I was not here.

One through five just in case.

All right.

One through five, yes.

Okay.

Moving on.

Thank you.

Item six, file number two five one seven nine eight.

I'll read in six and seven and then invite folks to the table.

Um this is a substitute motion modifying Milwaukee Police Department Standard Operating Procedure 340, uniforms, equipment, and appearance.

Um sponsored by Alders Zamaripa Dmitrievich Brower Perez, Bauman and more.

Um also reading in item seven, which will have a sub for file number two five one seven nine five.

This is a substitute motion modifying Milwaukee Police Department Standard Operating Procedure 460, use of force.

Um sponsors Zamaripa, Brouwer, Dmitrievich, Perez, and Bauman.

Umitrievich, or not Dmitrievich Zamaripa.

I don't see her here.

So um since these are modifications, proposed modifications of police department so ps.

We'll invite the chief to the table, but we'll have one of the sponsors speak first, just so folks understand what's going on.

Um Act 12 uh passed a couple of years ago, uh took the as it were rulemaking authority out of FPC's hands and uh placed it the ability to modify or uh rescind an SOP change, placed it in the council's hands by a two-thirds vote.

Um, but I was vocal at the time and continue to be vocal that just because the legislature saw fit to remove the FPC's authority in this regard, doesn't mean we have to play along.

Um so I think we do better as a government uh if we have the input from multiple perspectives and multiple bodies.

So it's going to be my practice as long as I'm chair um to encourage that first items relating to SOPs go to the fire and police commission and receive their extensive review, um cooperation and um assisting with public input.

They have their meetings at night where more of the public can attend, um, in addition, have their conversations with the police and fire chiefs, depending on whether it's an SOP or SOI, um, which they still have the authority to one name and to issue directives to uh with that in mind, you might say, well, then why the heck are you scheduling these items um that relate to SOPs?

Well, in both cases, it's my understanding, and I'll let the sponsors speak to it, that the sponsors have reached an accommodation with the police department, and so that everyone's rowing in the same direction.

So uh not to steal the thunder, although it's agendized as such.

Um the intent is we'll discuss these briefly and then um place them on file as no longer necessary.

So with that, um I'd invite Chief Norman and team to the table and start off um with uh Alder Brouwer.

Would you like to to bat for the team here?

Or would you rather wait for Alder Zamaripa?

Uh Mr.

Chair, thank you so much.

Uh and I'm I'm pleased to sit to your far left this morning.

Um the uh um sorry, what I got wanted to get to that joke before Alder Member Gullis.

Um, but if yes, if if Alderwoman Del Costa joins us in a few moments, um otherwise, yes, I can speak uh to the SOP uh modification.

Um would you like me to first or we would like to uh hear from the police department first?

Uh you you can as the sponsor just say what the intent was and then we'll kick it over to the chief.

Yeah, so the intent um with our coalition uh with this amendment, or excuse me, with this uh modification to a standard operating procedure, and again, I just want to um say thank you to the Milwaukee Police Department for being willing to work with us to achieve um to achieve our aims here.

So the intent with this um substitute motion modifying police department standard operating 340, which is uniforms, equipment, and appearance.

Basically, what we've seen when there has been a surge in ICE activity across the country is that we have agents, federal agents, who do not wear identification, they can seal their identity.

We're gonna have an ordinance considering something like this similar later in this agenda, but they conceal their identity.

They um are in our marked unmarked vehicles almost entirely or vehicles with mismatching license plates and all sorts of all sorts of things that are unbecoming um of any sort of law enforcement whatsoever.

So we want our intent with this is to have our law enforcement here in Milwaukee held to the highest standards um of accountability and conduct here.

So we offered this motion to uh raise the bar for our officers to make sure that when they're on public, they're clearly identified, they're not concealing their their identities to um the public, um, unless of course it's absolutely necessary.

Um but we are you know, so we we've put this forward this SOP to accomplish that, and in the course of that, we've had conversations with the Milwaukee Police Department and specifically uh Alder Woman Zamarepa that has um been leading some of those discussions, and she she may join us in a moment, but um, yeah, that that's the intent of this to make sure that when the public sees a masked officer, um, and there's no reason for them to be masked, that they know that it is not members of the Milwaukee police department out there, that they can be that they can be insured that our officers under our control are are held to the highest uh standards of behavior.

Um, and so that that's the genesis of the um substitute motion here that we have uh before us.

Okay, very good.

So we'll stick with item six first, the the motion relating to uh face coverings and MPD.

And with that, we'll kick it over to Chief Norman if you'd like to introduce yourself and your team.

Please proceed.

So just want to say first, thank you.

Good morning to the chair and to the chair, uh the members of the committee.

Uh, just want to have uh introductions for my chief of staff, Heather Huff, who's to my right here.

Uh we had a meeting with the auto persons, uh woman uh uh Dmitrievich, uh President Perez and also other person uh Zamaripa.

And we heard some of the concerns in regards to this particular item, uh understanding that we were trying to make sure that we can be uh responsive to this particular concern uh and that uh we do understand the concerns of the community in regards to this uh particular item.

And so with that being said, we were able to work with our unions to ensure that there is a level of cooperation that could be uh at a faster pace in regards to what we usually are bound by, because we are bound as a department by the uh CPA or the contractual bargaining agreement, and that uh we're able to uh get this uh rectified in quick and expeditious manner uh for the purpose of ensuring that our public understands how MPD operates, but also that uh we are being uh responsive to the concerns.

So just like to thank the uh you know all the persons that we work with and also the unions for being able to get to this particular point to have this uh response in a quick manner.

Very good.

And we're joined at the table by the chief sponsor, Alder Zemaripa.

Alder Zemaripa, would you like to say a few words?

Yes, thank you so much, Chairman Spiker, uh, and good morning.

Um to members of the committee and the public as well as um Chief Norman and Heather Huff.

Uh, first I want to apologize.

I thought you would take a little bit longer on the uh um initial items of the agenda.

Um, but such an efficient committee you are.

Um right.

I'm Alderpression Joe Castle Samaripa, and I come before you today on three files.

So I thought I'd try to roll it uh all together if that's okay, Chairman Specker.

Um uh let's uh first uh if you'd like to say something about the face covering, then we can move into the the others.

You want to take it one at a time?

Okay, all right.

So uh that would be item number six.

Correct.

Okay.

Um well, first I want to say this uh all has been a very long road of meetings and phone calls, debate and dialogue.

Um I had two SOP motions, but I'm gonna keep this one to um file number 251798, which was an SOP motion regarding SOP 340 on uniforms, equipment, and appearance.

Um myself, many of our colleagues and constituents have been disturbed to see that federal law enforcement agents across this country have been concealing their identities as they swarmed in many American cities.

And so I began to speak with um other Alders as well as Mayor Johnson and his office, and finally I asked to meet with Milwaukee Police Department Chief Jeffrey Norman as well as his chief of staff Heather Huff around this idea that I wanted our Milwaukee Police Department to be clearly distinguishable, transparent, and unmasked.

My goal with this modification was to be able to assure the public that our MPD officers are in fact the exact opposite of a federal ICE agent.

Police uh Chief Jeffrey Norman and his chief of staff Heather Huff heard me out and took it upon themselves to work with their membership to modify this SOP on uniform policy to explicitly state that MPD officers should never be concealing their identities.

And so I want to thank Chief Norman and Heather Huff for their leadership on this and their willingness to listen to the concerns of my colleagues and and and my um and that I shared with them.

And so with that, I'm moving on to the next motion, but I know you want to keep it to this one, so I'll conclude my remarks there.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

And uh the reason we need to do it that way, is there is a sub for the next one, so we'll have to take a procedural um motion to make sure that sub is before us.

So uh okay, so any questions relating to item six pertaining uh Alder Chambers.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, and uh thank you for uh giving me the opportunity to speak on this, as people may know.

Um we're working on this for quite some time, and I have also met with Heather with uh Chief of Staff Huff.

So I want to commend her and uh you know Chief Norman for their work on this and not you know necessarily coming to political theater um that is in front of us, but um you know, common sense um far as making things and doing what's right.

So um there will be more to this, but I just wanted to add my comments to it and thank them for their hard work and dedication on this.

Thank you, Alder Chambers.

Uh Alder Brighels.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um thank you to the sponsors of this file.

I think this was a uh our first exercise in uh dealing with repercussions from Act 12.

coming to political theater um that is in front of us but um you know common sense um far as making things and doing what's right so um there will be more to this but i just wanted uh my comments to it and thank them for their hard work and dedication on this thank you alder chambers uh alder brigals uh thank you mr chair um thank you to the sponsors of this file i think this was a um our first exercise in uh dealing with repercussions from act twelve uh like we heard from the from the department uh so p changes aren't solely uh in the realm uh or purview of the council even if act 12 deems it so uh there are uh collective bargaining agreements uh to consider as well um if the council were to change an SOP what would prevent the chief from changing it back the next day um there are a number of considerations that weren't thought out in act twelve uh and perhaps someday soon maybe january twenty twenty seven uh we'll have an opportunity to correct some of the some of uh of these and other uh failures uh for Milwaukee within Act 12 um that said uh what we saw in Chicago in Minneapolis and other cities from federal law enforcement was not law enforcement it's clear that those actors abused their position and abandoned any common sense convention of constitutional policing and law enforcement um this substitute motion uh addresses part of that concern we certainly have more work to do but I think it's an important first step uh and because of the ambiguity with Act 12 and uh policy from the fire police commission or not instead of uh placing this on file I would like to hold this item to the call of the chair so that it would be available should the council need to return to it in the future.

Thank you Mr.

Chair okay so it's Alder Zamric buzz uh as chief sponsor is that something you would be warm to or not well I um uh again wanted to uh reiterate for the public that um chief norman um did work to modify this SOP on its own so I was willing to place it on file today um but of course um I I leave I leave up the decision of what the committee wants to do to the committee members.

Yep and if you had your two cents do you care one way or another I I hadn't heard the thing Alder Brights was suggesting so I haven't thought about it but just interested in your take.

It also is news to me so wanted to of course I appreciate Alderman Brigelis's remarks greatly and um and so and so the motion would be to hold it then because there could be a desire to bring it up in the future is that correct um there could be a need to bring it up in the future um I suppose the rationale would be if the chief plays takes the back sees which he has given no indication he would then the motion would be sitting there I guess I don't want to put words in one's mouth but for our future chief future chief well again I would I suppose I would leave that up to the committee I I did I I don't want to surprise folks with been working together and trying to come to compromises and the like and I certainly don't want to pull a 180 on folks that I said I would be willing to put place this on file given our work together on this.

Okay.

Yep no I agree I agree these things should be sorted out.

Um yes Alder just a quick yeah thank you so much uh just a quick procedural uh question or musing um putting something uh or holding to the call the chair doesn't um I mean it does allow what the Alderman is is attempting to do which is that we could bring it up in the future but placing something on file does not eliminate particular the concept of that particular legislation into eternity I mean we can bring a file forward in the future as easy as as we can do in a new file in the future so that's you just wanted to make sure that that was a possibility um and all all files you know that aren't acted upon in a certain time do eventually get put to rest anyway so if we are talking about the possibility of looking if this is somehow need to be brought up years in the future it would already be put to rest as a matter of our council calendar anyway um so just just some two cents and for the listening audience as well for their and that's uh fair and good point um so just because you place something on file doesn't mean you can't recreate a version of it you know soon after um I guess one thing I would note is when I agreed to schedule this with with the chief sponsor and Alder Brower it was with the understanding that it was going to be placed on file I wouldn't want to send the message to the chief that we say things and then do something else and there would also then be a live opportunity for somebody to bring it out of committee on the floor which you know would not be possible if it were placed on file um long term so um okay so with that do members have a wish um it was Alder Taylor I'm sorry I forgot before you do that I had um there were quite a few um of these files coming forward um one of my goals was just to make sure that um members of the police department and uh chief norman were on board with some of them and this is one that um that accommodated for MPS uh made those exceptions and um not knowing that Chief Norman and um heather are in agreement with this um change I would um had asked to be added as a co-sponsor on here so if I could be added as a co-sponsor

Before you do that, I had um there were quite a few um of these files coming forward.

Um one of my goals was just to make sure that um members of the police department and uh Chief Norman were on board with some of them, and this is one that um that accommodated for MPS, uh, made those exceptions, and um now knowing that Chief Norman and um Heather are in agreement with this um change, I would um had asked to be added as a co-sponsor on here.

So if I could be added as a co-sponsor, uming that it will um fit in with um expectations or uh with the standard that has been set by Chief Norm.

Okay, very good.

Uh let the record reflect Alder Taylor's um co-sponsorship.

Um any other discussion.

Uh so the motion before us is to hold.

I'll be voting no just to preview it so as not to be.

I would object to that as well.

Okay, we'll take a roll call vote then on the motion to hold the file chambers.

No, Alderman Moore.

No.

Alder Woman Taylor.

No.

Alder Member Gallus.

Aye.

Mr.

Chair Alderman Spiker.

No.

Motion fails uh one four.

Uh is there another motion?

Place on file.

Alder Chambers has moved that the item be chased placed on file.

Are there any objections?

If not, then so ordered.

Thank you.

Moving on to item seven.

Um, this is again file number two five one seven nine five substitute motion modifying Milwaukee Police Department Standard Operating Procedure 6460, use of force.

We do have a sub.

So Alder Moore would move that proposed sub A B before us.

Um this uh changes the substitute motion now to relating to the standard operating procedure 172, sick and injured persons.

Um this again is sponsored by Alder Zamaripa and folks.

So Alder Zamaripa uh and hearing no objection to the motion that the sub be before us, um it is now before us.

Alder Zamaripa.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, and thank you, um Alderwoman Moore for um bringing that proposed substitute A before us.

Um again, this is um my second um SLP motion, it would be a motion modifying SOP 172, sick and injured persons.

And I I introduced this motion because, like so many other Americans, I was outraged, dismayed, and heartbroken when Renee Good was shot and killed by an ICE agent in Minneapolis.

And then to add insult to injury, no attempt at first aid was made by nor allowed by these federal agents.

Um I was determined to do everything I could to ensure that should a nightmare scenario like that occur in our city that our MPD would always attempt to administer first aid to an injured person, regardless of who caused that injury.

Again, Chief Norman and Heather Huff were willing to hear me out and in fact point it out uh and this is why this proposed substitutes before you I was in the wrong SOP uh initially, as which is why you saw 460 on the agenda.

Um they are the ones who let me know actually, Joe Castor, we have SOP 172 regarding sick and injured persons, which already does what I was setting out to accomplish.

And yet I still wanted to make sure that our officers understand this long-standing standing duty and goal to always attempt to render first aid to an injured person, even if that person was wounded at the hands of a federal agent.

Chief Norman took the initiative once again, not to do a modification as SOP 70 172 technically already addresses my concern, but he did agree to do a roll call clarifying memo to ensure that all of our MPD officers review the SOP and were reminded of their duty to try to aid an injured constituent, no matter who may have caused that injury.

Again, I want to thank Chief Norman and Heather Huff for hearing me out, hearing our constituents out and taking action and to continue doing everything that they can that we can to keep our folks safe and reassure them that we are committed to continuing to foster positive community relations in our city of Milwaukee.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Uh Chief, would you like to comment?

Just want to again reassert that we try our best to work with the concerns, understand the uh concerns within the community and understand that there is a you know reminder in regards to our responsibilities and duties.

We should again stand on that.

So thank you, Alder Zelmaripa and her colleagues in regards to that we are able to work through some of these concerns and show to the public that we are hearing and understanding and uh leaning to this challenge.

Very good.

Um are there any questions, comments?

Mr.

Chair, Alder Taylor.

Again, I I do want to uh commend my colleagues for the work that they have done and the collaboration that they have built with MPD, and so again, I'd like to make sure that I'm signed on as a co-sponsor for this next uh item as well.

Okay, let the record reflect Alder Burgels.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

Chair, I'd also ask to be uh added as a co-sponsor, and I see the fire chief here.

I wonder if he has something he'd like to add.

Um Alder Brighells, I'll run the meeting.

Thank you though.

Um questions, I have a question for the chief.

Okay, I have a I'm not calling on the third chief.

Um so this is not Jermaine, this is an SOP relating to the Milwaukee Police Department.

Chief Um Lipske will be called on in the next item, which relates to Milwaukee's protective services.

So with that, do I have a motion?

Mr.

Chair.

Mr.

Chair.

Uh Alder more than Alder Chambers.

Um, I think it was originally on this file.

I don't see my name on it, but just wanted to make sure that the record reflects that um I was one of the co-sponsors as well.

Very good.

Thank you.

Uh let the record record reflect that Alder Moore is um a co-sponsor.

Alder Chambers.

Yes, thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I was wondering, so Chief Norman have you you made the the changes to these files already, correct?

Like you made the changes to the SOP from the previous one, this current one, and I'm assuming the next one.

Yes, sir.

Um Alderman Chambers, this is Heather.

Yeah, sorry.

Sorry.

Um the first time sorry, did you introduce yourself Heather Hop Chief of Staff?

Okay, sorry.

Um the first SOP we discussed, the last file, there was a change made related to uh an explicit statement that uh officers shall not use facial masks to conceal their identity.

The second SOP that we're in discussion about right now, we had an SOP, sick and injured persons that did indeed say there is a duty for our officers to attempt to render aid uh with a procedure for that for everyone, and we just clarified that through a roll call memo to say, including uh other agencies if the injury is caused by other agencies.

So there was no need for an SOP change for this particular file.

So therefore there is no need for this file to be up if you already made the adjustments, correct.

Um so uh Chief.

I guess I guess the reason why I'm asking the question, the reason why I'm asking this question because this is a lot of theater right now.

So it's like they already made the changes.

So, you know, if we're gonna keep hearing the same stuff that already been talked about, I just feel like it's the service to those people that are waiting to service to the chief time and everything.

We're already gonna make the changes.

So I just want to be respectful of people's time that we are we are you know standing saw by with our constituents in this battle.

Um, but we got to be realistic here here and make sure that we're you know being mindful of you know, not just doing things just for show, but just doing things for action.

I think this file, because right now it seems like to me we're making a vote on the SOP change, or we're placing this on file, Mr.

Chair.

So uh Alder Chambers, so my understanding is that uh as chief of stuff staff Huff related with item six, there was a change in the SOP that the chief made voluntarily.

The file um before item six would have required that change, but the chief made it of his own volition in concert with the Alders, including the chief sponsor.

Item seven is a little different.

There is no change to the SOP, but what the chief did um was issue a roll call memo, as it were to underscore and raise to top of mind um this feature of the existing SOP.

Um have I characterized things correctly?

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Mr.

Chair, are you allowing Alder comments?

Yeah, well, Alder Chambers still has the floor.

Please put me in list.

Yep.

Thank you.

So we're so we're never on.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Uh Alder Dmitrievich.

Thank you so much.

Um Chairman Spyker.

I want to thank you for this unique accommodation.

I have a sick child at home, so I'm trying to do a couple things here, but I I appreciate the accommodation to allow for Alders to speak virtually.

Um so I see things just a little bit differently.

Um I see this as part of a process, a long process, and I see this as democracy in action.

We witnessed as Americans and as a community, just total atrocities being uh performed by our own federal government.

We heard from hundreds of people, many that I can see in that audience today holding those beautiful signs.

You were welcome at any meeting at City Hall, any time your emails, your phone calls matter, and what you got was a response, a legislative response put together in a package.

This item, this item and last item.

When you see the chief there, which I truly appreciate, listening to us and responding and making real modifications, that happens when you agendize something and have a committee process.

It's a process.

Uh even this this roll call had um changes within it in draft changes.

So it's a beautiful democratic process, and these are more wins for the ISO package.

This is what our nation and the people in Milwaukee and all of our organizations there were asking for.

We know we cannot do everything, but we will do all we can, and I do think this is the right step forward, and we should all be proud of ourselves for leaving no stone unturned and making every change possible.

There is now a roll call memo that specifically says the words any law enforcement agency.

I think that we are cleaning things up and making them tight, and I appreciate that the police department is responding to our actions.

Um the item after this is one that we didn't have as much alignment on, and I'll talk to that one when it's up.

But the point is there's much to be celebrated here when there's democracy and compromise, and I think it's worth the time.

People want to see us reacting to their requests.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you.

Point of information, Mr.

Chairman.

Um Alder Chambers.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um the so when the decision, Chief Norman, when was the decision made for the roll call memo and had the roll call memo been placed out to um the the individual shifts within the department already?

It was made last week, and it has been disseminated out to the uh department last earlier this week.

Earlier this week.

Earlier this week.

Tuesday.

So this the so this memo, so this memo change, this memo um, I guess Miranda would have been here with or without this committee, correct?

I mean, the expectations within ISOP, but this was been a uh re reminder or reassertion in regards to the request to ensure that we are um being uh leaning forward with this uh particular request from the author.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

If not, do we have a motion?

Uh Alder Taylor has moved that this item be placed on file is no longer necessary.

Are there any objections?

If not uh one objection by Alder Burghels.

Um the motion carries 41.

Um the item is dispensed with.

Thank you very much.

Moving now to item eight, file number two five one nine five one.

This is a substitute resolution relating to the rendering of first aid by Milwaukee's protective services, inclusive of the police and fire departments.

Alders Amaripa is sponsored, chief sponsor, along with Alder Moore.

Alders and Maripa.

Yes, thank you, Mr.

Chair.

This one is uh symbolic measure, a resolution that um honored to put forward with Alder Woman Moore, uh as well as Alderman Brouwer, um, and I and I believe Alder Alderwoman Dmitrievich wants to be signed on as well as a co-sponsor.

But um I put this resolution forward um around rendering first aid um by our Milwaukee's our protective services, which is why now we see Chief Aaron Lis Lipske at the table from the Milwaukee Fire Department.

Um I wanted to put forward this symbolic resolution, knowing that we had worked together on the last SOP motion, uh Chief Norman indicating that again was already addressed in 172, but he was willing to do a clarifying memo to all of his membership, which I greatly appreciate.

And it was Chief of Staff Huff who put it on my radar that hey Joe Castan on forget the fire department, um, who are devoted to of course rendering aid to our constituents.

Um and so conferring with MPD as well as Chief Whipsky at MFT, I put together this symbolic resolution that just speaks to our protective services and their and their long-standing efforts to make sure to render first aid to injured community members, regardless of the circumstances leading to that injury.

And so I just want to thank Chief of Staff Heather Huff Huff in particular, who helped me with some language here, and Chief Aaron Lipskey uh as well, and of course, uh Chief Norman for their continued input and insight.

And so I put together put forward this uh symbolic document today to continue to reassure our constituent constituents of our commitment to their public safety.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

And uh we're joined at the table by uh uh by Chief Lipske as well as Chief Norman.

So we'll start with Chief Lipsky.

Uh just want to thank uh Chief of Staff Heather Hoff for putting us on the radar.

Always appreciate that and uh appreciate all the women's amaripa for uh extremely good discourse that I think led to uh language that uh not only addresses the fact that uh your Milwaukee fire department would never withhold care and has never withheld care based upon anybody's immigration status, based upon anybody's uh having interacted with law enforcement.

We would never and have never, and this I believe accurately represents that.

I was just getting to my punchline through the timing all off.

No, uh it's good for a little levity because this these are scary times.

Yeah, people are afraid, and I think it is crucially important that we maintain the truths that do exist in front of us, and some of those truths that exist in front of us are what I just said.

Your Milwaukee Fire Department does not pick winners and losers.

We will help anybody who is in need.

Yes.

And I also want to address the concept covered in this ordinance uh or this resolution.

I'm sorry.

Uh I've been on the fire department for 29 years.

I worked in EMS uh in Milwaukee for a few years before that.

So I'm I'm over 30 years providing emergency medical services in this city.

I've attended dozens and dozens and dozens of violent crime scenes, many involving uh either officer-involved shootings or interactions with with law enforcement.

Uh and I can tell you personally, I have never, not once in my 32, 33 years of EMS in the city.

I have never come upon a scene where I've witnessed the law enforcement officer withholding care to a patient.

And I think it's important for the public to know this, that you are already in a system where we we do actually care.

We do actually care about humanity and injury and pain and suffering.

And we can disagree, you know, on a whole bunch of stuff, right?

And but I just that needs to be on record.

I think 33 years of experience in this city is important to be added to the record.

I've never witnessed them withholding care.

And I I applaud you all the women's Amaripa for making sure that this is given a voice and given a name, and for doing it in a way that respects those facts too.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Chief Norman.

What do you say?

Always looking forward to the cooperation and understanding that uh we are still trying to navigate some troubling and unprecedented time.

So I don't think I need to say more than what Chief Libsky says.

So thank you to the auditors in regards to this, and that we're still leaning in to the work that we need to do to reassure our public we're listening.

Very good.

Um any questions, comments from committee members.

Alder Bergellis.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh please add my name as a co-sponsor on the item.

Let the record reflect Alder Taylor.

Yes, I want to first say um I'm grateful and thankful for um two outstanding individuals that are sitting before us today and and what they bring to our city.

So thank you.

Um and I I will point out too 33 years is the last, so thank you so much for your 33 years of service.

Um in a time that to use your words as unprecedented and uncertain times and very crucial, um, with a lot of fear and anxiety that exists right now.

I think it's extremely important um that we have realistic expectations of what you can and cannot do.

Um and I think so it is important that we um bring light, even if we're not making major changes, but that we point out to the public what is already there.

Um so I agree with that and and thank you so much for that.

So, with that, then too, I am asking to make sure that I am added as a co-sponsor on this um substitute resolution as well.

Very good.

Let the record reflect that.

Any other questions, comments?

If not, do we have a motion?

Mr.

Chair.

Alder um Brouwer.

Yeah, thank you so much.

Yeah, I just want to I just want to comment again.

Thank you.

I'm I'm really glad we're able to, you know, make this change happen, make the this roll call memorandum um happen here so that all of every single um officer of the Milwaukee Police Department is aware of the standards that we have for their for their conduct.

Um, and I think really the question is that we're you know less concerned at uh in this context with the behavior of our officers um and our first responders than we are with what ice agents will be doing.

Um and I, you know, so that that is really the question.

I think everybody and I think everybody understands that in this room, but just so it's set out loud here.

I'm looking right now on my computer at an article from January um 9th from 2026 here from The Guardian reported.

The headline here is uh federal officers blocked medics from the scene of ice shooting.

Um, and that is from the uh murder of Renee Good.

Um it was witnessed there that the ICE officers themselves resisted the attempts by bystanders.

Um I don't I don't believe it was City of Minneapolis first responders who attempted to provide first aid, um, but they resisted the attempts of um individuals who did have medical training and could have provided first aid at that scene from providing first aid to Renee Good.

Um whether that would have saved her life or not, I'm not I have no idea, but um this is the kind of situation we are trying to avoid with this resolution, and I'm so glad to hear a commitment from our first responders, both the chief of police and uh the chief of the fire department that that they're gonna do everything they can to avoid a situation like that.

These federal agents are completely out of control when they've conducted a surge, and right now, you know, right now Trump's White House is is reeling a little bit.

They're they've they've taken a blow because of the conduct of some of their agents, but that doesn't mean that in the future, just like a lot of fascist regimes, they will not come back with a vengeance and try to do the same things again in other cities.

It is not of the question um that there could be a surge here in Milwaukee, and I'm so glad colleagues that we're preparing and doing everything we can and we're doing everything we can as immediately as possible right now, and that and that's today.

So thank you all so much.

And I just wanted to bring that to the attention that this, you know, the weren't this isn't even putting blame on the first responders in this particular context in Minneapolis.

Um we're talking about you know, like just like our first responders should now hear that there's an expectation that they should do everything they can um if there's a scene where federal agents um choose um through cold blood to murder uh somebody here in our city.

Mr.

Chair, Alder Moore.

Um thank you so much, Alder Um Brower, for your for your comments and um Alder Person Samaripa for your leadership on this.

Um I just simply want to say I'm just so proud to live in a city um that you know we have leaders that care and we're taking a stance um and we're being proactive and we're also being transparent.

I think these conversations need to happen.

I think that our community needs to know what we are doing, um, and so providing a space for us to have these conversations is really centered around transparency.

So I'm glad that we're having this conversation.

Uh Mr.

Chair, I move adoption when the time is appropriate.

All right.

Uh Alder Moore has moved to recommend adoption of the resolution.

Are there any objections?

If not, then so ordered.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Um item 10 is salient, but um, we're gonna go to item nine.

Um the chief has a time commitment, and uh Chief Norman does that.

We want to make sure to respect here.

So we'll call in item nine, file number two five one six six five.

This is a communication from the Milwaukee Police Department relating to its use of cameras, including but not limited to body cameras, automated license plate readers, and point-tilt zoom cameras, as well as any others that are provided by Fox Safety.

This is sponsored by myself.

So um I have to be a little delicate here.

There is an open investigation.

So the file pertains to the general question of uh MPD policy and practice relating to the use of various cameras, um, including automated license plate readers, and uh what precautions either have been in place or are now in place now uh to avoid potential abuse.

So with that, I will kick it off to Chief Norman.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, and again, good morning to you all, and a couple of apologies.

One, I'm not feeling the greatest a little bit underweather, so definitely uh trying my best.

Um and also that I do have a hard submit today o'clock.

I have a other engagement for 215.

But I like to first off by stating that uh I wish we were here to talk about the 22% reduction of violent crime.

Or wish we were here to talk about the 48% reduction in crop carjacking, or we should be able to talk about the 17% reduction in part one crimes in 2025.

But I do understand we're here to talk about technology, and it is important to talk about not only technology, but more specifically FLOC.

Uh first I'll start off with my stance.

I do support technology.

I believe in the responsible use of this resource because it's a force multiplier, especially for a department that we do have staffing challenges.

I know that the men and women of Milwaukee Police Department uses for more efficient and effective use in regards to impacting crime within our city, being able to address uh those type of concerns of missing uh uh persons and uh be able to help for the investigative resource, but also understand that there's individual use technology to do it for bad purposes, and we know that we have to use technology to again be able to impact and be able to respond appropriately to those who use it for their own uh illegitimate purposes.

So, more specifically about Flock, what it is and what it is not.

Flock is an Alpers system, meaning automated license plate reader, uh uses plates, either partially a full to help with investigative purposes.

It's also able to be used where you have specific details of a vehicle to be again used for investigative purposes.

What it is not is not FRT, it's not facial recognition technology being used in this.

It's not where we have a share with the federal government.

The market police department owes this particular information, is within our systems.

We have to give approval to anyone outside of our organization to be able to use it.

Also, is not to collect private information from our citizens.

That is not the purpose of this particular system.

And also that the MPD does not direct it to use for surveillance purposes.

It is again an investigative tool, which when we talk about investigations, that's a reaction that you have a reason for what you're doing.

MPD employees robust checks and balances.

One of the things that we also uh make sure that our MPD members are trained and reminded of the expectations in regards to using this tool.

We also have an SOP that guides us in regards to what is and what is not the responsible behavior for this.

And we have audit process involving our supervision and to ensure that there is a checks and balances.

We must inspect what we expect.

But we also understand, especially from our recent situation, that we can do better.

We understand that we have to put in more robust checks and balances.

And at this particular time, we will have uh, you know, uh the risk manager James Lewis talk a little bit more about it when I pass it off to him.

But in the end, I like to say this in regards to the use of technology.

I do understand that with uh great uh power that the technology provides brings great responsibility.

And I understand that as a department where we have you know, a couple thousand men and women, both sworn and unsworn, who work with this particular technology.

I can never guarantee that someone will abuse or misuse it.

It is uh definitely uh something that we do not accept, do we uh allow, uh, and that is something that we also make sure that we put in the type of checks and oversight.

So I can never guarantee someone will again misuse this responsibility.

What I will guarantee is that there will be swift accountability in regards to these particular type of losing uh the trust of our department of our of our community.

That I do guarantee, because it is important to understand that we need to make sure that our community, our department understands the responsibility that what technology comes comes with, and that we need to make sure that those who again uh do not live up to that trust, uh, find out what accountability is up until the point of that you would not be part of the MPD organization anymore.

And so with that said, I will pass it over to risk manager James Lewis to talk a little bit more about our checks and balances in regards to this uh particular uh use of technology.

So before Mr.

Lewis starts, um I'll have a question that Mr.

Lewis you can address directly, but um I'm sure the public will want to know who had access to the various cameras and in particular the ALPers, the automated license plate readers.

Is that something every sworn member of the police department is able to access or was and if things have changed recently um what the new standards of access are.

So that'll be a point um hope to have addressed.

So Mr.

Lewis.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh James Lewis, police risk manager, Milwaukee Police Department.

Um, thanks for the opportunity to share some information with us.

Uh I'll start off by answering your question just so we can get down to it, Mr.

Chair.

At no point did all members of the Milwaukee Police Department have access to Flock.

Access to Flock and the Alpers system was governed through the Criminal Investigation Bureau.

Access was limited to uh members who requested access, uh, but not all members had access.

Um we also, as the chief alluded to have a balance of sworn and and civilian employees, uh those would be crime analysts who aid our officers in uh investigative leads and follow-up.

Um just to clarify then, so you're not saying that only members of the criminal investigative bureau or CIB had access, that access was governed by CIB.

Um so first of all, you're saying that it's not just CIB members that have access.

Patrol and CIB officers and civilians had access, but it was not a blanket department-wide.

If you're a member of the MPD, you get access.

It was not um that style of access.

Right.

But just so we're not too clever by half.

If a member of CIB or patrol asked for access, um as long as they said what they were granted it.

There was a um I I don't know the exact that I don't believe that there were magic words that they needed to use, uh, that if they had a purpose for needing it in their investigation, or if their um division or bureau believed that they needed it that they were able to uh ask for it and uh receive it.

And do we know how many cases of officers asking for that access um resulted in them being denied?

I don't have that information.

I can certainly follow up with the committee on that.

Okay, that would be useful information because you can say, well, only a select group have access, but if anybody who asks from a wider group gets it, then we're kind of playing with words.

Um and then secondly, um the the current state of play I'd like to know as well.

Um Alder Berghouse, you had a question on the previous point.

Yes.

Um thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um someone was granted access previously, what did their training look like when they were given access to the database?

You want to handle that or do you want me to?

Was there any training on Flock?

Uh yes, there was training on Flock.

Uh when Flock was originally purchased by the department, Flock trainers came to the Milwaukee Police Department, and there were series of trainings that occurred.

Um Flock does charge additional money for those trainings.

Um the department uh had a train the trainer program where um FLOC would give us um they would train our folks and then our folks would train individuals uh who later requested access.

So everyone who requested access was trained on how to use it properly.

They were trained with uh what the SOP requires and the functionality of Flock.

Um we have realized through um several uh news articles and and re-looking at this tool um that more can always be done, and we've devised a uh a booster pack for any user, and I can kind of get into this because it dovetails to uh the chair's question.

Um, but when we revoked access to Flock, which we did um recently, in order to get back onto Flock um and and have access um restored, uh we're having our folks go through a uh a booster pack which is developed through the training academy and through um CIB who administers this and has been trained by Flock.

A booster pack that explicitly explains what's appropriate, what's not appropriate, and how to use it so that um our audit program which we've devised can sort data in a uniform way and find outliers and and find people who aren't inputting data correctly um very quickly because if you're not putting it in in the uniform way, it will throw the data off.

It will you you will become an outlier user and you'll be um audited in a deep dive audit of what is exactly this purpose to see if um it was just a user error in how you inputted things or um otherwise.

So we're looking for the law enforcement purpose for every single time that somebody accesses and uses Flock to query a plate.

Um it needs to associate to an active investigation and it needs to have an investigatory reason that a supervisor can readily identify through records, which is why you have to input numbers so that the supervisor knows where to look.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh and just sticking with that for a brief second.

So did I hear you correctly?

So these would be members of the CIB, the Criminal Investigation Bureau, and Patrol, both sets of SWORN could ask.

And Sillary non-sworn, every single one of those individuals who could request that access had hands-on training by Flock's flight into town.

No.

So then what was the nature?

How attenuated was that training?

They trained the trainers, but how did that training get to the folks who could request access when do you have something to say to add?

Um so I guess Flock trained our trainers when people requested Flock, our trainers were able to show them, and so at work locations, people who have been trained could train new users to say, here's how you use it, this is what we do it for, this is what um is required.

Um this is how you enter information into the portal and make sense of the data that you receive back.

This is how you can associate it to a case.

Um in order to use the system, it it is intuitive, but to connect it to a investigative purpose, um, there is a learning curve that you you gain through um folks who already are trained in it, showing you how to do it, um, which is not an uncommon thing.

Um I I don't want to make this perfect analogy, but it's similar to like a field training.

When you when you don't know what you're doing, you go to an officer who knows what they're doing and they show you how.

So that pertains to the technicalities of using the FLAC technology when an officer requests access or had requested access, was there also any sort of spot reminder of the SOP or governing the rules for that access?

So you might know the technology, but do you get the reminder, hey, this is our SOP, this is what you got to watch out for.

Yeah.

Was that standard?

And we've had yes, and we've had several um updates through roll calls and through reminders as time went on and users were granted access, we had roll call reminders saying these are the important pieces of the puzzle that you input into the system.

Excuse me, so that um not just that you're getting the results that you desire, but also that we are accountable for those entries.

So there was training and reminders of folks who asked for access that this requires that you have an investigative purpose?

Correct.

Okay.

And policy governing it as well.

So you have your your overall policy, which is what the chief alluded to, and you know, policy is for that high level.

This is the expectation of the department, and you set policies so that members understand what their obligations for use of any specific technology or technique is.

And then um the the part that we have built out in a more robust way now is audit, which is how do you measure whether or not your membership is following that policy, and what can you do better to detect areas of either non-compliance or misunderstanding, or um what systems do you have in place to catch abuse?

Um, since we are aware of abuse in the system, we needed to reboot the audit that did exist into a much more robust audit.

Um it's it is a program that our OMAP team developed.

Um they used the audit sort feature through Flock, um, which is provided by the vendor to actually make sense of that data.

Um Flock provides a an amount of data that isn't easily sortable for a department to determine whether or not somebody has used Flock inconsistent with normal expectations.

And what I mean by that is like outlier data.

And so when somebody uses Flock in an outlier way against their own queries, or um a certain plate is being run more than any other plate in the department, um in the past we had not had a way to automatically sort that on a per month basis to sort of look at like what are the z-scores or the means of means of these searches, and then associate those with directing supervisors to say you should look at this one because if you say to a supervisor, go ahead and audit it, um, without directing them with data, you're not leveraging like the best use of data to say where you should look.

So if you're looking for a needle in a haystack for for abuse or misuse, um what our audit system that we've developed over the last couple months will now allow supervisors to do is direct them.

We think that the needle is right here in this area, you should look for it.

Um then in the previous regime there was an audit system.

Um, but the audit system was not I guess invasive enough to, as it were, catch real-time anomalies, or even you know, within a month catching anomalies in terms of, hey, we have a member who's doing an awful lot of searches, or we have a member who's doing has a very strong fixation on this plate or that plate.

So the previous audit system lacked those tools?

Correct.

And the current audit system possesses them?

Correct.

Um given the concerns that had been voiced um, I guess at this committee, FPC hearings, um, a finance and personnel committee hearing, and given what's happened around the country in some bad instances, was there not felt a need by the department to examine the audit system and to per perhaps make it more robust in anticipation of problems that maybe we see elsewhere.

You're asking that question in like a historical context, because I would say yes, we have responded to that type of historical question.

Why why why didn't we know better?

Um I don't have an answer for that question.

Um I don't know.

Chief Stephoff.

I don't have an answer for that question either.

I think the assumption was the audit function that we had in place um was uh being utilized, and we didn't really understand the gaps in that audit system until uh something slipped through the cracks.

So um, yes, there was ongoing discussion.

Yes, we you know believed what we had in place uh was robust enough, but then uh when an incident occurred and we explored it and took a very deep dive, we realized here are places uh where we need to go.

And uh a last question on this.

Um the fire and police commission has uh more direct oversight function than this body does with respect to the operations of the police department.

Were there any subcommittee hearings or any commission hearings where the auditing tools of the department were examined?

To your knowledge?

Not to my recollection.

Um but I have a point on that.

I don't know that Lee's here, but he did text me and say that can speak for himself.

Okay.

Um Director Tad, would you like to introduce yourself and then if you need the question again, feel free.

Yes, good morning.

Uh Mr.

Chair, committee members, Leon Todd, executive director of the Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission.

Uh so this is one of the areas of emerging technology.

It's not something that the FPC uh specifically has had an opportunity to do a deep dive on, but as part of our 2026 audit plan, which we had uh uh created in late 2025 or early 2026, uh FLOC or ALP or is uh a subject matter that we do intend to do an audit on this year.

Uh so that will look at um presumably a uh a random sample uh of incidents and then look to determine uh compliance rates with uh existing policy and if there are any areas uh for improvement in terms of training or policy um or uh ongoing MPD audits, that is something that the FPC audit team will be looking at uh uh this year.

And does the FPC, when a department, whether it be police or fire, adopt a new technology, is there any look given by FPC as the oversight body to um ensure that a proper amount of caution is given because if you have to wait to run the full audit, well, by then you have a year's worth of issues potentially.

So is there anything built into the mechanism of a PC oversight that would elicit some caution from the departments overseeing about adopting the new technologies and avoiding potential perils that maybe we've seen elsewhere?

And I believe, and uh uh correct me if I'm wrong, I believe MPD acquired this technology in 2022 or early 2023.

Um so at that, and I don't have a specific recollection of this, but there certainly would have been a discussion about uh uh the acquisition of that in relation to uh the policy or the SOP that MPD has on that, but uh off the top of my head I don't remember the specifics of that discussion.

And it's it's uh, you know, I'm uh a frequent uh observer of fire and police commission hearings, um, try to stay in touch there.

And I know with the facial recognition technology, which this is not um unless the car has a face, um you see a plate or you see you get a picture of the back of the vehicle, look for identifying remarks.

I know with facial recognition policy is uh technology.

As soon as the fire and police commission caught wind of that, there was a reaction, and hey, we got to use caution here, um, which eventuated a year from then uh the fire and police commission saying, I thought rather clearly to the chief, hey, you need an SOP if you're gonna use this stuff.

Um so that makes me wonder why there wasn't a similar reaction with the adoption of the LPR cameras.

Was it felt to be a more mundane anodyne technology, and that's why there wasn't the um concern there?

I don't know if there was a lack of concern.

Um I'm assuming well, I don't specifically recall whether or not this particular SOP was established pre or post Act 12.

Uh there certainly would have been a discussion on it.

I just can't remember this discussion that took place you know two, three years ago off the top of my head.

So uh I do apologize for that.

I'm happy to look back at that and uh uh give you an update, but um I just don't recurrently as I sit here, I don't remember.

I I do remember an Alder Dmitrievich is still on the line.

I do remember sitting in a FNP hearing where a contract was up and there was a very thorough discussion of her concerns relating to the ALPR cameras.

Um so it had been foregrounded there.

I realize we're in this awkward space that just because something happens at public safety, it doesn't automatically rise to the level of salience to the FPC.

And similarly, we're in a disadvantaged position of not always knowing what's happening at FPC to a level of sales where we discuss it at public safety, although I do my best there.

Um so perhaps uh uh a note going forward is for these bodies to keep closer tabs on what each other are doing and uh to make sure there's a a more formal method of communication.

While ensuring the independence of each body, that doesn't mean we shouldn't know what the other are doing, and if there's concern is expressed somewhere, those should trickle across.

Um does that seem like a fair expectation?

It does.

Okay, thank you.

Um sorry, Mr.

Lewis, I interrupted your your train of thought.

You were saying how the world has now changed, um, a new auditing process has been set up, and what have been the changes in access?

Is it as easy to just request access and be granted it as before?

Um I would say no, it's not as easy.

Um it is a more vetted process.

So we have uh instructed our captains across the department if they have members, number one, that the captain must review and sign off on the request and um approve it before it gets approved by the administrator of the ALPER system.

And so what that ensures is that the captain um is saying, yes, this member uh is on a need basis from my work location.

Um they are also signing um essentially ALPR user agreements, which reiterate the very high level important pieces of the policy, must be for a law enforcement purpose, must have a CAD case or um IR number, a number we can verify with, must be for an investigative purpose.

Um searches made on behalf of other people.

So if if if I have access but uh Mr.

Chair as an officer does not, and Mr.

Chair asks me, hey James, can you run this plate?

I James am responsible for your search, which means I need to know your workup.

Um we've also made any so uh that user agreement will be signed by the member, signed by the captain.

Um it's not a new work condition because all it really is is re-emphasizing the policy that they've read it and understand it.

Um they will be uh then reviewed by the uh flock administrator and uh if granted access, then subject to audit.

Um they also have um I believe, yeah, that's as far as getting on board with it, um that's really the biggest changes is some sort of vetting process signed by the captain signed by the member.

Um also if a member changes a work location, they will be required to reapply.

Um that's that's to ensure that in the future of this program that a one-time grant by a captain who you know, oh I kind of know this person and they're gonna be used in this way at my work location.

Well, if that member gets transferred to another work location and they're not being used in that role that necessarily um requires access um or is is a good use of access, um they need to go through their captain again to get that approval if they so desire.

Um we also reminded our members uh, of course, any of uh a noncompliant or abusive search is subject to discipline.

Uh I think that that is a message that has reverberated through the department um without being specific, but just looking at the news.

Um members understand that this is this is serious, that violations of the misuse of this program aren't just um career enders, but they're breaches of public trust, which is the currency that we use to have effective law enforcement.

Okay.

Um other questions from committee members?

Mr.

Chair.

After committee members, I'd like to speak.

Yep.

So first we'll we'll go to committee members and then we'll we'll go to other alders.

So Alder Bergellis.

Thank you.

And you know, this file is about all cameras that the department uses.

We're kind of focusing in on automated license plate readers, but um and the consequences of misusing them.

But if we're talking about having this technology, what are the benefits of having it?

Does it help uh we've heard we heard from the chief before he he left uh that it's a force multiplier, but have there been real impacts to the community and to crime in our community as a result of using these cameras as an investigative tool, using them and using the technology properly.

100%.

Um so we have hundreds of examples of where the Alpers technologies has helped us solve crimes by locating suspects of those crimes and violent crimes.

Um a couple of examples that come to mind.

Recently, or in the past few years, there was a postal worker that was uh murdered, and Alper's cameras were utilized uh to find the suspect in that case, and it was one of the pieces of evidence that we relied heavily on to track down that suspect and bring that suspect to justice.

Another one that I I want to point out uh was in Walker's Point, um, not too long ago, I believe it was last summer, James, there was a bicyclist and uh severely injured by hit and run reckless driver, um, and we didn't have any information about the identity of uh that person they took off.

Um and so there uh was an outcry that you know they were seeking the individual that did this, and through Alpers, we were actually able um to locate, identify uh the suspect in that case and bring that suspect to justice.

So uh these you know their pizza huts on 76th Street robbery, um I didn't use the Alper camera and technology uh to identify suspects in that case.

So uh these are just some of the multitude of examples where this type of technology has helped us locate vehicles that are fleeing from serious crimes.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

So um, and I I remember an analogous discussion.

Hate to keep bringing it back to the facial recognition technology, but there the department had presented that there were real tangible benefits of using the technology and as an investigative tool.

Um, and you know, there were discussion of certain safeguards that would have to be brought into place.

So in the end, it's a cost-benefit analysis, I suppose, and similarly here.

Um, I guess I hear you saying, Chief of Steph Huff, that there are real benefits to the use of LPRs um on uh public safety standpoint, and the question is what costs there are, or whether those costs can be mitigated to the point where they don't outweigh those benefits.

That is correct, Chair.

And one thing I point out is that any of our tools, whether they're technology or not, have the capacity and potential to be misused.

And historically, uh they have been.

So uh just a couple of you know, uh examples, guns have been misused by law enforcement, cars, vehicles um have been misused by law enforcement.

This is another one of those things that has the potential for misuse, and we're continually um adapting to these new tools and putting um things in place to do everything that we can to prevent misuse.

Um besides looking past the misuse, there are real benefits of law enforcement having access to this type of tool.

Yep, and I'll kick it to Alder Dimitrivich in just one second, but I I would say that that might seem unduly dismissive, and that um an agency from outside the state can't come in and animate an MPD officer's gun.

Um there might be concerns, and you know, we can speak to them at some point of whether somebody could come in and use our data.

I know we're the keepers of the data, but there might be circumstances where we have to give it up.

So that allows for a potential, some might say for abuse that extends beyond our walls of our city, and so might be another reason for concern.

But I've said enough.

Um Aldri Dmitrievich has a very thoughtful letter that was submitted um to the file, is now in the file dated from yesterday.

Um so with that we'll hand it over to Alder Dmitrievich.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Chairman Spiker and committee.

Um, I know you have a very long agenda today, so I thank you for your service.

Thank you for putting the f uh letter in the file.

It's co-signed by um President Perez, uh Alder Per, I'm sorry, President Perez, Alder Woman Moore, and Alderman Brower.

Um, and I kept it to the people who had spoken to me about this issue, but I'm sure there's more council members that um have questions as well.

Uh your memory serves uh very astutely incorrectly as usual, um Chairman Spyker.

It was in finance a few months ago when I attempted to object uh to a single source contract um to the flock cameras, and I won't um put you through that again because I see that that speech hopefully had an impact partially.

I wish it could have prevented what happened here.

Um, you know, Flock is a seven point five billion dollar corporation and growing, and we are in somewhat of a a non um uh competition really, it's almost a sole source contract that I attempted to oppose uh months ago.

And and cities get in these situations where yes, they are looking at the the cost and benefit, but tell that to um you know, the looks like an ex-partner as reported in the journal who had their license plate read hundreds of times by this individual who's now resigned by the Milwaukee police department.

I don't think that's a reflection of the police department, but that's a pretty severe misuse.

And in the letter that is now part of the file and has gone directly to the fire and police commission, there is I'd like to draw your attention to the independent auditing, because that was what was discussed.

It must be independently audited.

It cannot be, we cannot police ourselves.

Uh we cannot police the police, like that's why we have an independent fire and police commission.

So that is a better practice.

Um, and last but not least, I must draw your attention.

This is the part that I have been the most concerned about, which is um item number four, a clear firewall for immigration enforcement and LPR specific policy.

We cannot disconnect this um from what is going on in our nation.

And one could say that if a police officer was able to abuse it this way, how could protocols be in place that the federal government, which is breaking rules left and right, doesn't end up providing a legit judicial warrant to actually access this data.

And now what could be caused in that situation?

We have someone sent to one of these detention camps where there's been hundreds of 911 calls and deplorable conditions for children.

So there are pretty outrageous um results if it is misused or not used correctly.

So I implore this letter to be not only read but acted on, discussed at the fire and police commission, and some true guardrails.

You know, I've often said this um about our president is that any guardrails that we've seen before have got to uh be evaluated and firmed up more than ever.

That's a lot of what the ICL package is as well.

Is no one had planned for these times, and I especially even the I know the police department um wasn't wasn't anticipating, but we are in a moment, just like I would say AI and data centers.

Some of this technology has some amazing um advantages and unique advancements.

We're living in a really interesting moment in time, but we're also living in a really dark time, and we do need to rise to the occasion.

So I hope that this letter will be taken seriously and real action will happen.

Um we've been asking for quite some time um for a change in the technology SOP.

In fact, the fire and police commission discussed it, but didn't have a real change, unless I'm mistaken.

So this is the time.

The time is now.

It's too bad that it has to be reactive and not proactive.

Thank you, Chairman Spiker and the committee.

Thank you.

Alder Brower.

Yeah, I just want to you know, first of all, thank you, Alderman Dmitrievich, for those comments.

That was very insightful.

I'm I was so glad to sign this letter, and I know there's their alders that would sign on it too as well.

We won't I mean I'll I'll just say broadly, like to respond to some of the things the police department has has said that are legitimate.

That we we don't we want we do not want crime in this city to be occurring.

Like I I don't think there's a and there's not a single constituent or a single person in this room who would want to see some of the some of the things that you've described, you know, happening, and and I know that the chief um you know just said from the jump that I wish we were here discussing crime reduction.

Um, but that's in some ways that is a whataboutism um because the issue here that we're discussing with this with this file and what we're discussing is a issue of the of power that we have, and because we're the ones who've we we the city of Milwaukee and through our police department are the ones who are retaining this immense power to if someone is associated with their license plate.

I mean, I'm usually the one driving my car.

You know, if a license plate my license plate is picked up by a raider, somebody can know my whereabouts at any time.

Um and that that's a huge amount of immense power that we have to be able to track through a database and then it be logged and stored and retrieved at any time um that we have.

So that has to be.

I mean, and and frankly, like you know, the the the criminal element does have the power that they do to to kill somebody or steal from somebody, but this this is a whole separate issue of debate of this kind of power, and since that power is within our hands, it is legitimate to debate and discuss it here at the table and look at like whether we should or shouldn't use that power or whether we should have should or shouldn't have guardrails on that power.

So I think just to kind of you know frame the debate there that we have this you know hugely powerful tool um in these in these flock cameras, and we have to be extrem at the very very very minimum extremely judicious, and at the very maximum consider you know whether we even want to use this or not.

I mean, we've decided collectively and and I appreciated the police department deciding to not use facial recognition technology despite there being you know potentially some legitimate benefits to be able to apprehend criminals, but like the the cost outweighed the benefit in that situation.

I do and I do appreciate the police department doing that.

I was glad to you know put out a statement thanking the department for doing that.

Um, but really, you know, and as far as the um another issue that was brought up too that I want to bring up is the historical question of whether, you know, when this came up, should we have done a better job?

And then Alderman Spyker asked a question related to that, and I'll just broadly say that with the emergence of technology here, um, and with things so rapidly changing, we it should not be a question of like putting the maximum guardrails on a piece of technology that we that we encounter and that we want to use in policing, or for that matter, any anything, right?

I mean, we know we're gonna be installing cameras on some of our DPW vehicles to analyze potholes.

Um, I mean, that could be a rec that's a recorded video that could be based on the internet that then and frankly, if any of this stuff is internet-based and housed on the internet could be accessed by Homeland Security.

I mean, to my knowledge, the Patriot Act gives them the warrantless ability to access that debt if it's stored in the internet.

I mean, we we don't even know when when this any federal agency is tapping into this thing, our phones at any at any point in time, and whether that's a phone owned by the Milwaukee Police Department or a flock camera owned by the Milwaukee Police Department or uh a pothole sensor mounted to the front of a DBW vehicle, right?

Whether they're tapping into that and potentially using that video, running that video through other technology that could include facial recognition that that they have access to, right?

So that's um I just wanted to put all that stuff out there.

I'm really really glad that we have this file before us and that we're that we're talking about this on the current constituents of mine to reach out to my office, you know, with your opinions, you know, about the kind of guardrails that should be had.

I would argue for them if we're gonna use this technology, and we should have that debate be one debate whether we want to use this technology or not.

And then the next debate we have is to what guardway rails we should put on, and in that particular case, I would argue the maximalist position that there should be the most guardrails, and um and and I mean you know apparently there was a guardrail that'll allowed us to uh discover what this police officer was doing to and these allegations to come forward.

So that's positive.

There could be others out there, there could be others that are less severe, but we're like related to these alligators less severe than what's being alleged.

There could be other and so do we have a guardrail to catch those um even before they're happening, and any time a new technology comes out of the gate, it should be you know regarded um you know with with the most hesitancy and then put and have guardrails around it.

I mean, I like you know, I am very cautious when it comes to AI broadly and and its implications for job losses and also just the fact that you know in the coming years, most of the content of the internet is gonna be AI slop uh coming out as well, and we should all be you know concerned about that, not just for the for our feeds, but for our um you know own liberties and and all this stuff that's coming out.

So I um really just want to see us have the most guardrails possible on this.

I think this starts that conversation, and I was really glad to sign that letter.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Alder Taylor.

Thank you so much.

Um, as I I sat here and listened, um I think that um technology is good in its place.

Um I think I agree with my colleagues that um I I heard you say a lot of uh things that you've put in place to sort of oversee the users within the department, but it didn't include public um uh public the public didn't have a say over um an oversight over the use of of that technology, and I think that's important because with the impact that that technology, the negative impact that it can have on the lives of so many people, um, that I agree with my colleague that the uh numerous amount of art rails that we could put in place um to make sure that there isn't misuse of that technology.

Um it's one thing to have it in-house, um, but I think it's a little bit different when we um utilize some public insight uh oversight as well.

So I think that we need to um and this and this is conversations that um that I've had specifically with um Alderman Spiker as well, uh, because or Chairman Spyker, um, because he's the chairman of this uh committee.

Um but uh for a long time coming, um I think it's important that um even though we're talking about flock cameras right now, um there has been talk about facial recognition technology.

Um and and if whether we're using this right now or going to add um cameras in the uh foreseeable future or near future, um we need to be very careful about how that information is used um and and who has access, and um because where there's a will, there's a way, and people do find a way around the rules all the time, and it's only so much we can do.

So um I think that we need to even just think about um how to incorporate public oversight as well to make sure that we are um not waiting for things to happen and then we come up with um with policies, but um anticipating what could happen um because we know some things may be happening and we're not quite aware of it, you know, but we should be anticipating that and and planning for it um and implementing those guardrails that were spoken about um by my colleagues.

Thank you very much.

Um any other questions?

Um I guess I have one more.

So um with the Alpers, the automated license plate readers, uh that through their function generates a certain amount of data.

Um that data is data that the Flock has.

Um so I guess I've two questions here.

One is are there agreements that prohibit Flock from sharing that data with other agencies outside of Milwaukee?

And two, um, if we are asked as a police department to share data under what circumstances do we do so under what circumstances must we do so.

I realize that's a broad set of questions, but that's obviously the salient point is is this stuff we can keep purely in-house, or might others have access to it.

And I think people's concerns grow to the extent the second question is answered affirmatively that others do have access.

So can you speak just generally to that point?

Sure.

I think James can provide more details, but um the user, the person who has the technology decides who gets access and who does not.

So in essence, there's a switch.

And some uh law enforcement agencies have the the switch flipped to allow access.

Others, like Milwaukee, have it set where we don't allow access.

Could you clarify to access by whom?

Which is the other agencies, other law enforcement agencies.

So nationwide.

You know, Arizona.

Federal Correct.

Okay.

Um so uh the position of this particular company is that the com we uh own a hundred percent of the data uh and it is never sold, and that uh our agency decides who to share the data with, not flock, and all of the data is deleted um after 30 days by default.

So that is the standard uh for this particular system.

Um and then James, if you want to talk about you know how that operates for the police.

Just a query.

So if the federal government believed um there were a terrorism suspect in Milwaukee, and they wanted keenly to know their whereabouts, would they have the resources then to ask or tell our police department, hey, we need access to this data as a means of tracking down this terrorism suspect.

So um to your specific question, we have not received a fact pattern like that.

So I can't give you a specific here's how it would happen.

This is how it went.

We've received FOIA requests there.

Um so somebody doesn't have to ask you for something to know what you would do if you were asked.

And I should think we would care very much given the concern that's in the ether right now, whether or not a federal agency could come in and demand this data from us.

Yeah, so I answered it that way to sort of just set the table that I can't give you concrete or specific examples, but I can tell you what we have received, which are FOIA requests.

Um we have FOIA, you have to define the Freedom of Information Act.

So we have received open records requests, we've received um FOIA requests from other agencies.

However, we haven't received a judicial a judicial warrant signed by a judge requiring us to give information over.

I would anticipate that if we did get a warrant like that, one, we would be running it through the city attorney's office to see what our obligations are under that warrant, but that if a warrant is signed by a judge, that we'd have to honor it the same way that when we obtain warrants, um individuals who say no, um, you know, can't you can't fight that warrant.

The the proper venue to fight it is in the court, not um as agency to agency.

Um however, we control the parameters and one of Flock's functionalities is that in any agency can decide uh the depth and breadth of the sharing that occurs from the cameras that are within their network.

And so our threshold for that has not been to share with federal partners.

Uh we have shared with state partners, um, and we share with Chicago as well, and there are mutual exchanges for that.

Um we understand crime patterns and need and use of this technology, uh, but we do look uh limit it to the the immediate locality here in Wisconsin uh and and just our neighbor to the south, but not participating in federal operations, although we have interstate systems like the highways that go through, we don't have um federal sharing with uh federal agencies or with other states, for example, any west coast, east coast states that are really far away from us, we don't share with them.

The sharing is within the state of Wisconsin and the city of Chicago.

And I mean, to a point that Alderberg Ellis had asked and elicited from Chief of Staff Huff, you might have an Amber alert or some situation where you really need to know what an individual where they are because they might have a a child that um and so the Alper camera could flag that, it could flag a stolen vehicle, it could flag all this stuff.

But I guess what I'm hearing from the department is we don't proactively share with partners outside the state and including federal partners, but one can imagine circumstances where there would be a live question of whether we must give over this data if we have a judicial warrant of a judge is saying you must do so, yeah.

Then we aren't entitled in the business of saying I'm gonna decide, judge, that you're wrong.

You're well it's not a it would become a legal it would be yeah, it would be a legal obligation.

Um if the if the judge orders you to do something, you must follow it.

Um contempt orders could follow things like that.

Um but as I alluded to, that's I'm not aware of a mass use of judicial warrant to obtain that type of information.

Um I haven't seen anything about that in the national news or coverage of this, uh, let alone being aware of it from a internal information sharing.

Um, but like I alluded to, if we get there, um, because we do have to prepare for what the future holds, um, that would be something that we would run through the city attorney's office, we'd be running it through best practices and and attempting to resolve it in a way that balances all the interest that we talk about here and the control that we actually have over any of this data.

And so um if it's it would depend on the the specific how that warrant is tailored, but if it says give the information to the agencies you sh already share with, we've covered that.

If it says this agency in Arizona wants it, we'd have to look at that.

Um, but I would be hard pressed to say you can flout that judge's order, it wouldn't matter.

There that that's bad legal advice.

Right.

Okay.

Um just by way of wrapping towards the conclusion, um, the during the discussion of the facial on this file, during the discussion of the facial recognition technology, there was a great hue and cry about that software and whether we should acquire it.

Um I thought that was a big deal, but not as big a deal as the underlying question, which is hey, we're putting up all these cameras all over the city.

Does is anybody concerned that the data they acquire may come into hands you don't want to have holding them?

And if you're talking facial recognition, they might have the software to run it.

Um so to the extent we are blithe and and cavalier about cameras going up for all manner of things to catch illegal dumping to catch any of the stuff that's that's in the file here, body cameras, um, ALPER's, point-tilt zoom cameras.

All that is generating data, and the concern is one concern is you don't want to inadvertently create an apparatus for a surveillance state and then wait to see if somebody turns it on.

So that is why this file was created.

Um that is something I think we could get um uh coming together, a meeting of the minds, if you will, of both folks on the right and the left.

Um, and it's something that um warrants our attention.

Um with that I'm concluded.

Are there any other questions?

Sure.

Uh Alder Brower.

Yeah, just a couple technical questions because I'm I'm want to make sure that I have my head around how this is actually going down technologically.

We have mounted cameras that are um at all times, day and night, operated only when there's light.

Um and then that'd be the first question I have.

And then as a as a vehicle is driving by it if the like if there is a license plate uh present on the vehicle on the front or the rear of the vehicle, um, it scans that plate, and that is logged somewhere, and then at that is logged and stored somewhere, and then at any point we can access the database in which that was stored.

Okay, we're gonna you know we have a suspect um and you know, type in their name, okay.

They have this vehicle registered to them according to the DMV records, okay, and there's a license plate for that vehicle.

We're gonna take that.

I mean, I'm assuming it's all integrated seamlessly, probably, but punch in the names, see the vehicle plate, and then we can see the list of all of the flock, this flock comma mounted uh over here on North Humboldt Boulevard or something.

We can and then it went by it, you know, oh 835 on Wednesday the 16th, or something, and then we can then that's a that's exactly time stamped.

Is that how that whole um is that exactly how that goes, or um do we we say, oh, we're looking for a suspect, here's their plate number, okay.

Cameras now be on alert and flag us when that happens.

Do we have data just being stored, or is it just getting flagged when we're looking for a specific vehicle or suspect?

I got it.

I think I understand.

So there's a lot there to unpack, and there are a couple of things working at the same time.

So there are things where we as a department develop a car, uh a plate on a vehicle that's involved with something, and we would do what's called a bolo, a be on the lookout for.

So that would go out to all officers, and traditionally how that's worked, like that's not new to Flock.

That is a long-standing, hey, everybody, we're looking for this car today.

If you see it, you should make that stop because we have information about an investigation that we need from this car.

You can use the technology to aid with that because if it if that car with that specific plate hits in a spot and it's in the bolo list, an alert can, if the officer has it logged in and they're they're you know, have their flock ready up and on their computer in their car, and it hits near them in their area, right?

It can tell them, hey, that car that maybe wanted for homicide, a stolen vehicle, armed robbery, something like that, is right by you.

Alert, you should do that.

That's one bucket, which answers, I think, only part of your question, because the other part is, well, what if I am an officer?

Let me give you an example from like a critical missing instance.

And so if if you're an officer and it comes over, hey, we got a critical missing, it's in your area.

Officer Brouwer, you're assigned to it.

Here's the the last known vehicle that this person was in, you can create a search saying, I want to find this car.

I'm very interested in it because the person who is supposed to be in it or driving is is is part of my critical missing investigation.

So you can use that information to make a query in Flock with those parameters to find that vehicle.

So it would give it sorry, I don't mean to give it a point.

It wouldn't be helpful to get historical data in that instance.

And so you can set the parameter to say, I want to know right now if this car is being driven in the city.

Um Flock's storage of data goes back 30 days.

So if you're officer Brouwer and you're like, Man, I think like last year I remember this car, I want to see like what it was up to last summer.

Can't do it.

It doesn't go back that far.

Okay, so there's not a log, there is not a lot of things.

And it would also be a misuse to do that.

What my example to you just there would be a misuse.

Just I want to see what it was doing last summer.

That's not a it needs to be related to investigation.

What I'm saying is is that that safeguard in there, one of them is historical data only goes back so far.

And so depending on the bucket of investigation or purpose that you have, there is different functionality.

There's what I would say is like the push functionality, which is hey, everyone needs to know where this car is because it's it's wanted and it's active and it's a public safety concern.

And then there's the individual officer queries, which you as the officer need to associate to an investigation with a legitimate lawful purpose, and then the queries that are associated to that will pop up in Flock, and then you can make sense of what you have, and you can then tailor your search better to the exact car and time space that you want.

If you want to know, I'm only interested in if it's right here because it's in my area, you can you can geo um like the geography of where that is, you can there's functionality for that.

So then if so, we're not little, so like let's say a car drives by one of these cameras, it's you know, not registered, everybody should have the vehicle registered, of course, but like but it's not registered, that's not getting flagged by flock for then an officer to or for parking enforcement to tow the vehicle when it's parked or something.

That's that's not how.

That's correct.

I would assume that that's how that works.

In in ours, it's not Flock is not integrated with um the E-Time query, and the E-Time query is a state-run system that all officers in the state of Wisconsin use to query plates to determine is it valid?

Is it registered with DOT?

Um, does it is it stolen?

Those types of things.

Does this plate list to this car?

That comes through a different system.

They're not integrated and they don't talk.

There is not functionality to um have a one-stop shop where I can just click this button and now I'm getting like here's all the drivers who's ever been associated with that car.

Here's all the information of any um registration addresses that they've used for DOT.

It doesn't have that type of functionality.

Um there certainly are ways if you're an investigator to piece things together, um, but it takes a human investigator to do that type of correlation connection and work up that would eventually get you to a place where you either say the target suspect of my investigation, I have probable cause to make an arrest, or I don't, and I've been able to rule them out through my investigation, and I need to look elsewhere.

So it I think that to the chair's concern too about the big brother state, right?

Like this is um this is a piece of technology, but it doesn't pull everything together where you're eagle eye sitting on a computer and you can just solve all the crime by sitting here.

It still takes an incredible amount of officer work up and work um to turn searches and queries and investigations into arrests and things like that.

No, thank and thank you for the clarification.

I just want to maybe clarify a little bit more.

So there's not like a so just just to confirm there's not a log of every vehicle that has gone by a flock camera at any point in the day unless it's being specifically flagged.

My understanding of the way that the data from the cameras are is that everything that the camera reads is retained for 30 days and in a black box system that is not accessible unless you make a query.

So I have to go through the officers have to go through the process of putting in their reason and their case number and the plate that they want in order to query against that data, and it will return results, but only up until a certain period of time.

So if you're trying to go back in time and far, far back, you it's not like the way back machine for Flock if you're familiar with the way back machine.

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.

So it's not like that.

It it is a rolling 30-day storage, and then it is deleted and purged.

Okay.

So this isn't being used to, you know, pull people over for registration issues or anything like that.

Okay.

I mean, an officer can do that on by not using Flock.

Flock will not be able to do that.

You know, along along Humboldt Boulevard and see somebody and all the plates not registered and pull them over for that, but the Flock isn't being used for that specifically.

Yeah.

And that would be a really bad use of Flock.

No, I mean it sounds like it, right?

But um I just want to make sure for clarity, because that you know, I I know that people are really, really wondering about the nature of this, and so that's why I'm glad that we're talking about this.

We share with um, you know, other agencies, including I mean, I know that you know, we have you know, there's federal, there's task force related to I mean, I know one of them is um you know, high-intensity drug traffic areas, and we work with those agencies.

Um where does Flock incorporate into our work with um federal agencies that aren't uh Department of Homeland Security or aren't ICE?

Because that's a piece of concern for me that, like, well, you know, if we're if if DEA can just tap right into this, I mean I know that's Department of Justice, different agency, but given that our president is throwing away every single norm that we've had for criminal investigations and anything that like okay, so if DEA has access to Flock to build a pipe in and view things um or run a query, um then that almost means that to my mind that is possible technologically anyway, for then um ICE to pipe in as well.

Yeah, so I understand the concern.

Uh the way that we regulate our our Flock use is that our task force officers that whenever an MPD member is part of a task force, they stay an MPD member.

They may be assigned to the task force, they're still subject to our rules and regulations.

And so, as members of a task force, they may have access to department information that they can use to leverage their responsibilities in the task force, but um they're still our members, they're still held to our standards, and so it's not um like a cat's paw, I think is what you're getting at, which is like, well, I'll put a member here, and then now the entire DEA has access.

No, it's it's through our member.

And so our member who is part of the task force is the one who's authorized to make those searches, and then that's how we control um who is making queries in our network.

Still subject to all of our standard operations procedures and if if the patch on the back says task force, you're still obligated to all of our rules, you just have more responsibilities because you are also subject to their rules, and where a competitive rule exists, one says one or the other, our rule prevails.

Okay, and that's how we've set up those arrangements is to ensure body cam use, for instance, which is on our agenda, right?

Task force officers in the feds don't always have body cams.

Our officers do.

They're subject to our rules, they must comply with them, and if they don't, we can remove them, we can discipline them, we can hold them accountable like any other member.

Thank you.

Yeah.

I just want to get through some technical things.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Chair.

Thank you.

Alder Moore.

Um, quick question.

Um, is it implied that we sort of share, because I know we share particular information with like Walkershaw and Washington County, there's some agreements or something like that that we have with particular counties.

Is it implied that they would or could share this information with ICE?

So, yeah, you're kind of getting again at the um cat's paw.

So it's our information, we control who is is accessing it.

So if I give it to Waukesha, they can't turn around and go like, well, I got it from them.

So here's access.

F like here's, you know, we're gonna turn on a button that you're gonna get it from us.

Because that would defeat the purpose of limiting that access.

Yeah.

It would essentially mean all everyone, what's known to one is known to all, and that is not how Flock has set up their systems.

It is designed to uh have agency control over who gets access.

Got it.

So just the example you used earlier, as far as I mean, obviously their um police officers without the use of flocks have access to particular information, like they pull over a car, they can pull up their, you know, pull up an individual's license plate, whatever.

Um and and even with that, those sort of things have oversight and it's monitored because if you know, you know, we you know, MPD, this is a bad actor, you know, our people constantly without police interaction, are people constant can can an employee pull up an individual information and is that monitored?

Yeah, so those are run through the state DOJ in conjunction with the FBI.

And so those databases are nationally linked databases because they'll if I if I get a plate from um Utah, yeah, that's driving through Wisconsin and I want to query it, I need access to Utah's database to say does the DOT in Utah recognize this plate?

And so that level of of clearance and oversight and accountability and audit is run by the FBI and it's run through um CGIS, which is the um criminal justice inst uh information system.

And there have been, I mean, you could look this up too.

There have been agencies, not MPD, other agencies who have lost their ability to participate in that because of abuse.

So they do have audit and their remedy for non-compliant use is we will just revoke you.

And so now your officers don't have access to this crucial tool that they need in order to do affect that traffic stop.

If I'm gonna pull you over for registration, I have to be able to confirm your registration is expired.

Otherwise, I've just pulled you over for an unlawful reason, which has other problems associated to it.

Thank you.

Yeah, yeah.

Thanks, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Um and I guess I'll just note as a result of Alder Brower's testimony.

So or questioning, uh so the fact that our officers have to do a query into the black box of data, as it were, is a bit of a check.

Um with things like body camera footage that is open recordsable.

Yep, to coin a word.

Um anybody who does an open records request can eventually get that data if it's you know subject to certain restrictions, but eventually it wouldn't be real-time access.

Um so and uh to your point earlier, you know, tremendous amount of investigative work has to come in to like link this with that right now.

A GenSIC AI could make this nothing.

Would you use what word you use?

Agenzik?

Yeah, an agent.

Oh, okay.

Got it.

Um could anything automatable, algorithmicable will be able to just keep making up words because I'm on a roll here.

Um you know, things that were extremely labor intensive will become routine.

So um, I guess for concerns about the future, one thing is stuff that they can just get the data, even if it would be extremely labor-intensive to do much with it right now, you know, in in the brave new world coming, it might not be um something that limits one's ability to make use of that data.

So just you know, flagging it for for future concern.

Um okay, well, we've had a a very robust discussion.

If there's no other questions, uh oh, sorry, I'm so sorry.

Elder Taylor, you asked me.

Yeah, like 10 minutes ago.

Um and and I think that you may have addressed some of it.

Um so you know, I guess with um with ICE presence and the the fear and anxiety that's been created, and um, I know it there was some you were saying that they people that other agencies have to have warrants in order to access that information, but um and that ends all you talked about other states maybe, but I I didn't hear you say the federal government also has to have that warrant in order to access that information.

Yeah, so we have not encountered yet an agency, federal, state, or local, tribal for that matter, bringing a warrant forward to say Milwaukee Police Department, we demand subpoena this information.

Um if they had that warrant, it would be something that we would have to scrutinize through legal through the city attorney's office to see the depth breadth and scope of what we're required to respond to.

Um and so if a federal agency, regardless of the acronym that they bring to us, obtains a judicial warrant signed by a judge.

Um I'm I'm less concerned with who the plaintiff is and more with who the judge's signature is.

If a federal judge is saying you have to do something, it's something we take very seriously.

Court orders are court orders, and um we don't want to be in the business of being in contempt of anything.

So we would have to look at that.

But again, in the national space of this, I'm not aware of that tool being a possibility, um, being leveraged in any way to make departments comply with um what would otherwise be a request, which can be denied.

If you're just asking me, may I have this, I can say no.

But if you're telling me that the court order is doing you must do something, that's something we we look at very differently than simple requests from agencies.

And there's just nothing saying that the federal government can come and have that information without that warrant.

Well, we don't share with the federal government.

That's that's a control that we have not uh had.

So um two two other things.

Um we know when the information is being stored, and um there are some situations as much as um companies and and other entities have tried to protect that information that there are times when there are breaches in the information.

Is there any possibility of that information being breached or compromised in any way?

Have we put any safeguards in place to make sure that that is limited as much as we possibly can?

Yeah, so there is access safeguards to that.

There's multi-factor authentication that must be done by anybody who's gonna be accessing the system.

So um at least from an end user standpoint, there there is robust protections against um me trying to obtain your information and then using it into a system and making queries.

Um there are also uh safeguards within the software itself by the vendor to protect the information and things like that.

So there are safeguards in that way.

Um we also have um seegus clearance for members in order to get to that, they have to have sieges clearance, so officers have that level of clearance of law enforcement sensitive information.

Um and so there are robust national safeguards like I talked about, kind of about who gets CGIS access and who doesn't.

Um I think in the premise of your question though, uh you alluded to the thing that we all need to always be aware of is safeguards are just safeguards, they're not guarantees.

And and so you can do as many things as you want.

Um but data and technology and uh anything in the cloud or online is always susceptible to it.

We've seen that across the country in in health care and law enforcement and even like Alderman Brower said in in your own device.

Um what's to stop anything there that you know that that question is kind of like larger than the Alper system here, but um it's something that is we have to be cognizant of always when selecting vendors and deploying technology.

All right, and uh um so the last thing is um how how do you advise a citizen who feels that they may be the subject of um uh misuse of the technology in any way.

So if we you know have um a resident that says, hey, I I think I'm the subject of of uh information being used inappropriately or attained on on me and used inappropriately, how do you advise them to deal with that?

Um and this is kind of going back to um what I mentioned about the public oversight and how how we can imp uh improve on that.

Yeah, so let me answer it in a couple ways.

Um, I think if anybody ever feels like their rights have been violated, that professionalism was not uh the product of the Milwaukee Police Department, or that they otherwise wish to bring to the attention of the department in the city a problem with officers or with law enforcement, they should file complaints.

And so they can file complaints at any district, they can file complaints online.

The fire and police commission takes complaints, it is one of our uh hallmarks of our obligations to the citizenry to investigate plausible complaints and to give dispositions to those members or to those individuals to say here's what we found, and we welcome that.

Um that's that's the most robust way.

I think too is uh the the audit that we've done is in direct relation to public trust and attempting to find instances where the data suggests this might not have been a perfect query.

Let's look into it more.

And if we find that, as the chief alluded to in his opening remarks, we're gonna swiftly take care of that.

We're gonna be referring charges to the district attorney's office.

We're gonna be opening up internal investigations, and and those members aren't welcome in the department.

That's point blank right there.

Um that misuse erodes any public safety mission that the department has.

It casts a negative light on all of the good officers who go day in and day out and try to impact public safety in a professional manner.

It there's no room for members that way, and we don't need them.

So if citizens feel aggrieved, please make complaints because we will investigate them, and if there were problems, we will handle it.

Thank you so much for that.

Um I would like to um definitely continue the discussion on um uh the public oversight and and how um we can s definitely improve on that.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Um so one advantage we've seen at the table is in addition to their subject area expertise.

We have um chief of staff Huff, risk manager Lewis, and uh executive director of the FPC Todd are all also lawyers, so we have an abundance of knowledge.

Um we've been able to take advantage here, even though they can't legally do the law business of the city, they know what they know.

Um, so good discussion, worthy discussion with that.

Alder Taylor would move that this be held to the call of the chair so that we can discuss it in the future, as I'm sure we will.

Mr.

Chair.

Um, Alder Brouwer.

Yeah, real quick procedural uh point here.

I do believe that um there was a letter from ACLU that was sent this morning.

I'm wondering what steps need to be taken to add that to the file.

Uh they can send it to Chef Steph, Assistant Polanco or Urties, and it can be added to the file there.

Okay, or they can send it to me and I'll forward it to the Mr.

Chair.

Mr.

Chair, one more uh Alder Moore.

Um thank you for that, uh Alderman Um Brower.

Uh it was sent to quite a bit of us, and I did send it to um our staff assistant to be added to the file.

Okay, great.

Well ahead of me.

Uh Alder Taylor.

Yeah, last thing.

Uh I know that uh my colleague uh mentioned that there might be others that are not on that letter that would like to be in.

Um I'm definitely one of those that would like to be added to okay.

I think it went out yesterday to the FPC, but I'm sure they could recirculate.

Um just in the discussion for further future discussions.

Yep.

Sounds good.

Okay.

Um okay.

So Alder Taylor's move that the item be held to the call the chair and hearing no objections, so order.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um little housekeeping for my files.

So item 16, file number 230676.

This is communication from Safety and Civic Commission relating to report of its recent activities.

We had communication from MPD's safety division that the chair of the safety and civic commission would like this item held.

So Alder Brigallus moves that it be held to the call the chair, hearing no objections so ordered.

Also, with apologies to ATT, we are backed up on our agenda.

So um item 14, file number 251903.

Deeply apologize if ATT is in the room and fire department, but I want to give you the opportunity to skedaddle because it's gonna be a while still.

So um with that, Alder Moore would move that that item also be held to the call to chair, and we'll get you next cycle.

Do you want to hold that one too?

15.

Okay.

No, I don't want to hold it.

He's here, but I like to.

Uh, we can't we can't go to it right now.

That's six time.

Um I guess uh on item 12.

Uh Ms.

Piero Padilla.

Are you there?

I know we've kept you online for an egregious amount of time.

Um here.

Yeah, why don't we deal with item 12, your item so file number 251694?

This is the appointment of Stephanie Fiero Padilla to the Milwaukee Commission on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault by the Common Council President.

President has nominated you.

Uh would you care to say a brief word on your interest in serving?

Uh yes.

So I bring the Matrix by RPK and Montana Research Center for about seven years now.

Could you speak a little closer to your microphone?

Yes, is this better?

Get as close as you can.

We'll ask audience members to please keep it down so we can hear you speak.

This will be a brief item.

Can you hear me better?

Yes, please.

Go ahead.

I'm kind of hunched over, so that's why I turned my camera off.

But um I've been uh advocate at Yumousatina Resource Center for about seven years now.

Uh as a commissioner, my goal is um to strengthen relationships and build trust across our city.

Um we cannot address domestic violence and sexual assault alone.

This work requires collaboration between community organizations, law enforcement, health care providers, educators, um, and most importantly, survivors themselves.

Um as first generation, it's really important for me to address every culture and every generation.

Uh we also know that barriers barriers exist, such as language, immigration concerns, um, during this political climate, stigma, lack of access to resources can prevent survivors from seeking help.

Our responsibility is to break those barriers down.

Uh, I really want our commission to be a place where voices from every community are welcome and respected, a place where we listen first, and a place where solutions are built together, not in force from above.

So it's our community partners and advocates.

I look forward to working alongside you all.

I am committed to listening, learning, and building strong partnerships so that together we can create meaningful change um in the city of Milwaukee.

Uh thank you very much.

Uh so appreciate your extensive leadership through UMOS and um the background you bring to the commission.

Um appreciate your willingness to serve.

Are there any questions or is there a motion?

Mr.

Chair motion.

Yes, Alder Moore.

Yes, motion for what would this be uh confirmation.

Okay, Alder Moore moves for confirmation.

Are there any objections?

Then so ordered.

Thank you, um, Ms.

Faro Padilla for willing to your willingness to serve and for your patience today waiting on the board.

Um with that, we'll move back in the order to item 10, file number 251797.

This is a substitute ordinance relating to law enforcement identification.

This is sponsored by Alder Brower and several other elders who are listed.

Um with that, we'll kick it over to Alder Brower, the chief sponsor.

Yeah, thank you so much, Mr.

Chair.

I really appreciate the time and thank you.

I'm sorry, and there you there is a sub before, so uh Alder Moore would move that the sub B before us um and hearing no objection, so order sub A.

Thank you so much.

Yeah.

And I believe every member of the committee has this.

I believe there's also some available for members of the audience as well, um, to check out this ordinance.

Thank you so much.

This ordinance attempts to accomplish what hasn't been accomplished um in other cities as it relates to ICE, which is to compel ICE in any way that we can and any um ramp up of immigration and uh enforcement, including customs and border patrol, um, to identify themselves when they are conducting their operations.

We've seen situations, it's been reported in the media where ICE agents have been um not only in unmarked vehicles that don't even identify any sort of law enforcement whatsoever, vehicles that have mismatched license plates, if license plates at all.

Um they won't get picked up by our readers.

Um in addition to that, being improper being poorly or improperly identified on their uniforms and masked.

So this is disturbing on a number of levels.

It's hearkening to um governments around the world and in history that abduct people with masked agents and disappear them for dissent.

Unfortunately, what's happening right now is even even worse in some respects than that because people are being abducted right now by ICE for the I don't even want to say for the crime, it's not it's not a crime at all.

It's just for the for the attempt by them to better the lives of their families and themselves by coming to this country.

Um, and so it's just completely uncalled for so much of their so much of their conduct, the entire idea that we need to be vigorously enforcing whether somebody has filled out the right form or or made it through the morass of red tape that is trying to become a citizen of this country for those of us that um weren't lucky enough to be born here.

Um is just is just completely unacceptable.

We need immigrants in this country.

This country was built by immigrants, this country is strengthened by immigrants, and if we claim, and if anybody's claiming that they want to make this country great, more immigrants would accomplish that.

out the right form or or made it through the morass of red tape that is trying to become a citizen of this country for those of us that um weren't lucky enough to be born here um is just is just completely unacceptable we need immigrants in this country this country was built by immigrants this country is strengthened by immigrants and if we claim and if anybody's claiming that they want to make this country great more immigrants would accomplish that so I think it goes without saying that we need to do everything we can um to um hold immigration and customs enforcement and CBP um accountable and so this what this ordinance attempts to do is to require that any law enforcement um regardless of agency uh be identified when they are conducting any sort of operation um here within the city limits of the city of Milwaukee and I uh proudly introduced this resolution um this ordinance excuse me I'm proudly introducing this along with other colleagues as an attempt to do every single thing that we can to prepare this city for the possibility of a of a ramp up in ICE operations or any sort of any operation by the federal government the period our residents want us to be prepared our residents want this body to do every single thing that it can to prepare this community um obviously we can't pass an ordinance um stopping what Donald Trump is doing um but we can pass ordinances that will attempt to hold those officers um accountable you know while they're here and so that's that's been the goal of the entire ICL package that's the goal of this ordinances it accomplishes several things it prohibits face coverings uh no law enforcement officer may wear a mask or face covering that obscures his or her face or identity it requires identification when acting in an official capacity all law enforcement officers so we're identification vehicles when acting in an official capacity no law enforcement officer may operate a vehicle that does not clearly identify the law enforcement agency um and listing a few exceptions um for those engaged in undercover operations or other um other situations um that would that would necessitate not being identified so really what we're trying to do and and certainly immigration enforcement which is a civil matter frankly um should not be um considered and that's what this ordinance attempts to do is to make sure that those operations uh the people are clearly identified um so that the public and the people they're interacting with and the people they're attempting to abduct um know who at least um is attempting to do that and so that's that's my argument for it um obviously we'll have further arguments in the market road discussion as this goes on um and I just uh appreciate Mr.

Chair um you placing this on the agenda thank you very much and I think there might be a very small technical correction needed to this sub A before us on uh under the penalty it looks like the end of the sentence cuts off so if you violate your subject to forfeiture of not less than five thousand or ten more than ten thousand and a default payment thereof we await with baited breath so um that can be correct though between now and council so yeah thank you um okay with that uh Alder Zemripa would you as the second sponsor on this um care to say anything um no I just want to join uh Alderman Bauer in thanking you for uh putting this file and the others that we heard earlier this morning on the agenda today Mr.

Chair and uh also allowing uh three of our community leaders to come forward and provide testimony public testimony as well too thank you okay thank you very much so this was discussed in advance we know we have a very packed agenda and um very thorough items but there were three members of the community who um were going to offer their testimony uh as relates to this as well so with that um if folks would like to come forward the three and and Mr.

Yeah and that would be that would be Emilio and Christine and Daryl.

Yep.

Okay.

So uh if we could keep our remarks brief two to three minutes um for each person then we can proceed maybe let you go just with um I guess I'll start and thank you so much for uh creating the space for us to share our um support um you know for this resolution obviously it reflects a much larger support of the uh community and many organizations uh voces of urges the common council members to strongly support the substitute ordinance to the MPD uniform standards operating procedure which requires all law enforcement officers to be unmasked with the sole purpose when the sole purpose is to hide their identity to require them to identify themselves individually their agencies and their agency vehicles this transparency is needed for public safety and to strengthen our democracy against encroaching authoritarianism ICE and other federal agencies have been deployed in city after city as a militarized operation terrorizing communities they are armed masked dressed in civilian clothes and in unmarked cars this secret police have grabbed fathers, mothers, students, children and shoved them in cars without judicial warrants violently attacking non white immigrants and peaceful protesters to more problems as there are people who have impersonated ICE and CBP to victimize immigrants in Milwaukee

They are armed, masked, dressed in civilian clothes, and in unmarked cars.

This secret police have grabbed fathers, mothers, students, children, and shoved them in cars without judicial warrants, violently attacking non-white immigrants and peaceful protesters.

This also contributes to more problems, as there are people who have impersonated ICE and CBP to victimize immigrants.

In Milwaukee, VOSIS has helped immigrants in this pat in the past, such as a family that was being extorted by a man that was pretending to be ICE.

They came forward because we had strong police policies that did not involve immigration.

Last year, one of our members was approached by someone claiming to be ICE.

Fortunately, they never opened the door and required ID and a judicial warrant.

After contacting the attorney, we still do not know if this was ICE or an impersonator.

This is a person who is uh fleeing from violent conditions and has been in the process of seeking asylum.

Most recently, um, I think you all have heard about the case of Elvira Benita Suarez, who just um just exemplifies the kind of trauma that is being created and the fear and the erosion of due process.

Um, this is someone who has been in this country for 35 years.

Uh, she's a Wisconsinite.

Her children are here, her family's here, and uh during a routine ICE check-in, as she appealed um her case and had been approved for lawful permanent residency, she was arbitrarily picked up by ICE and is now in detention in Kentucky without access to legal counsel.

So I say that maybe just as the larger context that we're living in and why the need for accountability and transparency in shoring up democracy is so important, because it's impacting us here in Wisconsin as well.

Um last year in Palmyra, a former chief of police, judge, and U.S.

veteran testified at a public hearing against 287G, sharing that when we allow people to be masked and inflict violence with impunity, they lose their humanity.

And he saw that during war, and he did not want to see that in their city, and we certainly don't want to see it in ours in Wisconsin or any part of the United States.

Um the village board, in fact, and the current chief there agreed to rescind the program.

So by voting to support this resolution, the City of Milwaukee elected leadership is standing up for public safety, upholding transparency, accountability, due process, and democracy.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Um, Chairman Spyker, uh we lost Vice Chair Virgilis and distinguished members of this committee.

Uh, thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today.

My name is Darrell Modine.

I serve as National President of Ford Latino.

Uh, we serve members throughout the city, throughout the state, and throughout the country.

Uh I sit before you today here to speak in strong staunch support of file number 251797.

Well, I would welcome the opportunity to discuss the serious threats posed by having armed masked agents who refuse to identify themselves, questioning and detaining individuals in a free society, particularly as they relate to our constitutional rights, due to the time constraints.

I'm going to limit my remarks to a single concern that I've had.

It's a concern I've shared with all the top law enforcement officials in our city, in our county, and in our state.

Across Wisconsin, many law-abiding citizens legally carry firearms under our state's concealed carry laws.

These individuals are trained to respond if they believe their lives or the lives of others are in immediate danger.

When a group of masked individuals with weapons aimed, shouting commands and refusing to clearly identify themselves, approach an individual.

Tragedy is inevitable.

And in a concealed state carry state like Wisconsin, confusion can become deadly in just seconds.

A resident confronted by a group of masked, unidentified and armed individuals may reasonably believe that they are in a life-threatening situation.

Under Wisconsin law, that person could respond with deadly force in what they believe is a lawful act of self-defense.

Not only could the outcome be the tragic death of one of our residents or a member of federal immigration enforcement, but in addition, under this administration, it could be used as a pretext to deploy members of the National Guard in our city, essentially to occupy our city.

While some may argue the threat is minimal because these immigration enforcement tactics are only used against the immigrant community, I would remind them that our constitutional rights are assured to all, regardless of immigration status.

Second, I would refer them to the countless number of U.S.

citizens who've been questioned, threatened, beaten, detained, and in some instances even killed by immigration enforcement officers.

Let me be clear.

Identification protects everyone involved.

It protects residents from fear and confusion.

It protects officers and agents from unnecessary dangers, and it protects the legitimacy of law enforcement and government authority.

The file before you today is not a radical proposal.

It sets the same basic standards that we've set and expect out of Milwaukee Police Department and our County Sheriff's Department.

When agents clearly identify themselves and their agency, they reduce misunderstandings, prevent impersonations, and help maintain the public trust.

At its core, this ordinance is about something very fundamental.

Legitimate governmental power never hides behind a mask.

Transparency builds trust, accountability, ensures the lawful use of authority and clear identification in this instance.

Yes, it will save lives.

I look forward to working with you and this and other parts of the Milwaukee Common Council's legislation legislative package that seeks to protect our individual freedoms, ensures our government accountability, and in so doing protects the lives of all residents of the Great City of Milwaukee.

Thank you all for your time this morning and for your consideration.

May God bless all of you.

May God bless the great city of Milwaukee, and may God bless the United States of America.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And lastly.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman.

Thank you, committee, and thank you to my colleagues sitting to the right.

I took a little different tack.

Of course, I please identify yourself first.

My apologies.

My name is Amelia De Torre, I'm the executive director of the Milwaukee Turner's Eternal Hall, founded by immigrants and refugees.

We are the oldest civic society in the city, if not the state.

And it is in this historic context that I'm going to speak.

Our founders arrived when there were virtually no federal restrictions on immigration.

We continue to be a principled organization that have a clear understanding of who we were and still are today.

Of course, we support this resolution and what we've just heard for the reasons we just heard.

Back when we were formed, one in three people spoke German as their native language, and there were six daily newspapers published in that language for city residents.

Milwaukee has always been a pluralistic society honoring the contributions of its children, native-born and adopted.

We have never been perfect, but we have consistently fought to live our values.

Milwaukee resisted slavery, which was then falsely enshrined by the federal government through the Fugitive Slave Act.

We broke Joshua Glover out of jail repeatedly, thousands of us, because it was the right thing to do in the 1850s.

Just as Milwaukeeans opposed the Blue Laws forbidding dancing or drinking beer on Sundays.

Milwaukee also rejected the laws and practices preventing black men from voting, fighting in the courts and press to ensure that Ezekiel Gillespie was the first African American to vote in 1865.

Milwaukee was also a hub for the labor movement.

Our citizens died on the streets of Bayview protesting subhuman working conditions that were legal at the time by demanding eight-hour work days and safety policies, ensuring that workers didn't need to place their bodies in harm's way.

Wisconsin was also and proudly the first state to ratify the 19th Amendment, which enshrined women's suffrage in 1919 after a 70-year battle against laws.

Milwaukee was strong when we were led by Vell Phillips, who was one of your predecessors, who advocated for open fair and accessible housing in the city while also demonstrating the moral and legal leadership that built equity for thousands of others.

And she stood for justice while others spit at her, called her names, and threw glass on bricks.

All of these ancestors did the right, albeit the difficult thing, pushing against injustice and morally reprehensible laws, even and especially federal laws.

Whether it was through marches, demonstrations, speeches, education, the press, local ordinances, or civil disobedience, they pushed for what was right even if it was imperfect.

It was then and it is still today the correct thing to do.

Milwaukee has another opportunity to push for what is right, to stand for moral and legal justice, and to continue a tradition of wearing a gritty, tough and fair identities on our sleeves.

I speak to hundreds and hundreds of people each week.

There is no debate on how federal immigration is being enforced.

Residents are in agreement.

No one wants secret masked police collecting bounties.

Police are frightened.

People are frightened and angry at a federal government that has made a hard left turn away from sanity and due process.

It is a fear-inducing abomination of who the United States is supposed to be, disrupting the economy, our schools, and institutions, and our daily lives.

We and you especially have the opportunity to heed Milwaukee's constituents while also heeding its history by supporting this ISI out of MKE package and this ordinance, and I hope to continue standing with you on the right side of history.

Thank you.

Um one quick question and then we'll kick it open.

Um I see there is a provision in here that relating to vehicles when acting in an official capacity, no law enforcement officer may operate a vehicle that does not clearly identify the law enforcement agency, the officer is representing.

At first you might say, oops, um the drug cars can't go around having identification that they're MPD vehicles consistent with their aim.

But then I see under 4B, it says there are certain exceptions, the provisions of subs 1 through 3, including the vehicle one, shall not apply to a law enforcement officer engaged in an undercover assignment for which concealing identity is necessary for the investigation of a criminal offense, not a civil one, a criminal offense, provided that information related to the undercover assignment has been provided to the Milwaukee Police Department.

So either for the sponsors or the uh the LRB drafters.

Um it does sound like that initial concern that this would apply to MPD drug cars has already been anticipated and dealt with in the sub before us.

Is that a fair characterization?

That's correct.

That's the intent of that exception.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah.

Um other questions, comments from committee members.

Um the city attorney's office joins us at the table.

Um can we speak to the question of uh the legality of the proposed ordinance as subbed?

Um with the understanding, Mr.

Tor Mr.

Del Torre kind of threw a gauntlet down that maybe sometimes you do pass something that's illegal in the larger.

But is that what is happening here, or is it the city attorney's opinion that this ordinance is legal?

Good morning, Mr.

Chair.

Ivan Goike City Attorney.

To my left, Assistant City Attorney Clint Mukey, uh, so that members of the public that are present today understand uh the file before the committee is an ordinance and under uh the a different ordinance, the city attorney is required to sign off on new ordinances uh to ensure that they're legal and enforceable prior to them being enacted.

And I've tried my best in the roughly two years that I've been city attorney to partner with the city council and council members to be a part of if it's drafting or the committee process so that we can flag concerns and address them as soon as possible so that the policy work that you are entrusted to do is successful and stands the test of time, and that includes withstanding uh potential legal scrutiny.

There is a substitute before the committee today, or that the committee may uh uh choose to adopt.

We urge you to do so.

It makes a small change but an important legal one.

The file is introduced originally uh uh excluded the city of Milwaukee, and uh there was a state statute in California that did a somewhat similar uh provision.

It applied to uh it did not up that California provision um did not apply to all law enforcement departments within the the state of California, and the district court and then the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down that law uh on uh under equal appropriate protection arguments because it didn't apply evenly.

Um the substitute takes care of that, it applies evenly.

There is an enforceability wrinkle with MPD that we can discuss if you'd like.

Uh but what we wanted to propose and what the sponsor uh has put forward is something that would survive uh a legal challenge.

And so uh I am here today to opi I have to do it again officially in writing, but we're we believe that the substitute as drafted would withstand that legal scrutiny, barring the technical change.

We will read the end of that sentence when it's drafted.

Um and ACA MUCE also flagged that there are two paragraph fours.

So we'll number them correctly and we'll finish that sentence.

And uh I imagine that those changes are minor and will not change our analysis that this file is legal.

Uh and we can touch on a enforceability questions.

We did want to prepare and answer those questions uh because there are some challenges and some limitations to when this ordinance could be effectively prosecuted, um, but that does not uh diminish or change our opinion that the file can move forward.

Okay.

So city attorney's office says to the best of their knowledge, given the sub, the broader sub that is now before us, um the uh legality is something they can sign off on.

Okay.

Um questions, comments from committee members?

Uh Alder Taylor, then Alder Bergels.

Oh, no, I was gonna move for adoption when when um appropriate.

Alder Burgells.

Thank you, ma'am.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh I appreciate the revisions.

Uh the Federal case in California uh stood out to me when that ruling came by.

Uh it's great to see that we can react so quickly and make uh accommodations and corrections uh to ensure that ordinances that we pass will be legal and enforceable and reflect the values of the citizens of Milwaukee.

Um reflect the values of the citizens and residents in Milwaukee.

I uh ask uh for unanimous consent to be added as a co-sponsor as well.

Thank you.

Very good.

Let the record reflect that co-sponsorship.

Um any other questions, comments?

Mr.

Alder Brower.

Is it uh if it's okay for members of that in front of the committee to jump in here?

I do want to be deferential to you guys here.

Um, but I would appreciate some you know comments on enforceability from the city attorney's office, all broadly, you know, kick it off by offering you know the thought that there is the possibility that if our police officers attempt to um ask an ICE agent or demand of an ICE agent that they identify themselves that the ICE agent could tell them uh to take a hike.

Um and that's probably the beginning of the enforcement questions.

Um, you know, I want to also just broadly say that you know, if if that turns out to be the case, I at least want, and one of my intents with this legislation is for our police um to at least attempt to do something rather than rather than nothing um here in this situation.

And I mean uh all alternatives could be also turning on their body camera while they're informing the ICE agents of this.

Um actually I you know I'll wait until the city attorney opines on or offers an opinion uh some thoughts on enforcement uh before I go into some more details about possible scenarios.

Well, I'll start and then I'm gonna turn it over to ACA Mookie, and I'll start very local and then we'll work out in concentric circles to the feds.

Um foremost, uh the file does not define law enforcement.

Uh so the a consideration, this is a policy consideration for policymakers, doesn't change our legal review, but that it you don't define in the file, the file does not define who you're talking about.

So thought of whether or not you want to look to existing state law, chapter 175 of the state statutes defines law enforcement um in in context of who has a resting power.

To be clear, uh the ordinance would not one limitation is for members of the Milwaukee Police Department, uh they have an SOP, as was talked about earlier today in this committee, uh, and that our SOPs are what handle uh uh uh violations of conduct.

And so you have a tension where uh MPD cannot cite themselves for the violation and assess a fine to themselves.

We but we have the SOP where there would be potential consequences for an MPD officer violating this conduct.

So you kind of have it enshrined for MPD in two places.

Just want to flag that the the MPD is not going to be able to cite themselves and then prosecute themselves for this violation, but that is probably redundant and unnecessary because of the SOP.

Second, there are three units, uh three law enforcement departments that have co-occurring or concurrent jurisdiction in the city of Milwaukee.

The Milwaukee County Sheriff's Department, uh the Marquette University Police, and UWM's police.

And um both UWM and Marquettes Police are defined as law enforcement in state law.

And so they operate exclusively or you know, really within the boundaries, and um we want to take a look at whether or not they have their own conduct or SOP like MPD, and so there may be challenges citing them and successfully prosecuting those concurrent law enforcement uh departments for violating this ordinance.

Uh and then the third flag is there may be scenarios, and I'm not here, I don't have anything in text today, where we have uh shared service agreement or task force agreements where the jurisdictional lines between Greenfield, West Dallas, Milwaukee, Glendale are a bit blurred, and multiple officers from multiple departments are working on some task force or project or uh have some form of agreement, and those agreements or contracts or whatever they may be may have language that uh would make it difficult to to successfully prosecute.

Those are all hypothetical.

I I that don't and and again I I don't have a vote on this file, but it doesn't change our legal review.

I just we thought it would be fair to flag for members that there may be fact patterns that arise where this ordinance does not result in the successful prosecution of uh some of the law enforcement members of those local jurisdictions I described.

The application to federal law enforcement is is different, and I'll turn it over to uh ACA Mookie to to handle that.

Thank you, Mr.

City Attorney.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, and good morning.

Uh good morning to the esteemed members of the committee as well as those alders joining us virtually.

Um I'm gonna I'm gonna sort of eat the sub from the opposite direction.

Uh there is a robust and well-established area of law interpreting uh the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution and dating back to uh the founding generation itself, that has been interpreted uh to prohibit any any local regulation or state regulation that impedes or burdens or in any manner controls the execution of federal law.

Um in general federal officers uh have immunity when they are performing acts authorized under federal law, and when in so doing, they subjectively believe that the actions that they take are necessary and proper to accomplish that goal, unless uh their belief was objectively unreasonable under the circumstances.

Now there as I stated, there is a a long and and and and robust uh set of cases interpreting that in a variety of contexts and uh prior cases have uh stated themselves, so this is not merely the analysis of the Milwaukee City Attorney's Office, uh, that no federal officer has ever been denied immunity because a court later second guessed the reasonableness of his conduct.

And so, in so much as uh a a federal agent uh were to allege a subjective belief in the necessity and and properness of of uh either uh failing to identify himself uh by name tag or or wearing a face covering, there is at least substantial doubt as as to whether or not uh a federal court would pierce immunity.

And it's likely that that any attempts at enforcing this ordinance would find their way into federal court for the assertion of federal immunity.

Um that all that being said, you know, there there have been uh recent cases uh uh which have at least suggested that the presumption of regularity normally and and historically afforded to federal actors uh may not be applied with with the same level of deference that has occurred in the past.

But um again at least under all of the existing case law interpreting this supremacy clause to date, it is likely that a federal agent would be uh entitled to federal immunity under this ordinance.

And I'll just add, and then we can take questions on on these points.

Federal law does change.

Uh the federal congress is an elected body, and you know, the U.S.

House all stand for re-election or election every two years in a chunk of the Senate.

So there may be, you know, I I don't want to leave the committee members uh with the impression that we are uh opining that this can never or could never be applied, but there are limitations under current law and current federal law where immunity is likely to be asserted and very unlikely to be defeated.

But again, that could change.

That could change a year from now, two years from now, and the ordinance would have different enforceability then.

And and just back to a point I made earlier whether or not an ordinance is used a lot or prosecuted a lot, does not capture its entire utility.

And I think Alder Brower, I'm now uh reaching way over my skis and opining on the uh value of the ordinance.

You know, you you mentioned in your commentary about wanting officers to at least attempt or to have some tool to try to attempt to change behavior.

Uh and so and I don't I don't want committee members to leave our comments to say this this is uh uh uh a file or an ordinance that could never be applied.

It's it will be challenging.

Uh but some of those challenges could be removed in the future and it could be used more effectively.

Okay.

Um additional comments, questions.

Um I guess so what I hear you saying, uh City Attorney Goyki is uh legal.

Yep.

Enforceability um as was commented on given the supremacy clause and its interpretation and federal court, there might be some challenges in an officer um writing a ticket, because this would be a civil penalty, correct, not a criminal civil penal money penalty.

Yep.

Um and so there might be well one the officer, the federal officer might you know rip up the ticket as it were and ignore it.

Um and even if it were pursued in federal court, there might be some challenges um relating to the deference points of it actually standing up in court.

Um of course, as you also alluded to, there might be utility in the ordinance, regardless of whether or not it would you know you can send messages without necessarily um being able to affect the behavior should somebody flout an ordinance on the books.

So okay, I think I understand the state of play well enough.

Um any other questions, comments?

Mr.

Chair Elder Brouwer.

Yeah, thank you so much.

And um really appreciate the city attorney's um office's work on this.

Thank you.

I know that we this has been moving very quickly, and thank you for prioritizing the work of analyzing these.

I I really do appreciate it with the fines that we uh what I think this establishes, what I want to see this establish is that um when an ICE abduction is occurring and uh organizations like Vosis Still and Frontera and other groups have identified and verified that it is an ice abduction that is occurring.

We may have protesters on the scene.

When MPD arrives, I want there to be um grounds right away for something occurring that's that's wrong.

And this this is one tool in that toolbox that that our police officers can begin uh deploying their uh body cam uh technology right away when upon arriving on scene can inform ICE that they're that they're violating the law.

And I mean, yes, I would want our officers to attempt to issue a citation.

I mean, yes, I do want them to do that.

Whether you know the actions of ICE are up to the I uh to that individual agent or what their agency is directing them to do.

But if we issue a citation, we stack up these fines.

I mean, that does create a civil claim that potentially, if the federal law is changed, could allow us to um could allow us to utilize it and actually actually win.

I mean, that's part of the reason I made the you know the forfeiture is not less than five thousand dollars.

Let's uh let's fix some potholes with all these uh goons out there too.

And I thank you for laughing at that.

The uh um but but for in but seriously though, like I do want to begin to establish um a precedent with how we're interacting with ICE agents, that our police are going to be um cautious and and look on them with as much suspicion as they look on the criminal element because I do believe these officers are are violating that these ICE agents excuse me, these ICE agents are violating, if not the direct letter of the law, they're violing the the the spirit of what this country stands for, which is to welcome immigrants into this country.

So let's uh let's at least establish that there's something going wrong.

Uh there's something is wrong with all these ice abductions that are occurring across the country.

Okay.

Um there are no other questions.

Uh Alder Taylor, you had a motion.

Yes, I had a motion for adoption.

Okay.

Alder Taylor who's moved to recommend.

Yep, I know.

Passage of the uh ordinance.

Um are there any objections?

If not, then so ordered.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um so although the next item on the agenda is item 11, which involves Alder Taylor's uh appointment to the Board of Health.

Um she has kindly offered uh to hear from folks who have been waiting for us um for quite some time.

So we'll move ahead to item 15, file number 25168.

This is the communication relating to Operation Safe Haven and its work supporting veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder.

This is sponsored by Alder Taylor.

Alder Taylor.

Thank you so much.

Um yeah, it was brought to my attention.

So as you many of you know that I am a veteran.

Uh and so I do know that veterans are dealing with many uh issues when they come home uh and and uh sometimes um those issues are sometimes overlooked.

Uh so I think it's important that when we can shed light on what those issues are, that we can be a little more sensitive and a little more supportive of our veterans and appreciating them for what they do for our country.

Uh and so today um there was an issue that was brought to my attention, and so we've invited the gentleman in to come and share uh information so that we are all made aware of it and that we could develop a little more sensitivity to it.

And so and so I'm gonna yield now to uh to him so he can do the introduction.

Very good.

If uh thank you for your service, sir.

If you would care to introduce yourself.

Sure, good morning, and uh thank you all for having me.

Um God bless you for um invite me in.

So thank you.

Um my name is Kent Quells, U.S.

Air Force veteran, um served the 320th Bombardment Wing and the Ninth Reconnaissance Wing.

Come from a family of uh uh military people and still going forward, we have people still serving.

And I just want to pause here just for a second.

I just want everybody that's in the room here to uh please embrace the uh the seven that passed away um a little while ago um under our war right now, and we have people being deployed from Wisconsin currently.

So keep those people in there on your prayers because those are people that's from our community.

Umce again, my name is Kent Qualls, and um representing the uh uh my my work that I'm trying to do for uh the state of Wisconsin uh more more more importantly, um, our community in Milwaukee.

Um it's called Operation Safe Space.

I actually actually had to change the name because there is an actual Operation Safe Haven that's located out of New Jersey, so I had to change the name.

But this came about, so let me just go back a little bit.

Let me uh read some information that's uh directed right from the VA website, and it's called uh fireworks and PTSD.

Fireworks used to, and you know what?

I want to apologize to my brothers who so whatever I'm talking about today, I hope that doesn't trigger anything.

I mean, my brother right here served in Desert Storms, so you know, um, but that's him for what he's done.

So hopefully it doesn't trigger anything, sir.

Um fireworks are used to celebrate many events from holidays to music concerts and sports.

Even though fireworks are meant to entertain us, it is not uncommon for the sounds, intense light or smells to cause distress.

Those who have gone through trauma that includes explosions, gunfire, loud noises or fire may be more likely to find fireworks to be a reminder, a trigger, a cue of such past events.

There are certain times of the year, like the July 4th, when fireworks are common or expected.

If fireworks bother you, the holiday or annual events may pull you on edge and as well and anticipate for displays to happen.

Oftentimes fireworks may be unexpected, going off on random day on or unusual locations.

Fireworks are loud with bright flashes of light creating smoke and burning smells.

There are often crowds gathered to watch displays and loud music may be typical.

Any of these sounds, sights or smells may serve as trauma reminders.

For veterans, fireworks may cue memories of combat or explosions, and certain military-related celebrations may also raise distress.

For others, fireworks mean reminders of intense fire or gun violence.

Whether or not fireworks were expected, you may know you are a safe setting, but you are still cute or triggered to react.

Some examples of the stress you may feel include strong reactions to the sound of fireworks, strong reaction to flashes, lights common with fireworks, feeling on edge or jittery, feeling jumpy, easily started by loud noises, flashbacks or feeling as traumatic event is happening again, feeling numb or emotionally distant during celebrations, feeling as if you can't control the situation as if you are blindsided, using alcohol or drugs to push away unwanted thoughts.

So for my personal experience, um we haven't been my family, haven't been around fireworks in many years, and last year we were home, and uh things started popping off, and it triggered me.

And I've never um witnessed my we have two small dogs, and I've never witnessed them go through something like they had to go.

So I literally had to pack up my family, and we had to drive around for two hours.

Now going down I-43 is we've seen fireworks going off on both sides, you know, and I know many people haven't probably served in the military, but it looked like mortar fire.

You know, so I'm trying to calm myself down.

My wife's in the car.

We had to pull over, actually.

She had to jump in the back seat with our dogs, get them under a blanket, and we continued on with our drive for two hours.

So when I returned home, she got them settled in the basement.

I called a couple of my friends that actually serve, whether it was in the Afghanistan or Iraq, and I just wanted to speak with them and see how they were doing.

Uh one uh female that served, she served two um two terms in Afghanistan.

She was downstairs in her basement with her family, pillows on the window, and that's how she was going through it.

Calling another friend of mine served in the Marines, and he uh he's under his bed, and I'm talking to him for a few hours, just talking them down.

So I wanted to create something that you know what that people can come to veterans, their family members and their support animals can come to and have an enjoyable evening on a July 4th away from the fireworks.

And that's why I created Operation Safe Space.

So this would be held if everything goes well because I'm still working on it.

I need sponsors.

I need um uh volunteers.

But uh that's gonna be held at the state fair park, and it's you know it's gonna be a beautiful event because there's gonna be uh uh veteran organizations there, mental health organizations, nurses, doctors, so you know, these veterans, their family members can talk to.

But also I'm gonna have activities, not only for the humans, but I'm gonna have activities for their support animals.

The other piece is creating a public service announcement, you know, coming up to the event, you know, or coming up to July 4th, because if your neighbor doesn't know that you've served, or if you're having trauma, you know, that's not their fault.

But doing radio and television, that's what I'm gonna try to do this summer.

Letting people know that PTSD and fireworks are very real.

The second part, you know, I'm producing is free.

Uh yard signs for veterans.

So it's gonna have uh veteran that lives here.

Please be courteous with your fireworks.

And lastly, I'm gonna have uh flyers going out to the police stations, fire departments in their local communities talking about uh the fireworks, and it's gonna talk about you know, the one piece is for the event, the other piece is just uh announcement saying that fireworks are very painful, but really important, it's gonna be on the bottom.

It's they can be able to go to the website for the VA and learn a little bit about PTSD and what it does to people.

So any questions for me.

All right, very good.

Thank you for the presentation.

Alder Taylor, did you have any follow-up?

Um yes, I was just gonna say that, you know, oftentimes we talk about um PTSD and we say it, um, but do we really realize how impactful it has been on the life of a veteran and what they have to deal with on a daily basis?

Um my son right now is serving overseas and he has to come home, and so I want to uh sorry uh make sure that we have things in place to support him when he does come home.

Um so I appreciate um Mr.

Qualls bringing this to the forefront um so that we are aware of it and that we are a little more sympathetic to those that serve our country.

Thank you, Mr.

J.

Alder Moore.

Um, can can you spell your last name for me?

Yes, ma'am.

Uh Q U A L S.

Qualls.

Okay, I just wanted to make sure I was pronouncing it correctly.

Thank you so much.

Um, quick question Are you working with any other veterans organizations to support this work?

Yes, ma'am.

So um currently with the VA, so I'm on the uh veterans suicide prevention task force that's at the VA and the veterans and um administration council.

So yeah.

And do we have a uh I'm um I'm assuming aside from the veterans organization.

One more time.

Aside from the veterans organization, yes, ma'am.

You want me to give that to you?

No, no, no.

Are are there any other you know, grassroots or other entities that are dealing with or working with doing veterans' work?

There's there's there's a ton, you know, and then the the thing about it too, you know, um us as veterans, we're we're pretty proud group, sure, and it doesn't matter, you know, how many we can have a hundred resources in front of us.

Yeah, but since we're so proud and then it's been dug so deep in us that hey, move on, you can you can handle it, right?

But that's not the case, you know.

We have so many veterans in the state of Wisconsin committing suicide, you know, on daily basis.

And it's just it's just unfair.

And for me, since I've been in mental health and suicide uh prevention, I've lost under I've lost one under my command, and you know, it's it still lives with me to this day, you know, because you know, when when you have the point of on Monday, this gentleman uh is in high spirits and he's great, you know.

We got him a job, we got him uh clothes for his job, got an apartment, and he's in good spirits.

And on Thursday, you know, you find out that um he passed away.

You know, it's just it's just it's just very difficult, you know.

And uh I don't know.

I'm just I'm just really scared for this this year.

250th anniversary, and people don't care about you know what what they do with their fireworks, you know, from June until whenever, from 10 o'clock in the morning till two o'clock in the morning.

It's just you know, it's just it's unfair.

And you don't even have to have served.

I mean, seriously, in your neighborhood, if you have to hear fireworks all night, it's just it's not it's it's just not cool.

So, you know, like I said, with the flyers and the public service announcements and everything, hopefully that would be what they say, you know what, maybe I need to tone it down a little bit.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Um so it's March, we have lots of time till the Fourth of July.

One idea I guess I would submit to you, sir, and to Alder Taylor, is that there be an attempt to do some outreach with our Fourth of July Commission, um, which is in the business of planning fireworks um events throughout the city.

But um, although people mention on the back end the effects on veterans, um that isn't always at the top of mind or forefront.

So now is an ideal time to make such contact, and if there's any questions about how that interaction can be facilitated, I'm happy to help.

Um other questions, comments.

All right.

Well, thank you.

Thank you for the informed presentation.

Thank you, thank you for having me today.

You all have a bless.

God bless what you guys are doing, and yeah, bless Milwaukee County and you know our our military.

So let's keep let's keep this moving.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

That Alder Taylor would move that this item be placed on file.

And are there any objections?

And so ordered.

Moving back in the agenda to item 11.

This is file number 251 878.

Appointment of our own Alder Woman Larisa Taylor to the Board of Health by the Mayor.

Um Mayor's office.

She was here.

I think she is not here yet.

All right.

Then we'll hold that so the mayor's office can come back.

Umderberg else that we moves that we hold this item to the call of the chair.

Um and hearing no objections so ordered.

Intense is to come back to this.

Um moving on then to item 13, file number 25178, appointment of Karen Tyler as the community wellness and safety director by the mayor.

Mayor's office.

If they're not here, then we're gonna have to hold you and go through the health department.

So we'll wait for the mayor's office.

So Alderberg Ellis again would move that we hold this to the called chair to the mayor's office consend a representative.

Um item 17, file number 251 845.

This is uh substitute resolution relative to acceptance and funding of the 2026 STD infertility prevention grant from the state of Wisconsin Department of Health Services.

Good morning, Mr.

Chair, afternoon, Mr.

Chair and Committee members.

I'm Allie Rice, uh grant budget specialist from the health department.

Uh this file accepts and funds the STD for infertility prevention grant for March 1, 2026 through February 28th of 2027.

The Health Department utilizes this funds to support our work reducing the incidents and fertility complications of sexually transmitted diseases in Milwaukee.

The grant will partially fund two positions.

Very good.

Okay.

Any questions about this grant?

Does it need to go to finance?

It does.

Um Mr.

Chair, I'll move um referral to finance and personnel.

Okay.

Um Alder uh Bergellus would move to recommend adoption or referral to finance and personnel.

And hearing no objections, so ordered.

Item 18, also the health department, file number 251753.

This is a resolution authorizing the health department to enter to an agreement with Milwaukee Public Schools for emergency mass care and sheltering sites.

Hi, uh Tyler Webber with the Health Department, Deputy Commissioner of Environmental Health.

So this is uh an agreement with the MPS.

So um in the event of an emergency, so uh mass vaccination, prophylaxis, uh medical equipment, we could use their sites uh as needed uh in partnership with them for as it says mass care.

So um this isn't a regular use, this is uh an emergency use as needed, and we're grateful to have uh a growing partnership with MPS in this regard.

And we have hosted in the past um exercise clinics at their schools, so this is an ongoing evolution of our work with them.

And what would be a couple for instances about an emergency mass care and sheltering need?

Um pandemic might be so setting up mass vaccine clinics or there's a situation for a large number of people aren't able to be in their homes, potentially overnight sheltering.

Um if there's um any other type of emergencies, we could use them either for distribution or for uh overnight housing.

Okay.

Any other questions, comments?

Mr.

Chair.

Move recommendation.

Okay.

Alderberg Else question.

Thank you.

Um would this apply to using MPS buildings as a warming shelter?

Um not necessarily in this agreement.

This is more um different types of emergencies.

We we're in the conversations with them that maybe this could be further use for that, but the main priority is more of a say traditional public health in terms of mass vaccines and so on.

Um there's a need for that housing in in the city, and we're exploring that with them.

Thank you for that.

Um big health emergencies, uh, what is the time frame for the cooperative agreement?

Is it for one year, ten years, a hundred years?

Um I don't see a timeline in the agreement.

So it's kind of seems like this would be an indefinite agreement with the first ongoing could be revised as needed.

All right, we have the city attorney's office who I'm sure helps with drafting this draft.

Um Ms.

Faller, would you care to introduce yourself and good morning?

Just to your to your question, Alderman about the term um assistant city attorney and your father.

The agreement will be effective uh upon signature and will continue for uh five years or unless it's uh terminated earlier.

I must have missed that.

All right, thank you.

Sure.

Thank you.

Um with that, Alder Moore uh moves uh adoption to recommend adoption and hearing no objections sorted.

Thank you.

Uh moving back in the agenda, keeping me on my toes here as myself.

Um item 13, file number 25178, appointment of Karen Tyler as the community wellness and safety director of the uh department of community wellness and safety by the mayor.

Okay, mayor's office, we're ready for you.

Mr.

Chair, uh committee members, good afternoon.

Amber Danias, counsel liaison for Mayor Johnson.

Here to introduce um Miss Karen Tyler, who the mayor is chosen as his nominee for the new director of the Department of Community Wellness and Safety.

So, Mr.

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

All right.

Um Ms.

Tyler, we're familiar with you, but if you'd like to introduce yourself and then say uh a few words, and then we can open up to questions.

Thank you.

So good morning, Chair and Committee members.

Um my name is Karen Tyler.

I am currently the interim director for the Department of Community Wellness and Safety.

And I'd like to start by saying thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as you consider my appointment to lead the Department of Community Wellness and Safety.

Violence in our city is not a public safety issue, is I'm sorry, is not only a public safety issue, it is a public health crisis.

And responding to a crisis like this requires urgency, coordination, and steady leadership.

Every act of violence represents a family forever changed, a neighborhood shaken, and a community in need of healing.

That reality calls on us to move forward forward with both urgency and intention.

My commitment to this work is both professional and deeply personal.

In 2011, I lost my son Andrew to down violence.

There is no preparation for that kind of loss.

I chose purpose.

That decision led me to dedicate my life and career to preventing violence and supporting families impacted by it.

Public health research tells us that instability is one of the strongest drivers behind violence.

We see that clearly in Milwaukee where economic pressure, housing instability, and untreated trauma often manifest as violence in our communities.

Because instability fuels violence, stability, stability must be part of the solution, not only in our neighborhoods, but also in the institutions responsible for prevention.

I currently serve as interim director for the department.

For more than eight years, I worked within the office, previous previously serving as operations manager.

In that time, I have helped guide daily operations, support community violence intervention programs, build healing and wellness infrastructure, manage major grant investments, and strengthen partnerships across city agencies and community organizations working on the front lines of prevention.

The office has experienced several leadership transitions in recent years.

The last three directors served an average of about 16 months.

Through those transitions, I remained focused on ensuring stability and continuity for the work.

I on board at the last two directors and supported their visions while helping guide the department so our staff, partners, and community programs could continue serving Milwaukee without interruption.

Throughout my career, spanning decades of working alongside vulnerable communities, I have worked with individuals and families facing violence, trauma, and instability.

Those experiences have shaped my belief that public safety cannot be achieved by one system alone.

It requires partnership, accountability, and a public health approach that prioritizes prevention, opportunity, and healing.

If confirmed, my leadership will focus on strengthening Milwaukee's public health strategy by concentrating resources in neighborhoods most impacted by violence.

Expanding pathways to employment and opportunity, strengthen part strengthening partnerships with schools to support youth, and ensuring individuals and families affected by violence are connected to services that support healing.

Because when we address trauma, instability and opportunity together, we reduce the likelihood that today's victim becomes tomorrow's perpetrator.

I believe my experience, my consistency through multiple transitions, and the decades I I have spent serving communities affected by violence, position me to lead this department at a critical critical time for our city.

Our community deserves stability, hope, and leadership that refuses to give up on them.

That is the leadership I am prepared to bring.

Thank you for your time and consideration, and I welcome your questions.

Very good.

Thank you for your presentation and your work.

Questions from committee members.

In the best of your belief, the difference between the work and operations director does versus the department HUD.

That's a good question.

So with my work in operations, I did oversee our leadership team.

I did look at our administrative practices in regards to grants, budgets, and different aspects of the work in that way.

When you think about a leader, you think of a vision.

So again, I've onboarded leaders and I've worked for their priorities and beliefs.

So really for me, making that transition, I look at what does the city need overall.

So we need a strong infrastructure that's based on public health, a public health approach.

Like now, even with the recent violence, we have to give the city hope.

We have to show up in spaces and show the community that we care and that we're here.

So again, for me, it's about building an infrastructure, talking to other city departments, talking to other community organizations, and making sure we have a strong public health approach to violence.

Because we got to think in in the years of in the year span of 2022 to 2024, we did see a 40% decrease.

So if we go back to those solid practices, we can get back to those reductions.

We're also talking to other national partners in regards to what is working in those cities.

We have to be creative with funding, with sustainability, um, and other things in that regard.

So those are some of the differences.

Okay.

And then looking at your resume, I know you started out in August of 2008 with the health department as a disease intervention specialist, progressed to November of 19 to family injury and violence prevention coordinator.

Um, and then under OVP, uh, as it was called then, uh Office of Violence Prevention, uh, and then progressed to the family injury and violence prevention manager in April of 21, serving for year and a half.

Um, and then you took the role of operations manager in November of 22, and have either served solely in that role or kind of doing double duty as interim uh head of the office in between the two A's, Ashanti and Adam, um, and now again in the interim role.

So um what just helped jug my memory, what um heads of the office have you served under?

So you served under Mr.

Purcell, the most recent head of the office, you served under Mr.

Hamilton, um was there anyone else, or was that the end of it?

Yes, Arnita Hallman and Reggie Moore.

Okay.

So you've served under uh a breadth of um heads of the office, all with uh distinct and sometimes maybe competing visions or um so I'm just wondering how your vision uh differs at all from those under whom you've served.

You can pick 01, you can pick go through all of them, but I'm just wondering what new you bring to the office because you've been the deputy, as it were, for you know, four years, um well, three and a half years.

Um so there you're serving under somebody else's vision, and this role you would be creating and implementing your own.

So, how does your vision for the department differ from any of the predecessors you've served under?

Sure.

Well, first of all, I want to say I did learn from each one of my predecessors, and I feel like each one did an amazing job.

Um I did notice that each time we had to shift, it would take us back a bit as we brought in a different vision.

Um, because you had like an Ashanti Hamilton who was community-based, promised zone focused, you had Adam Prosell, um, justice involved youth, um, you know, uh different things in that regard.

And so for me, I I almost I feel my focus will be similar to a Reggie Moore with a strong public health approach to violence.

Um, and again, I just feel like when you look across um the nation, we're we're evaluating everything, we're evaluating investments, we're evaluating how people mobilize, how outreach teams work in communities, and so what I feel I bring, uh, which I think they brought also, but it's a specific type of strategy.

I am very data informed.

I believe our outreach mobilization should be matched up with the prevalence of violence.

So in a year's time, we should be able to look at how we mobilize our teams, and we should be able to show where our work is in comparison to where violence is, and I think that's very impactful.

Also, I I feel like I've watched what works, what doesn't work, and I I just feel like I could grow beyond that to because like right now, for an example, this is urgent, this position is urgent, and then we're also becoming a department, so we have a lot of different things we have to navigate as well as the recent shootings, homicides, and different things like that.

So I also bring a strong background of interpersonal violence, which also is something that precedes homicides and different things like that.

So again, when you look at public health, um, you have to get ahead of violence.

That's the ideal place to be.

Um, so we'll do that through many different uh modalities as well as healing as prevention too.

When you think of the numbers or people look at percentages, those are also families that are devastated by by violence.

So we have to make sure we have healing spaces, healing opportunities for people, because again, we don't want victims to become perpetrators.

Um okay, so I guess just for my own edification, there's a little vagueness I'm hearing.

Um so the emphasis on data, I remember sitting across the desk from uh nominee, then director um Hamilton and him saying, look, Spiker, there's gonna be a sea change here, we're gonna lean into data, it's like gonna inform everything we do.

Um, and you were ops at that time, so I assume you helped implement that vision.

So is your characterization that that was promised but not delivered on back then, and here you are to finish the job, or what is um I mean that's just picking the data case, but I'm I'm looking again for a strategic vision that differs from what we've seen before.

And I understand the point, like, well, people get the vision, then they move on.

Um, but what would be new here?

And are you are you still claiming that the emphasis on data is what's new, and it just wasn't implemented before?

No, I wouldn't say that, but I would say that we need to double down on data.

So we need to have it to inform our work, and we need to be more transparent with our data to the con to the community.

So wasn't that part of the job though, as operations manager before to make that manifest, and to the extent that the department has then the office reported to this committee with data, it was discharging that duty, but to the extent it wasn't, to the extent there's still a need and we need to recommit to the emphasis on data, doesn't that indicate there was a lacking before that we are now correcting?

And um if so, then the it just strikes me as curious that somebody in in the operations role would say now we're gonna get down and serious about data in a way we haven't been before when I would have thought it would have been one of the principal duties of the deputy to implement that data.

Do you see where I'm coming from?

I do.

And you know, I guess my position is advisor to the head of the office.

Um, and so there would be things I I would have liked to have done different because I definitely think we could utilize data um in a more significant way.

So, for an example, we may have outreach teams out in the community, but are they there at the right times?

Um so having conversations with organizations that we invest in to really looking at are they there during the times that they need to be?

Are they in the communities they need to be in?

And was that not done when you were head of operations?

I can't imagine the director, director Hamilton or Director Um Purcell coming to you and saying, don't worry about what time things are happening, don't worry about the locations where things are happening, just get people out there.

That couldn't have been there charged to you.

So the question then is why would this be a new approach as opposed to what should have been done um as part of built cooked into the whole department's approach originally?

And if you were head of operations, wouldn't you have been in charge of making sure that that data was informing the decisions about the deployments of the teams?

You know, respectfully respectfully I did make recommendations, um, but I don't think um I don't think we did it to the best of our ability.

Um, and again, I'm making advisements, uh, but other leaders have other priorities as well.

So, like again, you think about someone like um director Hamilton, his was promise zones, his was you know, really pouring into community engagement and different things like that, but not so much of you know, are we here at this specific time?

Are we reviewing trends?

Are we looking at licensed premises or gas stations?

And we know that at this specific time, violence um has gone up in that specific area.

So I think I can lead us in that direction, and I think it does look a little different than previous directors.

Okay, I have other questions, but I want to make sure to ask um give committee members a chance to to weigh in.

So um are there other questions from committee members?

Sure.

Uh Alder Burgellis.

Thank you.

Um thank you for meeting with um me and I believe everyone else from the committee uh in the last couple days.

Um about half of your budget is uh from ARPA funding sources uh which will expire at the end of this year.

Um what is your confidence that you'll have a budget to work with and operate your department in 2027?

So you know, being with the office so long, I was there prior to ARPA, and I'm here now.

So I saw how it looked.

Um one thing we pride ourselves on is going after different grants and and other investments to bring money into our city for this work.

So what we're doing is we're talking to other cities in regards to creative ways to fund this work.

We're going after different grants, we're talking to philanthropic partners, and we're also talking to local business owners to bring in um other resources to Milwaukee.

So currently we do have a recast grant, we have city and state ARPA, and then we have a department of labor grant that's connected with employee Milwaukee.

So your um what's your total department budget now, and then how much of that is tax levy support.

So it's approximately like um, and I'm sorry.

Put that out.

So I would say it's about 1.5 tax levy and approximately 1.2 for city and and state ARPA, and then again with the recast budget in our uh Department of Labor grant, that's about one point almost 1.5 million.

And I'm sorry, was there a second part to that question I didn't answer?

No.

Okay.

Um have you had conversations with the mayor's office and the budget office about planning for next year?

I mean, is is are you gonna have to lay off half your department and go back to the same size it was pre-ARPA, or are there going to be funding sources available?

Yeah, so sustainability conversations are happening right now.

We're also looking at how we can maintain our staff, maintain our department, and bring in even additional money uh for this work to kind of uh take the place of ARPA.

So we're having conversations with everybody.

Okay, because the the budget process for 2027 has already started, it's clear.

Um and the clock is ticking, right?

Uh the mayor uh presents this proposed budget at the end of September, which is a mere five months away.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair for now.

Thank you.

Alder Moore.

Uh thank you so much, um, Mr.

Chair.

Um welcome, Karen.

And thank you for taking the opportunity to meet with me about a week or so ago.

Um I wanted to go back to or touch on a few points that our chair mentioned in reference to just some of the data.

Um have you um what have been evaluated with the data in the last three years?

So yeah.

So what's been evaluated is um like effectiveness of community programs, like our investments.

Um and so what I could present to the um to this committee is like our uh key performance indicators to to show you what we do specifically evaluate, but most importantly um our outreach.

So we are able to um see like uh for an example with our Forum for Life program, uh we see how effective the the hospital work is, um they also have a community program and uh violence interrupters, as well as our other uh outreach um I'm sorry, outreach teams, our critical response teams, and our promise keepers.

So within with those, you can see times, you can see the hours that they're out, uh, you can see how often they do mediations, the follow-ups that they do, um, the families that they touch, and there's even storytelling to to show impact in that way because sometimes numbers do not capture it, so we do have different stories of families that have been impacted.

So those are some of the things we evaluate.

Got it.

So I see that you've you know the the chair sort of went through your resume and um shared that you've been with the department um as far as the city, but have been with the department um for quite some time.

Um of some of the questions that I have, and I'm gonna try to be as succinct as possible um just to get some points in.

Um let me let me add to this before we move from the data piece.

Uh I know that you're very familiar with VR FAST and that that entity.

How often do you meet with Dr.

Um Connie Cost Costalek?

Yeah, to you know, sort of talk about and address those data points.

They provide very great um reports of you know, just information of what's been going on in our city.

How often do you meet with her or her team to sort of strategize around those data pieces that's been collected?

Um since I came into the interim role, I have met with them twice already.

Um so I would say every other week we're meeting, and we plan to meet.

Uh so and that's also with Reggie Moore and David Mohammed from the county to just discuss a citywide structure moving forward.

So yeah, we do look at the data, we look at effectiveness and so currently you're meeting, you're currently meeting with those that team right now every other week.

Correct.

Okay.

Um that's great.

That's really good to hear.

Um really good what is the leading cause of death among children?

Among children.

Among children.

I'm sorry, I don't know.

You're not a you're not from like as far as data is concerned.

So guns.

Guns are the leading cause of death among um among children.

And and the reason why I wanted to bring that up is because obviously gun violence, right?

We have a huge um huge issue in this city.

And I wanted to reference that for you know our committee because we're experiencing a serious issue here in the city, and you know, some of the things where um Alderman Bergalis mentioned just around funding.

Um it's really concerning that um more than half of you know the budget is on is on ARPA recast ends, so the 1.5 million that you talked about the last uh I think we're in year of number five, if I'm not mistaken.

Um we this is the last year.

This is the last year, so there goes though the rest of those dollars.

Um and I I know that you said that you've been in communication with the administration, but have they confirmed?

Have they confirmed to say yes, this is how much we're going to support?

Have they shared anything with you in regards to the survival of this department?

Nothing specific for sure, but we have been in discussions and we definitely feel that that's a valuable space for sure because we do a lot with uh youth engagement.

So we partner with Uncome, which is a collective of youth organizations across the city that do great work, so we connect with them, uh running rebels, um, there's an there's just a number of different youth organizations.

We also have our summer of healing initiatives, but we definitely want to plan to continue those, but we'd have to see how they look and sure.

But has the administration confirmed?

I mean, my thing is just around the department and the survival of the department.

Has the administration confirmed anything to you, knowing that you know, the the issues like from 2024, no, let me make that right, yep, 2024 to 25 homicides have gone up.

And so there are other um, you know, cities around the countries that are you know really investing in violence prevention.

Has the administration confirmed anything with you to say, okay, we're going to make sure that we put some of this back on the levy to ensure the survival of the department.

Have they said anything like that to you?

Not at this time in in regards to specifics for sure.

But we're also looking at that, we're also in transition to to become to be a department.

So there's there's a lot of different discussion in regards to our office and um, you know, the the sustainability of it for sure.

But yeah.

Um and I appreciate that, you know.

I I think one of the things that I've um that have really, you know, sort of bothered me, um, because we have some great leaders here in the city.

Um one of the things that have really bothered me is that you know, the last process, you were part of the last um nomination or not even nomination, you know, process where um we were looking for a a new leader.

Um and the administration bypassed that process and hired um hired uh Adam.

Um prior to that, you had again been with the administration for quite some time.

Uh Shanti was um nominated.

Um why do you think that instead of the the administration you know doing another national search, you know, why do you think that you were you know just now being nominated because you've you've been you know part of the department for so long.

Um the mayor could have appointed you, you know, during the last process.

Like why is it that you were continuously, you know, looked over?

Well, with the with the first situation with the shanti Hamilton, I I didn't consider an appointment at that time.

Uh so I don't think I'm continuously looked over, but I think this last time, um, you know, there were different decisions that were made.

Uh, but one thing I can say is that I am highly qualified.

I did I was a finalist.

Uh there was a very diverse group of um people that did make that selection out of I think it was hundreds of people or I I I believe it was.

Uh and so I I feel I'm qualified based on education, based on experience, and based on lived experience.

Um and work experience, excuse me.

Uh so yeah, I mean it is difficult, but I know that time there are times people make decisions for the reasons that they do, but I think what they did see was how I um did help on board uh Mr.

Purcell.

I did support him in his work.

I supported his vision, and I was just a strong supporter of our office to continue the work even though I was not selected.

So I think that that should that should say a lot for my commitment to this community and to the city.

And Mr.

Um Chair, just a few more.

Um, you know, I've also realized that you know, staff um turnover has been a contributing factor, you know, to the department even since Arnita Holloman um was uh the director of the office.

Um what do you believe is the contributing factor?

Because you know, you've you've been there a lot, quite a few of the staff, you know, since that have been um have been new.

Um what do you feel is the contributing factor for um a lot of that turnover?

I feel that this work is very difficult too, and I feel this is a very new industry too.

So I think somebody who could maybe come from like a youth organization and come into this work, they may think they know this work, but there are a lot of unique skills that you have to have here.

You have to have a range too.

You have to be able to go deep into the community and also deal with some of the political aspects of this work.

Um so I think there's a lot of stress.

Uh we're dealing with homicides, we're we're dealing with non-fatal shootings, we're dealing with domestic violence, sexual assault, and I think that can be hard for people.

So I think those are some of the things I see.

How many current staff do you have now?

Uh we have two, three.

I want to say nine currently.

Nine.

Correct.

I had a list of ten, but okay, not um nine, but I think it's a list of ten.

Um what is the uh what do you need to bring the c staff to capacity to do its to do for the department for the department to do its work?

We're budgeted at 14.

Okay.

So would you be able to bring the staff or what's the goal to bring the um the capacity of the department to 14?

What's the goal?

What's the goal?

So if you if the if you're budgeted for 14, um, what is the what is the goal to bring the department, you know what we look to bring it to capacity in the next six months and then by the end of the year?

Like I'm trying to get a sense of you know, when will the department be ramped up?

So we do have a few positions in the process right now, but we can't hire without a without a director.

So we're kind of at a holding space, but what we're trying to do is just get all the paperwork together so it doesn't take a long process because we're headed towards the summer and it's urgent.

So yeah, again, we have two in the process, but hopefully we can get everybody geared up and hired, I would say within the next six months because the process does take a while.

And do you have the support that you need seeing that obviously we're gonna be past summer in the next sort of six months?

Do you think you have the sub the the support currently with the ten um that's needed um to support the work going into summer?

I do um because we do have a great staff that is assisted in other capacities because again we're we're our own department, and so that means you know, like we don't have an HR person or or certain um other administrative uh aspects to our staff.

So we definitely have to look at that, but I think we have enough to make sure we make it through, and we do still have support through the department of administration.

And how many sole contracts do does the department have?

How many soul?

Because I'm just trying to think because there I know there's some folks that I'm like promiskeepers that you know um I would assume that's a sole contract, but how many sole contracts does the department have?

I'd have to get back to you on that.

Um because we do have quite a few, and then there's people like even like the medical college of Wisconsin that has a few different contracts with us, so there are a number.

Perfect.

And then the last question is just really centered around, you know, you mentioned that there were some national partners.

So in your um 90 day strategic priorities, stabilization, sustainability, and summer readiness.

You mentioned that um there's a comprehensive citywide strategic planning process supported by national partners to strengthen Milwaukee's long-term violence prevention.

Um who are those national partners that you all are looking to be supported by?

Sure.

So currently we're supported by Cities United, and then we also are working with the National Office of Violence Prevention, um, who is willing to support our work.

And that leader also uh conducted the strategic plan in Baltimore, which we consider is our city, our sister city.

And um, so I'm very excited about that work.

Excellent.

And then how was the next year spent um building the department out to sort of interfere with the implementation of the city's response to violence?

How is it spent?

Can you see how we how is your yep, yep.

So for example, the rest of this year, how will it be spent building, like so we're now moving into the department, you know, obviously from an office into a department.

Um how is the department going to interfere with the impl implementation of the city's response to violence?

So definitely we're looking at our organization structure to make sure um to make sure it goes along with us being a department, and then I think we'll get a lot of information in regards to that intensive strategic plan that we have, which will last from four to six months, which will um include community partners, department heads, our office, um, council representation.

Uh, and then they'll give us recommendations on how we move forward.

When will that for the when will that start?

That strategic plan.

Again, that's it's somewhat delayed until we have a leader in place, um, because then we just need to know the leader.

I mean, you're you're the interim, but so you're saying that it won't happen until there's a director in place?

Well, that's a good question because we don't want to do too we don't want to double down on too many things if we don't have that confirmed because another leader may come come in and take us in another direction.

Okay, but you're the current leader right now.

Am I correct?

Yes.

I'm I guess I'm just confused because if we're you're saying you're you're probably you're essentially saying that well, we'll just wait on the confirmation of the leader, but yet you're acting as the interim, so the interim doesn't do anything much.

So I'm in discussions.

I am talking about strategy.

I am talking about putting this in place, but we do want the new director, if it's me or if it's someone else, to make their own decisions.

So we don't want to make too many big commitments on our work without a solid director in place.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Alder Bergells, you had some more questions.

Sure.

Uh wish if you wouldn't mind Alger Bergus, we'll go to Alder Chambers since he has another chance to chime in yet.

Alder Chambers.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

And and thank you, uh, Ms.

Tyler, for your willingness to serve in this in this leadership role.

Um, you know, I'm I'm kind of conflicted on a a couple of things.

Um, you know, one of the concerns that I have is some of these questions that are being brought, you know, to light, you know, any discussions.

I don't recall being brought when you know we brought, you know, Adam Procell up here.

Um you know, to, you know, to the table to have it, you know, when he was here.

I I don't remember even bringing having a conversation when, you know, uh Shanti Hamilton was uh brought up in here.

So I just I I think it's kind of unfair to have these type of expectations um on someone that you know was serving in a different role.

Now I'm not taking away from you know what you should know or what you should do as the director, um, but I I completely understand that you know as an interim, I wouldn't want to implement you know new ideas, not knowing that I'm gonna be in the in the road permanently because as you stated, someone else can just come in and just ball up and throw it out the way.

Um but I also expect the director to know the leading leading um you know the leading charge or leading thing of of youth violence of youth deaths.

Um so that's kind of where I'm conflicted at.

I guess the question that I have for you uh Ms.

Tyler is where do you see the direction, like the real direction, given the current state of um you know, the the funding sources potentially will be dwindling down after 2026 because the ARPA will be gone.

Um, you know, far as obligations that we have outside of here, like where do you see your the honest direction should you be afforded the opportunity to lead this department?

And I'm sorry, can you repeat the last part of the question?

Where do you see where do you see given the current state that you know this current department is in, or where it's previously done, knowing that funds will be dwindled down because right now majority of your funds are grant-based and ARPA funded.

Um so once the ARPA dollars dry up, where do you see yourself as a department should you have the opportunity to lead the department?

Sure.

First of all, I think uh I want to make something very clear too.

Is this is a a national concern with uh existing funding for uh what we call CDI work or community violence intervention work.

Um so we're meeting with other national partners, uh other cities to see how they creatively fund different things.

So for an example, in Chicago, they use cannabis funds.

Now, of course, we cannot do that.

Um, but we have to think creatively, and I feel I'm willing to do that.

So in New York they use money from the DA's office um for different things.

So again, we really have to go after resources for our city, and we have to really think creatively.

We have to go after grants.

We're currently writing for two right now.

Um we're in conversations with philanthropic partners, local businesses, because like a lot of requests have been have come to us in regards to our promise keepers.

So now we're talking to them like Summerfest wants us there.

So we're talking to them about uh funding in a in a different way versus before we just would go out there, so we cannot afford to do that.

Um and again, we're having conversations with the administration and other sources too.

Thank you for that.

Um my next question is what are your thoughts on possible consolidation?

Um consolidation of life programs and departments, um, you know, if if the opportunity presents itself.

I definitely think we need to leverage partnerships, and I think that would help with efficiency within our department.

So I'm having a conversation with the commissioner of public health, um, and other community organizations, other department heads, because again, when you think about a public health approach and building an infrastructure, it's gonna take other departments.

Um we're looking at different things that impact violence, like um uh youth being absent at school that increases their risk significantly.

Uh or what else are we looking at?

Um just a number of different things that cause uh that underlie b violence.

Uh domestic violence, for an example, and I'm sorry, um we just see like the medium um household income, uh and then also just our cost of living.

So there's just a number of different concerns that we have to look at that impact violence.

So it's not just what our department can do, and it and even if we had money, it wouldn't be uh just our small department that would kind of counteract that.

We would have to look to other people to align with to help bring about change.

Thank you.

I'll probably have more questions, but I'll I'll pass it on.

Thank you, Mr.

Chester.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr.

Allen.

Uh Alder Taylor, did you have any questions before I want to make sure everybody had a chance?

No, go ahead.

Okay.

Alder Burghels.

Thanks.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

And just to be clear, previously this body uh welcomed the head of the um uh division of city government uh as an office uh with an as uh an appointment from the mayor's office.

Today we're here uh for your nomination subject to council approval as the head of a department.

Uh so it's uh so there is a lot more scrutiny from the council uh today than there was probably uh ever considered or or uh the council was able to do previously.

Um and I'll I'll uh I'll continue with uh similar questions from my colleague from the second.

Um there are uh there's a a large 300 million dollar innovation uh pot of money that state government has set aside uh to help local locals uh innovate and collaborate and consolidate um similar uh processes and programs uh generally between other municipalities, but I think there's an opportunity and and have you considered uh what kind of opportunities this uh department has now to collaborate consolidate with um uh with uh results or processes that Milwaukee County provides uh residents in the in the city of Milwaukee and and uh uh throughout um have those partnerships are those partnerships going to be explored um that can kind of consolidation can reduce programming costs, operational efficiencies.

Um is that part of your plan?

Yes.

So we meet with Milwaukee County and the Medical College of Wisconsin to review grants and to um help bring in resources to the city.

Uh we also partner with Milwaukee County with a trauma response team.

Um and that that's a focus effort on youth.

And so that's a partnership we're we're reviewing now to see um how we can work together, how they could look different.

Um but we we have had those conversations with the county.

Not just I'm sorry to interrupt you, but not just collaboration.

Right, but combining efforts and consolidating and working as one organization together.

That's what the innovation grant uh can help fund startup costs for two years, right?

Uh if you're doing the same kind of work in the same kind of space, it would make financial sense, especially with this innovation incentive to not just collaborate and have a partnership uh and and hold hands, but to work hand in hand together, doing the same thing together as one.

So that was brought up to me before, I believe by Ottoman uh Spiker.

Um but I mean definitely we would consider anything we need to to make sure we bring in resources to the city and that it's efficient.

Um I know their work is somewhat a little different, but at the same time, a lot of things are complementary, like their behavioral health services that they do, and then they have um uh the I'm sorry, the credible messengers that have a justice involved focus on on youth.

So I could see some synergy there for sure, though.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

Um I guess returning to a couple of questions that came up from the questioning of my colleagues, which is why this is a good process.

Um so the numbers that were revealed from Alder Burghels' questioning was were 1.5 million of levy support for the department 1.2 of state and city ARPA money that's gonna be gone by the end of the year, and then 1.5 in terms of the recast grants at the federal level, which we're winding down as well.

So what would be left in terms of funding is something like one third of your current funding.

Um I'm making a decision about confirmation or not, I've been emphasizing the vision thing.

Um because such a radical change in funding, the question is do we keep going the same direction we've always been going, or do we try a new direction?

And given that two-thirds of our funding is potentially gonna evaporate, it's clear we're gonna need to pivot in some way.

So if you do find yourself with a third of your funding that you had, you know, that you have next year compared to this year, where do you think you could scale back or cut um where you wouldn't impact the provision of the services that folks rely on?

I think those are some hard questions we do have to answer, and I think a lot of that will probably present itself during um the strategic planning that we're doing, not just the citywide one, but our internal one.

Uh but one thing I can tell you for sure is I probably do know where the priority needs to be, and that would be with outreach.

Um isn't most a lot a good chunk.

If you only have nine employees, you're paying.

Isn't a huge amount of the money that you're expending other than those employees?

Isn't it precisely to the community groups and others that you're kind of passing on the money to?

So how could you continue that level of outreach or anything near it if two-thirds of your funding evaporates?

So, what I mean by outreach though is like we also fund community organizations, and so I would rather put that money to boots on the ground versus community organizations, which they need it for sure as well.

Um, but like I'll give an example.

I remember we were doing outreach and we were in front of Casiesco Park uh recenter, and there were two youth that were across the street, and you know, there was just a significant disconnect from the root from the rec center and from uh from those youth.

And so if we have boots on the ground and people out there, they'll be able to connect communities to resources and get ahead of violence that way.

So I think it's it's much more of a significant investment that we have got to continue versus um supporting other community organizations, I would say.

So if pusc push comes to shove the funding for the community organizations would have to go first, and what would be left would be the funding that would support the infrastructure in the department.

But nine people, some of whom are are pretty high up, um, is that going to leave anything left to do meaningful community intervention?

Um, or will the staff then be shrunk to the level of near insignificance and then to Alder Chambers and Bergellis's point?

At that point, don't we just simply give up the ghost and say we can't make an impact with this level of funding?

If the mayor is not committing to doubling our levy support, not suggesting he should, but if he's not committing to that, then isn't the only hope going ahead that we not just partner with the county, but that we basically go over to the county and give them uh the scope to do the work since we don't have the funds available anymore.

I mean, this is why the vision thing is so important to me is we're at a pivotal point for whether this department uh whether it was an office or department even continues anymore.

And so what I'm looking for is a leader of the department who can chart a path forward.

And you know, I've worked very well with you in the past, I've had good things to say about you as operations, but we're at a moment where vision is needed because we're looking over a cliff.

And so what I keep coming back to is kind of what is that vision, not vagaries of partnerships and look for money from grants, but what is that vision of what the future looks like for violence prevention in Milwaukee, given that the city's share of it is largely gonna evaporate.

Again, um one thing I just really need to emphasize is this is happening across the country, and people are finding solutions to this dilemma for sure.

So it's a reality.

And the other one was I mean, they weren't ones that we can avail ourselves of here.

So I'm looking at for the local Milwaukee, what are we gonna do when these sources of funding which we've relied upon, which when the mayor was council president, I said careful what you do with expanding, because this is an ongoing source of funding.

When that all dries up, what's the vision for Milwaukee other than let's look around and point to examples that are noticeably different from what we have available to us here?

I wish there were more funding sources, but there aren't.

Yeah.

I mean, I think it's worth evaluating though.

I think we have to evaluate, we have to look uh within our city for opportunities.

Um we don't have specific answers right now, other than again, we're going for grants, we're talking to local business partners, we're talking to philanthropic partners.

That's the same thing other cities are doing, and that that's what they did to find the solution.

So I think we're right on the right track with other cities.

Um, but you gotta also think right now we're down staff, we're transitioning into a department, and we also have to look at sustainability.

But I am very hopeful that we'll do the research to figure figure it out because we need to.

And I don't think I don't think our city can afford to downsize because our numbers have trended up.

We have to we have to find the money.

We have to go after different grants, and we have to make a solution.

So again, a part of that will be talking to the administration, seeing how they support us, um, maybe even contracting with a uh grant person or somebody who could specialize in our sustainability and have a specific focus on that, but different ways we got to be creative, and I believe we can find a way through.

Um this is what I noticed last summer when I went to the community listening session involving two national candidate finalists, so Abe from Orlando, I believe, and Paul from Louisville, and then we had Karen from Milwaukee.

They made clear, I think to the audience and to me that this is um not just a localized Milwaukee approach.

There is expertise in this space.

And they had whole visions, competing visions, but whole visions of what this work would look like in Milwaukee and how to carry it forward.

What I'm concerned about is the lack of a uh a clear vision here for how we move forward is going to hurt us in our attempts to leverage the philanthropic community.

It's gonna hurt us in our attempts to partner with the county, the medical college, what have you.

The folks that you ask money of, um, they're not venture capitalists, but they want to know that their money is well spent, and so that's why it seems pivotal to me at this point to have a clear specific vision for what this department looks like moving forward before we stick out our hands and ask somebody to fund it.

So that's what's what's giving me pause here.

So um any other on that point?

Uh older uh Alder Chambers, please.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, and I want to clarify something.

Uh I'm not advocating for us to combine anything with anybody.

Um, I'll just ask a realistic realistic question, because quite frankly, to your point, we are at a time where we might need a fighting uh a belt or two or anything like that.

I mean, me personally, I will I will agree with uh Miss File's approach and possibly focus more on booth and ground than actually giving money to other organizations.

Um but um, you know, and I also want to clarify that while I know this is for a department um, you know, that we just created, we also as council members have the opportunity to bring any department here, whether they're from an office or a department to have same conversation.

So that was the point of me uh bringing up my previous commentary.

Um so Ms.

Tyler, one last question, and I'll be done with this.

Um to run an efficient department, how many people would you need as far as booth and ground or anything under your leadership to make sure that your office should you be appointed will run us moving to your liking into the community's quality?

And you're speaking of outreach teams?

Outreach team leadership, anything you want to add to make this uh this department successful.

So I would say right now we have a staff of 14.

I think um that's efficient in regards to our outreach teams.

I think uh the more people we have out there, the better we have um micro hot spots, we have what's called promise zones, and we need to mobilize in those areas.

So um so we bring people in position to look at primary prevent prevention, which is just uh engagement with the community, uh a significant presence in communities.

Uh we also have uh outreach teams that do help some of the council members with ongoing neighborhood disputes and different things like that, which is also helpful because it helps uh a situ a situation not elevate to uh homicide.

As well as the healing component of that, we have families that are devastated by trauma.

And in those ways, we do work with the county and other organizations to bring about healing to families that have been devastated.

So then those victims do not turn around and become perpetrators.

So there's a number of things that we do with our outreach teams, but I mean to quantify it, I would say maybe we would need at least 50 individuals.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

And how much would 50 individuals cost if we could have our heart's desire?

It would be hard to say right now.

Um you know, because we what we do have is we have our forward for life, which takes a significant amount of our funding currently, uh, but they would probably go with without ARPA, they would go down to um I would say 750,000 a year, uh, as well as our promise keepers and our critical response team.

They're probably double that because they're double in size.

So millions, if we wanted to staff up to that vision.

Okay.

Um we've had a pretty thorough discussion and uh I guess I agree.

Um with my colleague that you know, when previous heads of the office were named, we had no say.

So there was not a discussion about that, which which we didn't have any control over.

Now with the new department, we do have that oversight ability.

So Alder Moore.

Yeah, I just um thank you um so much for what was offered um so far in the questions of my colleagues.

Um I just wanted to um share that I think probably all of us received emails um in regards to um your appointment.

Um the ones that I've counted, there was one in favor, um, and there were three in opposition, and some of the things that kept coming up, which is something that I've experienced as well, um, was just uh a lack of um response.

Um if you can talk about what will be different, you are interim twice.

Um I've reached out to the department and received no response.

Um I know I some of my colleagues um have had the same sort of experience, reached out, no response.

Um can you talk about what will be different if you're appointed this go-round as far as your um just oversight on responding as well as um communicating because again um when you were in the interim role, uh no emails were sent out when incidents happened, there was just it was just nothing.

Um can you talk a little bit about what would be different this time?

Sure.

Um and first of all, um I don't recall an email I didn't respond of yours, so maybe we need to we could look at that, but um uh one thing I do want to say is the first time I was interim, it was a very abrupt transition.

Um I didn't put anybody in place as far as an operations manager, so I have learned since then as well.

Um, but then we were also down to managers at the time, so I don't think people realized what we were dealing with internally, um, but it it was very hard.

So I mean it may have affected um the timing in regards to response, but definitely the work uh still was maintained.

Uh but it is a very it was a very challenging time.

It was the heart of the summer.

Um there was homicides going on, and so you definitely have to prioritize whether I'm gonna address uh these types of situations or or answer a phone, you know.

So it can be difficult for sure.

What I am putting in place though is a communication structure because I have talked to other authors in regards to that, and so they've given me a lot of helpful information in regards to their expectations.

So definitely um, like for an example, I emailed you because we were gonna be in your district in regards to the recent homicides, uh, to just inform you that we're gonna be there and even whose district?

Yours.

No, it wasn't my district.

60 second and chambers.

You're going to be, or you were there.

We were.

Okay.

Yeah.

So I sent you an order woman Pratt an email.

Yes, I saw.

Yeah.

I saw that with Alderman.

I thought you were in her district.

I thought that's too.

I'm sorry.

Yep, it's so it was both.

Um, but yeah, just to inform you um of that, so you have an awareness of the work that's going on in the district.

Uh, but yeah, so we're putting together a strong communication structure so that isn't an issue anymore.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Uh Alder Tiller.

Uh thank you so much for being here.

Um there was a lot of information that was shared, and um, so I'm I'm gonna have confidence that um later that you will have you know, if appointed that you will begin to have um that hard data because I think that's what really um supports your position is the the data that you can display um regarding you know your staffing and your budgeting and your contracts and the effectiveness of that.

So um I think given the opportunity that you could bring that forward, um I do want to say that um there have been times um I understand that this um division that's now becoming a department, it's important for you to exist because there has been times when we've called um and you've come uh and I appreciated that, and so did the neighbors.

Um we've lost lives.

I called you, the neighbor said what do we do?

We need someone to talk to, and I called to ask if you had someone in your department that could come and address the needs of the neighbors so that they could deal with the loss of a neighbor in uh to a violent crime.

You came, you sat in the meeting and you talked with them and you offered services.

Um there's been times where we've had incidences that occurred um due to gun violence.

Um we've had uh and and we had um promise keepers show up for that, and I appreciated that.

When I do neighborhood walks, you guys have always been there, and I appreciate that.

Um so I think the work that you do, whether you do it with the nine that are in your office or you do it with those that you have contracted with, is extremely important to the well-being because we are in a time right now where we have a lot of um individuals that are dealing with um mental health issues and emotional trauma, and we need an entity that can handle that.

Um so I I appreciate that you are developing this communication structure.

I think it's extremely important.

So I guess when I think about uh department of community wellness and safety, I'm thinking about your ability to be able to respond.

So um I guess I I want to know is am I thinking in that right direction and and how can you how can can you speak to that and and just talk a little bit about how you see that going forward for your department?

The response, like basically with alder women more speaking of yeah, so again, we're we're putting a structure together so we know for an example if there is a homicide, we want to be able to contact uh the council member.

Uh the other thing um Perez talked to us about is even not only just on the front end but the back end too, like what were the results of that too.

So um we want to definitely invite you out if we're doing a community walk, like we're talking to Alder Woman Dimitrievich in regards to some things that are happening in her district and doing a community walk and different things like that, but working more as a partnership uh to support the different districts.

Um, and then again, we will get specific referrals from council members if there's like an ongoing situation with neighbors or if they have uh certain uh concerns within their community, and so then we definitely um work with them to help rectify that and keep them informed.

And so then we definitely um work with them to help rectify that and keep them informed.

Thank you so much for that.

And I'm also looking for um and I think that's what we were looking at um when we think about uh mental health issues and um emotional trauma, um individuals that would have expertise in grief counseling and those kinds of things, and so if that's something is that something that your department can handle.

Yeah, so currently we have our credible clinicians and healers.

Uh we do provide uh grief support to individuals across the city.

We have healing hubs.

Um but yeah, uh what I find significant too is if people don't prefer talk therapy because it just could be so devastating to them, we could bring a healer uh to their home.

So that's been uh pretty significant for us too.

So just really identifying a number of different ways to provide healing uh to families that have been devastated by violence is valuable.

For sure.

So and I I just want to end with um I appreciate um the work that you've done with domestic violence and sexual assault survivors uh and the um support that you've given to um organizations that are trying to sub um to work with individuals that are dealing with those traumas as well.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair, on that point.

Um I just want to piggyback on all woman Taylor's point.

Um for those who already know, you know, my nephew uh was tragically murdered uh October 20th.

Um and I can say right now I did not receive a call from her from her the predecessor of her department or office.

I receive a call from Karen Tyler.

Um you know, I receive uh resources to provide for my sister.

Uh she has you know step stood by my sister's side by side as far as just giving her moral and mental support as a person who lives have life experiences going through the same traumas as my sibling went through.

Um so you know, I I I can't speak on other others and their response or their context, but I can speak about my experiences and my uh, you know, uh uh my experiences with Miss Tyler and it's been nothing but superb.

So um I I know we've been through a lot of this.

Uh I'm at the appropriate time on a move for confirmation of her appointment.

Very good.

Um I guess a last question.

Um well, first a comment based on that.

So let nobody misunderstand the questioning here.

This is our oversight role.

We take it very seriously.

We're asking questions because not we don't value the department, but we do value the department and want to make sure that it can succeed in the future.

So the integrity of Ms.

Tyler is nowhere um being questioned here.

If it were on the agenda, it would receive our our unanimous support.

The question I guess that we're trying to figure out is what is the department look like going forward, and uh would Ms.

Tyler be the appropriate leader to take it into that um new direction because the the current direction which we've been on is not financially sustainable, and speaking of innovation, uh we're gonna need some innovation if we're going to do anything like have an impact um given the the existing funding sources.

Um there were two kind of hiccups, I guess, while you were director of operations that I'd want to give you an opportunity to to speak to when Alder Woman Cogs had brought forward a file relating to the non-payment of community groups.

Is that me or you um the payment of community groups?

There was um uh money owed that was not paid, had to have a committee hearing to get that sorted out with Director Hamilton and team.

Um with the domestic violence sexual assault commission, that's something we had more recent experience.

So I believe it was last August or something, we learned there were a bunch of folks expired and that hadn't been meeting.

Um and it wasn't until January of this year that we had to basically take a whole committee hearing and uh listen to 14 uh worthy candidates for getting on the commission.

But wasn't it at the job of the at the time Office of Community Wellness and Safety to staff that committee and make sure that that commission was able to run?

And when it kind of petered out and died for a minute, and we had to reinstitute it, wasn't that um under the office's watch?

So I guess both with respect to those hiccups um that occurred in the past, is there anything you might say to um a lay folks' concerns that you know the problems in the shop with just running the day-to-day um might be laid at your feet, or are you having a role in that?

Is there I want to give you the opportunity to address that kind of concern.

So with the first one, um, I think a lot of people know me in regards to our financial practices.

I've always advocated for additional staff in that regard because I feel that that is serious and nobody should have a delayed payment.

So I think there's a lot of behind the scenes conversations that happen in that regard where I have made advisement uh with that uh because you may not know like we've had like all last year, I think we only had point five position for for our grant compliance person who maintained all our funding.

So you gotta think if we're doing a huge initiative like our um Summer of Healing, we're dealing with a lot of contracted partners, uh youth organizations, and there's a lot of there's a lot of money flowing through.

Uh so definitely one thing I want to do is make sure we have a hardcore department of at least two people, somebody who's looking at it in regards to administrative and regards to grants, compliance, and different things like that, and another person that processes.

Uh so to me that's something I I took concern with as well, and uh definitely want solutions in that regard.

So the proposal is to take the halftime position and turn it into two positions?

Correct.

And while your funding is being slashed by two-thirds.

Well, you we have to look at the efficiency, so we we'd have to look at uh a different position, possibly replacing uh that position for sure.

Okay.

So but I think it's just that important.

Uh in regards to the commission, so you know, we went through the process uh with the council with that, and I think some of that was a misunderstanding because we had to um come before the council a few different times in regards to the specific commissioners, their focus areas or different things like that.

So it delayed uh um the implementation of the council reigniting for quite some time, and then you gotta think, you know, we have to meet with all those uh nominees, we have to get all the information to present, and it has to go through their um appointments.

So the mayor's office, the president of the county council, um uh MPD chief, you know, just a number of different entities that we have to work with.

So that did take time.

Uh we did have a meeting with that group of people, and we did provide clarity in regards to that process.

So wasn't when we had the reconfirmations or the confirmations um community wellness and safety were here at the table, you know.

Um, but doesn't that only happen because nobody was minding the store and seeing that we were in need of new members and stuff?

So I get it, once you see the problem, it's gonna take some time to implement to solve, but isn't the fact that the problem was allowed to accrue over time signify that nobody was keeping tabs on it as it were, and given the centrality and importance of the domestic sexual assault commission, um that seems like a a pretty big gap to for something to have missed?

I don't believe it was missed.

So I just think we changed the ordinance which reduced commission size, and then we had to come back and forth in regards to um the the specific uh focus areas of each commissioner, um, and that all took some time.

But if the commission, and I remember it shrinking shrinks, wouldn't that make the job easier, not harder?

Because you have fewer positions, right?

That was the purpose, yeah.

But again, it still took time, and we're at the point now where we do have I think everybody confirmed except for one person, and we are starting commission meetings as of um at the end of this month, actually.

Okay, very good.

So Alder Chambers had made a motion for confirmation.

So now is the point where we stop testimony and we um have our deliberation.

So is there any commentary on on um by way of discussion?

Okay, um, yes, Alder Moore.

What was the last uh I'm sorry, um, what was the last thing that you said?

Are we taking a vote?

Uh Alder uh Chambers has made the motion for confirmation, so this is where we have a chance to discuss the motion and um say anything in its favor or against or propose a different motion, that sort of situation.

Yeah, just ask that we take individual vote roll of call when it comes out.

Uh Alder Westmoreland has appeared on the board.

I want to give our colleague a chance to weigh in if he has commentary.

Yeah, uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh just a question for Ms.

Tyler.

Um, and sorry if I missed this earlier, um, if it was part of the discussion.

But typically, if there is a homicide in the district, like what is what is typical, like as a as an alder, what can I expect as far as uh somebody or you know, part of your team being dispatched to that uh location, and then after that, what is the communication to that alder?

Sure.

So what happens now is the police department will send us a referral and then it will be assigned to one of our outreach teams.

Uh they will do research in regards to retali uh the um retaliation of that situation, and then they may deploy um people out there at the time.

Uh what I have uh stated earlier was that we will be informing council members uh when there is a homicide, when there is the deployment of our outreach teams in districts, and then work along with that council member to um like for an example we do what's called a community response to violence, so we may bring several teams out there and we definitely invite council members to join us.

Uh but yeah, so that's basically the communication that uh we will be moving forward with also to bring uh some type of summary to uh the outcomes of of those situations.

Currently, well what I'm looking for more so a timeline.

Like currently, what is the timeline?

Like when does MPD reach out to you?

When do you dispatch?

When do you communicate with the Alder?

That's what I'm unclear of is is the actual timeline.

Yes.

So MPD, I would say they probably get us this information approximately I would say within hours on average of a situation that may happen, it could be sooner, it could be later.

Um, and then with our outreach teams, it depends on the teams.

Uh so but we definitely ideally want to make contact or begin that research, and well, let me just back up.

The research begins right away where we're evaluating do does people know any of the individuals?

Um they may even look on social media to see if there's uh conversation going on.

Uh but they're evaluating the situation before they even uh touch ground, and then they're out there.

So I would say everything happens within a 24-hour um time frame.

And with all of that being said, what is a typical timeline of an alder being alerted to an incident happening in their district and your team being dispatched?

So ideally, um how we want to move forward with that is that would happen within presently.

How was it how was it set up presently?

So presently, um I would say it's somewhat sporadic, so we may um we may reach out to an author if it's a significant situation versus um uh like a non-fatal shooting.

So if there's like significant retaliation where we need to come into the community, we may contact that author.

Um but in regards to the time frame, I would say that does happen within I would say I would say between 24 and 72 hours.

Okay.

Um I had a homicide in my district last night.

When can I expect to hear from somebody?

Today.

Today.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Um so we have a motion on the floor from Alder Chambers.

Motion is for confirmation.

So, Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll?

Alderman chambers.

Abstain.

Taylor.

Aye.

Aldermember Gallus.

Hi.

Mr.

Chair Alderman Spiker.

No.

So the vote is three in favor, one opposed, one abstain.

Uh confirmation is recommended to the full council.

Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh there are items left, but these should go fairly quickly.

Item 20, file number 251831.

11.

Yeah.

Because remember we were waiting on Amber.

Oh yeah, we don't have time for you.

No, no, no.

Oh, better.

Go back.

Thank you.

No.

You're waiting for the mayor's office.

Okay, yeah.

Mayor.

So we'll go back to item 11, actually, file number 251878.

So Alder Moore makes the motion to reconsider.

Um appointment of Alder Taylor to the Board of Health by the Mayor.

Thank you.

Ms.

Danius.

Yeah.

Uh thank you again, uh Mr.

Chair and Committee Amber Danius, Council Liaison for Mayor Johnson.

Um, and we're really excited to nominate um Alderoman Taylor to the Board of Health.

Um long time coming, so we're excited to put that before you today.

Okay, very good.

Alder Taylor, anything to add?

Uh no, I'm excited about taking on this new role and uh becoming more involved in supporting our Department of Health.

Okay, very good.

Uh Alder Moore would move confirmation of the appointment.

Um Alder Taylor um graciously is abstaining from her own confirmation vote.

Um so we will have that pass um on a vote of four uh zero one.

Um very good.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um now moving on to item 20, file number 251831.

Resolution relating to acceptance and funding of a 2026 Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Safety and Pert Impaired Driving Enforcement Grant.

We must have outwaited MPD.

I did see Ms.

Angon in the uh audience, so she wants to come back, she can.

Um so we'll hold that to the call of the chair.

Likewise for 21, 22, and 23.

Then moving on to item 24.

This is our file 251-843, our standing communication from the fire and police commission relating to standard operating procedures.

Um Mr.

Todd, thank you for your patience and for coming back.

Mr.

Chair, committee members, Leon Todd, uh executive director of the fire and police commission.

So there are four SOP changes or excuse me.

Four standard oper changes to standard operating procedures or instructions that are before you uh uh today.

These were uh all heard at the FPC meeting on February 19th.

Uh the the changes include uh SOP 960 correction correction and discipline, uh the standard operating instruction for camera trailers, the SO or standard operating procedure 002, law enforcement officer safety act or HR 218 and SOP 440 early intervention program.

Uh I would characterize all the changes as either administrative, routine, and or non-controversial changes.

Um I'm happy to answer any questions or or provide a summary depending on your preference.

And just making sure we have the correct memo in the file, um, because I'm seeing the 122 memo and the two five memo.

Yes.

Um just given there was an extensive public comment at the last few FPC meetings, so that necessitated holding uh previous files uh over to the February 19th FPC meeting, but they were originally intended to be heard on January 22nd and February 5th.

All right.

Well, um, I guess just for future reference for the edification of the committee, if we could have Ms.

Cooley prepare a Frankenstein memo when there are a couple instead of because not all of those, right?

It's not all of those in each of those memos that are being considered.

It's all the SOPs other than SOP 660, which we uh heard at the last public safety meeting.

The vehicle pursuit one.

So yeah, um, just having her, I guess, give a note saying, you know, what's before you at this one is um everything except the one because I saw 660, and I'm like, well, that that's we've already discussed this.

This must not be the memo.

So we can certainly do that.

Okay, thanks.

Um with that, are there any questions, comments?

Okay.

If not, then Alder Taylor would move that or Alder Moore would move that we uh place this item on file and hearing no objection so ordered.

Um now back to item 19.

Oh, yeah, 19.

Um file number 251 830, resolution relating to acceptance and funding of a 2026 Wisconsin DOT bot's C seat belt enforcement grant.

Good afternoon, Laura Angon, Milwaukee Police Department.

The file before you would authorize the Milwaukee Police Department to um apply, accept and fund the 2026 seatbelt grant.

Um this particular grant funds overtime for our officers to serve on a task force to address um seat belt violations.

Very good.

Um and then uh it doesn't have to be now, but just moving ahead.

Uh, if we can have um some data about you know how many stops, what the results were, that would be helpful because I'm not sure if members have have dealt with the bots stuff in detail before.

Absolutely.

We can provide a summary of all of the um bots grants that will be before you today.

Okay.

Um if you want, I can put a little bit more information now, or we can move ahead.

I know it's been a long day.

And I don't know if you carry it out here.

Um so uh with that, then Alder Burgels would move to recommend adoption, hearing no objections so ordered.

Item 20, file number 251831 resolution relating to acceptance and funding of a 2026 Wisconsin DOT BOTS impaired driving enforcement grant.

Again, the file before you would authorize the 2026 program.

Um that does provide uh officer overtime, it's a voluntary sign-up to address issues of um operating uh cars in um intoxicated situations.

Okay, just to to um provide a little bit of information this year.

We do have additional partner on our group.

We are involving Marquette's police department, so they will also receive a distribution of this particular grant funding.

Got it.

Okay, thank you.

Thanks for that clarification.

Any questions?

Did you say we were gonna come back to hear like specifics on the we're going to provide a little bit more detailed program information as a package as opposed to individual grants just to facilitate the uh meetings time frame?

Okay, all right, thank you.

Um with that, Alder Bergels would move to recommend adoption and hearing no objection so ordered.

Item number 21, file number 251832 resolution relating to acceptance and funding of a 2026 Wisconsin State Patrol Division, spring drug recognition expert field certification training grant.

Thank you.

Again, this provides funding for a 2026 year program.

This is a program where we um essentially help train for the awareness of how to identify particular drugs.

Um and it's a voluntary uh program, been very successful, and this would just continue that program in 2026.

And a question, uh Alder Pratt and I have been working on um some legislation with respect to requirements for licensing certain establishments and um attempts to deal with the opioid crisis and situation.

Um some sort of training might be helpful for staff members at those things.

Would you mind following up with me and we can see if we can take your experts in MPD and see if we could apply that training if you I would be happy to bring that back to Captain Gherky at our academy and work with you on that?

Okay, so thank you so much.

Um with that, Alder Taylor moves to recommend adoption and hearing no objections so ordered.

Um item number 22, file number 251833 resolution relating to acceptance and funding of the 2026 Wisconsin DOT bot's speed enforcement grant.

Again, this would provide funding for our 2026 task force.

And again, um a new member to that task force this year is again Marquette University's police department.

It helps us um essentially address issue of speed enforcement, which is a very critical issue in Milwaukee, and this provides additional resources to um address those issues.

And sorry, I just don't remember is UWM's police department already a beneficiary or are they not involved?

So our partners are the Sheriff's Office, UWM, Marquette, and Milwaukee Police Department.

Okay, Marquette being the new one.

Yep.

Okay, gotcha.

Okay, then Alder Burgels would recommend removed to recommend adoption and hearing no objection so ordered.

Last item is item number 23, file number 251838.

Um resolution relating to acceptance and funding of 26 through 27 Wisconsin Internet Crime Against Children Task Force Program Grant.

There is a proposed sub which Alder Taylor moves be before us.

Hearing no objection is before us.

If you'd care to describe the grants and what technical changes were made in the sub just very briefly.

Absolutely.

Again, this provides funding for the 26 and 27 program years of Internet Crimes Against Children's Task Force.

The only change in the file is a correction on the end date of the grant period.

So it reflects January 1 of 26 through December 31st of 27.

The original file said 26, but it's through 27.

Right.

And essentially we received $40,000 each year.

Okay.

Very good.

With that, Alder Moore would move to recommend adoption of the sub and hearing no objection, so ordered.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

All right.

And seeing no items before us, we are adjourned.