Read the January 26 meeting.

!

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

guitar solo

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

guitar solo

guitar solo

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm sorry.

Jennifer L. Hall

Mayor, you can begin.

Valerie Amezcua

Thank you very much, Madam Clerk. I hereby convene the Santa Ana City Council meeting to order. Madam Clerk, please conduct the roll call.

Jennifer L. Hall

Councilmember Becerra?

Johnathan Ryan Hernandez

Here.

Jennifer L. Hall

Councilmember Hernandez?

Johnathan Ryan Hernandez

Present.

Jennifer L. Hall

Councilmember Lopez? Here. Councilmember Phan? Here. Councilmember Vazquez?

Benjamin Vazquez

Present.

Jennifer L. Hall

Mayor Pro Tem Penalosa? Mayor Meskwa? Present. There's five members present. that is a quorum thank you madam clerk before we proceed to the pledge of allegiance please make any announcements for members of the public on zoom or teleconference to request to speak during public comments on agenda items only the police oversight commission ordinance you must dial star 9 from your phone or click the button labeled raise hand from zoom now to be in the speaker queue once public comments commence thank you thank you councilmember vasquez can you lead

Valerie Amezcua

us in the pledge of allegiance please thank you this heavy day

Benjamin Vazquez

put your hand over your heart ready to begin

Benjamin Vazquez

of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all

Valerie Amezcua

All right. This is the time of the meeting for the City Council to receive comments from the public on agenda items only. Madam City Clerk, please explain the public comment procedures and call the first speakers. Three minutes, please.

Thank you, Mayor.

Jennifer L. Hall

Thank you, Mayor. Pursuant to resolution number 2025-004, speakers are requested to address the City Council directly and to refrain from profane language racial epitaphs and libelous or slanderous statements that disturb the decorum of the meeting pursuant to the Brown Act the City Council may not enter into discussion at this time speakers will have three minutes for their comments before calling the speakers I'll report the summary of emails as of today at 3 p.m. we received four e-comments related to the special meeting agenda item number one those were distributed to the City Council and posted online as part of the public

Jennifer L. Hall

record well now here for members of the public that are here present in the the Council Chamber followed by those on conference call or Zoom to provide comments on the item. Please state your name and the ward or neighbourhood that you reside in for the record. If you could please line up in the centre aisle when you hear your name called.

Jennifer L. Hall

Emma Gottfried. Matthew Compton. Abraham Kew.

My name is Emma Gottfried. I'm a resident of Ward 4 and a member of community service organization, Orange County, and its police accountability committee. We're demanding that there's no attacks on the police oversight commission. This oversight commission needs the power to independently investigate police violence. It cannot be just a tool for the internal audit of the police department. We want, we need to keep the power to review the board's, the commission's ability to review police policy and make recommendations to the police chief and city council.

This oversight commission was created to promote transparency and increase accountability and public confidence between the community and SAPD, but the way that this commission has been handled has been anything but transparent. parent. There's been years of delay and stalling and then finally once this Commission was staffed immediately a proposal to drastically change the powers of the Commission. That's not accountability, that's not transparency, it's not building trust between the community. And this original ordinance also for the Commission had input from community organizations while this

This proposed ordinance was created by an ad hoc committee that involved the police department, but not community organizations. That's extremely suspect right there.

And it of course included our police funded mayor and our police funded council member, Council Member Becerra.

And this proposed ordinance was originally proposed needed to comply with state law, but after the very intense community backlash of that initial proposal, we were there. Other members, other people in this room were there.

The city attorney's office admitted that that was not true in terms of complying with state law in terms of having an independent investigation happening in parallel with the police department's internal investigation. So why is this proposal even being considered? Like that was apparently the main justification is on the name of the original proposal, but that's not true So we need stronger police oversight than we've ever We stronger police oversight more than ever right now while members of our community have been out in the streets Protecting each other from federal forces SAPD has still been out there attacking protesters

And Trump's executive orders have emboldened local law enforcement to brutalize us There are killer cops out on our streets like Luis Casillas and Isaac Ibarra who have still not faced justice for killing Noe Rodriguez.

And for this proposed hybrid model, if we limit the kind of cases that can be investigated like Freddie Washington's who died in SAPD custody, that wouldn't be eligible, so that's not okay too.

Jennifer L. Hall

We need the most flexibility and power for the ordinance. Next speaker, Matthew Compton, followed by Abraham Kew and Daniel Polito.

Hello again. My name is Matthew. I'm with Community Service Organization Orange County's Police Accountability Committee. I'm here to demand that this council read the powers of the Police Oversight Commission as is in the original ordinance. This commission was established due to community concerns about SAPD misconduct. Those concerns and the misconduct still remain. For example, Noe Rodriguez was killed by SAPD officers Luis Casillas and Isaac Ibarra on December 1st, 2024. Since the killing of Noe, there has been relentless outcries from the community.

People have taken to the streets to show their frustration, posted on social media, and even stood in front of this council to share their own personal experiences with how SAPD has treated them. him. Freddie Washington, who died in SAPD custody, was strapped to a chair with a spit mask. SAPD officers beat Freddie and treated him like he was less than human. Mario Diaz, a 15-year-old minor, was badly beaten by SAPD officers. In an era of being under Trump, where federal and local police violence is being uplifted, we must protect police oversight since SAPD refuses to protect residents of Santa Ana.

Back in April of 2025, Trump signed an executive order 14288. This order provides further support for officers to get away with misconduct, including murder. Despite all this, you three cowardly sellouts, Mayor Valerie Emezcua, Phil Becerra, and conveniently, David Penaloza, who isn't here, and you two who aren't even paying attention. When will enough be enough for you three? $100,000 from the Santa Ana Police Officers Association, $200,000? A million? For the rest of you, if you actually care about the community you represent, unlike these three, then I urge you to leave the commission as is.

SAPD will continue to kill and harm community members, and they will not stop. up.

Jennifer L. Hall

Abraham Kew, Daniel Pulido, Carlos Perea.

Good evening, city staff and fellow santaneros. My name is Abe. I live in Ward 3, and I'm a member of Community Service Organization, Orange County. We're here to demand that the Police Oversight Commission retain the powers it was granted in the original ordinance. ordinance. The amendments being proposed come from a conflict with state law, but not because of a violation of state law that would require changing the ordinance. The amendments also come at a time when the commission is finally able to function and use its investigative powers and we are seeing an increase in federal activity leading to more protests everywhere,

especially in our streets. I know you'd like to believe it, but we don't organize every protest you see out there. It is clearly more important than ever to protect the Police Police Oversight Commission and give the community a say in how Santa Ana PD is patrolling our neighborhoods. We should be expanding oversight to include hiring and firing officers, training, discipline spending, and more. We need community control of the police to demand changes like no crowd control for federal operations. Members of CSO have been going to neighborhoods all across

Santa Ana and every ward to demand justice for Noe Rodriguez, who was unarmed and experiencing experiencing a mental health crisis in downtown Santa Ana when he was shot 29 times by officers Luis Casillas and Isaac Ibarra. These killer cops continue to work for the police department and have been involved in other deaths and alleged misconduct, with Casillas specifically taking part in the brutal beating of 15-year-old Mario Diaz. Noe's family and our organization are demanding that these officers be fired from SAPD so that they don't brutalize or kill more members of our communities.

When we go out and talk about these officers during our outreach, people tell us about their own experiences with SAPD and their experiences of misconduct, including discrimination, intimidation, and often outright violence. But many also fear retaliation and feel hopeless at the idea of demanding accountability. A majority of residents don't even know that the Police Oversight Commission exists. We cannot gut the oversight powers before they've even had a chance to be used, especially especially in light of the murders of Renee Good, Keith Porter, Alex Preti, and more at the hands of violent federal agents.

These events only intensify mistrust between the department and residents, especially when over the last year, we've seen SAPD violate reporting standards for military equipment usage. We've seen them sign agreements with FLOC for automatic license plate readers that lead to ICE detainments. Chief Robert Rodriguez said himself that only 0.2% of the information collected from these automatic license plate readers lead to actual assistance with investigations.

And the city continues to pay out millions in lawsuits for SAPD's misconduct. Let's also not forget that they withheld 42 ICE notifications over the summer, and they're still not sharing this kind of information with the public. We need community control of the police. The decision this council makes today will be remembered the next time that Santa Ana police officers again brutalize protesters, when they again conduct a traffic stop that leads to the assault of a civilian, and when another unarmed community member dies due to excessive police violence. Protect and expand the powers of the Police Oversight

Commission and justice for Noe Rodriguez.

Jennifer L. Hall

Daniel Pulido, Carlos Perea, Tanya Nava.

Jennifer L. Hall

I'm sorry, David.

That's okay. All right. Good. Oh, oh, no, that's fine. Yes, my name is David Pulido. I'm a resident of Ward 5 and member of community service organization, we demand an end to attacks on the Police Oversight Commission. We want to keep the power to independently investigate police violence, the power to review police policy, and make recommendations to the police chief and City Council. We cannot take a single step backward on police oversight under the Trump administration. As others have said here, last year Trump signed an executive order to train

police to be more aggressive, to expand police protections, and to weaken police oversight. Since then, states like Florida and Iowa gutted civilian review boards, while police killings have just continued to grow year after year. At the same time, we've seen Trump unleash racist armies of federal agents across the country, including here in Santa Ana, while the local police collaborate with them in the light and in the dark. Last year in Santa Ana, police-backed council members Valerie Amesqua, Phil Becerra, and David Peñalosa was not here. They tried to

remove pro-accountability commissioner Amalia Mejia. Then city staff claimed that they needed to change the commission so it complied with state law. Those changes would strip the power of the commission and its ability to investigate police violence. They claimed it was to avoid lawsuits, but the city was facing at least four lawsuits from families whose loved ones were killed by police. Two from the family of Noe Rodriguez, one from the family of Luisa Mezcua, and one from the family of Miguel Chavez. So the approach of Santa Ana to police killings is clear. Cover them up and settle lawsuits with

the victims while letting killer cops roam our streets. Shame! Yes, it's disgusting. The approach of Santa Ana, this is why CSO fights for community control of the police. The people who live in this city have a basic democratic right to decide on policing matters where they live. That happens, that includes killer cops and what happens to these officers. This commission is just a starting point. That's how we understand it, not as a destination. You know, that means it needs to be fully empowered. No one wants the audit model. Not a single family member I've ever seen or has come here has

demanded the audit model. No one's asking for us to investigate the officers after they they investigate themselves. That's not going to work. If you have a problem with the funding this Commission, then you should fire the killer cops on your payroll. Fire Mark Shifflett, the officer who mauled unarmed 73 year old Miguel Chavez with a police dog for almost two minutes. Fire Luis Casillas and Isaac Ibarra, who shot 29 bullets at unarmed Noe Rodriguez and left him to die in downtown Santa Ana. You should fire all the officers who were involved in the brutal arrest of

Freddie Washington, including the officers who were pinning him down for for almost two minutes and that footage was cut from the community briefing. If you want to solve the problem with funding, you could start there. You should choose a side today and boldly stand for victims of police violence. Thank you.

Hello, City Council. My name is Tanya Wachispa.

And I'm here today because I personally experienced and witnessed police misconduct in this city.

The commission was created after over 50 years of community advocacy to address generations of police violence, secrecy, and impunity. I'm here to demand that the original ordinance be honored at the very least. We need to retain independent investigative authority, maintain the commission's authority to make disciplinary recommendations, ensure clear and direct pathways for commission recommendations to reach the city council, and preserve the commission's responsibility to review the memoranda of understanding.

You know, Ben Camacho recently reported on law enforcement creating a t-shirt commemorating the protest that was marked by police brutality, and this is one of the many signals of a dangerous culture that has been cultivated here. Many of you brag that you are tough on crime, but that standard must apply to police misconduct as well. Well, oversight exists to prevent and address abuse, specifically. Rejecting it raises the question of what culture this city is choosing to protect and why.

Many of you have spoken out against the rogue agency violence that's been going on by ICE. I saw a few statements be put out by many of you. And you have the ability right now to create meaningful guardrails against misconduct so that that level of escalation and violence can be prevented in the future here in Santa Ana because it has happened in the past already. We have people here in this audience who no longer have their father. We have people here who have experienced very extreme abuse by the hands of the Santa Ana Police Department and by this council that has not moved to hold them

accountable. Meaningful guardrails against misconduct must exist and protect your sit your residents in this city and that's public safety. I always uplift the demand for justice for Noe Rodriguez, for Brandon Lopez, and by all families and people who have been affected by police misconduct.

Jennifer L. Hall

The next three speakers Carlos Perea, Bumaro Vicente, and Jer. Good evening

Mayor and City Council members. My name is Carlos Perea. I'm Commissioner for for Council Member Vasquez, and I reside in Ward 1. I'm just here again to state my support for continuing the ordinance as it is for the Oversight Commission. We just began reviewing complaints, and I think it will obstruct, disrupt the work that we have begun to do if the Council moves towards gutting the Commission significantly. I know that today you're going to be discussing, reviewing the different recommendations that city staff has put forward.

Let me be clear, and that has been included in staff report, the Police Oversight Commission overwhelmingly has recommended the City Council to maintain its investigatory powers, subpoena powers, whether it is through a hybrid model, which is what the Commission is supporting, reporting or my preference is just clean up the language of the current ordinance and don't do any major changes. I do want to note that a lot of these concerns that were brought forward by staff and some of you in the dais early on was that we will be in conflict with state law with POPR.

Now the governor and the California state legislature has actually affirmed the ability of independent oversight bodies to look into personnel files, subpoena those files through ABA 47. So I believe some of those major concerns should be clarified for you all. The other part which I'm actually concerned if the council decides to move forward with a hybrid model is to ensure that you don't narrow down even more the types of cases that we're looking into. Yes, it's important to preserve the ability to investigate cases like great bodily injury, death, in custody or dead,

but there's other serious cases here that we need to also be able to look into when needed, including dishonesty, sexual assault, unlawful arrest or unlawful search, unreasonable or excessive force, failure to intervene against another officer using force that is clearly unreasonable, excessive,

the commission, I understand that there are issues on resources. I share those concerns. Perhaps we can look into a limited amount of cases that we look per year. But again, do not strip the ability for the commission to investigate or subpoena. And again, we all do this at the direct level. giving direction to the oversight directors it's not like we are doing that ourselves thank you hello mayor and council my name is

Bumalo Vicente which is PA it's been a long journey to get where we're at today we finally onboarded a new director for the police oversight Commission and the Commission has begun reviewing complaints but at this critical moment we need to stop playing political games and start acting with transparency and good faith. This special meeting was called by the mayor within 72 hours. Even though it's clear this discussion has been planned for weeks, the Commission itself was not even informed. That lack of transparency is shameful, undermines public trust, and actively damages the integrity of police oversight.

Today, we urge the Council to preserve the core powers of the Police Oversight Commission. Commission. With AB 847 now in effect, the legal concerns previously raised no longer exist. Staff's recommendation to move towards an audit-only model is a step backwards. Instead, the City must preserve the following core powers. Retain independent investigative authority, including the ability to investigate serious and deadly uses of force. Maintain the Commission's authority to make disciplinary recommendations based on the findings of those investigations.

Ensure clear and direct pathways for Commission recommendations to reach the City Council so that transparency, accountability, and public oversight are not weakened. And then lastly, preserve the Commission's responsibility to review the MOU for both the Santa Ana Police Officers Association and the Santa Ana Police Management Association and to provide recommendations as appropriate. We are also in support and call on the Commission to initiate an investigation into the murder of Noah Rodriguez. Rodriguez. While oversight commissions cannot replace or interfere with the Department of

Justice criminal investigations under AB 1506, they are explicitly permitted to conduct parallel administrative and policy-focused reviews. This includes examining whether department policy was followed, whether training and supervision were adequate, and whether broader systemic failures contributed to the incident. We are living in a moment where agencies like ICE operate with little accountability and innocent people are being killed. We have former SAPD officers openly selling merchandise with SAPD and ICE glorifying brutality. This is not the time to weaken oversight or allow or

allow our own agencies to operate unchecked. People are watching, the community is paying attention and it is an election year. The city must choose transparency, accountability, and public trust. Thank you.

Jennifer L. Hall

Chair?

Greetings. So there's a few things, right? The one I just want to say that I'm in agreeance with what the community has come out to confront, which is this gutting of the police oversight commission so I'm not gonna go over the facts I think most of you are familiar with that right a couple of questions rhetorical but you already know the answers to this is who do you work for right you might think hey I work for the city of Santa Anna sure who does that make up the people of Santa Anna right you don't work for the police the police work for the city of Santa Anna it's just simple right it's not trying to be

be a certain way about it, it's just simple.

The next thing that I wanna get into is how things connect, because in this world, everything's related. Whether it's your food choices, how you treat people, how you navigate the seat that you're in and were elected to serve, it's just, it's related, right? Ya sabemos, we already know this. So when we talk about what's happening, not just in Minneapolis, but across the world, we know that people are suffering, right? Regardless of politics. That's just the truth. people are suffering and they're not suffering out of happenstance it just happens to be this way and things are gonna balance out when they balance out

it's up to people right people who may disagree with each other it's up to them it's up to people who are elected by the people right so I'm not here to again spit these facts at you but I'm here to remind you of something that accountability is just as important as it is today as it was 10 20 30 40 50 100 hundred, two hundred, four hundred years ago. And I'm nothing special, neither is anyone in this room including you, but you have a responsibility to the people. We can't argue that. And that starts with the responsibility of this Police Oversight Commission. It doesn't

start there, it continues. But it can pause there if you decide to let it. And let me Let me tell you that these times that are here now, they're nothing new. They are things that were prophesized long ago, whether you believe in Western science or non-Western science. Things are coming, things are unfolding. And if you think that that seat that you're on is gonna protect you, when the time comes, trust me, it won't. It's not gonna protect anybody. And what's gonna happen after, because this isn't where it ends. This life is not where it ends. whatever your belief whatever your faith may be phil

whatever your faith may be i want you to understand this is not the end and we're going to have to answer for our actions in the next life when we approach those gates regardless of what your belief is and he's going to ask you did you do everything you can to serve the people did you do everything you can to make those people accountable what are you going to tell what are you going to say remember that this isn't the end this isn't the only life we have

Jennifer L. Hall

your time's up you know this

Jennifer L. Hall

mayor and city council that concludes the speakers that are present we'll now begin with the zoom speakers speakers on zoom when unmuted please announce your name and the ward or neighborhood that you reside in within the city of santa ana for the record you'll have three minutes for your comments victor mendez

Can you hear me okay?

Jennifer L. Hall

Yes, please go ahead.

Thank you. Yeah, so I'm going to be very brief, but I do want to counter some points that were made by the other commenters, both in support of and frankly, as well as some critical comments. I do support the recommendation to go forward with the audit model. In fact, it was the one I always felt was best. best, but I understand there was a process and people weighed in and had their thoughts and out came this ordinance, which while I didn't agree with it, I still felt it was a good step forward and we should do our best. Obviously, what resulted has been less than satisfactory.

I don't think the commission has really done much, unfortunately. So I really appreciate, appreciate, understand people's indignation about what's transpired, but it's not the end of it. I think an audit is a good foundation to move forward. All the things people are talking about can be easily and readily and immediately accomplished through the audit model. We talk about parallel investigations. Well, an audit of what's happening in the the systems would be accomplished through the audit model. You audit the systems, you look at conduct, you look at performance. These parallel investigations are perfectly aligned

to the audit model. Again, a step forward. You know, and I want to just clarify that people are talking about how SAP does not protect residents. I'm somebody who could testify that's simply not the case. You know, as everyone knows what's happened along for east first the last year and a half sapd has done everything they can to protect women who are in wheelchairs children afghan refugees businesses small businesses immigrants and this place is a lot better and a lot cleaner and a lot safer because of sapd

it doesn't mean i i i turn a blind eye to everything that else is going on but let's be also very realistic and fair about it. East First Street would not be where it is if we didn't have a responsive Santa Ana Police Department that still continues on this to this day, even after I was recently assaulted in my own apartment by a homeless man. And the response was everything effect with everything that I could expect effective, quick and uniform to not only protect me, a 67 year old disabled man with three screws in his neck, but all the senior citizens that

live with me all the afghan refugees and all those 800 children that go to school each day that i see you should really spend some time outside your own neighborhood and find out what's really happening and talk to our police department okay but again i appreciate the indignation so i'm encouraging everyone to go forward with this audit model i think things will happen people do need to be protected you know we have violent people need to protect against violence we had a gentleman and drive die from a drug overdose he needs to we need to protect the drug dealers so we need

Jennifer L. Hall

our santa ana police department victor your time is up next speaker andre abajian andre can you Can you unmute please?

Jennifer L. Hall

Andre?

Jennifer L. Hall

Mayor and City Council. Hello? Hello? Andre, please proceed with your comments.

Yeah, hi, my name's Andre Abagian. I'm a small business owner over in Santa Ana. I'm on Edinger.

And I've been doing a lot of work in Santa Ana. The room you're sitting in right now, I don't know if you can all hear me or not, but I've done a lot of things in that room. I'm a contractor. And I'm very thankful today to know that you're all enjoying that room because of my hard work.

and I recently on that recently about a year ago my company obtained a you know there's 16 bidders all of St. Anne I went to go bid on the job but I completely renovated the sixth floor of the

Jennifer L. Hall

council Andre this meeting is limited to comments on the police oversight Commission are you

addressing that okay with police oversight Commission I can go ahead and help everyone everyone over there, everyone write this down.

Susan Bassey, B, Bassey with a B like boy. And you give her a call, she'll wipe it up real quick. Susan Bassey, check out her YouTube channel.

Thank you.

Jennifer L. Hall

Mayor and City Council that concludes the public speakers this evening.

Valerie Amezcua

Thank you very much Madam City Clerk. Thank you to those who came up to speak. The only item today is a Police Oversight Commission ordinance. Mr. City Manager may we please have the staff presentation. However before we start I would like to be very clear, very transparent with the community. This meeting was not called 72 hours ago so I want to be clear because when people come up here and say false information or tell lies this meeting i asked for in the beginning of

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

january is that correct mr city manager actually the first direction came back in july if i believe and so the the objective at that point was to try to coordinate a meeting with all customers were available our our clerk of the council sent multiple emails and uh to ensure we could get a forum eventually after over six months we were able to consolidate a month where most if the majority if not the all of the customers were available and so we scheduled that in compliance with the Brown Act thank you that is correct

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

so that the statement earlier about I called us within 72 hours is not accurate and so thank you for clarifying that I really appreciate it and as you can tell there's five of us here and we all appreciate those that are here so So again, the only item today is the Police Oversight Commission ordinance. Mr. City Manager, may we please have a staff presentation at this time? Thank you.

MR.

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

Yes. Jack Morris, our Oversight Director, will do the presentation and we'll have the city. Thank you.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

So, Mr. Morse, just to quickly add, you'll give the presentation and then at that point the Councilmembers will be asking questions, okay? Thank you. Absolutely.

Thank you, Mayor.

Mayor, members of city council, and members of the community, thank you all for being here tonight as we continue to discuss the ordinance that establishes the Police Oversight Commission and the role of the Independent Oversight Director.

I've been asked to provide some information to the City Council about various oversight models and how they may be implemented here in Santa Ana. So tonight we'll be talking a little bit about changes in law that are relevant to the type of work that the Police Oversight Commission is doing. We'll go through an overview of the current ordinance that is in place. We'll talk about other options that the City Council may consider. This includes a pattern practice model as well as a hybrid model that incorporates aspects of both an investigations model which is currently in place and a pattern practice model. We'll talk about input

that members of the Police Service Site Commission provided regarding the ordinance and potential changes, and then we'll talk about next steps.

If I can get my clicker to work.

Phil BacerraItem 1

Do you notice?

Sorry, technical difficulties. Okay. I want to talk a little bit about AB 847, which is a new law recently passed in California. Next slide.

So, AB 847 was introduced by Dr. Sharp Collins in the 79th Assembly District. So, AB 847 changes PC 832.7, which dictates what types of information and officer personnel files can be released to the public. The law was signed by Governor Newsom on October 6 of 2025 and it just became effective a few weeks ago on January 1st of this year. Now the goal of this law is to clarify and expand which records an oversight entity may may access. Now it does not make those

records public under the Public Records Act. So it's about what police oversight bodies can access, not about what the public can access. So even though the oversight body may be gaining access to new information, that doesn't mean that that the public gets to see that information. Next slide.

So a little bit of background here. Penal Code 832.7 is that section of the penal code which dictates which elements of an officer's personnel file may be released to the public pursuant to a Public Records Act request. Now under PC 832.7, certain information may be released regardless of whether or not the underlying findings were sustained. So for example investigations regarding officer involved shootings and use of force incidents that result in great bodily injury, that information can be released to the public regardless of whether or

not the allegations were sustained or not. Now other information under the penal code can only be released if the underlying findings were sustained. This includes investigations regarding allegations of dishonesty, discrimination, sexual harassment, and excessive force. Now prior to January 1st of 2026 under PC 832.7, the the the Penal Code clarified that that only applied to the public, it did not apply to other investigatory bodies such as a District

Attorney's Office or post investigators who are investigating officer misconduct. Now it did not create that same carve-out for police oversight commissions. So police oversight commissions arguably were still contained by the framework of PC 832.7. This created a problem because some law enforcement agencies would not provide officer personnel records unless they they could also be released publicly. So we saw this come to a head in LA County. The LA County Police Oversight Commission or Sheriff's Oversight Commission

subpoenaed the Sheriff's Department for records regarding various officer personnel files. The Sheriff's Department declined and filed a lawsuit to resolve that issue. Next slide.

So it appears as if AB 847 was passed to address this issue. So now under the new penal code, civilian oversight bodies are expressly authorized to access confidential officer personnel records for oversight investigations and related proceedings. Now again, oversight bodies must maintain confidentiality so they must be disclosed and discussed in closed session and those that That information cannot be released publicly, but now police oversight commissions can gain access to confidential personnel records. Next slide.

So the exact language of the Penal Code now reads that the personal records of peace officers and consensual officers and records maintained by a state or local agency are confidential. This section does not apply to investigations or proceedings concerning the conduct of peace officers conducting by a grand jury, a district attorney's office, the AG's office, or post, and here's the new language, or civilian oversight board or commissions for a law enforcement agency. Oops.

All right, so for current ordinance, I'll talk a little bit about the current structure, the current framework that is now in place. The current structure focuses on conducting investigations of individual officers. So the ordinance in place gives the oversight director authority to investigate officers alleged to have engaged in 10 types of misconduct. Now each investigation is duplicative of an IA investigation. Per policy, whenever the police department becomes aware of an allegation of misconduct, IA has to investigate that that allegation. Also when when complaints come in to the

Police Oversight Commission, they are immediately forward to the police department as well. So IA is conducting investigations of each or addressing each complaint that comes into the Police Oversight Commission. So if the Police Oversight Director also conducts an investigation, it's duplicative. Now under the current ordinance, the Oversight Director may also audit complaint files and review policies. Now following any investigation that the Oversight Director conducts, the Oversight Commission may direct the Oversight Director to investigate further. It can forward those findings

and recommendations to the city manager and for sustained findings it can also include disciplinary recommendations. Now under the current ordinance those ten categories that the oversight director can investigate are as follows officer involved shootings ending in death, in custody deaths, uses use of force incidents resulting in great bodily injury, discrimination, dishonesty, sexual assault, unlawful arrest or search, excessive force, failure to intervene when another officer uses excessive force, and interference with First

Amendment activities. Something to keep in mind is our current budgetary constraints. So a simple complaint investigation regarding one subject, two and two witnesses will cost around $15,000 on average. More complex Complex investigations will be more than twice that. An investigation with 10 witnesses and 10 hours of body-worn camera footage to review could cost $40,000 or more. And the police oversight director has an annual budget of around $125,000. So that averages out to about three complex investigations per year without any other work completed.

Some problematic issues with the current structure in place. It conflicts with the city charter because under the current structure the oversight director reports to City Council and is put in place by City Council which conflicts with the city with the city manager form of government established by city charter. There's also a lack of clarity regarding the process and the extent to which complainants can be informed of what action may be taken regarding complaints that they file with the with the Oversight Commission. So that's the

current structure that is in place. Now back in the summer of 2025 an ad hoc commission was created to consider revisions to the current ordinance. The ad hoc Commission worked with the police department, the city attorney's office, and the City Manager's Office to consider how it might be revised and that was presented to that was presented in in July to the public. Under the July revision by the ad hoc committee the Police Oversight Director may only review complaints after the IA investigation is completed. The Oversight

Director is authorized under this model is still authorized to review the same categories of complaints as dictated in the current ordinance. Completed IA investigations are thus reviewed by the oversight director who then forwards their recommendations to the police oversight commission. Then it's forwarded to the chief with with recommendations regarding the outcome. The chief makes the final determination. Also under the revised ordinance put put forth in July, the oversight director may audit IA files regarding those same

ten categories of alleged misconduct. Other changes included in the July revisions, so the July version maintains consistency with the city charter, with the city charter city manager form of government, and it does also affirm the police oversight director's advisory and independent role. Language from the revisions say the police oversight director independent from the police department provides a review of analysis and recommendations on police practices with the revisions contemplated in the July draft it does not require a

charter amendment now just for context context here sometimes people talk about the system that that is in place in in Oakland that system was put in place place because it did go to the voters who voted to pass measure L which did change the the city charter that is not required here in Santa Ana with the changes contemplated in the July revision that would shift the reporting structure of the police oversight director to the city manager

the July revision also includes additional training requirements eight hour ride along within 90 days of a commissioner's appointment. Commissioners should also must also attend a SAPD community academy not the actual police academy but a community citizens academy within 18 months. That Academy is provided twice a year and each course is approximately two to three hours and provides training on things such as communications, patrol Patrol operations, jail operations, crime scene investigations, internal affairs, that type of thing. So that's an overview of what was proposed in July by the ad hoc.

Let's move on to another option, and this is a pattern and practice model in which the police oversight director would focus on identifying and addressing patterns of misconduct within the Santa Ana Police Department. So, moving forward as we discuss this model, I'll just talk about how this could look in Santa Ana, not how it must look. If the City Council chooses to move forward with a pattern practice model, the City Council could give the Police Oversight Director broad authority to investigate types of police activity within a certain time frame.

One year. Two years. It wouldn't need to be limited to 10 categories. It could be much broader than that. Not only looking at excessive force, but for example, lack of probable cause or reasonable suspicion for pedestrian stops.

The pattern practice model also with this model, the oversight director would offer recommendations to address the identified misconduct. so it's an oversight director conducts an audit and identifies problems with pedestrian stops or vehicle stops the oversight director could implement or could recommend changes to training policy that type of thing to address those patterns and this would shift the focus of the oversight director from investigating individual officers to into identifying patterns of misconduct

and addressing those patterns. So what types of issues could the police oversight director address with a pattern practice model? Well, audits could look at things like internal affairs investigations, investigations conducted by supervisors, general use of force incidents, use of less lethal weapons, stop and frisk, pet stops, vehicle stops, vehicle pursuits, verbal threats, and conditions with the jail or suicides within the jail. There are various benefits to this approach. One, these investigations may identify

recurring policy violations or the need to change protocols, policies, and training that is currently ongoing within the police department. This type This type of model focuses on changing the culture and preventing future misconduct. So rather than addressing misconduct officer by officer, you're looking for patterns and looking at the root causes of those patterns and addressing those root causes. And the oversight director could look at far more than just three incidents a year in this pattern practice model. model. Arguably, this makes a better use of the POD's limited time and resources.

Some suggested sample language to add to the ordinance is as follows. The Police Oversight Director shall be authorized to conduct a substantive investigations of Police Department policies, protocols, practices, and patterns of conduct that may result in harm to individuals. The Oversight Director will have access to Police Department personnel, documents, data, and information as needed in order to conduct the work of the police oversight director. That type of language is not present in the current framework.

So that's a pattern practice model focused largely on identifying patterns of misconduct. Many jurisdictions have essentially a hybrid model that combines investigations of individual officers with audits, and I'll talk a little bit about how that could look in Santa Ana. So if the City Council so chooses it could create a structure where the police oversight director, where the police oversight commission may authorize the oversight director to investigate certain types of misconduct. The police oversight director for example could be author, the oversight commission could direct the oversight

director to investigate officer-involved shootings under AB 1506. This is the assembly bill that mandates that the California Attorney General must investigate officer-involved shootings where there was no weapon present, where the subject did not have a weapon. So under this model the oversight director could also investigate those officer-involved shootings simultaneously. The commission could also direct the oversight director to investigate use of force incidents that result in death or great bodily injury.

So under this model the Commission could retain the ability to determine exactly what the police oversight director will investigate. So while the oversight director will have the authority to investigate officer-involved shootings under AB 1506, they would not do so until directed to do so by the Police Oversight Commission. So they're retaining that authority to receive complaints and then direct the oversight director to investigate those complaints that that they vote on to to move forward with. Now note that administrative

investigations conducted by the police or flight director while criminal investigations are conducted by the AG's office can move forward simultaneously. So a common practice in jurisdictions throughout California and throughout the country is to toll administrative investigations while the criminal investigation is ongoing that's not a requirement so here in Santa Ana if the City Council so chooses you could create a structure where the police oversight director conducts a simultaneous investigation administrative investigation while the Attorney General is conducting their investigation

criminally in that scenario there would be no need to wait one or more years while the California DOJ completes their investigation. So a potential investigatory caseload under this model would entail a couple of complex investigations per year. So for context since 2008 there's been an average of about two officer-involved shootings in Santa Ana per year and there's been a comparable number of other use of force incidents resulting in great bodily

injury such as canine dog bites. So again each of these investigations could take months meanwhile the oversight director could conduct an unrelated pattern practice investigation to identify ongoing problems within the police department. So I'll talk a little bit about a practical application and and how the pattern practice review has worked elsewhere.

So between 2010 and 2018, I worked for the US Department of Justice in the Civil Rights Division during the Obama administration. While I was there, I was with the Special Litigation Section which was charged with investigating law enforcement agencies across the country. And we were specifically mandated to identify patterns or practices of unconstitutional conduct and address them. Often this was a pattern or practice of excessive use of force or bias-based policing, both violations of the Fourth Amendment. So I'll talk about a case study and I'll talk about how a pattern practice framework

worked in Cleveland, Ohio. So in 2013, the DOJ opened up an investigation of the Cleveland Division of Police in Cleveland, Ohio. Ohio. That investigation came back, came to fruition because of an incident that occurred on November 29, 2012. On this particular night, two African-American individuals, Melissa Williams and Timothy Russell, were driving a car in downtown Cleveland. The car backfired and an officer mistook that bang for a gunshot. The officer initiated a vehicle's pursuit and the car didn't stop.

Eventually, more than 100 officers, Cleveland officers in 62 different patrol cars joined that vehicle pursuit. The pursuit finally came to stop about 30 minutes later after reaching speeds of more than 100 miles per hour. The officers surrounded the subject's vehicle. They discharged charge 137 rounds and both vehicle occupants were killed even though they were unarmed. So that caught DOJ's attention. We opened up a pattern practice investigation and as a during the course of this investigation we were

we reviewed more than 600 use of force incidents including deadly force incidents. We analyzed use of force policies and procedures. We attended a academy and in-service training. We conducted interviews with community members, police department leaders, patrol officers, and commanders, and we assess the police department's internal accountability systems.

So our investigation took about a year and a half, two years, and at the end of it we concluded that officers shoot at people who do not pose an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or to others. We concluded that officers hit people who are handcuffed. They hit people on the head with guns. Accidental discharges routinely occurred by police officers. We noted that CDB Super... Cleveland Division of Police Supervisors found that all 4,427 use of force incidents were justified over the course of four years and officers use of

force was never found to be outside of policy. In between 2005 and 2011, officers used tasers 969 times. All but five were deemed to be justified. So when conducting a review like this, we're looking at not only what the problems are, but what leads to these problems. So in Cleveland, we found that there were inadequate force policies and an inadequate training on the use of force. There was an insufficient focus on de-escalation. De-escalation was not addressed in policy. De-escalation was not addressed

in training. So when out in the field police officers were not appropriately using de-escalation tactics to try to minimize or eliminate the need for force. There was little to no crisis intervention training. Officers were not trained to know how to interact with individuals who are in mental health crisis. Head strikes with firearms were allowed. In fact, on their use of force report there was even a checkbox for head strike with firearm. We found that there were also poor supervisory reviews of use of force incidents. So a use of force would occur, the officer would complete a use of force report, and too

too often that the supervisors would just rubber stamp that report without appropriately applying the law to determine whether or not that use of force was actually reasonable and in policy.

So as a result of our review, we agreed with the city after filing a lawsuit to put into place a settlement agreement that included a number of corrective measures. These included new policies and training regarding de-escalation and crisis intervention, established specialized crisis intervention teams to respond to people who are experiencing mental health crisis, more robust reporting and use of force reviews, a general ban on using your firearm as an impact weapon. Officers were required to document unholstering their their firearms. Why? Too often we found that officers were prematurely

unholstering their firearms and then when going hands-on in a physical altercation with a subject that officer is then limited because they're holding a firearm in their hand. What then happens the officer hits the subject on the head with the gun. We implemented more restrictions regarding the use of tasers and we implemented an early intervention system to track potentially problematic officers. These are implementations that we required to address the policy and procedural deficiencies we found and this is the type of changes that could be implemented in Santa Ana with a robust

pattern and practice framework. So what are the benefits to the pattern practice review and resulting recommendations and new policies and training that we implemented in Cleveland? Well, use of, if you look at the use of force trends, so the new use of force policies and training went into place in 2017, and what we found was that after that, use of force incidents fell by 29%. Now, this is crucial. A lot of times you get pushback by police unions and others who say, look, if you implement more robust policies, training, that type of thing, you're going

going to restrict how our officers can act in the field and officers are going to get hurt. Well what we found was that use of force incidents went down but officer injuries also went down. Overall officers officer injuries went down by 20% and officer injuries specifically related to use of force injuries went down by 22%. Fewer subjects were also injured and crime went down. Again an An argument that we typically hear from police departments is, if you implement these restrictions, crime is going to go up. It didn't happen in Cleveland. Homicide fell, robbery fell, felonious assault fell, et cetera.

So in September, back on September 11, 2025,

Police Oversight Commission met and discussed the current framework and other potential frameworks that the city may may consider and I'll share with you some of the feedback feedback that we received from the Commission in terms of the current ordinance some benefits include that it gives a police oversight director some authority to review policies and ensure best practices are implemented and with authority to investigate ten different types of complaints the police oversight Commission may use a large amount of discretion to select a limited number of investigations or incidents to investigate. Now the consensus was that

trying to investigate every single complaint that came into the police oversight commission would be unrealistic and create an unworkable backlog. In terms of a pattern of practice focus, some observations from the police oversight commission were as follows. A pattern practice framework This framework can create long-term change. Again, you're looking at changing culture, you're looking at changing systems moving forward to prevent misconduct from occurring in the future.

This may result in a decrease of complaints and misconduct moving forward, but single incidents of misconduct may go unresolved if not adequately addressed by IA. and the concern was that restricting the police oversight authority to act until after an IA investigation may result in some adverse outcomes on individual incidents. The general consensus from the police oversight Commission was that the hybrid may be the best option. Many commissioners again did express a need to retain some investigatory powers especially for serious use of

force cases again officer officer involved shootings uh use of force incidents ending in great bodily injury um but the oversight commission did express an interest in tracking recurring complaints to identify policy changes so more of an auditing function there was a sentiment that this balances limited resources with efficacy and effectiveness and provides reassurance to the community provides reassurance to members of the community who have skepticism about the efficacy of

internal affairs so next steps we are looking for direction from the City Council so City Council has before it various broad oversight models the the investigatory model that is currently in place, a pattern and practice model that largely focuses on auditing potentially problematic conduct, and a hybrid model that melds both of these oversight models. Once the city council provides direction as to the type of framework it wants to see in place,

the oversight director will work with city staff to create a draft incorporating City Council's comments and then we'll return that to City Council for consideration. Thank you.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Thank you very much for the presentation. We really appreciate it. Council members, please raise your mic if you'd like to speak.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

We'll go around and around and around for three minutes each time so that we can make sure everybody gets an opportunity to speak. I WANT TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

SO, COUNCILMEMBER VASQUEZ, GO AHEAD.

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

THANK YOU SO MUCH AND THANK YOU MAYOR FOR INVITING ME TO THE COMMITTEE. I LEARNED SO MUCH FROM WORKING WITH THE STAFF AND YOURSELF AND COUNCILMEMBER VECETA. I KNOW THE STAFF AND I APPRECIATE THE STAFF AND THE professionalism it's it's protect the city first right and me i'm a policymaker and i i more believe in transparency let the truth out and that's where i'm coming uh with this and um we even had a opacity manager who did their own investigation on police matters she told me i did an investigation

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

ON THE, WHAT'S THE, KULECHE TOWN PART. I SAID, WOW, THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT FOR A CITY MANAGER TO GO OUT OF THEIR WAY AND PROTECTING THE CITY. THEY HAD THEIR OWN AGENDA. SO WE CAME TO THIS THING AND I WAS TOLD THAT WE COULDN'T HAVE AN INDEPENDENT POLICE OVERSIGHT COMMISSION. THERE'S NOWHERE WHERE IT FIT BUT IT DOESN'T FIT IN. IT CAN'T BE INDEPENDENT. IT CAN'T BE ALONE. BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

BE ALONE. IT COULD BE WITHIN THIS BODY OF SEVEN. IT COULD BE A LEGISLATIVE POLICE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. WE HAVE THAT RIGHT TO HAVE A LEGISLATIVE POLICE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. WE CAN IT COULD BE AN ARM OF THE CITY COUNCIL. SO NOW WE FOUND A HOME FOR THEM TO BE INDEPENDENT. DON'T CALL

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

CITY COUNCIL. AND HERE'S HOW IT SHOULD GO. THE POLICE OVERSIGHT COMMISSION IS THE LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT BODY OF THE CITY AND SHOULD REPORT DIRECTLY AND PRIMARILY TO THE CITY COUNCIL. THE COMMISSION SHOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO THE DIRECTION, SUPERVISION OR CONTROL OF THE CITY MANAGER OR ANY DEPARTMENT HEAD. NOTHING HEREIN SHOULD BE CONSTRUED TO ALTER THE CITY COUNCIL MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT OR CONFER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY UPON COMMISSION. SO NOW WE HAVE have a place for it, that we are granted these rights through state law, that we have right

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

over municipal parts of our city, and this is considered municipal. We're able to do this. So, and we have explicit, we're going to continue with our complicit council manager structure, AND THE OVERSIGHT COMMISSION HAS NO DISCIPLINE, NO OPERATIONS, NO COMMAND AUTHORITY. THEY'RE GOING TO RECOMMEND TO THE POLICE CHIEF AND THE CITY MANAGER.

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

AND THEN WE, THE ORIGINAL ONE, WE'RE ASKING THAT YOU MUST ATTEND OVERSIGHT COMMISSION MEETINGS AT THE CITY MANAGER IN CHIEF. and now we're going to take that off and we're going to say they may attend if requested by the commission or the city council. The commission shall then we're going to fix the reporting recommendations and say the commission shall transmit its findings or recommendations concurrently to the city council, the chief of police and the city manager. The chief of police or city manager should provide a written response to the city council within 60 days.

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

THIS GIVES US THE INFORMATION DIRECTLY AND TRANSPARENTLY AND WE GET TO DECIDE ON WHAT IS DONE. ANY AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT UH WE HAD ANY DISCIPLINARY RECOMMENDATION ISSUED BY THE COMMISSION IS ADVISORY ONLY AND SHOULD NOT CREATE ANY PROPERTY INTEREST EXPECTATION OF OUTCOME OR LIMITATION ON THE LAWFUL DISCRETION OF THE POLICE CHIEF OR CITY MANAGER. SO THEY'RE NOT actually have power they're recommending and the power stays within the chief of police and the

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

city manager and but we're reported on what's happening to from the commission and as uh and then for the budget we should also make sure that we keep the same budget and if there's a a reason to decrease it they should have a written statement upon the new budget coming out so So everything that we said couldn't be done, we figured out by calling it a legislative

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

commission now allows us, it's an arm of the city council.

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

City attorney Cavallo, am I right in this, that we're allowed to create an arm through?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

Yes, your city charter actually allows the city council to vote to create separate bodies, commissions and boards that you may create via ordinance you have created your police commission in that manner that you currently have on the books but you can only empower that Commission with you know powers responsibilities that the law allows you to do and you can only do so in a way that doesn't conflict with your city charter or with state law and so I think so far so good we were headed in that direction staff this evening made some recommendations to you to continue to keep that ordinance that you have consistent. »» Okay.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

»» But your comments are generally in line with the city charter. »» Great.

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

That's all I have for now.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

»» Thank you very much, Council Member Vasquez. Council Member Lopez?

Jessie LopezItem 1

»» Oh, I didn't raise my mic. Thank you.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

»» Yeah, I'm working my way down. Council Member Phan, anything?

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

»» Thank you, Mayor. So a couple of things that I wanted to make sure we clarify. So first, I completely understand the need for the audit model. I understand that there are limited resources as well as limited time for what we can do. And our commissioners are not full time. However, I do support this hybrid model. I do think that there are certain cases, incidences, allegations that are important enough for our commission to review.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

So I'm supportive of any edits necessary to facilitate such a, I guess, hybrid model. It doesn't seem to me that it's necessary to do such extensive edits. I know some of the edits in the draft ordinance are really clean-up language, but or some some clarification, but I guess my question is with the current draft or the ordinance as is, does it prohibit us doing any types of audits? I guess it might be a question for Mr. Morse. It does not. Okay.

It authorizes audits. I would, given my preference, I would include new language that makes clear that the police oversight director has broad authority to conduct various types of audits regarding any type of police conduct, to include pedestrian stops, vehicle stops, issues regarding probable cause, reasonable suspicion, that type of thing.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

And that makes a lot of sense to me because regarding the investigations, it's limited to the approximately seven to 10 categories. I can't remember how many exactly. However, this idea of pedestrian stops or things like that, that's a little bit broader. But like you said, that we can look at patterns or practices. So I would be supportive of that kind of language added in to allow for audits of these types types of alleged patterns or practices, you know, how we can improve, as well as reviewing previous investigations.

Sorry, Councilmember, if I could. The language in the current ordinance says authorize the independent oversight director to audit complaint files and review policies to ensure best practices are implemented.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

I see. So because it's limited to just complaint files, it's a lot narrower than what you would would prefer.

That may be one interpretation.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

Okay. Thanks.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

The other thing, oh, man, I can't read my own handwriting. Okay. On page 4 of 14 of the redlined ordinance, section 2-664 meetings, the second paragraph The paragraph which is read in red says if a commissioner wishes to propose an item for placement on a future meeting agenda, the commissioner shall prepare a written memorandum describing the proposed item and after consulting with the police oversight director and the city manager, et cetera, et cetera. That to me reads as because I know there have been some comments or discussions about the

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

police oversight commission making recommendation, policy, suggestions to the city council as a body, not as individual commissioners. That language here seems to allow that. Am I reading it correctly?

»» Sorry, where are you exactly and in which version are you reading from?

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

»» So it's page 4 of 14 of the red lined ordinance on section 2-664. The second paragraph, it's in all red.

The language beginning with if a commissioner wishes to propose an item for placement on the future meeting agenda.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

Yes. So that I understand is directly regarding let's say, you know, if I'm a commissioner I'm a commissioner and I want to add something about use of military equipment onto the agenda. It's kind of like our council member requested items.

Yes, that's correct.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

So, but I guess my question is if I wanted to say, hey, I want a resolution to say this is what the body of the commission wants to recommend to the city council relating to to military equipment. Can I do that under that provision?

As I understand it, City Councilmember, this dictates how that would come to the

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

But not what can come through. But not what? So thank you. So I would like to make sure that we can allow such recommendations. It's my understanding, for example, the Planning Commission. We have policy review of planning planning documents, the general plan, or even projects, and the resolutions might be resolution recommending the city council approve, disapprove, et cetera. Or for example, Parks and Rec Commission, they reviewed the Parks Master Plan. And I can imagine that the Police Oversight Commission may have a majority vote or a singular

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

particular voice on any particular policy ideas or issues. I guess because in the past we've had, I think some commissioners talk about how, you know, they didn't want to just come as individuals to talk to the city council members individually or something, or not coming as just a member of the public, but to make specific recommendations to the city council. So I want to see that that language which specifically allows that type of activity be added into the ordinance.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

It should be.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

Do you think it's on there?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

Okay. If you can. »» The way I read this is the powers and duties of the Police Oversight Commission in section 2-665, subsections A through FG all the way through. I think that first category A is simply saying you're saying the Commission shall review on page 4 of 14 right in subsection a mm-hmm yes they shall review evaluate and make recommendations they can make recommendations that's their jurisdiction so they can make recommendations to the city to the they can make recommendations and actually doesn't even say who to specifically just as they can make recommendations regarding police department policies

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

well it says to the city manager right so I think how it usually works but they

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

can always make a recommendation that's going to come before you and the City City Council, regardless of what authority they have, can always direct your City Manager to work or review something based on a recommendation you get from one of your commissions.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

Right. So I guess I just want to make it clear that it can go, especially if it's a policy issue, go to the City Council. Because I understand when it's an administrative or procedural type of implementation that goes to the City Manager that's under a charter, but there are going to be certain policy issues that I think could be and should be recommended to the City Council for a

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

discussion yeah I think we could add a sentence it just says their recommendations at their discretion can be sent to directly to the City Council because the recommendation right like this is city manager form of government so it's the city manager who forwards it on to you anyway right and my issue

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

isn't with our city manager because right you can have administrative administrative processes that facilitate these types of policies going forward or prevent these types of policies from going forward. And if we have someone say who is not so willing to bring an item onto the agenda, that could be a problem. Again, not anyone here, but what I have to think about is what it's going to be like in 15 years.

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

So more to second the City Attorney's comments. One, this mirrors the similar process that city council members get to bring an item before city council because majority approval, staff gets to work, they will bring it back for follow-up. That's the distinction we're making here. The secondary aspect, as you indicated, you're right, it's not about the current city council or me as particular as Alvaro Nunez, but you're right, the position. So, and I think for us, we're trying to be mutually exclusive, more open about understanding

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

what that means so that as community members have often said, get the work, start working on this.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

Thank you. I know my three minutes are up, but I have some other items I can back up.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

I'm going to go to Councilman Hernandez. He did put his mic up first and then I'll come back to you, okay? Okay. Thank you. I appreciate it. Councilman Hernandez.

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 1

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I want to thank my colleagues for showing up to today's council meeting and members members of the public. This is a very difficult item to debate because I have attended every council meeting since I've been elected in 2020 and I've not seen enough people show up to this dais and demand that this commission be changed. So I'm very concerned as to where the desire to change this is coming from. At a time where state sanctioned violence is at its height, we are seeing Santa Ana, the City Council attempt to roll back policies that address misconduct and

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 1

major liabilities to the city. There's a history of police misconduct in Santa Ana and the reason why we were forced to create police oversight was because the public was having to provide oversight for us in the form of auditing us, cop watching, filming, ensuring that people's vehicles were not illegally seized because they were immigrants, making sure that children could safely walk in their neighborhoods and that they shouldn't be policed because they're wearing a baggy sweater. This history of police misconduct has cost taxpayers 24.5 million dollars since 2010 to 2020. From 2020 to 2025, taxpayers have paid over

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 1

five million dollars in liabilities related to car accidents for our very own police department. There is no other department in the city that is costing

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 1

IN 2023 NOT ONLY WERE WE RIDDLED WITH THE ISSUES OF HAVING TO PAY OUT LIABILITY LAWSUITS IN 2023 A FORMER CITY MANAGER FILED A CLAIM WITH THE CITY ALLEGING THE POA OF CONTROLLING THE CITY THROUGH THE MAYOR. OUR MAYOR WAS THE ONLY ELECTED WHO WAS ALLEGED OVER 14 TIMES ON THAT DOCUMENT. THE CITY PAID OUT A SETTLEMENT THAT NEARED $600,000. DECEMBER 1ST THE MAYOR WAS of 2024, Noe Rodriguez was shot 28 plus times. 30 days later, Henry Gonzalez Jr. was shot.

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 1

June 2025, we saw ICE come into our community. We saw our own police department brutalize the public while they were not in compliance with state law for their militarized equipment. equipment. In 2025, shortly after this violence, Mayor Valeria Mesquita created an ad hoc committee. I was the first appointed member of the ad hoc committee to author the very oversight commission that is now attempted to be rolled back. That occurred shortly after Brandon Lopez was murdered on September 28th of 2021. The only sitting member of that ad hoc who who was an elected, who voted on police oversight, was Phil Becerra.

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 1

The three members of the ad hoc were Mayor Valeria Mescua, who was not elected when we introduced this ordinance, Mayor Pro Tem Benjamin Vasquez, who was not elected at that time, and of course, the third being Phil Becerra. It requires two members of that ad hoc to have a majority, and it wasn't a secret that Phil Becerra voted in favor of police oversight in 2022. However, with having Mayor Emescu at the helm of this ad hoc, we know that the police interests to attempt to control the city, there's too much at stake. And to have members of this ad hoc who were going to utilize it to engage in a democratic

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 1

debate, I don't believe that's what we saw. We are now seeing in 2026 the murder of Renee Good, Keith Porter, and Alex Preti. We are seeing an increase in violence. This violence that ICE is exhibiting all throughout our streets, they are taking the model from the police departments. This is a two-pronged issue. In order for us to continue to keep our residents safe, we must not roll back on the initiatives that are designed to improve this police department, to help reestablish trust with this community that they serve.

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 1

and I don't think rolling back on these initiatives is going to do that so I will place a motion on the floor to keep the police oversight Commission and the

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

ordinance as is Thank You councilman Hernandez councilmember Sarah Thank You

Phil BacerraItem 1

madam mayor councilmember Hernandez it's a work-safe session there's no actions I don't believe we're gonna be taking tonight correct this is just we're just gonna give direction okay I just want to make sure so I want to thank everybody that came out tonight whether I agree or disagree with you I I think it's important to recognize that you guys are here in our chambers tonight and recognize the fact that you're here in a peaceful way. You're here in a way where the council, despite what some might think, some of us are jotting notes down up here, but we're listening to you. And I appreciate you guys coming in.

Phil BacerraItem 1

But I am going to give you some inconvenient facts that might ruin your political narrative for this evening. So I think a lot of you like to reference some members up here as being supported by the Police Officers Association, right? including myself. But for those of you that aren't paying attention back in 2022, who introduced having a police oversight commission? Not just voted on it, as Councilmember Hernandez said, who introduced it? It was myself and Councilmember Panaloza, two people that were supported by the Police Officers Association. Okay, they didn't ask us to introduce this. We knew it was the right

Phil BacerraItem 1

thing to do. So I just want to make sure that that's clear. There is also insinuation about THE EFFORT THAT'S BEFORE US TONIGHT, WHO INITIATED IT? I'M GOING TO ASK OUR CITY ATTORNEY. WHO INITIATED THIS EFFORT BEFORE US THIS EVENING?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

I BELIEVE IT WAS THE TWO OF YOU COUNCIL MEMBERS. WHAT DO YOU MEAN, THIS TONIGHT? OKAY, LET ME CLARIFY.

Phil BacerraItem 1

SO THE ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED. VERY HASTILY, THOUGH, BACK IN 2022. BUT SO THIS IDEA OF HAVING TO REVISE THE ORDINANCE, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY COUNCIL MEMBER BRINGING THAT FORWARD. In fact, if my understanding is correctly.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

It was a staff-driven recommendation to revise the ordinance based on inconsistencies with the charter at the time, which were perceived inconsistencies with state law, which have been resolved through the new legislation. And an overall.

Phil BacerraItem 1

No, no, that's okay. But just right now, just the simple question is, it was not initiated.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

By the city council.

Phil BacerraItem 1

By the city council.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

It was not.

Phil BacerraItem 1

Was it initiated by the mayor?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

No.

Phil BacerraItem 1

Was the ad hoc created just out of thin air or was it because staff was asking us to, or asking the mayor to create an ad hoc?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

The staff specifically asked the mayor if you could create an ad hoc so we could address these issues.

Phil BacerraItem 1

So between you and Mr. City Manager, did the POA contact you asking to create an ad hoc?

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

No.

Phil BacerraItem 1

Did the POA contact you asking to amend the ordinance? Did they call you asking to do this?

No.

Phil BacerraItem 1

Mayor Redekopal, Okay, so I have to inform some of the speakers tonight, who many of whom were probably paid to be here anyways. It's a very inconvenient truth for you guys that this isn't POA driven. This is because our staff brought this to our attention. I want to see this thing succeed. I want to see it succeed. And so when our staff, our professional staff says you may want to look into this, again, prior to state legislation amending certain things that were out of conflict, which brings That brings me to, and I'll throw it up in the air whether it's the city attorney or Jack or whomever.

Phil BacerraItem 1

So we talk about 832.7 being amended in the penal code, penal code section 832.7. But in the staff report from way back in July, we talk about 832.5 and 832.8 being out of compliance. And looking at 832.8, that's merely definitions of personnel records. So with 832.5, are we still out of compliance? If we do not touch the ordinance, we say, you know what? Thanks for asking us to change it, staff, but we're not going to, we're just gonna leave it as is. Are we out of compliance with 832.5?

832.5 is a portion of the penal code that requires the Santa Ana Police Department, all law enforcement agencies to conduct internal investigations of citizen's complaints. It also creates a retention period for the police department for sustained investigations where the finding is sustained. So is the question, is the current ordinance out of compliance with 832.5? No, the current ordinance is not out of compliance. It simply creates a commission that also can investigate. Santa Ana Police Department is going to continue to investigate citizen complaints under their statutory obligation of 832.5.

Phil BacerraItem 1

Okay, thank you, because I know 832.5 was cited in the staff report back in July.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

I understand that. And I think the reason for that is we were just trying to reconcile processes so they would be consistent with that state law that we have to follow and we wanted to make sure that the new provision that The provisions the ordinance were gonna match up with that state law So when this first came to you what had happened is various departments had looked at this at the ordinance We were getting into the point in time. We're gonna hire an independent oversight director We started to take that critical look as you mentioned the ordinance was adopted quickly

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

the ordinance was adopted and when its original form was adopted quickly some of us asked for some more time to evaluate to analyze and so when we had more time with our with our new city manager some of these issues were brought to your attention I do think that in our staff report we we said well there's inconsistencies we could have been clearer we could have said 832.5 isn't the problem it's the provisions of the ordinance but it was so we didn't want to leave you with the impression that it was that was inconsistent but we wanted to do better and that's that's where we came forward

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

with the new revisions we just wanted to make it perfect and i appreciate that madam city attorney

Phil BacerraItem 1

i just want to highlight for everybody that one thing you did say this was brought to us very quickly back then in other words we had an ad hoc committee as councilmember hernandez mentioned myself councilmember hernandez and councilmember lopez and i've said this on the dais publicly i think we were doing a good job we were taking a lot of time we were grinding out a lot of the details there were times where there were two of us one way two of us the other way but nonetheless the rug was pulled out from under us by the mayor at that time which was not valerie

Phil BacerraItem 1

mesqua it was sarmento that pulled the rug out from under us and rushed it which was very convenient given the election calendar in 2022 so it was rushed and now the city attorney and staff and this council are now having to look at cleaning it up so i just want to make sure that that is very very clear um one thing with the ad hoc this current ad hoc the one with myself the mayor and then pro tem vasquez was a lot of what came into july into that um draft uh ordinance a lot of it was agreed upon unanimously not everything not everything but there were a lot

Phil BacerraItem 1

of things that came before us that were unanimous um just a couple things i want to throw out um The enhanced training for commissioners, I would hope nobody would be against that. I'm sure there probably is some. That's fine. But I think making sure that our commissioners are trained, given what a sensitive issue this is, I would hope nobody would be opposed to that. One of my concerns, and I'm going to throw this out to you guys, when it comes to investigations, one of my concerns from the very beginning, I mean, we're going way back before the ordinance was rushed through, was if we're going to

Phil BacerraItem 1

have a commission do investigations, the timing is the concern for me because of the fact that, and I forget where this is legislated, but we, I'm sorry, officers are afforded only a one-year period before they would, not officers, I guess chief command staff are only afforded one year to conduct an investigation and issue discipline, correct?

In general, yes. The clock starts at the date that someone with the authority to investigate that issue becomes aware of the issue. That clock can be told in certain circumstances, such as if there is an ongoing criminal investigation, that stops the clock on the administrative investigation.

Phil BacerraItem 1

Right. Thank you for that. And so one of my concerns has always been this, I think, lofty expectation that's not realistic in that there are going to be instances where IA is conducting their investigation. IA is going to move at a pace where they're going to want to get through it as quickly as possible. possible, but given that the Police Oversight Commission is not going to be neck and neck with the PD investigations, there is a chance that at some point, because I know there are folks that want to see the commission also suggest recommended discipline, and I think

Phil BacerraItem 1

what we're setting ourselves up for is a letdown because you're not going to always have that ability. I think the clock, which is not a city issue, this is above us, that clock will run out. And so by the time the Police Oversight Commission is looking at these investigations, you're already going from investigation to audit. Because at that point, the investigation is completed, the chief, the city manager have agreed upon discipline, and now the Police Oversight Commission is still looking at the case. Is that a fair assessment?

That is certainly an issue that would need to be addressed, so you're right. and that's that that process is not clear in the current ordinance but but but you're right with parallel admin investigations if the IA investigation concludes more quickly than the POC investigation then that that clock is still running on the one-year time limit and then it's a matter of delivering delivering both the results of both investigations to the chief who is the decision maker on

discipline with a sufficient amount of time for the chief to make that decision within that one year. Okay, thank you.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Senator Serik, can I come back to you please?

Phil BacerraItem 1

To quote you, Mayor, I'm going to forget something. So just let me finish this one question, then you can come back. That is, so when we talk about officer-involved shootings, right, many of them, and I forget get the exact specifics, but many of them not only go to the district attorney, but they also go to the state attorney general, correct?

It's either or.

Phil BacerraItem 1

Either or. Okay. So this isn't something where there's an officer involved shooting, IA investigates it, IA conveniently says, like you were mentioning in Cleveland, nope, all the shootings are all justified, that's it. There's always going to be somebody auditing it. and beyond the POC there's always going to be an entity auditing that

investigation correct there will be an entity investigating it I'm sorry that's

Phil BacerraItem 1

a better way to say there's another entity investigating now to be clear

that any investigation conducted by the DA or the AG is a criminal investigation that applies a criminal standard so that's the investigator or the prosecutor there is looking at whether or not at trial they could prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt. A different standard applies to administrative investigations, whether conducted by IA or the police oversight director. That's a preponderance of the evidence standard. So a much lower standard, and you're looking at not whether or not criminal charges could be filed, but whether policy was violated. Okay, but in that point though, so criminal

Phil BacerraItem 1

in the sense that when we hear people come in the audience and say, you know, we got to fire certain police officers, right? So that preponderance of, I guess, of proof, at that point, that's something that isn't just simply, how do I say this? This isn't something where it's just arbitrary, like we're going to fire somebody. In other words, this is something that's being investigated not internally, solely, but also at the criminal threshold by either the district attorney or the the State Attorney General.

Right, so two different investigations, the criminal investigation as to whether or not the officers could be charged criminally, and then the administrative investigation regarding whether or not the officers violated policy, and if so, then what discipline would be appropriate up to and including termination.

Phil BacerraItem 1

I'll just say right now that, you know, it's funny, we all talk about our First Amendment rights, don't forget the other part of the Constitution that talks about due process. So I'll come back, thank you, ma'am.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

Councilmember, I want to respond to something because I think it's really important for you to understand and the community to understand. I'm sorry, Mayor, but the Councilmember raises a very good issue. Right now, if we have an officer-involved shooting in our community, we, the police department, we wait because that matter might be referred by the DA's office, that criminal standard that was just explained to you. It might be submitted to the Attorney General's office for a full-blown investigation. An investigation by bodies that have multiple investigators and investigation tools that

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

we would never have, right, without a significant investment in terms of independence. What you have right now to investigate, Mr. Morris, and the resources he brings to the table. Remember that some of those investigations are taking a very long time. I do not think that we have gotten back anything from the Attorney General's office. this. And our DA's investigations, I want to make sure I'm saying this correctly, but I think there are 12, maybe 12 to 14 months, 18 months. So one of the concerns, because this is very important as to why, because I want the public to understand why did we make this recommendation?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

Why are we saying that the auditor model might be better for us? Is because we know from experience that these investigations are taking anywhere from 18 18 months to years.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

And we have one person to do that. So it is a resource allocation issue, but it's also a reasoned recommendation to you based on what can we begin to do to make sure that we're addressing problems quickly. We want to see the ordinance implemented. By the way, we're ready to go. We have our independent director. We've hired the administrative analyst that you put into the budget and asked us to hire. And we've got two of our attorneys in the city attorney's office that are ready to go. So I just wanted to say that because I think the public needs to understand like why are we making the recommendation?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

No one is anti POC. No one is saying get rid of it What we're trying to do is give you a tool to evaluate the operations, right? And that that's what we're doing So I just want to make sure that we know that the public understands that this is a true

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

Professional recommendation that you're getting from people who work in this area day in and day out Thank You Madame City Attorney now

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

It's a beautiful explanation. I appreciate it. Thank you Council Member Lopez please.

Jessie LopezItem 1

Thank you. I wanted to know how many community meetings has the city hosted about the changes that they want to make to the ordinance?

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

other than presentations to the police oversight commission and the ones held here at the city council unless you're referring to separate meetings like in the neighborhoods.

Jessie LopezItem 1

So we've had zero outreach with the community about how they feel about the preferential recommendations that SAPD is making.

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

All public presentations have been at the formal settings, either the police oversight commission meetings or at the city council meetings.

Jessie LopezItem 1

Got it. So again, no community meetings, right? Like outside in the community? The way we treat any other subjects, like if we're going to like expand a street or try to reduce the lane, sometimes we go out there?

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

Correct.

Jessie LopezItem 1

Okay, thank you.

Jessie LopezItem 1

I'm also trying to understand, and if I'm not mistaken, I think you mentioned the city attorney. But what currently in the ordinance, what language is conflicting with state law?

Currently, when we first looked at it back in July with the ad hoc revisions, the The new bill had not yet been introduced or passed. And so at that time, there were confidentiality issues as it relates to peace officer personnel records. The new law has changed that structure, which is what Director Morse outlined in his presentation.

Jessie LopezItem 1

So currently, what is in conflict with state law?

Currently, there are charter issues as outlined in the presentation. Okay.

Jessie LopezItem 1

Okay. I would like to see a slide of just the language that is in conflict with state law or federal law. I think for digestion, not just of the policymakers, but for the community, I think that would be helpful. Because it's a little confusing to say that that there were issues but new state bills resolved them and then to say there's issues with our charter. So I would like to have that information be clarified.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

»» I just want to make sure we understand. So when this was first brought forward there were some issues with the state law now have been largely resolved. There were issues with the charter. Some of those recommendations were made. And I do know because this is a workshop meeting we can get back to you. We did break down the ordinance and we have a chart with every section that was made that we made right in the ad hoc meetings We had a chart that had every section that we were making Recommendations for changes and the reasons why now some of those reasons were just staff preferences

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

Some of them were for operational cleanup. Some of them were for efficiency, but there is a there is a chart I'm looking at now that we can share with the council so you understand and by staff

Jessie LopezItem 1

it's your office and and then Sunana Police Department.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

Well, it was actually city manager office input, city attorney's office input. What happened at the time that we decided we were gonna review it is everyone took an independent review and look at it, and then we all came together and put all of our comments together. So for example, there might have been comments from the city manager's office on a charter issue that we said, no, that's not inconsistent with the charter, we'll leave that comment out. Or maybe there was something the PD said, we'd like to propose this. And we said, well, that's not a legal conflict, but we understand that's an efficiency issue, so we'll keep that in.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

So it was just kind of a collaborative process that we made the recommendations to the Ad Hoc Committee.

I think that one change that was warranted under the charter is in the current ordinance, and I can be corrected if I'm wrong here, Ms. City Attorney, but in the current ordinance, the Police Oversight Director reports to City Council, and in the revision in July, the Oversight Director reports to City Manager, which I think is in keeping with the framework established by the city charter.

Jessie LopezItem 1

Yeah, and that I can understand because that is complementary to what the charter says, right? Whether that is my preference or not, I can see why you would want to line that up to match the government style of this city. So not necessarily completely against those, again, preferential recommendations, because when I look at the chart, that's what they all are. It's just preference. It's not necessarily that we're in a direct violation of state law or federal law, as I understand it.

Jessie LopezItem 1

And so I'm trying to get a better understanding of these changes, who specifically is recommending these changes. And I think for me, I would actually, one of the changes here is that, you know, investigations can't necessarily, like from previous months or years, right, be submitted, as I understand it correctly. And so I would actually be opposed to that because I think that so much has happened in one year that our community deserves the right to pursue justice. and so that's going to be language that you guys are recommending to strike that

Jessie LopezItem 1

I'm not going to be in support of so that's just one of the recommendations but I did want to get clarity half the city received you know feedback that we're going to be sued if we don't change this this ordinance I I can tell

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

you that at one point in a in a separate discussion with legal counsel for the POA they expressed some concern about about the ordinance and how it was going to be implemented there was no direct like we're going to see you over this ordinance it was we will watch carefully to see how this is implemented and at the time under the existing law i had concerns that if we implemented it under that existing law we would potentially be successfully sued so that there was a conversation yes by the poa i mean the poa which is it is their job as the bargaining unit

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

to look out after the interest of their membership and so in looking out the membership they did make the statement that look your ordinance when you put into practice and again not with the new law that we have under ab847 under the old law they said we will look carefully and we believe that it's going to violate the due process and potentially even do pobar rights of our officers and that was one of the reasons why i as your city attorney said yeah i'd like to go back and take a second look at this because i'm trying to reduce your your exposure so thank you for that clarifying

Jessie LopezItem 1

State and City Attorney and I know today is just more of a workshop but I again I would really recommend the city go out and take into account into consideration our community especially everything that we've experienced this past year even the things that we're seeing now where you have a former people that used to work here making fun of the of the city for what is happening because of the federal government you know current employees of the department that think it's funny. And so I don't even want to begin to have that conversation tonight because I am so upset about the things that are going on.

Jessie LopezItem 1

And so again, go out to the community, hear directly from them what they've experienced, what they would like to see reflected in this ordinance, and then come back to this council with recommendations. At least the things that my office cares about are things that are direct in conflict with state law, which I'm hearing not a whole lot is. We want to clean up language here to be in compliant or to mirror the language of the charter, which, again, those are stylistic changes. But, you know, for the majority of these issues, you're not necessarily going to have my support to change all of the language that currently exists.

Jessie LopezItem 1

So thank you.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Thank you, Council Member Lopez. Okay, so my turn here. Let me have a shot at this. Council Member Penalosa, you have nothing?

No, no.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Okay, perfect. Perfect. So Madam City Attorney, again, I want to thank you for your comments earlier. So just to be clear, so, you know, it's a silly season of elections. So we know 2026, every meeting will be a little interesting. So Madam City Attorney, once again, who was on the

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

ad hoc in the very first time? Very first ad hoc committee, and forgive me if any of you were Mayor Pro Tem at the time, but Council Member Becerra, Council Member Hernandez, and Council Member member Lopez were on the very first ad hoc committee to address this issue after council members Penaloza and council member Becerra proposed that we look into a commission.

Phil BacerraItem 1

Point of order. We weren't addressing this issue. We were part of the ad hoc, myself, council member Hernandez, and council member Lopez, to draft the original ordinance, not to

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

address this issue. No, no. But that proposed an original ordinance is what you guys were appointed to do. Then the secondary ad hoc. I'm sorry. Clarification. The ad hoc was council member

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Hernandez, Council Member Becerra, and Council Member Lopez or Panelosa? Lopez? Lopez. Okay,

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

okay go ahead Madam City Chair. Yeah so I'm just saying that it was initiated though by the other two Council Members in the beginning then it became an ad hoc committee then we started working on the ordinance we were making a lot of progress we still had concerns about consistency with the charter there were proposals on the table to have these totally independent investigations that conflicted with our charter and the state law because other cities had done so so we were receiving input on a model that was from other cities that actually changed their charter so

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

once we got through that we thought we were making progress but then there was a push you know we answered to the majority of the city council there was a push to go forward with the ordinance we had a meeting in these chambers the former city manager was here and we said look if you want to try to make this happen we'll try to draft it in the safest way we can but we still believe that that there may be potential problems. So that ordinance got adopted, even though some of your professional staff was saying, look, we can't guarantee you that this is gonna work. We can't guarantee you that we're not gonna get that claim

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

from a bargaining unit. We're not gonna get a complaint from an officer, or we're not gonna get a complaint from a citizen that we're in violation of the charter, and we move forward. And quite frankly, this council and the city was experiencing some administrative changes within your management leadership, and the ordinance kind of sat there for a while. But as we began to implement it again, as you had a new city manager, we implemented it. We saw it as a new opportunity to move forward and to fix it.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

And it was at our initiative that we came forward and said to you, and I remember sending an email to the council saying, this is our opportunity to potentially look at this. Do you want to look at it? And the answer that we got back from the council was, let's appoint the ad hoc committee and we'll go look at it. And that's what we did. We looked at it. We got staff together. We put them together, each staff department that was involved put in their input and then we took those items to the ad hoc. We actually listed them like in a chart and we just started to work on them item by item.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

For those of you that are in the ad hoc, you may recall it was very tedious work because we went through each item by item.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Thank you, Madam City Attorney, for correcting the information that was shared because this mayor did not call an ad hoc. It was requested by the City Manager's Office, your office and professional staff. staff. So as we go into 2026, there'll be a lot more lies and false information about the mayor's calling for this or the mayor's calling for that. When I came aboard, there was a discussion about this item. We were asked to create an ad hoc. The three of us, Councilman, Member Vasquez, myself, Councilman Becerra, we met with all of you several times

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

for long meetings, went through everything, and as Councilman Becerra had indicated, for For the most part, we all agreed on things. There are a few things that the three of us did not agree on, and we worked them out, and we agreed to disagree agreeably. There was no screaming, no yelling, no fighting, no being disrespectful. We asked a lot of questions and got our answers. So I want to thank the staff for that. Jack, you, I just have a question for you, Jack. Did you or Madam City Attorney has, because, you know, everybody wants to talk about police and POA or whatever. Has the POA pushed back against any of this?

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

It's a yes or no answer.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

I'm not aware. I'm not aware of any. I've not personally had any communications on it, and I am not aware of any personally.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Thank you, Madam City Attorney Jack.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

It's a yes or no. Mr. City Manager?

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

Again, not to our knowledge. We're working this ordinance, as the city attorney has said, right? When we came on board, there was this common concern that, one, there was no lack of police oversight commission meetings. Two, the director had not been appointed. Three, there were concerns. Well, we can say that we have been meeting for the last six, seven, eight, nine months as far as police oversight commission. We started working on the hiring of the director, which came into effect in July. and we continue to meet and as we align ourselves to try to make this quote

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

unquote gross those concerns within the ordinance I think the whole point of us bringing this to a finality almost is to get the clear direction where we want to go right this doesn't there's no stopping continuing meetings with the Commission that's current ordinance right so this is us the city attorney's office, the city manager's office, the new director and the police department, trying to provide ordinance that tries to align to as much as possible for efficiency, comply with state law, and still get what the quote unquote what the community wants. That's the mission for us here.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Thank you, Mr. City Manager. Madam City Attorney or Tamara, you were both or one of you were in attendance at all of our ad hoc meetings. Is that correct?

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Absolutely, yes, Mayor. Yes. And so, did we do anything illegal, unethical, or immoral in that Ad-Hoc Committee?

Absolutely not. Okay. I just want to clarify that.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Thank you. So, Jack, let me ask you a question. So you gave an example of the 2013 DOJ investigation of Cleveland, Cleveland Police Department. And just for my curiosity, and it was very serious, everything that was occurring in Cleveland at that time in 2013. Since you've come to Santa Ana, have you seen

that type of behavior here? There has not been an incident in Santa Ana exactly like that which I described in Cleveland and regarding the 137 rounds discharged.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

137 rounds, all the other information that you shared about their patterns, so So the use of force policies and have you met with community members, leaders, patrol officers and commanders, sir?

I've met with members of the community and members of community-based organizations as well as representatives of the police department.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Can you tell me what community-based organizations you met with?

Various entities, Ms. Mayor. I don't know that I could provide an exhaustive list right here.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Can you give me an example, please?

please. The ACLU, CHSPA. I've been in touch with others as well. Did you meet with the

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

neighborhood association leaders? No. Did you meet with the faith-based leaders? No. Did you meet with the business leaders? No. Thank you, Jack. And then as far as Councilman Becerra asked about the training or commented about the training, Jack, is there any or or are you aware, Madam City Attorney, Mr. City Manager, is there any pushback for our commissioners to attend the training? It is identified in here in section, what is it?

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Section 2-663, Commissioner Confidentiality and Training, page 4 of 14, where it says members of the commission are required to attend and complete at minimum the following Santa Ana Police Academy program courses, communications, patrol operations, Santa Ana jail, crime scene investigations, investigations, internal affairs, air support, traffic stops, motor officers, directed patrol, use of force, homicide gang, SWAT, within 18 months of appointment and or the first available offering of the program. Current Commissioner shall participate in this community academy within 18 months from the effective date

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

of this ordinance. These classes are subject to change at the the discussion of the city manager.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

Mayor, you may recall that the direction of the city council was that we, and when you said we, the director, the city manager, myself, you actually directed us to meet with each of the commissioners. That's correct. And during those meetings, we took careful notes and some of the commissioners did mention concerns that they had about the training. Some were concerned because they have full-time jobs outside of the city and they felt like it was a lot of an obligation to impose on them to do the type of trainings that were listed others had concerns as to whether the training

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

would compromise their objectivity and their fairness quite you know every so we did get some feedback and cons and that was given to us by the commissioners um as to whether they supported the training some of them supported the training and thought it was a great idea and others like i explained to you said that they did not support that training for either time commitments or because they had concerns about what it might do to the process to review these these investigations

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Thank you for sharing that Madam City Attorney. Just for me personally you know you're going to investigate police departments or let's just say you're going to investigate doctors. You need to know what doctors do and how they do it and so I would say the same with police officers. You need to get into the police department and the community academy that we have it's attended by community members. Every time they put a class on it's completely full. There's always a waiting list because it is such a good Academy and basically it shares with the

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

community what officers do and how they do it so my only concern around that would be how do how do our commissioners evaluate cases or make decisions to share with ujoc or with the city manager when they don't know the job or they don't even have a basic understanding of what let's say a traffic stop is or a use of force or what the gang unit does and in the city of santa ana we have quite a bit of gang activity so what a crime scene investigator does so that would be my only concern is that and here it says within an 18-month period so i'm hoping that that's not a

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

problem and it's in the evening if i am not mistaken is that correct mr city manager the classes are in the evening yes and they vary right so they can go one week and maybe not the following

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

week and they can go another week is that correct right i think a review of how the community community training is done, there's specific windows and providing 18 months allows three different opportunities to complete the training.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Perfect. Thank you. And the last thing that I have right now, Madam City Attorney, same section, Section D, it says failure to comply with subsections B and C shall result in the members removal from the commission by the appointing counsel. Because it's also asking for a ride along. Was there an issue with that with Jack or Madam City Attorney? Was there an issue with any of the commissioners around that? I would say the same thing, right? It's

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

so as the City Attorney has said, I wouldn't call it pushback, but there are concerns. And so regarding objectivity, I mean to be blunt, I think one commissioner felt unsafe. safe. So for us, we want to make sure that when we did the one-on-ones, we allow people to express their feelings, have the discussion. So if the question is being asked to ensure do we have unanimous consent, the answer is no.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

It's interesting that a commissioner would be afraid because imagine how our police officers feel when they go to work every single day and some of them don't come home. So Madam Madam City Attorney, my last question would be the, I'm sorry, nobody's interrupted you, please don't be rude. Madam City Attorney, on the confidentiality issue, I believe you submitted an email to the commissioners, wrote a letter, had conversations with them regarding the item in here that if they were to in any way breach confidentiality, what would happen? Madam City Attorney.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

Yes, we, our office is legal counsel to the commission. We do have an appointed attorney from the city attorney's office and we did we did provide communication Trying to stress the importance of the confidentiality and the po bar requirements So that was we're very concerned about that from a personnel matter And so so far that they appear to to have you know understood what the confidentiality issue is I'm going to ask our director. I know that when they recently went into closed session We discussed whether they would be reminded of the confidentiality.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

I'm not sure how you handled that, but you might share with the Council how that was handled.

MR. Yes, I can address that, Mayor. So when we went into the last closed session, we actually had all the commissioners sign updated confidentiality agreements. So those are now in place. They're live, they're active. And myself did provide another verbal admonition about the importance of confidentiality and and Pobar and all applicable confidentiality laws.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Female Speaker 1 And what are the laws?

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

What are the laws?

Male Speaker 1 So, primarily, you're looking at Pobar is a huge law in terms of what rights are afforded to police officers. I know that we have 832.7, which was discussed earlier today by Director Morse. There's also various government codes on point. There's general law applying to the California Constitution that would protect a lot of this information as well. So there is a very large body of law that applies, Mayor.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Thank you very much. Council Member Fan, please.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

Thank you, Mayor. So this is going to be on page 5 of 14, section 2-665. It's also under the powers and duties of the POC. This might just be an organizational question so that I understand where we're getting at. So first I want to clarify that even with the red lines, we never limited or deleted any categories of investigations that were in the original ordinance, correct?

That's correct. We didn't delete any categories. There were some restrictions added about some categories.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

Right. And that seemed to me to be under subsection F because that was relating to the reports from the POD. And this seems to be the portion discussing audits.

is that correct so that the the restrictions added derived from the old version of PC 832.7 which said only only certain officer personnel files can be made public even if there's not a sustained finding so so under the old The old version of PC 832.7, complaints of dishonesty, discrimination, sexual harassment, that type of thing, could only be made public if there was a sustained finding. And in the July version... I see.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

So F3 makes that clarification with the additional red lines that says it's completed with sustained findings. Okay. So I guess the one thing, because there have been those changes, I want to make sure that that we go back to the previous version of this ordinance that doesn't have those limitations. As we've discussed, state law has changed. And if anybody, I don't care who, decides to sue because they think it's a violation of Pobar or state law, they can have at it, but the state legislature changed it so that commissions such as this Police Oversight Commission can have access to such investigative documents and records.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

And that, I believe, is under 2-665 B, C, D, E, and F. So, yes. In subsection G, also subsection G, I think kind of let's just make sure the entire section the new law. That was what I had.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

Similarly, well, not similarly, but section 2-666, page 9 of 14.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

The second section of subsection C, I think, was specific to the investigations and changed it to audit.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

Let me see. I guess I just want to make sure that with any changes, sorry, that we don't implement that would conflict with the ability to conduct an investigation on limited cases. And I guess with that, I think I've made this comment to you before, Mr. Morse, that I understand the limitations of staff time, resources, et cetera. However, I do believe that there are benefits to conducting some investigations, particularly of issues and cases that are of great importance to the public.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

We hear sometimes from public comments that, you know, it might be a shooting, but in other cases, it might, maybe it's a case of discrimination or sexual harassment or collaboration with ICE. I don't know, right? There could be other cases that don't include a shooting that might be of great importance to our community that the Police Oversight Commission might want to investigate after receiving a complaint. that they are able to do so and have that review, make any type of recommendations necessary as well as make those recommendations to the city council. But I understand that similar to a grand jury, they are

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

not able to take every single complaint that comes before them. So they are going to have limited ability to select a case, have you pursue it or review it, investigate it, and come back to them. I don't think that that is inconsistent with an audit model, and I don't think that that's inconsistent with the ability to review policies. Maybe I used a lot of negatives in that sentence.

So, just so I understand, Councilmember, you want the Police Service Site Director to retain the authority to conduct investigations of individual officers for alleged misconduct and the additional authority to conduct separate audits of potential patterns or practices of misconduct.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

Yeah, so the hybrid model, but I guess I wanted to make clear that you're not going to be able to, with the current funding and limited resources that we have, especially as the city is facing a structural deficit, that you're not gonna be able to take on 10 different investigations all at once or 10 different investigations in one year. It might just be one. It might be three. We don't know because it depends on the scope of these investigations. But I think that that is up to this police oversight commission to make that determination once they receive a certain number of things.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

Yes. And I think what's going to happen is a practical matter. Again, why did we make these recommendations for this hybrid? Our preference is stated for the 10th time as the audit model, but if you want to do the hybrid, why did we do it? Because for those of us that have worked in local government for 30 plus years of our lives the worst thing you can do for your public is promise something that you can't deliver you have to manage their expectations and this is such an important issue for the city of santa anna this this ordinance is really important to build community trust and what we don't want to do is

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

say sure here we'll give you the investigations and then the police oversight commission stacks up 15 matters they want to investigate and you know what the truth is we will never get to all 15. because you would have to make such crazy budget decisions in this city to give us the resources we need to do all 15 and so that was just why i just want the public to understand it's not because we don't want to do that but we know from a practical matter that if that's all you say we know that the commission is going to keep saying well we want to investigate that we want to

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

investigate that in fact just to put this in context the commission did review some complaints just at their last meeting i think there was a total i want to make sure i have this a total of of eight?

That's correct.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

And they decided to pursue how many?

The Oversight Commission sought further information on three.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

So three, so already. Now, you know what? The Commission did decline on some others, but they decided to pursue three. That's three, one person. So we're already after their first meeting in a scenario under your current ordinance where we have three. And maybe what we should to tell you is like, Director Morris, how long do you think it'll take to investigate those three? What kind of resources are we looking at? Could you deliver those three investigations within the first three months, six months, nine months, twelve

months? For full-blown investigations, well I don't have a full understanding yet of the entire fact patterns because at this point what I know is largely based on on the complaint submitted. I've not reviewed body-worn camera footage, I I don't know how many officers may have been witnesses. I don't know how many other precipient witnesses there may be, so not sure. But I think on average, you could expect the oversight director to conduct maybe three robust complex investigations per year.

And to add on to what the city attorney was saying, in the hybrid model that I sort of pitched and envisioned.

You know, I talked about limiting those types of investigations, individual investigations that the oversight director conducts to officer-involved shootings and use-of-force incidents resulting in great bodily injury to sort of put some guardrails. There are very few of those incidents that occur on an annual basis. I think the average is two OISs per year, two additional additional use of force incidents that result in great bodily injury per year on average. So with those guardrails in place, there is by design a

limitation on the number of investigations that may be assigned to the oversight director within a given time frame.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

Thank you. You know, that is helpful to understand, however, it's my view, and this is just my view, that when there is an officer involved shooting, you have multiple agencies doing that oversight, doing that investigation. So my biggest concern isn't necessarily always an officer involved shooting. It might be some other action that results in great bodily injury or again, profiling or traffic stops. There are so many different things that might not fall under something that results in great bodily injury but that affects the policing that we do in the city and the

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

relationship the community has with our police officers so that's why I am okay with having a broader range of categories that may be reviewed however I'm also okay with saying we do one investigation at that a time and for members of the public who says you know we want to have an investigation this is what it looks like and this is what it's going to take with the budget that we have now. I am not going to take 20 million dollars away from funding Euclid Street in order to do this because that is something that my residents are asking for because that

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

is also a public safety issue. There are a variety of priorities that we have to figure out in this city and this is one of those many priorities. So I think we just have to be honest with people to say if we are going to investigate, we can do one at a time, this This is how long it's going to take, and this is what we are willing to commit, and this is what we can provide to you. And if they can't understand that, or if someone says, no, you're not doing enough, they're always going to say that. Because in some cases, government is never going to do enough for some people, and in some other cases, government's doing too much.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

So for me, it's just really about actually communicating that and saying, this is what we can do for now with what we have. So with the three cases, I don't know what they are. I don't know what is possible. And if you're saying, hey, you know what, POC, with these three cases, there really is one that I think that's gonna take me six months to do, you should come back to them and tell them that so then they can decide whether they only want you to do these three cases for the rest of the year or if they want you to do that one that they have to select. That's a decision for them to make

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

and and not for for you or me or any of the staff right because we selected them to make these decisions for the community the other thing I want to say is I I really appreciate staff coming back to us and saying hey there are some things that are incongruent with the Charter I think those things need to be fixed whether it's a language or stylistic issue I do think it's It's important that anything that is personnel related, administrative stays with under the umbrella of the city manager's authority as consistent with the charter.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

But anything that's policy oriented or have a broader reach that should be within the purview of the Police Oversight Commission, that should be something that they can make recommendations through a resolution to the city council for us to take a look at. I don't have a problem with that. If you need to change the ordinance so that the police oversight director is, you know, under the city manager's office just as any other department head, I understand that. If there's a desire to update the charter in order to change that, we can do that as a city council. We have a 2026 election coming up.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

So I'm perfectly fine with that, too, if someone wants to bring that forward. The one thing I do want to say regarding this update is that I understand us saying we don't want to over promise and under deliver. But I also believe that we have to give it a chance to work. And there might be some things that don't work. It might be a situation where, you know what, the City of Santa Ana, in light of the budget deficit, in light of homelessness, in light of the ICE raids, in light of everything that's happening, we cannot commit to an investigatory model.

Thai Viet PhanItem 1

But before we even implement and do our best to try to implement, we can't. I don't think that we should take our foot off the gas. So that's why I support this hybrid model, and hopefully with these edits we can make something work and go from there thank you thank you counselor and again as a reminder to the

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

council to the mayor especially with those comments we are moving along with the current ordinance we're implementing the current earnings this is the whole aspect of us meeting with the commission right uh this is us appointing you know helping with the appointment of the director we're not stopping quote unquote the implementation of the current ordinance that's correct you just

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

brought it for us for some direction you're and you're hearing us loud and clear i know you are

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 1

councilmember hernandez thank you madam mayor i i i think that the conversation happening here at the diocese is a healthy one but um to councilmember fan's point about the cost um that the city would have to be responsible for i i think that that cost is just i think that that is something that that the city needs to prioritize. If the Santa Ana Police Department didn't cost us 30 million dollars in the last 15 years in liability lawsuits, we probably wouldn't be facing a budget shortfall. If we didn't see unarmed people getting killed by law enforcement that then in turn gets us sued

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 1

for liabilities because people's constitutional rights are being violated, we wouldn't have to face a budget shortfall. If the city did its due diligence in creating guardrails for preventing police misconduct, and actually held some of their officers accountable, especially officers who may show a pattern to have had a number of complaints lodged against them, excessive amount of complaints, or whether it be officers who are being investigated for a number of different officer-involved shootings within their career. I think that there's room for improvement here in the city,

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 1

and I was duly elected to help ensure that there is a bridge for our residents to be established where they can feel that this is a department that they can trust. Unfortunately, that's not where we're at today, but I do think we need to prioritize putting the money behind this commission, behind this police oversight body to ensure that we can make improvements in the police department. And those will be my final comments, Mr. City Manager. I'm supportive of keeping things as is, as I mentioned, and those will be my final comments. Thank you.

Jessie LopezItem 1

Thank you. Council Member Lopez, please. Yes. You know, I just wanted to say how valuable, I think, Councilman Phan's speaking points were, right? And I hope that you heard them. I heard that Jack heard them. I hope that the city attorney's office also heard them. And I also hope that the chief was able to understand the importance of what she was discussing in terms of not necessarily right tying ourselves to just like one allowing the Commission to

Jessie LopezItem 1

have the independence that we all really needed to have in order for it to truly work and to be able to look into things other than the high-profile issues that that happen in the city. Everybody always wants to talk about homicides, right? But in terms of public safety, if I'm not mistaken, the number one reason why people die in our streets is not because they're being shot, it's because they're being killed by cars.

Jessie LopezItem 1

That is the number one reason why people are dying in the city. And what has the city done about that? How are we prioritizing that public safety issue? right and so I would like us to again for the well-being of our city not just now but in the long term to also discuss the issues that are happening in our communities in every single district that we represent right these are the issues that we get asked about all the time when we're talking to neighborhood meetings when are people going to slow down where are the stop signs where are

Jessie LopezItem 1

the speed bumps and so I think that is incredibly important for people not to forget or not discuss because I think that those issues again and not just that but to the councilman's point are important for the Commission and for this council to receive update or recommendations and so I think that the other conversation is really more a conversation of political will right we we have heard now many times in our individual meetings, publicly, the commission has heard,

Jessie LopezItem 1

the public has heard that this body, right, even though we all sit up here and say this is my baby, this is what I worked for, this is what I advocated prior to this person or that person, doesn't have the resources that it actually needs to deliver the promises it has made to our community. And so if we actually care about justice, keeping people safe, accountability, what is this body going to do about that? Just ignore it? Be okay with the fact that maybe you'll be able to conduct one investigation a year if you don't run out of your hours?

Jessie LopezItem 1

That's the other thing that is not being, I think, I hope the public is able to understand. And so again, I think that those conversations are incredibly important because it can happen. It can be funded. It's just a matter of will. The other thing you commented, which I think is important, City Manager, as a reminder to the commissioners, and I sigh heavily because I'm sure we all hear it. I mean, I hear it. I'm convinced that everybody else must hear it too, right? Your commissioners are showing up unprepared.

Jessie LopezItem 1

Your commissioners don't even want to receive more information that is being offered to them. Your commissioners don't know what they're discussing up there. And so, as you just said, you know, the commission, right now, there are powers that exist for the commissioners, for the public. Can any resident file a citizen's complaint? Yes, right, I see both of you shaking your heads. Can the commission investigate currently, now? Yes, because that is the way that it is currently written and being honored. So I hope that that is also helpful for the current commissioners and for the public.

Jessie LopezItem 1

The other thing I did want clarification on, because I see people discussing this all the time is how can an agenda item get discussed or placed on the police oversight commission the Commission

voted on some bylaws back in November and those are actually coming to be affirmed by the City Council at the next council meeting in that they have a process similar to the one that City Council uses which is they submit a memo we place it for everyone to hear it and then if enough if enough if the majority wants to hear it we bring it to the next Commission meeting thank you I

Jessie LopezItem 1

appreciate that being on track I think what that discussion I think it's good I think hopefully people read the bylaws right you can understand procedure if you don't take the time to read it and fully understand it and put it into practice so that's that that's my recommend that's my advice really to all the commissions because it's not an issue of just one um so so thank you for those uh clarifying uh

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

answers i think oh yeah okay go ahead councilman vascos thank you i just want to say i had a really

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

educational time on the committee i learned a lot we got along great thank you for all your input to everybody but i was in a group that I was not always in agreement with. Now, you know, I appreciate the everything that we had a conversation. And I think during our meetings, the concerns that I had and I protested was me saying the community will not be in agreement to Council Member Lopez's points. That was what I protested many times.

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

AND WE DID AGREE ON EDUCATING THE COMMISSIONERS. AND THAT'S A GOOD POINT TO HAVE SOME KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT POLICE GO THROUGH AND SOME OF THE WORK. SO MOST, YOU KNOW, WE HAD A LOT OF AGREEMENTS, BUT I WASN'T AT A TIME WHERE THE NEW LAW HADN'T COME INTO PLACE. and there was a lot of changes that were decided by not by policy or by law but just because people wanted changes but I do want to go to the original with I do still support the

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

changes that I came into was to clarify the police oversight commission as a legislative oversight body remove the mandatory city manager supervision or attendance and even if you go hybrid i also want to provide concurrent reporting of commission recommendations to the city council so we get their policies so we get to learn about what's happening and make sure we preserve compliance with pobar and that the budget if there's any change to lessen the budget that it comes before us in a written notice um i do agree that we need more funding for the police oversight commission we need to make sure that we're able

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

I WANT PEOPLE TO LOOK AT THIS DEPARTMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAD A FEW CASES WHERE OFFICERS ARE NOT HAPPY WITH THIS DEPARTMENT. I WANT OUR OFFICERS TO BE HAPPY WITH THIS DEPARTMENT. BUT I KNOW AS A TEACHER, AS A MANAGER OF PEOPLE, IF PEOPLE ARE NOT HAPPY, THEY'RE GOING TO ACT OUT. out. If they don't have the respect from the person in charge, they will be acting out. So I do think we need more money for police oversight, for the budget. I think we need

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

to, including with the police oversight, I want to make sure that we do have a process of healing. There's something that happened before we all got here, and some of you were here, I was here at the end of Jerry Serrano and Valentin. There was something that happened WITH THIS DEPARTMENT THAT NEEDS HEALING AND AND AND I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER HERNANDEZ SAID IF OUR OFFICERS ARE NOT HAPPY THEY'RE NOT GOING TO SERVICE THE PUBLIC IN THE RIGHT WAY AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GOOD BY OUR OFFICERS TO SUPPORT THE PUBLIC AND THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME HEALING GO

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

WE HAVE TO ACCEPT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST TO MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T STAY AND SIT THERE AND I and I will fully support how we heal within the city and what we had before. And not just the police department, but it's like all departments of how we did things before. We had 25 years of Pulido. It was not a great place. You know, the city was ran for the benefit of not the people.

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

So I would want us to look at how we manage not just the police department but the whole city for a time of healing and growing and be more proactive for everybody. everybody. But we do need more funding for the police oversight. And I want to support the words of Ty, a VFMHR council member, with the hybrid model and making sure that we keep those topics for investigating on 265. I forget the sub numbers. To make sure we're able to investigate if we do go with the hybrid model. And setting expectations is important for

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

anybody and thank you for bringing up setting expectations because we could probably investigate one a month and if they're small cases it's one a month for one month or three months or four months so we don't know what we're going to do between 12 and you know three cases a year depends on the case so setting expectations are important because the public's going to come up we want this one this one this one and this one and we could you know we we can't uh say right now the way the budget is we can't uh investigate all everything but um i i'm i'm uh hopefully we we

Benjamin VazquezItem 1

get this done and we have a police oversight that does have investigative powers and uh good luck to

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

the city and hope we do right by the people and mayor i'd just like to make one comment about process because I think what I've heard today I just want the council to remember under the charter you are the body you are the body that has a lot of power and authority you have chosen a model that that delegates that authority to the police oversight commission I just want to remind you that you control the budget you control policy you have a section in your charter I want to read I'll read it to you quickly. City Council, that's city manager, any other person or committee authorized by them shall

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

have the power to inquire into the conduct of any office, any department, any agency, or officer of the city and to make investigation as to the city affair. And for that purpose, may subpoena witnesses administer oaths and compel the production of books, papers and other evidence. Why do I say that to you? because it's a reminder that if there is an issue that comes up outside of this police commission that is so important to you that you know we have an ordinance in the commission but if there's an issue on top of all that that is so important to you that you feel it needs to be investigated

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

this is the tool you have and it's the tool that's given to the city council all of you as elected directly by your constituents so i just wanted to make sure that you understand that there is a relief valve a safety valve if you want to call it as something that if it doesn't make it into your police commission ordinance you still have that power by a vote of four thank you madam city

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

attorney and and uh thank you for always sharing the city charter with us because that is true we do have that power and um i think once or twice up here we've asked for investigations and they're conducted um and so we really appreciate that and so thank you council member vasquez for bringing that up um you know i'm gonna let councilman i don't i think you're the last one that wants to speak but councilman becerra before we close but all i'm going to say is you know madam city attorney the lawsuits that i'm going to just share what you can i don't want to violate any

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

laws or brown act the lawsuits that keep coming up how much we're paying and whatnot they have been from the previous police chief time is that correct i think some of the numbers

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

you're seeing are from cases from what i can tell from like 2018 forward and um so those we We sometimes see litigation that takes about a year to 18 months for a case to bubble up. So many of these cases are from I'd say the years of like 19, 20, and 21.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

I think there's some that are a little bit older than that too.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

I have one that's going to trial today and that case is all the way from 2009, 7, 12.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

So when we talk about all the cases that we're paying out currently, there are cases that that as you had indicated, Jack, city manager, police chief, during the ad hoc we had talked about, it takes years for cases to settle. So, the previous chief, previous leadership, previous city manager, previous, before Councilman Vasquez and I are sitting on the council, some of them, some members up here already were here, but some of us, the majority of us were not. So, I just want to be really clear that the lawsuits that we're settling now are not from this current leadership and this current chief and this current POA president

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

and this current body, they are from the previous chief, the previous leadership in our police department. So, and thank you, Madam City Attorney, for sharing, again, the charter. I think that's very, very important. Councilman Becerra.

Phil BacerraItem 1

Councilman Becerra Thank you, Madam Mayor. I, too, want to express my appreciation for the clarity on the charter, because when we talk about legislative oversight, I feel like when I hear certain comments up here, It feels like there are commissioners that are confusing certain council members to the point that they think they're doing a good thing by giving away their authority or giving away their ability to govern. That's what they were elected to do. Commissioners were appointed by council members who were elected by the people to govern. So it's kind of a responsibility we need to shoulder and we need to take very seriously.

Phil BacerraItem 1

I have a question. So earlier, and I forget which council member, it doesn't really matter. Somebody brought up the fact that there was a retired police officer that was making shirts that were offensive. I don't want to get into the details of the shirts or anything like that, but let's just say somebody submitted a written complaint to Jack, to the commissioners. What authority do you have to do anything in regards to retired police officers?

Nothing. Nothing under the ordinance, right?

Phil BacerraItem 1

And I appreciate that because what I want to make clear, and this is kind of a theme you've probably heard up here tonight, and that is let's not set expectations that are unrealistic. Let's be realistic about what we can do. It's not about saying what we don't want to do. It's about saying what we can realistically do, whether it's capacity, whether it's subject matter. Let's just be truthful. Let's shed the politics. Let's shed all the finger pointing. Let's get down to business. You have seven council members that all support police oversight. I

Phil BacerraItem 1

I remember when certain folks came in a couple years ago and were worried that the council wasn't going to appoint commissioners. And yet we have a fully appointed police oversight commission today. And we've had it for a couple of years now. I want to go back to something. I'm going to quote our oversight director, not from tonight, but rather from the September 11 POC meeting, which you had said, and I appreciate this because you are consistent. And that is, you'd said investigating patterns of practice should be prioritized over investigating individual incidents.

Phil BacerraItem 1

Investigating patterns of practice would be more effective long term to change the culture within the Santa Ana Police Department. And you mentioned that tonight as well. And I appreciate that because that's what this commission is supposed to be about. This is not about going after officers and being punitive. This is the long-term impact of having a police department that is responsive to the community, that protects the community. And the way we do that is make sure that policy and the culture within the department is improved the best way we can.

Phil BacerraItem 1

And so I just want to thank you for saying that because I think that's something that we should all be mindful of. This is about improving the PD, not trying to abolish the police. There are folks that come in here that make comment about the Oversight Commission, but they're not here to talk about improving it, because if you look at comments they make elsewhere, they make comments like, all cops are bad, or abolish the police. I got to tell you right now, when we introduced, myself and Council Member Penaloza, introduced police oversight a couple years ago, it was not about abolishing.

Phil BacerraItem 1

It was always about improving our police department. We have an amazing police department, and of course there's going to be instances where where they make mistakes. And I'm hopeful that the Police Oversight Commission will come in and make sure that they recommend policy to the council so that we can make sure that they continue to improve, not be abolished, to improve our police department. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

All right, Mr. City Manager, I think you have some clarity, right, where we're going.

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

So again, as a reminder, because it was mentioned, so we're clear, and I think Council Member remember Jesse Lopez just mentioned, right? We have a current ordinance, we're working effectively on the approved ordinance. So we're not mitigating any of that aspects, that's one. We have a director, we're conducting investigations now, we're working with the Police Oversight Commission. So we are currently working with the current framework, period, right? Second, as City Attorney Sonia Cavallo said, part of the issues when we come with these recommendations is because it was our perspective,

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

and when we were informed that there were issues that needed to be realigned. This is what this policy decision is for. In the end, all seven, the majority get to decide and make the recommendations. And so part of the insight of having somebody like Jack, our director, is so that we're not enthralled in this historical type of perspective. He brings a new perspective, an insight, and an experience that we value. And so in the end, as everybody I think here in the forum wants, including, you know, management from the city attorney's office, me, myself, the city manager, my team, the police department,

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

and Jack, we want to make sure that we are responsive to the community. And yeah, dare I say, even the expectation, right, because nobody wants to limit their expectation. We just want to be successful in meeting those expectations because nobody wants to underfill those expectations. That's the key for us. But I think we have direction. direction. Again, we continue to work with the current ordinance and do the best thing that we can. And as far as the practicality regarding the finances and this commitment, we let the practice and the history that's coming forward dictate to us how much funding and how much research we need to do.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Mr. City Manager, the only thing I'd ask, maybe I didn't hear it because I know a few of us up here talked about the hybrid model. I think that's where we're at right now. Is that correct?

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

I think some of the years still. But yeah, we're getting to that perspective. Again, if we were to be responsible with the current ordinance, right, and look for the patterns, I think as we evolve both with the commission, right, and you just heard the update from Director Morris. at the last first closed session meeting reviewed eight complaints or issues and they decided to move with more information for three. So the practice alone would dictate how effective we're going to be and how fast we move. And I think for us, I know I hear the concern regarding the budget aspect, but let's wait. Let's see what the commission needs. Let's

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

see where it takes us. I do think the significant issue, like any other issue that's significant, Yeah, we'll have the discussion and we'll set as a priority. But that's what this practice is getting us in the end, right? Let's start working on the issues. Let's develop the pattern. Let's get the perspective and the practical experience that will guide us.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Mr. Center Manager, the only thing I'd ask and maybe the council would agree or disagree that if you could come back and share with us, give us an update in about three months about how things are going. I have a quick question.

Phil BacerraItem 1

So will there be something coming back to us? Because while there may be consensus about the type of commission this is, I think there were things that were proposed in the draft ordinance that came to us in July that should be coming back to us. I would say training is one, for sure. There may be a lot less than what we see here, maybe more. I don't know. But I just hope that per what the mayor just said, this isn't just a receiving file. There should be something coming back to us.

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

Right. So at least from my perspective, alignment with the charter language, consistency, make sure with the recent implementation of the new PC change, and at the same time then the investigation and how we move forward.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

And that's why I asked for three months. That should give you enough time.

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

Right.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

Yes, I mean, I envision that when we come back, we will do much like what was in the staff report today. It will give you the options, right? We always give you options.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem 1

! And we're using the current ordinance and it's not perfect, but that's your options moving forward. You either act and give us new direction or we're going to continue to implement the ordinance that we have.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Well, Madam Attorney, I think what you heard tonight was you can come back in three months with the current one that we have and then what you heard tonight. There doesn't need to be three or four of them. I mean, just simple as possible. You heard tonight the council and then the entire council and then we have the current one. So in three months.

Alvaro NuñezItem 1

But we are working again. Yes. At the next meeting in, what's the date? February 3rd, you get a real hot bylaws as a proof by the commission. Perfect, thank you.

Valerie AmezcuaItem 1

Thank you, this meeting is adjourned.

Thank you.