Sorry for the interruption.

Please continue.

And no problem.

Let me go back to what I was saying.

The second concern that we had was that currently internal affairs only investigates those complaints that are categorized as category one, which are the most serious, as well as category two that are combined with a category one complaint.

And that means that uh about half of the complaints uh against ten legal police officers currently have no civilian oversight.

And so we created a system so there would be at least an auditing of category two complaints, and we were waiting to implement that.

And that was one of the things that are the top the pipeline that I mentioned.

And uh the documents that is before you today includes the ability to do that.

And so with those concerns addressed, uh, our board vote voted unanimously at our last meeting to uh uh support the uh draft documents that are before you today, and I'll turn it over to Mr.

Graham to explain those.

Thank you very much.

And thank you to Doug for his input to the CRB for their input.

Um there were three community review board meetings, uh public hearings where we received input from the public and from the board.

There are also three public hearings that were the uh rules committee, and want to thank the members of that CRB rules committee for their input that led to um what you will see today.

Uh and finally, as Doug mentioned, there was unanimous support from the board recently regarding this draft ordinance with a couple of changes as Doug um mentioned, and I incorporated those.

So what we're talking about is implementing Measure G, which was passed uh in November of 2016, with uh the main highlights really having to do with the administration of the board being the mayor and city council now administering the board.

Previously it was solely the mayor, additionally, enshrining in the charter the ability to oversee uh complaints um in addition to officer involved shootings and in custody deaths.

Those by practice had previously also been incorporated, but now it's enshrined in the charter, and finally the changing of the name of the CRB.

In order to then implement this as a charter board, uh it was important to work through a implementing ordinance that then would be able to define the relationship between the mayor and council in administering the rules and regulations for the board.

Um, as you know, this board is responsible for complaints and is privy to confidential information with regards to San Diego police officers through the complaint process and internal affairs.

And so the level of detail that is currently right now in uh the bylaws of the board, administrative rules and procedures, all of which are approved um in general by the mayor, also needed to be handled.

And so we're proposing to bring forward the implementing ordinance as well as a set of standard operating procedures that would govern the board, then the board itself would have approval authority over its bylaws.

As far as the board today, um the power currently rests with the mayor and city manager.

Um they review complaints against police officers, officer involved shootings in custody deaths.

It's a 23-member board.

Um there are prospective alternate and full board members, and I'll get to the importance of that in a moment.

Um they're governed by bylaws that are approved by the mayor.

And there's a set of operational standing rules that are approved by the the board and mayor as well.

And they conduct both open meetings and closed session meetings.

The closed sessions are the meetings in which they review um cases with confidential information.

What we're proposing under this ordinance is that the power to create the board now rests with the mayor and council per the city charter.

They continue to review complaints against police peace officers.

That the board remain a 23 member board.

Um that is appointed by the mayor, uh, confirmed by council.

That's how our boards under the charter are uh currently appointed.

And so there's consistency here with this charter board.

That there are appointments that are made to the full board itself.

So rather than the current procedure of having prospective, alternate, and board members, like the rest of our boards.

The mayor proposes and the council approves a slate of board members.

In a moment, I'll tell you how we're addressing the prospective board member issue.

That they would maintain a training program for those interested in being to the appointed to the CRB.

This is important because right now the CRB goes through and solicits applications for people who want to join the CRB.

They then go through several trainings.

And in fact, as a prospective board member, you're able to review cases so that you get really on the job training, if you will, before being appointed as a full board member.

That can be accomplished today because the mayor is the one that approves that slate of prospective members.

And instead of having two slates of appointees, so having to go through 43 appointees and put that before council twice and be duplicative.

A training program is what we have proposed that the CRB would use its existing process in which it vets candidates, trains them, and puts them forward for recommendation to fill appointments.

There no longer would be prospective board members.

There no longer would be alternate board members, but the goals of the prospective board members would still be achieved through the CRB process of soliciting.

They do a great job of outreach in the communities, soliciting applications, people who are interested, vetting them, and then putting them through the training process.

Additionally, this board would be governed by ordinance, as I've mentioned, and the standard operating procedures that are would be approved by the mayor and city council.

You have a draft of both the ordinance and those standard operating procedures in front of you today.

The board, in addition to that, would create and approve bylaws which could include their own operational standing rules.

This is really the minutiae that is not currently covered in either the standard operating procedures or the implementing ordinance or the charter.

The board would do the same sort of things that are in their existing bylaws regarding Roberts Rules of Order or the types of the way in which cases are exactly disposed.

Many of those things that don't rise to the level of need to be approved by the mayor and council would be approved by the CRB in a set of bylaws that they would subsequently create.

That's just like many of our other boards and commissions who create and approve their own bylaws that cannot be in conflict with other city rules and regulations.

And then finally, they would continue to have the ability to conduct open and closed session meetings.

So talking about the board members themselves, uh the ordinance is clear that they would consist that there would continue to be nominations as the mayor's office does today solicited from city council, that that action would go before the city council, those that would be recommended by the mayor for appointment, and the city council would have to approve or deny those appointees, as they do today with other boards and commissions.