[00:00:04]
[Call to Order]
MEETING OF THE MUNICIPAL FIRE AND POLICE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD TO ORDER.MAY WE HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE, MA'AM.
ATTORNEY JOSHUA JOSHUA NEWVILLE, PRESENT AND BOARD ATTORNEY JOSHUA DERA.
AT THIS POINT, UH, WE'RE GONNA CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
IF THERE ARE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO MAKE A COMMENT ON ANY AGENDA ITEM, PLEASE DO SO AT THE START.
SEEING NO ONE APPROACH THE PODIUM.
OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE NO COMMENTS.
[2. Consider Motion to Approve Agenda.]
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO, CONSIDER MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA.SECONDED BY MR. THOMAS THAT THE AGENDA BE APPROVED.
[3. Consider Motion to Approve Minutes]
CONSIDER A MOTION TO APPROVE MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 24TH, 2025.SO MOVE MOVED BY MR. NEWVILLE.
BY MR. THOMAS THAT THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 24, 25 BE APPROVED.
[4. Consider Motion to Approve or Reject Personnel Action Forms]
CONSIDER MOTION TO APPROVE OR REJECT PERSONNEL ACTION FORMS. WE HAVE PERSONAL ACTION FORMS. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE PERSON I ACTION FORMS, UH, FOR THE BAT US POLICE DEPARTMENT, ALL EXCEPT FOR ONE, THE ONE FOR ZACHARY EVANS.UH, I WISH IT TO BE WITHHELD IF MISSING, UH, UH, NECESSARY PAPERWORK TO GO IN THIS FILE.
I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE PERSONAL ACTION PHONE FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WITH ONE EXCEPTION.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE PERSONAL ELECTION FORM FOR BAT RIDGE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT PERSONAL ACTION FROM S FIRE DEPARTMENT.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND IT.
[5. Consider Motion to call for examinations in the Baton Rouge Police Department]
CONSIDER A MOTION TO CALL FOR EXAMINATIONS IN THE BATON ROUGE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR POLICE CAPTAIN AND POLICE.I MOVE TO CALL FOR THE EXAMINATION FOR THE POLICE.
LIEUTENANT IS ON THE BATON ROUGE POLICE DEPARTMENT MOTION BY MR. THOMAS.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION COULD SAY AYE.
[6. Consider Motion to call for examinations in the Baton Rouge Fire Department]
SIX, CONSIDER MOTION TO CALL FOR EXAMINATIONS IN THE BATON ROUGE FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR ASSISTANT HAZARDOUS MATERIALS CHIEF MR. LEMON.I MAKE A MOTION TO CALL FOR AN EXAMINATION WITH THE BATON ROUGE FIRE DEPARTMENT ASSISTANT HAZARDOUS MATERIALS CHIEF.
I HAVE A MOTION BY MR. LEMONS TO APPROVE.
MOTION APPROVED AGENDA ITEM SEVEN.
[7. Consider Motion to Approve / Reject applications]
CONSIDER A MOTION TO APPROVE OR REJECT APPLICATIONS FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS CHIEF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL TO THE OFFICER.FIRE SAFETY OFFICER, ASSISTANT FIRE, PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER.
ONE ASSISTANT CHIEF OF SPECIAL SERVICES AND ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE APPLICATIONS.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I, I SECOND.
[8. Discuss ongoing litigation: Brandon O'Neal v. City of Baton Rouge, Docket Number C-759828, pending in the 19th JDC.]
EIGHT, DISCUSS ONGOING LITIGATION.BRANDON O'NEILL VERSUS CITY OF BATON ROUGE.
[00:05:01]
DOCKET NUMBER CS 7 5 9 8 2 8 PENDING IN THE 19TH JUDICIAL COURT.SOME OF YOU ALL JUST THIS MORNING, UH, RECEIVED A GUEST SERVICE OF A LAWSUIT AND THAT WAS FILED ON FEBRUARY 27TH, 2025.
I'M NOT SURE WHY, YOU KNOW, WE'VE JUST RECEIVED THE ACTUAL SUIT, BUT IT DOES REQUEST THAT EVERYONE UP APPEAR ON NEXT MONDAY.
THE LAWSUIT IS PRETTY EVERYONE.
UH, IT IS A PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD, UH, LAWSUIT.
ESSENTIALLY, THE ISSUE IS REALLY SIMPLE.
THE ISSUE IS THAT DURING THE JANUARY MEETING, THE CONCERN IS THAT IT WAS NOT NOTICED AS TO THE, UH, PURPOSE OR EVEN THE INTENT TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
UH, TYPICALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS WHEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPEN, EVERYONE WILL BRIEF OR SUBMIT RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS BEFORE YOU GUYS GET TO COURT TO KIND OF EXPLAIN EVERYBODY'S RESPECTIVE POSITION IN THIS SITUATION BECAUSE OF THE LATE SERVICE THAT DEADLINE HAS PASSED.
SO WHAT WILL LIKELY HAPPEN IS I'LL COMMUNICATE TO THE COURT THAT, HEY, WE DIDN'T ACTUALLY RECEIVE NOTICE UNTIL AFTER THE RESPONSIVE DEADLINE, WHICH PROBABLY I CAN'T SPEAK FOR.
OKAY? SO I'LL HAVE TO COMMUNICATE THAT TO YOU GUYS THROUGHOUT THE WEEK.
MORE THAN LIKELY THAT'S WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
UM, THE OTHER ISSUE, OF COURSE IS JUST THE, UM, THE VALIDITY OF THE LAWSUIT, RIGHT? WE COULD ALL MAKE OUR ARGUMENTS ABOUT THIS, BUT I THINK ON THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM, THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN HANDLE IT THAT IS MOST EFFICIENT FOR EVERYBODY BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE DO HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO THE PUBLIC IN, IN TERMS OF HOW WE DECIDE TO, UH, I GUESS MARSHAL OUT PUBLIC RESOURCES.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE COULD SPEND THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS SAYING WE'RE RIGHT OR WE CAN JUST FIX THE PROBLEM.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING FOR THE THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM.
QUESTIONS FOR ME? ANY QUESTIONS? UH, JOHN? NO.
SO THAT'S, IT'S STILL IN MY MICROPHONE.
I DIDN'T REALIZE YOU DIDN'T HAVE ONE.
SO THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS ON AGENDA ITEM EIGHT.
[9. Discuss January 13, 2025, meeting and consider motions or resolutions needed to ratify or give legal effect to all decisions taken at the January 13, 2025, meeting, specifically the Board's decision to go into executive session for the same reasons listed in subpart (a) and the Board's decision regarding the summary disposition heard at the January 13, 2025, meeting.]
TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER NINE.DISCUSSED JANUARY THE 2025 MEETING AND CONSIDER MOTIONS OR RESOLUTIONS NEEDED TO RATIFY OR GIVE LEGAL EFFECT TO ALL DECISIONS TAKEN AT THE JANUARY 13TH, 2025 MEETING, SPECIFICALLY THE BOARD'S DECISION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE SAME REASONS LISTED IN SUB PART A OF THE BOARD'S DECISION REGARDING THE SUMMARY DISPOSITION HEARD ON JANUARY 13TH, 2025 MEETING MR. DARA.
ALRIGHT, SO TYPICALLY WHAT WE DO, GUYS, AND I FORGOT TO MENTION THIS TO YOU, YOU SEE SUB PART A, THIS IS THE MATTER MAY BE DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
TYPICALLY, THAT GOES UNDER EVERY SINGLE ONE OF OUR ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS, I GUESS ON THE JANUARY 13TH, 2025 AGENDA THAT WAS NOT ON THERE.
OKAY? BUT THAT'S, THAT LITTLE BLURB RIGHT THERE IS TYPICALLY ON EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM.
IF WE GO BACK AND LOOK, PROBABLY THE ONLY THING THAT'S NOT ON THERE IS THE SITE TO REVISE STATUTE 33 25 0 1, WHICH IT SHOULD.
AND THAT BEING SAID, SO JOSH, YES, THE, THE, UH, STATE LAW GIVES US THE ABILITY, UH, TO GO INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
DOES THE STATE LAW EXACTLY, DOES IT SAY EXACTLY THAT THIS HAS TO BE POSTED ON EVERY HEARING CASE ON EVERY EXECUTIVE SESSION WE GO INTO? UH, THE SHORT ANSWER TO THAT IS NO.
I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF, UM, INTERPRETATION THERE.
TYPICALLY, ANYTIME YOU'RE GONNA DO ANYTHING IN A PUBLIC MEETING, YOUR ANSWER, YOU WANNA PUT IT ON THE AGENDA, RIGHT? SO THE PUBLIC CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN, UH, SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO EXECUTIVE SESSION, THE TIMES WHERE IT ACTUALLY PROVIDES THAT YOU HAVE TO PUT SPECIFIC THINGS ON THE AGENDA THAT'S ENUMERATED BY STATUTE AS WELL, RIGHT? SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT A CASE, IT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS YOU HAVE TO LIST.
IF WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT AN EMPLOYEE'S, UH, CO, UH, COMPETENCY OR CHARACTER, THOSE THINGS HAVE TO BE RIGHT, YOU KNOW, LISTED AND YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE NOTICE TO THAT EMPLOYEE MM-HMM
[00:10:01]
IT'S, IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE IT KIND OF DEPENDS ON THE SITUATION, BUT TO AVOID SITUATIONS LIKE THIS, WHAT WE SHOULD DO IS PUT THAT LITTLE SUBPART A EVERY TIME, YOU KNOW, IT'S ON THERE, JUST SO THAT WAY WE DON'T HAVE THIS ISSUE.UH, WHICH KIND OF BRINGS US TO THE POINT.
SO IT SEEMS AFTER READING THE LAWSUIT, THE REAL ISSUE, THE LAWSUIT'S NOT EVEN ASKING THAT.
WHATEVER WE DID BE VOIDED, WHICH IS KIND OF A STRANGE OR UNIQUE FEATURE OF THE LAWSUIT, I SHOULD SAY.
BUT IN ORDER TO REALLY CUT TO THE CORE OF THE LAWSUIT, WHICH THE LAWSUIT IS SAYING, HEY, THE BOARD DID NOT GIVE ANY NOTICE OF ITS INTENT TO GO IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, WE CAN FIX THAT.
WHAT I WOULD ACTUALLY SUGGEST THE BOARD DO IS MOVE TO VACATE WHAT YOU GUYS DID AT THE JANUARY 13TH MEETING, RESET THE HEARING FOR RESET THE, THE MATTER, I SHOULD SAY FOR THE UPCOMING MEETING AND DO IT AGAIN, UH, THIS TIME.
MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC THAT WE MAY GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
AND WHAT THAT DOES IS THAT RESOLVES YOUR ISSUE.
UH, BECAUSE IT'S NOT THAT WE DID ANYTHING BAD IN EXECUTIVE SESSION OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT FROM READING THE LAWSUIT.
IT SEEMS LIKE THE ISSUE IS JUST THAT, UH, THE INTENT OR THAT WE MAY GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION WAS THE ISSUE.
JUST, JUST TO BE CLEAR, IF WE RESET THE MATTER TO OUR NEXT BOARD MEETING TO TALK ABOUT IT.
JUST TO BE CLEAR, IF WE RESET THE MATTER TO OUR NEXT BOARD MEETING, DOES THAT MEAN WE HAVE TO, UH, HAVE THE ATTORNEYS PRESENT AGAIN OR JUST REVIEW THE DECISION THAT WE MADE? THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE BOARD, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE THE BOARD, THE ATTORNEYS COME BACK AND PRESENT.
THAT PART OF THE MEETING WAS DONE IN OPEN SESSION IN FRONT OF EVERYBODY.
UH, THE ONLY ISSUE AS IT RELATES TO THIS IS SIMPLY THE DECISION OR THE INTENT TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
UH, OF COURSE THERE'S ALSO THE DISPUTE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE ACTUALLY HAD LEGAL GROUNDS, UH, TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
THAT, YOU KNOW, I TAKE CONSIDERABLE ISSUE.
THERE'S PLENTY OF REASONS WHY YOU WOULD GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION, WHETHER, I MEAN, WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT TWO
IF YOU LOOK AT 33 25 0 1, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
YOU'RE HAVING A HEARING AND INVESTIGATION WHEN PEOPLE APPEAL TO YOU GUYS.
SO IT, IT KIND OF FLOWS DIRECTLY INVOLVED.
I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY CASES ON THIS ISSUE.
THERE'S ALSO AN EXCEPTION FOR JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS.
THIS IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL BOARD THAT TO SUGGEST THAT THERE'S NO GROUNDS TO GO TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSIONS IS TO ME NOT NECESSARILY CORRECT.
YOU'RE GONNA FIND SEVERAL CASES.
I MEAN, I BROUGHT SOME WITH ME WHERE PEOPLE GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION, THE COURT TALKS ABOUT THE FACT THAT THEY WENT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION MADE A DECISION, AND THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE.
SO IT'S NOT THE GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION THAT'S THE ISSUE.
IT, IT SEEMS LIKE FOR THIS CASE, ALTHOUGH THEY HAVE MADE THAT AN ISSUE, I THINK THE REAL ISSUE IS SIMPLY NOTIFYING THE PUBLIC OF YOUR INTENT.
THAT THAT'S REALLY, I THINK THE ISSUE IF THEY LIKE OUR DECISION.
LOOK, AND, AND YOU GUYS HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE.
SO I MEAN, RESET IT, COME BACK AND DO IT AGAIN.
YEAH, I THINK, I THINK THE ONLY THING THAT STATE LAW REQUIRES IS IF, IS IF YOU'RE GONNA GO IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND TALK ABOUT SOMEONE'S CHARACTER OR MENTAL STABILITY.
AND I THINK THERE'S ONE OTHER ISSUE THAT, THAT, THAT HAS TO BE, THEY HAVE TO BE NOTIFIED AND THEY HAVE THE CHOICE TO WHETHER THEY WANNA DISCUSS IT PUBLIC RIGHT.
OR PUBLIC OR AN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
SO OTHER THAN THAT, IN MY OPINION, THAT'S, IT'S A NON-ISSUE.
I MEAN, YOU, YOU MAY WANT TO GO IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT ANY TIME, THAT MAY NOT BE LISTED FOR ANY, FOR ANY SUBJECT.
SO, BUT THAT TO BE LISTED EVERY TIME, I THINK IT'S, LIKE YOU SAID, IT'S PROBABLY PROACTIVE FOR THIS BOARD, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S REQUIRED BY, BY LAW.
SO I, THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD A WOULD ASK IS BECAUSE I HAVE NO REASON TO DOUBT THAT YOU ARE CORRECT.
HOWEVER, IT, THERE IS CERTAINLY NOTHING STOPPING MR. IVY FROM REFILING AT A FUTURE DATE.
IT, YOU KNOW, IF WE VOID THIS DECISION, COME BACK, REDO IT, AND THEN WE HAVE A FUTURE HEARING WHERE WE GO BACK INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PROPERLY, NOTICE ALL OF THAT, WE MAY END UP SERVED WITH A NEARLY IDENTICAL LAWSUIT MINUS THE, THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.
[00:15:01]
IS THERE ANY MERIT TO WHETHER, AND YOU WOULD KNOW BETTER THAN I WOULD, IS THIS A REQUEST FOR AG OPINION? WHO, WHO, IF ANYONE? SO THE AGS ACTUALLY ALREADY SPOKEN ON THE ISSUE.UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ALAN STOKES OPINION, THAT'S ACTUALLY FROM MY NECK OF THE WOODS.
THE AG DID, THE AG SUGGESTED THAT, HEY, YOU CAN GO IN EXECUTIVE SESSION EVEN TO SPEAK ABOUT SOMEONE'S, UH, CHARACTER INCOMPETENCE.
UH, SO IN REALITY, AND I DON'T WANNA GET TOO BOGGED INTO THE WEEDS, BUT THE LAWYER ASKED ME, YOU CAN, I'M NOT SO UNDER, UNDER THE EXCEPTIONS FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION, YOU CAN CONDUCT HEARINGS OR INVESTIGATION TYPE STUFF AND EXECUTIVE SESSION.
WHAT FORCES THIS BOARD TO DO IT IN THE PUBLIC IS 33 25 0 1, WHICH SAYS ALL OF THEM HAVE TO BE CONDUCTED IN THE PUBLIC.
IT'S NOT EVEN THE OPEN THE PUBLIC MEETING LAW.
SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE THE LAWSUIT'S IN REVERSE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
SO THE, THAT'S WHY THE AG OPINION SUGGESTS, HEY, LOOK, TAKE ALL YOUR EVIDENCE IN PUBLIC SO THAT WAY YOU COMPLY WITH 33 25 0 1.
BUT AS TO THE OTHER STUFF, YOU CAN DO THAT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
JUST DON'T DEVELOP THE RECORD IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
AND THERE ARE SOME BOARDS THAT DO THE ENTIRE HEARING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
SO WHAT'S OUR PLEASURE, UH, BOARD MEMBERS, JOSH HAS SUGGESTED THAT WE RESET THE MATTER FOR OUR NEXT MEETING IN APRIL.
VACATE THE JANUARY 13TH DECISION DECISION AND RESET THE MATTER.
AND WE'LL HAVE TO NOTIFY THE ATTORNEYS, THE PARTIES OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S GOING ON.
AND DO WE, BEFORE WE MAKE A MOTION IT, DO WE WANT TO JUST DEFINITIVELY STATE THAT WE WILL NOT BE TAKING ANY NEW EVIDENCE? DO WE WANT TO ASK AND DEFER TO COUNSEL? I I WANTED TO ASK BEFORE WE MADE ANY MOTION ON THE SUBJECT.
THAT'S WHY I ASKED THAT QUESTION.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE PRUDENT.
IT'S UP TO THE BOARD IF Y'ALL WANT TO CONSIDER MORE STUFF, BUT I, I DON'T SEE THE NEED TO DO THAT.
THAT PART OF THE, THE HEARING WAS FINE.
ARE WE OPEN IT FOR ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? AND, UM, IT'S AGAIN, UP TO YOU GUYS.
I MEAN, IF ANYBODY WISHES TO COMMENT, NOT HEARING ANY, NO EMOTIONS IN ORDER.
IF YOU DECIDE WHAT WE SHOULD DO THEN MR. CHAIR, I, I WOULD MOVE TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF MR. DARA VACATE THIS BOARD'S DECISION ON, WHAT WAS THAT DATE AGAIN? JANUARY 13TH.
UM, RESET THAT MATTER, UM, SOLELY FOR DELIBERATION AND DECISION.
UM, NOT FOR ANY FURTHER EVIDENTIARY, UM, HEARING OR LEGAL ARGUMENT FROM COUNSEL.
YOU HEARD THE MOTION? DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND.
SECONDED BY MR. THOMAS, AFTER MOTION BY MR. NEWVILLE THAT WE RESCHEDULED THIS, WELL VACATE THE DECISION OF JANUARY 13TH, 2025.
RESET THE MATTER FOR OUR APRIL MEETING, UM, ABSENT, UM, PRESENTATION WITH FOR DECISION ONLY.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
[10. Discuss and consider a resolution to inform the public about how Executive Session related to disciplinary hearings and investigations will be handled in the future.]
10, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER A RESOLUTION TO INFORM THE PUBLIC ABOUT HOW EXECUTIVE SESSIONS RELATED TO DISCIPLINARY HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIONS WILL BE HANDLED IN THE FUTURE.AGAIN, MR. D, SO SAME KIND OF CONCEPT HERE, SINCE IT KIND OF SEEMS TO ME THAT THE, THE TWO ISSUES IN THIS LAWSUIT ARE THE NOTICE AND THEN THE LEGAL GROUNDS.
I PROPOSE WE JUST DO A, UH, SOME TYPE OF RESOLUTION THAT OUTLINES THAT.
A, WE MAY GO IN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR ANY OF THESE ADMIN, UH, HEARINGS.
AND THEN TWO, JUST STATE THE LEGAL GROUNDS.
NOW, OF COURSE, ON THE AGENDAS FOR EACH MEETING WILL STILL PUT THE, UH, SUBPART A SO IT'S CLEAR.
BUT AGAIN, THE ISSUE AT LEAST FOR US, SHOULD BE MAKING SURE IT'S CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC WHAT'S GOING ON.
YOU KNOW, NOT NECESSARILY, UM, YOU KNOW, WHO'S RIGHT, WHAT, MAKING
[00:20:01]
SURE THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT'S GOING ON.AND I THINK IF WE DO A RESOLUTION THAT INFORMS EVERYBODY THE LEGAL GROUNDS AND OUR INTENTIONS GOING FORWARD, AND ALSO ON EVERY AGENDA, THERE WILL NEVER BE ANOTHER QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE CLEAR ABOUT OUR INTENTION.
SO IS THAT RESOLUTION SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD DRAW UP? I DRAFTED AND BRING IT TO THE NEXT MEETING.
CHIEF, SIR, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO COMMENT.
YOU KNOW, I'VE COME TO THIS BOARD SOME MONTHS AGO WITH THE SAME CONCERN THAT WE HAD A, A, A GENTLEMAN THAT WE DEALT WITH.
YOU FELT, YOU, YOU, YOUR TEAM WENT IN TO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
AND WHEN YOU COME OUT, IT WAS STRAIGHT TO THE DETERMINATION.
AND I THINK FROM THE, THE ADMINISTRATION SIDE AND THE, THE MEN AND WOMEN ON THE, ON THE STREETS, THEY NEED TO KNOW BOTH SIDES OF THE, OF THE STORY.
AND WHEN YOU GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND DISCUSS IT, THEY DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO GET TO THAT POINT.
AND I THINK THAT HELPS BOTH SIDES OF THE, THE DEPARTMENTS TO SEE WHAT WAS DISCUSSED.
AND SOMETIMES THAT STUFF SHOULD BE DISCUSSED OUT HERE IN THE OPEN 'CAUSE IT IS A PUBLIC HEARING.
SO I JUST WANNA BRING THAT BACK UP.
THIS IS SOME OF THE SAME THINGS WE BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION SEVERAL MONTHS AGO.
HEY, WHAT'S OUR PLEASURE? SO IF, IF I COULD JUST MAKE A COMMENT, UM, FROM THE CHIEF, AND AGAIN, I I'M IS YOUR MY CONTACT? IT IS.
UM, AND I'M THE NEWEST MEMBER OF THE BOARD.
SO I, I ASK A LOT OF QUESTIONS REGARDING GOOD IDEA, BAD IDEA, UM, FROM EITHER A BOARD BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE OR A PUBLIC POLICY PERSPECTIVE.
IS, IS THERE ANY HARM IN HAVING SOME OR ALL OF OUR DELIBERATIONS IN, IN THE PUBLIC? OR IS, IS IT SIMPLY MORE OF A, A HISTORICAL, THIS IS HOW IT'S DONE AND BECAUSE WE CAN DO IT, WE DO DO IT THAT WAY? UM, AGAIN, I'VE ONLY BEEN THROUGH, I BELIEVE IT'S TWO HEARINGS NOW.
I HAVE VERY LITTLE PERSONAL EXPERIENCE REGARDING THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY ON THAT.
BUT I, I UNDERSTAND THE CHIEF'S PERSPECTIVE AND I, I BELIEVE I HAD JUST STARTED, UM, THE VERY FIRST, I, I WASN'T ON THE BOARD FOR THE, THE DECISION THAT HE'S REFERENCING, BUT I BELIEVE MY VERY FIRST MEETING WAS THE MEETING THAT THE CHIEF CAME UP AND, AND WAS FRUSTRATED ABOUT HOW THAT HAD GONE DOWN AND HAD VOICED CONCERNS.
AND SO I ONLY KNOW KIND OF THE BLOWBACK OF WHAT HAS OCCURRED.
I WASN'T PART OF THAT DECISION.
AND SO I, I JUST, I WAS WONDERING IF IT'S WORTH THE DISCUSSION, UM, OR CONVERSATION REGARDING WHETHER THERE WOULD BE, WHETHER SEPARATE AND APART FROM WHETHER WE LEGALLY CAN DO SOMETHING, WHETHER THERE WOULD BE ANY PUBLIC POLICY OR PUBLIC TRUST REASON THAT WE SHOULD POTENTIALLY CONSIDER EITHER ALL OR AT LEAST PART MORE THAN WE'RE DOING NOW, INCLUDING THOSE DELIBERATIONS IN THE PUBLIC.
AND OF COURSE, FROM MY STANDPOINT AND THE TIMES THAT I'VE SPENT ON THE BOARD, THERE'S ALWAYS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS IN PUBLIC.
IT'S UP TO THE BOARD MEMBERS AS WELL.
THEY FEEL COMFORTABLE IN BRINGING FORTH WHATEVER THEY WANT TO BRING FORTH.
SO WE CAN ALWAYS DO IT IN, IN PUBLIC.
NOW, WHETHER WE DO IT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION OR NOT USUALLY IS RELATED TO SAFEGUARDING ANY LEGAL POSITIONS THAT WE MIGHT HAVE TO DEFEND SUBSEQUENTLY.
BUT THAT'S THE GENERAL, ANY OTHER COMMENTS ABOUT THAT? I MEAN, I, I WOULD PROBABLY JUST CLARIFY ON THAT.
IT'S, WITHOUT GETTING INTO THE SPECIFICS OF ANY LEGAL, ANY SPECIFIC, UM, EXECUTIVE SESSION, TYPICALLY WHAT YOU HAVE BACK THERE ARE QUESTIONS TO LEGAL COUNSEL, RIGHT.
THAT, THAT'S TYPICALLY WHAT YOU'RE DEALING WITH.
UM, I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CHIEF IS SAYING.
I THINK WE, I WOULD GET THERE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY.
UM, AND, AND I GUESS WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE TO REMEMBER, I'M ACTUALLY A PRACTITIONER MOST OF THE TIME.
I'M THE GUY OUT THERE ARGUING BEFORE THESE BOARDS.
SO I, I RESPECT THE FACT THAT THE, THE PRACTITIONER, THE EMPLOYEE, THE ADMINISTRATION WANTS TO KNOW THE BASIS FOR A DECISION.
I, I THINK THAT CAN ALL STILL BE ACCOMPLISHED.
REMEMBER JUST THE MECHANICS OF A MOTION WHENEVER YOU UP OR DOWN THE DECISION IS YOU MAKE THE MOTION, YOU SECOND IT, THEN THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DISCUSSION, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK, UH, DR. ROBINSON WAS GETTING AT.
AND I DO BELIEVE THAT TO YOUR POINT, WHENEVER WE MAKE DECISIONS, WE DO NEED TO ARTICULATE WHY.
RIGHT? I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR, UM, EVERYBODY GOING FORWARD, ESPECIALLY ON JUDICIAL REVIEW, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT GOES UP BECAUSE THAT WAY THEY UNDERSTAND IT.
YOU KNOW, JUST, YOU KNOW, WE'VE DONE A LITTLE BIT BETTER, SPECIFICALLY MR. NEWVILLE, I THINK THAT, UH, UH, MR. THOMAS HAS DONE A GOOD JOB EXPLAINING, OR AT
[00:25:01]
LEAST PUTTING SOMETHING ON THE RECORD AS TO WHY THEY MADE THEIR DECISION.I MEAN, IT MAYBE AS SIMPLE AS, UH, WHEN YOU DO YOUR ROLL CALL VOTES, STATE YOUR BASIS, YOU KNOW, AT THAT POINT, AT THAT POINT YOU WOULD'VE HAD WHATEVER ADVICE YOU NEED FROM ME, JUST STATE YOUR BASIS FOR IT AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL LIVE AND DIE WITH OUR DECISION.
RIGHT? UM, I THINK THAT WILL ACCOMPLISH WHAT THE CHIEF IS ASKING FOR IN GIVING EVERYBODY, UH, SOME TYPE OF BASIS SO THEY UNDERSTAND GOING FORWARD, WHAT DO YOU DO NEXT? LIKE, YOU KNOW, WHENEVER I MAKE MY NEXT DECISION, HOW DO I, HOW DO I DO THIS? THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME.
UH, BUT AS FAR AS Y'ALL ARE ASKING ME LEGAL ADVICE AND STUFF LIKE THAT, FOR EXAMPLE, UH, YOU MAY HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, POLICE OFFICER BILL OF RIGHTS AND SPECIFIC CASES AND, YOU KNOW, ALL THAT GOOD STUFF.
I, I'M, THAT'S LEGAL ADVICE THAT I'D LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU GUYS, UM, IN EXECUTIVE SESSION THAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION.
BUT TO THE CHIEF'S POINT, TO JOSH'S POINT, ATTORNEY, NEVILLE'S, POINT,
I THINK THAT'S MORE THAN FAIR AND, AND RECALLED ALSO THAT USUALLY WHEN WE WERE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE POINT OUT IS YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS WHATEVER YOUR DECISION IS INDIVIDUALLY WHEN WE COME BACK OUT, GIVE MY LEGAL ADVICE,
SO, UM, AND THAT'S ALWAYS THERE.
SO YOU CHOOSE IF YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN WHAT YOUR VOTE IS AND WHY.
SO IS THERE ANY FORMAL ACTION WE NEED TO TAKE ON ITEM 10 THEN? UH, OTHER THAN CONSENSUS THAT WE ARE GOING TO DRAW UP A RESOLUTION ABOUT HOW WE ARE GONNA DO THIS AND KNOWING THAT FROM NOW ON WHEN WE DO, UH, EXIT FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION OR MAKE A DECISION, WE'LL EXPLAIN WHY.
MR. CHAIR, JUST FOR CLARITY, I WILL MAKE A MOTION, UM, FOR THE, FOR THE BOARD TO DIRECT ATTORNEY DARA TO, TO DRAFT, UM, THIS RESOLUTION TO BE PLACED ON OUR NEXT MEETING AS AN ACTION ITEM FOR, UM, FOR OUR APPROVAL.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO DIRECT OUR ATTORNEY TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION, UH, EXPLAINING THE HANDLING OF EXECUTIVE SESSIONS IN THE FUTURE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
UH, AND IMPOSES NA, THE MOTIONS CARRIED.
DO I HEAR ONE? I MOVE TO ADJOURN HERE.
SAY WE MOVE BY MR. THOMAS THAT WE ADJOURN.
BY MR. NEWVILLE, WE ARE ADJOURNED.