San Leandro Community Police Review Board Meeting — November 19, 2025

The Community Police Review Board (CPRB) met on November 19, 2025 to approve prior minutes, receive updates from the Police Department and Independent Police Auditor (IPA), hear public testimony (including on ALPR/Flock data sharing and the pending Jason Fletcher manslaughter case), review oversight metrics (use of force, pursuits, complaints, and backlogs), discuss AI and oversight topics from a regional NACOLE conference, and vote to amend the SLPD First Amendment Assemblies policy to incorporate specific state-law requirements governing kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents for crowd control.

Consent Calendar

• Approved October 15 meeting minutes with no corrections.
  • Vote: passed 6–0, with 1 absence (Peter Eichel was absent at roll call).

Reports

Police Department Report (Assistant Chief)

• Announced “Cookies with the Cops” on December 2, 5:30 p.m.–8:30 p.m., in front of the Police Department; included cookie-decorating and a toy drive.
• Staffing update:
  • 4 police recruits currently in the academy.
  • 3 projected to graduate next month, then begin an approximately 18-week field training program.
  • A 4th recruit projected to graduate next year.
  • Department stated it is actively hiring and hopes to improve staffing enough to move away from an “emergency schedule” described as ongoing for “four plus years.”
• Board invitation to attend virtual reality use-of-force training at the Police Department:
  • Dates given: Mon Dec 1, Thu Dec 4, and clarified as Wed Dec 10 (initially discussed as “Thursday the 10th/11th,” then corrected).
  • Time: 6:00 p.m.–8:00 p.m.
  • City Attorney guidance discussed: up to 3 board members may attend together without additional meeting/agenda constraints.

Independent Police Auditor (IPA) Report (Jeff; Denise provided monthly numbers)

• IPA continued bi-weekly meetings reviewing ongoing incidents.
• ALPR audit: IPA reported an ALPR audit was submitted to the Police Department for review; IPA expected departmental responses on fixes made since the audit began, with a final report anticipated in December or January.
• IPA annual report: not presented because it had not been fully reviewed by the Chief (who had “just returned to work” per IPA); expected on the December agenda.

Use-of-force “spike” follow-up

• IPA explained a previously discussed high month initially shown as 17 uses of force was actually 15, because 2 entries were stopstick deployments during pursuits.
• IPA and SLPD characterized the 15 as “low level” force and stated they were reviewed and found within policy.
  • Examples provided: force used to overcome minimal resistance, including control holds, physical force, takedowns, and handcuffing with resistance.
  • IPA noted one incident involved a taser display (described as displayed and not utilized).
• Board questions focused on:
  • Clarifying what “low level” means.
  • Whether the spike could be explained by call type (IPA and Assistant Chief stated nothing out of the ordinary was found).

October oversight metrics (reported at the November meeting)

• Use of force: 4 incidents in October (context discussed that monthly figures had varied—e.g., “four, eight, seven, and then…14” was referenced as the earlier spike).
  • Reviews: 7 reviewed by the Department and 7 by the IPA.
  • 1 ACA (Agreed-upon Course of Action) noted; example given involved remediation for tactical communication skills (including language use described as “Jem’o-Matter,” as transcribed).
  • Queue: 46 use-of-force cases referenced as “in the queue” for a later stage of review.
• Pursuits: 5 pursuits in October.
  • Reviews: 15 reviewed by the Department and 15 by the IPA.
  • 12 ACAs described, including remedial action for unsafe driving, supervisor identification/documentation of policy issues, and report-writing clarity/consistency.
  • Queue: 34 pursuit cases waiting for review.
• Complaints: 2 new complaints in October.
  • Reviews: 4 reviewed by the Department and 4 by the IPA.
  • 2 AUCAs (described as tied to the same case) involving remedial action related to misconduct (details limited due to confidentiality).
  • Queue: 19 complaint investigations waiting to come to the IPA.

Repeat issues and remediation

• In response to board questions, IPA confirmed there are repeat offenders (general statement; no identifying details).
• Remediation described as progressive, including coaching/mentoring/training, escalating to documented counseling, written reprimand, or further discipline.
• SLPD confirmed it uses Performance Improvement Plans (PIPs); members noted microphone audio issues during this exchange.

Complaint confidentiality / request for aggregated complaint-type reporting

• City Attorney advised that complaints and officer names are generally confidential personnel records under Penal Code 832.7, with limited exceptions.
• City Attorney stated the City can provide a general overview of complaint types and actions taken that does not identify officers or reproduce complaints verbatim.
• Board requested a summary/overview report of 2025 complaints, including complaint types and outcomes, and basic breakdowns (discussion included interest in identifying patterns such as repeat issues without naming officers).
  • Timing: Board asked that the report be available in time for publication with the agenda for the next meeting (December).

Public Comments & Testimony

• Speaker reported attending a court hearing on whether to dismiss the manslaughter case against former officer Jason Fletcher; stated Judge Reardon ruled the case would not be dismissed and would proceed to trial in January. The speaker characterized the matter as significant in the context of post–SB 2 accountability changes.
• Speaker urged the City to stop sharing Flock (license plate reader) data with agencies allegedly violating California law prohibiting sharing ALPR data with out-of-state/federal agencies; cited an October 3, 2025 California Attorney General lawsuit against El Cajon and alleged San Leandro shares data with El Cajon. The speaker also raised concerns about immigration enforcement use, cybersecurity vulnerabilities, and cited other cities said to have rejected/canceled Flock.
• During discussion of complaint/use-of-force review, a speaker urged that “anomalies” may reflect bias and asked for deeper analysis including demographics (race/age) of individuals against whom force is used, and asked about the threshold for concluding remediation is not working.
• During NACOLE conference discussion, a speaker expressed concern about AI editing/standardizing language and supported a cautious approach.
• The same speaker asked what happens if residents flee suspected ICE activity and go to a police station for help—asking whether SLPD would protect them and require a judicial warrant.
• Regarding First Amendment assemblies policy, a speaker described a patrol officer asking whether the speaker’s banner message was “appropriate,” and argued content is protected by the Constitution; urged policy sensitivity to “low-level” First Amendment activity (banners/signs).
• A speaker cautioned that Lexipol updates could overwrite local policy improvements unless changes are tracked and preserved.

Discussion Items

Regional NACOLE conference report (Chair Bailey)

• Chair reported on a NACOLE regional conference held in San Francisco in August (attended in person by board members including Tim and Jenny; Eric attended a second day; Zaidia attended virtually).
• Main themes discussed:
  • AI in law enforcement and oversight, including:
    • Body-worn camera video indexing/labeling.
    • AI-assisted redaction (a statistic was cited: 40 hours manual redaction vs 1 hour using AI).
    • Concerns about AI-assisted report writing, including potential bias and “auto-filling” narratives (example term discussed: “furtive movement”).
    • San Francisco pilot reportedly did not yield anticipated time savings due to time spent validating AI outputs.
  • Mentioned SB 524 (described as signed “last month”): if an officer uses AI for a first draft, the draft must be preserved with the final report and signed off for the audit trail.
  • Implicit bias keynote by Stanford professor Jennifer Eberhardt; emphasis on how “what we see and where we look” affects policing, and on adding “friction” to slow decision-making.
  • Community engagement ideas (including outreach mapping in larger jurisdictions) and website usefulness.
  • ICE/local law enforcement interface and oversight; included a discussion question about how a local duty to intervene applies when observing federal agents’ force.
  • RIPA data quality concerns raised from other jurisdictions; Tim noted examples from San Francisco involving missing/incorrect entries.
• IPA stated it did not audit RIPA data in 2025 yet, but expects to do an audit comparing 2024 to 2025 once 2025 data is complete, looking for anomalies.
• Assistant Chief explained SLPD uses a phone application for RIPA reporting, includes fields beyond minimum requirements (examples mentioned: whether the person was identifiable before the stop; high- vs low-discretion search; and city of residence), and would attempt to provide screenshots/format examples to the board.
• Assistant Chief reiterated SLPD’s duty-to-intervene policy would apply to observing unlawful force, with reporting up the chain and to the relevant outside agency.

Policy amendment: First Amendment Assemblies (SLPD Policy 413)

• The Board considered an amendment to SLPD policy on First Amendment assemblies, specifically the section on use of kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents for crowd control.
• Chair proposed adding the specific statutory requirements from Penal Code 13652(b)(1)–(11) that were described as omitted from the Lexipol template.
• Assistant Chief stated the policy already references Penal Code 13652 and that the department had no issues with the proposed change.

Key Outcomes

• Approved October 15 minutes: 6–0, 1 absent.
• Directed staff/IPA/department (as discussed) to provide the CPRB a non-identifying overview of 2025 complaints (types, outcomes, and basic breakdowns), targeted for inclusion with the December meeting agenda packet.
• Adopted policy amendment to update SLPD Policy 413 (First Amendment assemblies) to include the explicit statutory requirements governing crowd-control use of kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents.
  • Vote: 6–0, 1 absent.
• Formed an ad hoc committee on broader crowd control policies (beyond the specific statutory insertion) with Tim, Denise, and Joseph volunteering to participate.
• Noted upcoming items:
  • VR use-of-force training sessions at SLPD (Dec 1, Dec 4, Dec 10; 6–8 p.m.; up to 3 board members per session).
  • IPA annual report expected in December.
  • Budget topic deferred; Assistant Chief clarified the City is in a mid-cycle budget period (bi-annual budget) with baseline adjustments rather than a full new budget cycle; further reporting to the board anticipated.