STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COMMISSION ON PEACE OFFICERS STANDARDS AND TRAININGS

POST COMMISSION MEETING OPEN SESSION

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2019 9:39 A.M.

SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT

1170 WEST THIRD STREET

SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

Stenographically Reported by: Kathryn S. Swank California Certified Shorthand Reporter #13061 Registered Professional Reporter

KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 A P P E A R A N C E S 2 POST COMMISSIONERS PRESENT 3 JOYCE DUDLEY 4 (Commission Chairperson) Santa Barbara District Attorney 5 Santa Barbara County

6 RICK BRAZIEL (Vice Chairperson) 7 Educator Humboldt State University 8 ALAN BARCELONA 9 Special Agent Department of Justice 10 LAI LAI BUI 11 Sergeant Sacramento Police Department 12 THOMAS CHAPLIN 13 Chief Walnut Creek Police Department 14 BARRY DONELAN 15 Sergeant Oakland Police Department 16 KEVIN GARDNER 17 for XAVIER BECERRA, Attorney General Department of Justice 18 (Ex Officio Member)

19 GEOFF LONG Public Member 20 (Chair, Finance Committee)

21 JOHN McMAHON Sheriff 22 San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department

23 JETHROE MOORE II Public Member 24 JAMES O'ROURKE 25 Sergeant California Highway Patrol 2 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 A P P E A R A N C E S C O N T I N U E D 2 POST COMMISSIONERS PRESENT (CONTINUED) 3 BATINE RAMIREZ 4 Sergeant Placer County Sheriff’s Department 5 LAURIE SMITH 6 Sheriff Santa Clara County Sheriff's Department 7 WALTER VASQUEZ 8 Chief La Mesa Police Department 9 ---o0o--- 10 POST COMMISSION LEGAL COUNSEL 11 WILLIAM "TOBY" DARDEN 12 Department of Justice Office of the Attorney General 13 ---o0o--- 14 POST COMMISSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS 15 ARTIN BARON 16 (POST Advisory Committee Vice Chairperson) California Coalition of Law 17 Enforcement Associations

18 ---o0o---

19 POST COMMISSION STAFF

20 MANUEL ALVAREZ, JR. Executive Director 21 Executive Office

22 SCOTT LOGGINS Assistant Executive Director 23 Standards and Development Division Executive Office 24 25 3 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 A P P E A R A N C E S C O N T I N U E D 2 POST COMMISSION STAFF (CONTINUED) 3 4 MARIA SANDOVAL Assistant Executive Director 5 Field Services Division Executive Office 6 MEAGAN CATAFI 7 Public Information/Legislative Liaison Executive Office 8 ELENA FERNANDEZ 9 Associate Governmental Program Analyst Executive Office 10 HEIDI HERNANDEZ 11 Executive Assistant Executive Office 12 JIM KATAPODIS 13 Law Enforcement Consultant Training Program Services 14 ANDREW MENDONSA 15 Senior Consultant Management Counseling and Projects 16 JANNA MUNK 17 Bureau Chief Training Program Services 18 MIKE RADFORD 19 Senior Consultant Training Program Services 20 ROSANNE RICHEAL 21 Senior Consultant Basic Training 22 JENNIFER VAN 23 Associate Governmental Program Analyst Training Program Services 24 25 4 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 A P P E A R A N C E S C O N T I N U E D 2 ---o0o--- 3 ALSO PRESENT 4 MIKE BARNES 5 Public Participant

6 SHAWN KEHOE Lieutenant 7 Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department

8 MARK KLING Chief 9 Rialto Police Department

10 RON LOWENBERG Dean 11 Golden West College Criminal Justice Training Center 12 TIM McGRATH 13 President Golden West College 14

15 ---o0o--- 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 I N D E X 2 PROCEEDINGS PAGE 3 CALL TO ORDER AND WELCOME 13

4 COLOR GUARD AND FLAG SALUTE 13 Presented by San Bernardino County Sheriff's 5 Department

6 MOMENT OF SILENCE HONORING THE OFFICERS WHO LOST THEIR LIVES IN THE LINE OF DUTY SINCE THE LAST 7 MEETING: 13

8 Sergeant Ron Helus, Ventura County Sheriff's Office 9 Officer Toshio Hirai, Gardena Police Department 10 Deputy Antonio Hinostroza, Stanislaus County Sheriff's Department 11 Corporal Ronil Singh, Newman Police Department 12 Officer Natalie Corona, Davis Police Department 13 ROLL CALL OF COMMISSION MEMBERS 17 14 INTRODUCTION OF POST ADVISORY COMMITTEE CHAIR, 18 15 POST LEGAL COUNSEL, AND THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

16 OPENING REMARKS 18

17 Chief Mark Kling, Rialto Police Department, will provide Opening Remarks. 18 PUBLIC COMMENT 34 19 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMENTS 39 20 POST Executive Director Manny Alvarez 21 22 23 24 25 6 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 I N D E X C O N T I N U E D 2 PROCEEDINGS PAGE 3 APPROVAL OF ACTION SUMMARY AND MINUTES 45 4 A. Approval of the Action Summary and Minutes of the previous Commission meeting 5 Action Summary - October 18, 2018 6 Meeting Minutes - October 18, 2018

7 EMERGING TRENDS 45

8 B. Emerging Trends (held during Opening Remarks)

9 1. Report on Impact of the Dark Web on Law Enforcement's Future by Los Angeles 10 Sheriff's Department Lieutenant Shawn Kehoe 11 CONSENT 12 C. Consent Items 13 (Consent Items 1, 2, 3, and 6 were not 14 discussed.)

15 4. Report on the Status of the Basic 55 Course Pilot Project 16 5. Report on Basic Courses' Testing, 61 17 Remedial Training, and Retesting

18 7. Report on Legislative Update 102

19 FINANCE COMMITTEE 113

20 D. Financial Report

21 The Chair of the Finance Committee will report on the results of the Finance Committee meeting 22 held on Wednesday, February 20, 2019, in San Bernardino, California. 23 24 25 7 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 I N D E X C O N T I N U E D 2 PROCEEDINGS PAGE 3 BASIC TRAINING BUREAU 132

4 E. Report on Proposed Changes to the Training and Testing Specifications for Peace Officer 5 Basic Courses

6 EXECUTIVE OFFICE

7 F. Tim McGrath, President, Golden West College 82 in Huntington Beach, will speak on the Fiscal 8 challenges for community college Law and Fire Academies. 9 G. Request to Modify Language in Law Enforcement 133 10 Code of Ethics

11 H. Report on Commission Regulation 1052, 171 Requirements for Course Certification (Pilot 12 Presentation)

13 I. Report on Amendment to Commission Regulation 172 1015, Reimbursement, Creating Plans VI and 14 VII (Regional Training)

15 MANAGEMENT COUNSELING AND PROJECTS BUREAU 180

16 J. Report on Innovative Grant Program

17 TRAINING DELIVERY AND COMPLIANCE BUREAU 111

18 K. Report on the Course Certification Statistics from 9/1/2018-12/31/2018 19 (No Presentation)

20 TRAINING PROGRAM SERVICES BUREAU

21 L. Report on Amendment to Commission 191 Regulation 1052, Requirements for 22 Course Certification

23

24

25 8 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 I N D E X C O N T I N U E D 2 PROCEEDINGS PAGE 3 M. Report on Progress of Crisis Intervention 199 Behavioral Health, De-escalation, and 4 Procedural Justice Training

5 COMMITTEE REPORTS

6 N. Sub-Committee 211

7 The Sub-Committee Chair will report on the results of the Sub-Committee meeting held on 8 Wednesday, February 20, 2019, in San Bernardino, California. 9 O. Advisory Committee 214 10 The Advisory Chair will report on the 11 results of the Advisory Committee meeting held on Wednesday, February 20, 2019, in San 12 Bernardino, California.

13 CORRESPONDENCE 217

14 P. Correspondence Sent To and From POST

15 OLD BUSINESS

16 Q. The following items are submitted for discussion: 17 At the October 18, 2018, Commission Meeting, 18 the Commission decided to delay the discussion of the following items until the 19 February 2019 meeting.

20 Appointment of replacement representative to 218 the Advisory Committee. Request to appoint 21 Professor Kathy Oborn, M.S., President of the California Association of Administration 22 of Justice Educators (CAAJE), to the POST Advisory Committee as replacement 23 representative for Bradley J. Young. (Postponed)

24 Steve Moore, Retired Sheriff, San Joaquin 220 County, has nominated Rick DiBasilio, Sheriff, 25 Calaveras County, for appointment to the Advisory Committee. 9 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 I N D E X C O N T I N U E D 2 PROCEEDINGS PAGE 3 Brian Marvel, President, Peace Officers 222 Research Association of California (PORAC) 4 has nominated Philip (PJ) Webb for appointment to the Advisory Committee. 5 NEW BUSINESS 6 R. The following items are submitted for New 7 Business discussion. 8 Consideration for next Commission Meetings. 233 9 February 12-13, 2020 - TBD June 3-4, 2020 - POST HQ, West Sacramento 10 October 21-22, 2020 - POST HQ, West Sacramento 11 Executive Director Performance Review - 235 12 May 23, 2019

13 FUTURE COMMISSION DATES 238 14 S. Upcoming Committee Meetings: 15 May 29-30, 2019 – POST, West Sacramento 16 October 23-24, 2019 – POST, West Sacramento

17 CLOSED SESSION (Transcript prepared and bound 238 under separate cover) 18 T. Closed Executive Session 19 1) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing 20 Litigation: Pursuant to Government Code Section11126(e)(1), the Commission hereby 21 provides public notice that the following pending litigation matters may be considered 22 and acted upon, as necessary and appropriate, in closed session. 23 a) Alice Cotti and Vladimir Serdyukov v. 24 California Department of Social Services et al, United States 25 District Court, Northern District, Case No. 5:18-CV-02980 BLF. 10 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 I N D E X C O N T I N U E D 2 PROCEEDINGS PAGE 3 b) Jeremy Maurer v. Commission on Peace 4 Officer Standards and Training, Sacramento Superior Court, Case No. 5 34-2018-80002807.

6 c) Knowledge and Intelligence Professional Programs v. POST, 7 Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. NC058217, NC053503 and related appeals, 8 Second Appellate District, Case No's B266376 and B278820. 9 d) Tamara Evans v. POST, Sacramento 10 Superior Court, Case No. 34-2014-00164423; Eastern District 11 of California, Case No. 2:15-cv-01951.

12 2) Conference with Legal Counsel -

13 Existing/Potential Litigation: Pursuant to Government Code Section 11126(e)(1) and (2), 14 the Commission hereby provides public notice that it may meet in closed session 15 to consider the following matters, and/or to determine whether, based on existing 16 facts and circumstances, any matter presents a significant exposure to 17 litigation [see Government Code Section 11126(e)(2)(B)(ii)] and, if so, to proceed 18 with closed session consideration and action on that matter, as necessary and 19 appropriate [see Government Code Section 11126(e)(2)(B)(i)], or, based on existing 20 facts and circumstances, if it has decided to initiate or is deciding to initiate 21 litigation [see Government Code Section 11126(e)(2)(C)], or, if in the opinion of 22 the state body on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and 23 circumstances, there is litigation, or significant exposure to litigation, against 24 the state body [see Government Code Section 11126(e)(2) (B)(i)]. Such consideration may 25 include but is not limited to the following matters: 11 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 I N D E X C O N T I N U E D 2 PROCEEDINGS PAGE 3 a) Public Records Act Requests/Release 4 of information to UC Berkeley Investigative Reporting 5 Program/Investigative Studios

6 REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION 239 7 ADJOURNMENT 239 8 CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER 240 9 ---o0o--- 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 12 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Thursday, February 21, 2019, 9:39 a.m. 2 San Bernardino, California 3 ---o0o--- 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Please stand for the 5 Presentation of the Colors by the San Bernardino County 6 Sheriff's Department. 7 (Presentation of Colors) 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Please remain standing and 9 join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. 10 (Pledge of Allegiance recited in 11 unison) 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Please remain standing for a 13 moment of silence honoring the officers who have lost 14 their lives in the line of duty since the last meeting: 15 Sergeant Ron Helus, Ventura County Sheriff's Office; 16 Toshio Hirai, Gardena Police Department; Deputy 17 Hinostroza, Stanislaus -- excuse me. Stanislaus County 18 Sheriff's Department; Corporal Ronil Singh, Newman 19 Police Department; Officer Natalie Corona, Davis Police 20 Department. 21 Please join me in a moment of silence. 22 (Moment of silence observed) 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: We would also like to remember 24 Deputy Nicholas O'Loughlin, San Bernardino County 25 Sheriff's Department, who perished while off duty in a 13 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 tragic car accident on Sunday, February 17th. 2 Sheriff McMahon, on behalf of the Commission, you 3 and your entire department have our sincere condolences. 4 Would you like to say a few words? 5 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Thank you, Madam Chair. 6 Even though he was only with us for a short period 7 of time on our department, he was incredibly popular. 8 And I spent some time at West Valley Detention Center 9 just the other day, where he was assigned, and -- and he 10 will truly be missed. He made an incredible impact in a 11 year and a half working for our great organization. His 12 father is a retired L.A. sheriff and his brother is 13 currently an L.A. sheriff's deputy. 14 Thank you. 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you, Sheriff. 16 Now, please join me in thanking the San Bernardino 17 County Sheriff's Department. Thank you. 18 (Applause) 19 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Please take your seats. 20 Sheriff, wow. 21 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Thank you. 22 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: That was very impressive. 23 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: We're proud of them. 24 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I can see why. Sheriff 25 McMahon, we would also like to thank you for helping put 14 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 this incredible event together, this Commission meeting. 2 The beautiful and historic venue, the terrific food, 3 and, most of all, the support of your staff. Would you 4 please ask your staff to stand so that we can recognize 5 them, and perhaps tell us their names and something 6 about them. 7 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: All right. Over there, 8 Pauline. Over here, Michael, Kelly. Some of them are 9 standing in the back and I'll just -- oh, there -- 10 there. Robert up there. So we had a whole host of 11 folks that make this event possible. And from our tech 12 services to our intel division that's providing 13 security, to our culinary team that you saw yesterday if 14 you were here; they will be back today. The lunch will 15 be a bit different but it will be just as good. 16 And we have a saying in our organization, if you go 17 away hungry when our folks are feeding you, it's your 18 own fault. So they do an incredible job, and part of 19 it's an ROP program with our jail folks. But doing 20 something like this is not a simple task. It takes a 21 lot of work, collectively. 22 And once -- once we decided we were going to host 23 here, I reached out to my assistant Kelly Kesler, who 24 said, yes, we'll make it happen. She then reached out 25 to Sarkis Ohannessian, the captain of tech services, who 15 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 got his tech services team and Michael Cotton and his 2 whole group together. And, obviously, you have the 3 security concerns. And then Ron Baldwin, our food 4 services director, he got his whole team together, which 5 you met yesterday: Holly James, Ms. B (phonetic), 6 Carlos Serango (phonetic), those folks that were 7 upstairs that took care of it. 8 And then, if you didn't realize that the 9 connectivity with cell service isn't the best here. So 10 because we have a good relationship with AT&T and First 11 Net, they delivered some special equipment. Julio, if 12 you saw him yesterday, delivered some special equipment 13 here to enhance the signal so that everybody can get the 14 service that they need -- Wi-Fi and all of that. So you 15 shouldn't have any problems, they tell me. Between 16 Pauline and Robert and Derrick, they all tell me, we got 17 great, great, service, right? And then they are here if 18 something goes wrong. If you need to log on, they 19 are -- they are here to take care of you as well. 20 So it takes a great team coming together to make 21 something like this happen, and -- and we were able to 22 pull it off. And as I say, I'm not surprised because 23 our team's incredible. They do great work all the time. 24 So happy to have you. 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Please join me in applauding 16 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 the sheriff and his great team. 2 (Applause) 3 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: It's the team that makes it 4 all work. 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Sheriff, this has really been 6 terrific. Thank you so much. 7 Ms. Fernandez, will you please take roll call. 8 MS. FERNANDEZ: Barcelona. 9 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: Here. 10 MS. FERNANDEZ: Braziel. 11 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Here. 12 MS. FERNANDEZ: Bui. 13 COMMISSIONER BUI: Here. 14 MS. FERNANDEZ: Chaplin. 15 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: Here. 16 MS. FERNANDEZ: Donelan. 17 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Here. 18 MS. FERNANDEZ: Doyle. 19 (No response) 20 MS. FERNANDEZ: Dudley. 21 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Here. 22 MS. FERNANDEZ: Gardner. 23 COMMISSIONER GARDNER: Here. 24 MS. FERNANDEZ: Long. 25 COMMISSIONER LONG: Here. 17 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 MS. FERNANDEZ: McMahon. 2 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Here. 3 MS. FERNANDEZ: Moore. 4 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Here. 5 MS. FERNANDEZ: O'Rourke. 6 COMMISSIONER O'ROURKE: Here. 7 MS. FERNANDEZ: Ramirez. 8 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Here. 9 MS. FERNANDEZ: Smith. 10 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Here. 11 MS. FERNANDEZ: Vasquez. 12 COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ: Here. 13 MS. FERNANDEZ: Thank you. 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 15 So two seats away from me, to my right, is POST 16 Advisory Committee Vice Chair, Artin Baron. To my left 17 is POST Legal Counsel William "Toby" Darden. And to my 18 immediate right is POST Executive Director Manny 19 Alvarez. 20 Please join me in welcoming Mark Kling. He's chief 21 of police of the Rialto Police Department, who will 22 provide opening marks. 23 Police Chief Mark Kling started his law enforcement 24 career in 1983, as a police officer for the Monterey 25 Park Police Department. He served at Monterey Park 18 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Police Department, Ontario Police Department, Baldwin 2 Park Police Department, and Rialto Police Department. 3 In 1999, he was appointed as the chief of police at 4 Baldwin Police Department, and, later, the chief of 5 police at Rialto Police Department, ultimately retiring 6 in 2011. 7 But in 2017, Chief Kling was reappointed for a 8 second time as the chief for the police for Rialto 9 Police Department. During his six-year stint in what 10 has been termed his retirement, he was employed as an 11 associate professor of criminal justice at Cal Baptist 12 University in Riverside. Chief Kling has a wealth of 13 experience and is a strong leader in California law 14 enforcement. 15 Chief Kling, thank you for addressing us this 16 morning. We're looking forward to your comments. 17 CHIEF KLING: Thank you, Madam Chair, and also 18 members of the POST Commission, members of the audience. 19 It's a -- it's really an honor to be here. I know that 20 reading that or listening to that -- and most of you are 21 probably asking that the psychological evaluations here 22 in California don't really work, because I know I told 23 the psychologist when I was getting reinst -- you know, 24 back into the business that I'm not quite sure I should 25 even be sitting here or he should actually get me 19 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 through the process, but I'm here so -- 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: We're happy you're here. 3 CHIEF KLING: Thank you. 4 I'll keep my comments brief in addressing you 5 today, and it's certainly a privilege to be here. 6 So you have already heard my introduction, and so I 7 will keep my remarks short, and I have certainly 8 noticed, looking at the agenda online, that you are all 9 going to be very busy today. 10 So the Rialto Police Department employs about 111 11 police officers. It has 40 civilian employees and 12 totaling about 151 employees total. This is slightly 13 lower than where we were ten years ago, and I don't 14 think that the Rialto department is unique. Rather, I 15 think we're representative of the trend that is 16 occurring here throughout our state. 17 Many in leadership is now challenged, and -- and 18 it's really a heightened leadership, due to retirements, 19 younger, and often inexperienced replacement of an 20 executive workforce, and then the lack of knowledge of 21 management processes and the resulting lack of 22 succession planning and development. Those are some of 23 the challenges that I've actually been faced with, yet 24 again, here at this department. So all these variables 25 can lead to extreme agency challenges. 20 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 So as you've heard, I have 31 years of experience 2 in probably what I feel is most noblest profession known 3 to mankind and also the profession of law enforcement. 4 The last 11 years, as you have heard, I served in two 5 police departments as police chief; they're very two 6 unique jurisdictions. I was actually the type of leader 7 that was brought in once an agency was being 8 consolidated or considering consolidation with the 9 county sheriff's department, and whose city leaders 10 voted, at the last moment, to retain its police 11 department and rebuild. So in those two jurisdictions, 12 when I say uniqueness, each one of them brings some 13 challenges and they are both in two separate counties. 14 So the last six of those years, as you heard, I was 15 at the helm of this police department, and then I 16 retired in 2012 and felt that we had everything pretty 17 well settled, and we had a direction that was set for 18 the succession of our PD. 19 So when I took over in 2007, it was a rebuilding 20 phase, as I said. It was a moment in time where we were 21 coming out of consolidation efforts, and there was 27 22 police officer openings, not that trying to retain or 23 recruit officers is difficult, but when you are looking 24 at a department that's going to be consolidated, 25 recruitment challenges are even much greater. 21 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 So in 2012 when I retired, we were fully staffed. 2 We had an executive level of professionals that were in 3 place to carry on the direction that we felt was good 4 for our department. 5 After retirement, as you heard, I began teaching at 6 the doctoral level and also the master's and undergrad 7 level at a university. But what I found is, from an 8 academic point of view, is that leadership is 9 challenged, and, unfortunately, what I was finding is 10 that some of the students were actually members of law 11 enforcement profession. They are in school to learn, 12 but we really started seeing a gap in leadership. 13 So when I came back to the Rialto Police Department 14 in the last day of 2017, as the interim police chief, I 15 never had the idea that I was actually going to come 16 back out of retirement to once again lead. 17 But what we found quickly was, we had lost 50 18 employees since the last time that I was there, for a 19 number of reasons. Fifty employees is huge to an agency 20 our size, roughly a third if you are doing the math. 21 And it was due -- really due to the fact that we didn't 22 have a proper succession plan in place. We had it in 23 place in 2012. But we have gone through two leadership 24 changes in five short years. 25 Now, many would say and blame that the agency just 22 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 makes poor choices. I would argue and tell you that 2 when you lose 50 people, the knowledge management that 3 you are losing at that perspective or that point in time 4 is going to have dramatic effects. And I'm using the 5 representation of the Rialto Police Department. But I 6 am going to also tell you that agencies that I have 7 spoken with, not just in our region but throughout the 8 state, are in similar situations that we're in. 9 So we use this as an example to get into a little 10 bit more depth of what I am talking to you about today. 11 So what I quickly learned from our department is that 12 after losing the 50 employees and being fully staffed, 13 where we're at right now is that we've got 17 openings 14 of police officers, which some would say, that's great. 15 Others would tell you that we're in the same boat. 16 And I won't go into the challenges today of 17 recruitment and retention. You have all heard that time 18 and time again. But the challenge is real for us in 19 this profession. And each and every department in the 20 state is facing this challenge from one perspective or 21 another. And the often negative connotation of what the 22 media places on this -- on this profession doesn't help 23 us whatsoever, and you know that also. 24 The Rialto Police Department recently conducted an 25 assessment center for testing for a captain, lieutenant, 23 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 sergeant, and corporals. 2 So an agency our size to undertask -- or take that 3 task on, to actually try to find the -- the most 4 qualified candidates, both internally and externally, is 5 certainly a challenge. To put together 36 assessments 6 and actually have 36 individuals from other departments 7 represent what we needed, hiring an outside firm to put 8 that assessment center was a challenge, let alone 9 expensive. 10 But it's an exciting time for our department. We 11 promoted 12 people inside. We're actually going to be 12 bringing maybe one or two leaders in from the outside, 13 at the executive level, because I'm setting this place 14 up because I'm going to be here limited, just maybe a 15 couple years. 16 But mainly our challenge, once again, is leading. 17 So as I said, in six short years, we lost all of our 18 knowledge. We're actually challenged from 19 administrative processes. As our aging workforce 20 continues to go down that path, the knowledge of those 21 seasoned professionals, we just didn't quite do the 22 right thing as far as capturing that knowledge and 23 actually instilling it from a succession point of view. 24 So the ongoing knowledge has definitely affected -- or 25 lack thereof has affected our agency. 24 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 The organizational challenge for us is now what? 2 So when I came out of retirement to once again lead 3 this, I can actually empathize for other agencies 4 because I don't think we're the anomaly here. I think 5 that this is really what's happening throughout the 6 state, especially for smaller agencies and agencies of 7 our size. It's a total different, I think, perspective 8 when you are looking at a large agency. And I know 9 that, because when I did my dissertation on challenges 10 in law enforcement, I specifically looked at agencies 11 that were smaller in nature, because it's a different 12 type of culture, it's a different type of processes. 13 Not that larger agencies don't have issues; it's just 14 more challenging for smaller ones, in my opinion. So I 15 can empathize with that. 16 As the leader of this agency and rebuilding once 17 again, I give you two examples, and this is where I'm 18 actually pleading for assistance. 19 We have sergeants that are on the SLI list. 20 Unfortunately, because of the reduction in SLI classes 21 since the last time that I was a police chief, it's 22 pretty frightening. Compound that because of the 23 movement that I have just explained -- and, again, I 24 don't think I'm the anomaly here -- is that once a 25 sergeant gets on a sergeants' list to get into SLI 25 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 unless there's an opening at the last moment, it becomes 2 really problematic. And when we get on that list, what 3 happens is the officer or -- at that point -- well, the 4 sergeant will promote, and unless they are already in 5 SLI and the class approves it, then they don't get to 6 go. So we actually have this void. 7 So the need for SLI is real and it's expected from 8 our leadership development. But it's limited, as I 9 said, from the amount of courses that are -- that are 10 offered. So the complexities of promotions, more times 11 than not -- like I say, a sergeant, once they get 12 promoted, they certainly either get -- they are in 13 either SLI or they get off the list. 14 Another challenge -- and this one is hitting much 15 closer to heart for me, and hopefully it will to you 16 too -- is that when we promote -- and as I explained, I 17 just promoted 12 -- 12 individuals. I'm going to be 18 bringing in maybe two executives from the outside. And 19 the need for a team building workshop is paramount. 20 I know this because the two agencies that I have 21 led now, to have a team building workshop put in place 22 is -- and I -- I sense just from what the sheriff talked 23 to you about today, to put something to this magnitude 24 together, you can only imagine how difficult it is to 25 bring a team building workshop together when you have to 26 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 bring outside agencies to cover your department while 2 all of your staff, including your -- your civilian 3 employees, get to or need to go out and do this, this 4 workshop. 5 So in my experience, with the right facilitator, a 6 clear vision for the future, organizational growth and 7 development, the three days away from the department 8 provides the management team and this new team with the 9 skills and continued developing strategic plans and 10 leadership skills that overall -- overall lead to a 11 successful organization. 12 So in my 12 years of experience with the police 13 chief position and the team building workshops that -- 14 that we've led, the opportunity is not only necessary, 15 but vital, for the future of organizational successes, 16 as I said. 17 But I was really perplexed when I came back this 18 time to learn that POST does provide for team building 19 workshops. The issue comes down to the amount of 20 reimbursement to -- to departments. Again, we're a 21 little different; agencies my size and agencies that are 22 smaller than us. The facilitator is actually provided, 23 but it's the other funding sources that are not. 24 So what I learned is that -- as I said, that most 25 will reimburse for the facilitator, but the financial 27 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 impact for the cities or the department will rest 2 strictly on -- on that city. 3 So for many agencies, the decision is a difficult 4 one because you are either going to forgo the team 5 building workshop or you are going to try to budget 6 accordingly. And, again, I'm a brand new leader in a 7 new organization. The need for a team building workshop 8 in this budget cycle is really difficult to start 9 planning for. That kicks it down to the next budget 10 cycle. Hopefully I can get that funding through my -- 11 my council, which now gets me about six to eight, maybe 12 even ten months, into a transition phase to try to put 13 together a team building workshop. I can get the 14 facilitator from POST, but it's the other necessary 15 items that I need. 16 So -- so for many instances, team building workshop 17 is viewed by, I would say, the naive as a luxury and not 18 a necessity. So to others, it's placed in the category 19 of priorities. 20 So do we send officers, to supervisors, to school 21 for perishable skills training, or to POST-mandated 22 training, or team building workshop, and the team 23 building workshop usually gets put down to the bottom of 24 the list. 25 So, again, for larger agencies, it's a little bit 28 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 easier. For us, it's a lot challenging. 2 So for agencies like the Rialto Police Department, 3 who are smaller, which comprise the majority of police 4 agencies throughout the state of California, the 5 decision is much harder for us. 6 My position is that I'm sure -- and I'm not alone 7 in this thought -- that the decision to forego team 8 building and disseminate these limited POST training 9 funds to other areas of the department is more vital 10 than a workshop for us. 11 But the decision is wrong. And it's wrong because 12 the resulting idea of kicking the leadership can down 13 the road mentality is having a dramatic effect on our 14 profession and at that the supervisory and executive 15 levels. And we at the Rialto Police Department are the 16 unfortunate Rialto -- I would say -- poster child for 17 this often complicated decision. 18 So as a former and now current chief police, I 19 would implore the Commission to advise the Governor's 20 public staff and Legislature about please restoring the 21 levels of funding so police agencies throughout 22 California can take advantage of opportunities to build 23 their departments, not just for now, but for the future. 24 So if you are in concurrence and can assist in make 25 that happening, we can surely avoid situations that the 29 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Rialto Police Department is currently faced with, and 2 those other agencies throughout California that are in 3 our similar situations. 4 So I can't stress enough to you all about the 5 challenges that we're being faced with on so many 6 different levels. And I would certainly ask for your 7 assistance, but I do want to also compliment the 8 Commission on your often overlooked and underappreciated 9 jobs that you do every day for us, in this profession, 10 in our state, and appreciate your continued support. 11 I thank you for your time this morning and your 12 interest in listening to me for a few minutes, and I 13 wish you all a great day. 14 Thank you. 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 16 If you could just stay up there. 17 (Applause) 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: So I have a couple of 19 comments -- and others may as well -- and a question. 20 I think your dreams have come true. I think we are 21 working today on the reimbursement issue, and that's 22 going to be one of the topics of the agenda as well as 23 increasing the SLI classes. 24 CHIEF KLING: Oh, perfect. 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: So thank you for addressing an 30 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 issue that we knew was important, but it was great to 2 hear you speak about it today. 3 In the book, "From [sic] Good to Great," the author 4 suggests that we look at our organizations a year after 5 we've left, to see how they are doing as an assessment 6 of how well we've done as leaders. 7 And you spoke about succession. I've been hearing 8 that a lot, as well as retention -- we all have -- and 9 recruitment. 10 Do you think the succession difficulty that we're 11 experiencing now is relatively new or has it always been 12 there? And how are you combating it? 13 CHIEF KLING: So it's funny -- and I don't mean 14 that in a literal sense. "Good to Great" by Collins is 15 a great book, as you know. 16 We tend to see at Rialto, back in 06/07, that we 17 were -- want to be on the leading edge. Collins' book, 18 if you know anything about it, was actually geared 19 towards more of the private side of -- of the enterprise 20 here. But he also came out a few years later with 21 something specific to public -- public agencies, which 22 was great. 23 We hired the Strondo House (phonetic), I believe is 24 what it was -- Ron -- 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Uh-huh. 31 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 CHIEF KLING: -- and his team, and we actually led 2 a "Good to Great" team building workshop in 2008. 3 So I want to put that out there so we're 4 understanding -- I, at least, get it. 5 So to ask -- answer your question, and think, is it 6 new, I would say no. We go back to that ability -- and 7 it's unfortunate to kick it down the road, that 8 leadership point. But we got to get to a point where 9 we're on more of the leading edge of understanding how 10 dynamic life is changing for us all and bring in 11 concepts like "Good to Great," things that are necessary 12 for us, in today's world, that oftentimes we're in the 13 public service -- you know this. We're usually eight to 14 ten years behind the private side of the enterprise, so 15 to speak. 16 So I think that we need to put forth a much greater 17 emphasis. But when you are hiring and promoting younger 18 workforces that, frankly, are still stumbling to find 19 their own way in organizations, and you bring in a 20 concept, such as "Good to Great," it's in -- the impact 21 is not felt in an organization for years afterwards. 22 One, it was a standing joke, when I came back this 23 last time, that if we would have only put the right 24 people in the right spots on the bus -- which if you 25 know anything about Collins' points, is what he says -- 32 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 then we would have been so much better off. But what we 2 did is, we parked the bus and we started putting people 3 in places that we shouldn't have, because we didn't have 4 the people, and we weren't knowledgeable enough because 5 we lost all of our experience, and that's what got us 6 back to this point. 7 So I think there's much different perspectives than 8 leadership and directional -- organizational direction 9 that all of us need to really take a focused look 10 because, you know, the dynamic changes of law 11 enforcement is really what is now the biggest challenge 12 for us, if that answers your question. 13 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Are there any other comments 14 or questions? 15 Yes. Sheriff. 16 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Chief Kling is a great 17 partner for us in our county. And it -- may or may not 18 be aware. We have 24 cities in our county and ten have 19 their own police departments. And I got a chance to 20 work with Mark when he was here the first time and, now, 21 the second time. 22 And thank you for being here. You are a great part 23 of the team. 24 CHIEF KLING: Thank you. 25 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: And our county works very 33 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 well together, and Mark is a big part of that. So thank 2 you. 3 CHIEF KLING: Thank you, Sheriff. Thank you, 4 Commission. 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 6 Thank you, Commissioner McMahon. 7 Okay. Speaking now to the audience, this is the 8 time on the agenda for public comment. This is the time 9 set aside for members of the public to comment on either 10 items on the Commission agenda or issues not on the 11 agenda, but pertaining to POST Commission business. 12 Members of the public who wish to speak are asked 13 to limit their remarks to no more than five minutes. 14 Please be advised that the Commission cannot take action 15 on items that are not on the agenda. 16 So let me ask, is there anyone in the audience who 17 would like to address the commission during the public 18 comment? 19 Please, come forward. And would you please 20 introduce yourself. 21 Thank you. 22 MR. BARNES: Good morning. My name is Mike Barnes, 23 and, first, I want to thank you on behalf of many and 24 myself for bringing a very important topic back to the 25 Commission agenda today. 34 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Although I may have other associations that I could 2 come before you with today, I instead come simply as a 3 citizen of this tremendous country and this great state, 4 which leads others in law enforcement principles, 5 standards, and training. 6 Before my thoughts on this issue, I first offer 7 several significant quotations: 8 The Declaration of Independence: 9 "When, in the course of human events, it becomes 10 necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands 11 which have connected them with another, and to assume 12 among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal 13 station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God 14 entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of 15 mankind requires that they should declare causes which 16 compel them to the separation. We hold these truths to 17 be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that 18 they are endowed by their Creator with certain 19 unalienable rights, that among them [sic] are life, 20 liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." 21 The Preamble to the California Constitution: 22 "We, the People of the State of California, 23 grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to 24 secure and perpetuate its blessings, to establish this 25 Constitution." 35 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 California Constitutional Oath of Office: "I do 2 solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and 3 defend the Constitution of the United States and the 4 Constitution of the State of California against all 5 enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true 6 faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United 7 States and the Constitution of the State of California." 8 February 21st, 2019: 9 I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United 10 States of America and to the Republic for which it 11 stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty 12 and justice for all. 13 Excerpts from Regulation 1013, the Law Enforcement 14 Code of Ethics: 15 "As a Law Enforcement Officer, my fundamental duty 16 is to serve mankind; to safeguard lives and property; to 17 protect the innocent against deception, the weak against 18 oppression or intimidation, and the peaceful against 19 violence or disorder; and to respect the Constitutional 20 rights of all men to liberty, equality, and justice." 21 It continues: 22 "I recognize the badge of my office as a symbol of 23 public faith, and I accept it as a public trust to be 24 held as long as I am true to the ethics of the police 25 service. I will constantly strive to achieve these 36 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 objectives and ideals, dedicating myself before God, to 2 my chosen profession, law enforcement." 3 With a footnote that the reference to religious 4 affirmation may be omitted where objected to by the 5 officer. 6 The very declaration separating our country from 7 England, that three years later established the very 8 Constitution that we all support and the Bill of Rights, 9 the Preamble to this state's own Constitution, the oath 10 of office taken by every peace officer and 11 constitutional officer in this state to support said 12 Constitutions, and the very Pledge of Allegiance recited 13 just moments ago in this Commission meeting, and 14 hundreds of other meetings throughout this nation every 15 day; each provide reference to deity or use terms such 16 as "mankind," "men," and are well used with historical 17 universal applicability and are very well known to apply 18 to all people. 19 If such usage suffices for the beginning of our 20 great nation and that of our state's Constitution, the 21 very instruments by which California peace officers 22 derive their authority over the governed, and to which 23 the governing swear to support and defend, and that is 24 included in each of our pledges of allegiance to this 25 great country, the need for the Commission to change the 37 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 terminology of the current California Law Enforcement 2 Code of Ethics, which even provides accommodation to 3 those objecting to a religious reference, is a need I 4 cannot recognize. 5 With all the winds of change that continue to blow, 6 a change to the foundational documents for this 7 profession is no more warranted than changes to our 8 country's Declaration, the state's Constitution, our 9 leaders' oaths, or our very pledges of allegiance. 10 Try as some may want to convince you otherwise, the 11 record of our country that we have inherited as a 12 foundation proven true, built well into our Code of 13 Ethics, understood by today's nearly 90,000 officers, 14 and hundreds of thousands who have gone before them, and 15 recognized by many others. 16 But the great words of the Code of Ethics and other 17 grand documents, and all they stand for, are neither 18 outdated nor in need of change. 19 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Mr. Barnes, respectfully, I 20 need to interrupt you. You have about a minute left. 21 MR. BARNES: Thank you. 22 Please allow me one last quotation. 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Sure. 24 MR. BARNES: Minutes dated June 13, 1957. Quote: 25 "It was the consensus of the Commission that the 38 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Code of Ethics should be left alone until there is a 2 problem demonstrated," end quote. 3 I would ask that in respect for the great depth and 4 meaning of the traditional wording of the California Law 5 Enforcement Code of Ethics, that it has both 6 historically and through the daily service provided by 7 our peace officers to all people, without 8 misunderstanding, that today's Commission's minutes 9 would read likewise and this great work would remain 10 intact, unchanged, and undiminished in its value and 11 wording. 12 Thank you for your service. Thank you for your 13 time and your thoughtful consideration in this matter. 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you, Mr. Barnes. 15 Is there anyone else that would like to address the 16 Commission? 17 (No response) 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Thank you. 19 At this time, the Executive Director would like to 20 address the Commission. 21 Executive Director Alvarez? 22 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Thank you, Madam 23 Chair. 24 Thank you all for attending the Commission meeting 25 once again and for all the support you have provided 39 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 through this last year. 2 Today we're going to speak on a number of topics, 3 and I won't go into detail on them so that I don't get 4 out ahead of my colleagues. But, today, you are going 5 to hear discussion on the regular Basic Course Pilot 6 Project. You are also going to hear some information on 7 what we're doing with the $25 million that was provided 8 to POST effective July 1. And you are going to hear 9 information on our contracts, which we do at every 10 February Commission meeting. 11 Again, I don't want to get into great specifics on 12 those. But as you all know, there is a proposed budget 13 that the Governor released in January that goes into 14 funding for POST and an augmentation for POST, which is 15 a great thing. However, it comes with some stressors 16 for us to -- to do certain things that we're being asked 17 to do by the Legislature, by the Governor, and, 18 obviously, by you all. And I ask that you just be 19 patient with us. You are going to hear some 20 presentations today in terms of de-escalation training 21 and crisis intervention training. We have a long way to 22 go, there's no question. 23 But keep in mind that the de-escalation topic, 24 although not new to law enforcement, is new to us in 25 terms of providing training on that and funding that 40 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 comes with it. And the same goes for crisis 2 intervention training, which has been around for many, 3 many, many years, but has never really been funded by 4 us -- or actually was defunded by us a few years ago. 5 So we are a little bit behind in that regard, but 6 we're making good progress, and I ask just for patience, 7 if you all would. 8 And then since this meeting is really -- there's a 9 lot of discussion about money and our training contracts 10 and such. I would like to just go over where we are 11 with the budget after eight months of the fiscal year. 12 In terms of our administrative side of the house, 13 we are right on target, at this point, to meet our 14 numbers by the end of the year. We had some concerns 15 coming into -- or ending last year -- ending the 16 calendar year and going into January, that we were 17 overspending on our administrative budget. We feel now 18 that we're right in the right spot, in that regard, and 19 that we will not overspend and we will be right up to 20 that line. That includes all of our -- all of our 21 administrative expenditures, all of our travel, all of 22 our workshop costs, all of our supplies, etc. So we're 23 in a good spot. 24 In terms of local assistance, we continue to push 25 out travel reimbursement requests as fast as we possibly 41 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 can. 2 In the month of January 2019, we pushed out 3 $6.5 million in that one month alone. 4 We're currently processing Fiscal Year 2017/2018. 5 Our target -- it's kind of a soft target, so to speak, 6 was to complete the 2017/18 reimbursement requests by 7 June 30th of this year. More likely, that's going to be 8 September of this year. We're going to continue doing 9 our best, but we are a little bit behind, but less 10 behind than we've ever been. 11 As -- as many of you know, we pushed out an 12 automated travel reimbursement request form to agencies 13 on February 5th. That platform, as you all know, from 14 the last Commission meeting, took us a great deal of 15 time for our engineers to put that together. It took 18 16 months to build it. It's still not completed. There's 17 still some back-end work that needs to be done. 18 But just to give you some statistics on that -- 19 that initiative, the ETRRs, as we are calling them, 20 since February 5th, we've had eight -- 117 agencies 21 submit 4,302 in -- in about a two-week time period. For 22 us to enter TRRs, it takes one employee -- they can do 23 about 250 a week so -- for one staff member. So that's 24 a -- that's a significant thing for us. 25 I have some updated numbers. Actually, we have 42 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 pushed out $8,051 -- $8,051,000, year to date, for our 2 TRRs. So we are trying to do the best we can. 3 We are behind in processing, but we think we have 4 the money to push, to pay them all off, and continue, as 5 opposed to collecting and not paying them. Now it's 6 just a matter of pushing them out. 7 In terms of training, as you will see from the 8 results of the Finance Committee, we did not overspend 9 on our training budget, but, at the same time, we are 10 waiting for a majority of invoices to come in, so you 11 will see that -- I can't remember the exact number. I 12 think it's, like, $16 million that we're supposed to 13 have in training contracts, and we've only paid out, 14 like, 2 million. And it's -- it's simply a timing issue 15 at this point, that we're waiting for the invoices to 16 come so we can pay them. 17 We are reaching out to all the contracts -- or the 18 contractors that we have, to make sure that they are 19 going to spend those monies. If they are not going to 20 spend those monies, we want to move them to other pots 21 so that we can try to best utilize all those funds. 22 So in closing, our focus for the last two months 23 has been on the 2018 -- I'm sorry. 2019 -- 2019/2020 24 proposed budget. 25 Next year's budget has a significant emphasis on 43 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 de-escalation and mental health training. Charting a 2 plan will be of significant importance, and we will 3 focus on this endeavor between now and June 30th. 4 Additionally, we will be addressing a proposed 5 budget at budget hearings with the Legislature starting 6 next month. 7 And in close -- and in finally closing, I just want 8 to thank the commissioners for all you have done. I 9 think many of you have been vocal with the 10 administration, with the Legislature, on the need for 11 proper law enforcement training and proper support to 12 POST. The Department of Finance, as I say, at the 13 Commission meetings, has been terrific. And obviously 14 Governor Newsom put this in his proposed budget. I 15 can't thank him personally because we don't have contact 16 with him, but I do thank him here for -- for extending 17 that -- that to us and having the faith in us to -- to 18 move this forward. 19 And then, lastly, as I always do, the important 20 people are the POST staff that are moving these things 21 forward and making us shine and having -- creating, you 22 know, a relationship with the law enforcement community 23 and the community in California that -- that has faith 24 in what we're trying to do. So I do thank all of our 25 118 staff members for getting us to where we are. 44 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 That concludes my statement, Madam Chair, and I 2 will pass it back to you. 3 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 4 You spoke of one tremendous success after another. 5 Congratulations to you and your staff. 6 Our first item is the Approval of the Action 7 Summary and Meetings Minutes from the October 18th, 8 2018, Commission Meeting. 9 Is there a motion to approve the minutes? 10 COMMISSIONER LONG: So moved. Long. 11 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is there a second? 12 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Second. Moore. 13 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Questions? Comments? 14 (No response) 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 16 (Ayes) 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Opposed? 18 (No response) 19 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: The motion passes. 20 At this time, I would like to call upon POST 21 Associate Governmental Program Analyst Jennifer Van, who 22 has arranged for a Command College graduate to provide 23 us with the presentation. 24 MS. VAN: Good morning, Madam Chair, and members of 25 the Commission. My name is Jennifer Van, and I am 45 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 representing the Impact Team at POST. 2 For our emerging trends presentation today, we have 3 asked a recent Command College graduate to present his 4 futures portfolio. 5 One of the components of a futures portfolio 6 includes the completion of an emerging trends paper that 7 requires the identification and research of an emerging 8 issue of relevance to law enforcement in the next 10 to 9 15 years. 10 So with that brief introduction, I would like to 11 introduce Lieutenant Shawn Kehoe from the L.A. County 12 Sheriff's Department. 13 LIEUTENANT KEHOE: I apologize for my raspy voice. 14 I have three kids, five and under, at my house, and I am 15 either constantly sick or getting over being sick, and 16 it is now the latter. 17 A couple of disclaimers: I'm going to talk a 18 little bit about the dark web. So I don't encourage you 19 to jump on the dark web after hearing this conversation. 20 (Laughter) 21 LIEUTENANT KEHOE: So there is a lot that goes 22 along with it, and I'm going to hopefully capture that 23 in my talk. 24 And also, the paper that I wrote that was 25 ultimately published was focused on international law 46 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 enforcement, so beyond just California, including the 2 U.S. and international; published in "IACP." So I know 3 that California is very progressive in what we do and -- 4 and there's a lot of this that's already going to be 5 captured in some of the agencies. So keep that in mind 6 as I speak. 7 Definitely honored to be here today to speak to the 8 POST Commission and to represent my class, class number 9 63. 10 I wrote a paper that was published in "IACP" 11 magazine, which is, "The Digital Alleyway: Why the Dark 12 Web Cannot be Ignored." 13 At the time of this project, I was working at our 14 contracted law enforcement services on the 15 administrative side of the shop. And ultimately, after 16 this paper was written, I was taken to the Fraud and 17 Cyber Crimes Bureau at the detective division, and I'm 18 very thankful to POST and my department for opening up 19 that opportunity for me and allowing me to move on to 20 something that I truly love. 21 I became passionate about this project when I was 22 actuality in charge of our IT side of the shop and was 23 assisting investigators in the role of investigations. 24 And what I heard from a lot of the investigators were 25 that they did not want to do anything on the dark web; 47 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 they are not familiar with the dark web; they said that 2 we can do enough on Craigslist; we don't need to do 3 anything beyond that. 4 So I realized that this was an issue that -- that 5 law enforcement needed to become aware of and not shy 6 away from. 7 Currently, there's over 40 percent of the world's 8 population on the internet. If you look back to 1995, 9 only 1 percent of the world's population was on the 10 internet. So if we do the math, we can see that our law 11 enforcement managers, executives, were all of working 12 age at the time that the internet was actually 13 widespread. And, yet, many of our current cyber 14 criminals and people that activate -- that work on the 15 internet grew up on it. So there's a little bit of a 16 disconnect between -- between that. 17 As we know, the internet allows us to be 18 interconnected but also equally disconnected from direct 19 observation. As studies show, this leads to a belief of 20 anonymity, which supports criminal behavior. Unlike a 21 dark alleyway in a high crime neighborhood, the digital 22 alleyway of the dark web is not as easily driven down. 23 So what is the dark web? 24 The internet, as we know it, is called the surface 25 web. This consists of approximately 4 billion websites 48 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 indexed on search engines and accessible via standard 2 web browsers. But that's actually .2 percent of the 3 entire internet. 4 The remaining 99.8 percent is known as the deep 5 web. That's data that is not indexed or easily 6 accessible from a web browser. This includes private 7 networks, corporate databases, websites not on the 8 surface web, and private intranets. 9 Within the deep web lies what's known as the dark 10 web. The dark web is a highly encrypted network that 11 provides a high level of anonymity and is accessible via 12 a special web browser known as Tor, or the Onion Router. 13 With very little technical expertise, you can 14 access the dark web and begin browsing completely 15 anonymous and completely encrypted and very difficult to 16 track and find. 17 Due to this, it's often associated with criminal 18 activity. The dark web remains mysterious and is often 19 sensationalized by the media. Unfortunately, the dark 20 web also remains mysterious to law enforcement as well. 21 For very few agencies, we do not actively monitor 22 the dark web, have training on the subject or staff 23 experts within our agencies on the dark web. The dark 24 web itself makes it impossible for internet service 25 providers to provide usage information, is difficult to 49 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 track and monitor suspects, and there's the inherent 2 jurisdictional issues of the dark web, which impedes our 3 law enforcement efforts. 4 Statistics are impossible to track as the dark web 5 is primarily a nexus to criminal activity and not the 6 fruits of the crime itself. 7 As an example, a stolen firearm discovered during a 8 traffic stop is easy to capture and consider the crime 9 solved. However, the fact that the firearm was 10 purchased on the dark web itself may not ever be 11 discovered or captured statistically. The seller or the 12 buyer could be in your own backyard. 13 Without active enforcement on the dark web, our 14 basic knowledge by patrol officers and detectives of the 15 fruits of the crime, such as .onion addresses leading 16 you to dark websites, or cryptocurrency wallets on 17 suspects during traffic stops, criminals are motivated 18 and incentivized to commit crimes in the dark web. 19 Further escalating the problem is the overall 20 growth of internet users and the fact that the Tor 21 community is trying to eliminate the dark element of the 22 dark web and encourage more and more users, and they 23 want it as a standard browser that everybody is using, 24 to make it more of a -- of a herd where there's a lot 25 more people involved, and it's not just people 50 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 committing criminal activity. 2 Law enforcement must be prepared for this 3 expansion. Further, the technology of encryption is 4 getting more and more powerful and becoming more and 5 more difficult to track and crack. 6 Proper budgeting and training, staffing and 7 expertise in the field of cyber crimes and the dark web 8 is necessary to combat the growing trends of the dark 9 web. 10 Line officers and detectives must learn to 11 recognize and deal with crimes on dark web. Line 12 officers as early as the academy should be taught how to 13 recognize criminals with a nexus to the dark web. As I 14 stated before, pieces of paper with .onion addresses, 15 cryptocurrency wallets, those things should be 16 triggered, and they should know that those are leading 17 to the dark web. 18 The key -- and their -- detectives need a basic 19 understanding of technology and the difference between 20 the surface web and the dark web. Yet they should also 21 know the dangers of the dark web and the risk of -- of 22 compromising investigations. They should know that 23 there's many resources out there for them to be 24 successful in their investigations. Managers and 25 supervisors must also learn this information so they can 51 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 properly question detectives on any connections to the 2 dark web or cyber crimes. 3 Depending on the size of agencies -- of the agency, 4 you should consider dedicated staff to cyber crimes with 5 an expertise in the dark web or participation on a 6 technology task force or trade groups. 7 These staff should be familiar with and monitor the 8 dark web for their jurisdictions and -- and 9 investigations. 10 Although a detailed understanding is recommended 11 for sworn agencies -- excuse me. Although that detailed 12 understanding is recommended for sworn, agencies should 13 be considered -- should consider professional staff 14 civilians with a computer expertise such as engineers in 15 computer sciences, above and beyond the basic 16 understanding of a technology help desk. 17 Law enforcement utilizes crime scene investigators 18 and civilian crime analysts, which are special skills, 19 and those are no different than computer engineers and 20 computer scientists. 21 Unfortunately, computer scientists are not widely 22 used outside of federal agencies, and this is the 23 mindset that should be changed if we wish to support our 24 detectives in combating crimes committed in our own 25 backyard, on the dark web. 52 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 In conclusion, the dark web is an emerging problem 2 that needs a proper understanding and proper budgeting. 3 Detectives need proper training and support. And as 4 more agencies operate on the dark web, we must all work 5 together to reduce crime. 6 We all have a responsibility to understand this 7 technology and work to reduce crime through the dark 8 web. 9 On that note, I would like to personally thank the 10 opportunity for being here and for participating in 11 Command College. The networking that was through that, 12 I am still in contact with my cohort and reach out. And 13 the overall change in mindset that was provided to me 14 was -- was huge and beneficial. 15 And a special thanks to Bob Harrison and Sandy 16 Boyd -- both are facilitators for the course -- as well 17 as Joe Sampson and Jennifer Van for bringing me here 18 today. 19 And with that, I will take any questions. 20 (No response) 21 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you very much. 22 LIEUTENANT KEHOE: Thank you. 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All right. 24 It is now 10:30. We're going to take a five-minute 25 break and start up again at 10:35. And just let me give 53 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 you a heads-up. We're going to jump to Item F, Tim 2 McGrath, president of Golden West College in Huntington 3 Beach, will address us next. See you in five minutes. 4 (Break taken: 10:30 a.m. to 10:39 a.m.) 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Commissioners, let's 6 start back up. 7 I neglected to have our latest commissioner 8 introduce himself. Alan Barcelona -- where are you? 9 Did he already leave? 10 Okay. Let's wait for him to come back. Was it 11 something I said? 12 All right. Let's go on to the consent items, and 13 when he comes back, we will have him introduce himself. 14 But just to keep this moving. 15 President McGrath is not quite here yet. Should be 16 here about 11:00, so we'll be able to move through that. 17 Okay. We'll be having -- as to the consent items, 18 we'll be having a presentation on Consent Items 4, 5, 19 and 7. 20 Would the Commission like a report on any of the 21 other consent agenda items? 22 (No response) 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Going to give you a minute to 24 review those again. 25 (No response) 54 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Hearing none, let's 2 start with the -- with Consent Item 4. 3 At this time, I will call upon Assistant Executive 4 Director Maria Sandoval, executive office, to provide us 5 with a report on the Basic Course Pilot Project. This 6 is presented for information only; no action is 7 required. 8 MS. SANDOVAL: Good morning, Commissioners. 9 This is a report on the current in-progress Basic 10 Course Pilot Project. There are three participants: 11 The San Bernardino Sheriff's Department, Alan Hancock 12 Junior College, and Santa Rosa Junior College. 13 Work involved and still ongoing includes and 14 included establishing subject matter experts, developing 15 a curriculum in procedural justice, de-escalation, and 16 tac medicine; developing and revising training and 17 testing specs; updating student workbooks; and assessing 18 course for content, delivery, and time allotment. 19 Knowing and encouraging different teaching styles 20 and adaptation of material, POST's intent was to ensure 21 that the learning objectives were met. For consistent 22 evaluation and analysis, we believed it was important to 23 have the same POST staff at each pilot location. 24 I would like to introduce law enforcement 25 consultant Jim Katapodis, who sat through all three 55 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 de-escalation components. 2 MR. KATAPODIS: Good morning, Commissioners. 3 I was part of the -- putting the curriculum 4 together. We decided to do de-escalation, and we had 16 5 law enforcement trainers and four people from the 6 community as part of the curriculum committee. 7 I actually just went to two so far, because there's 8 another one coming up on the 26th, that I will be in 9 Santa Rosa for. 10 The feedback, basically, from the students in the 11 academy -- well, first of all, the instructors all say 12 that de-escalation is in the academy, but they can't 13 really point to it. 14 You know, it's discussed in Learning Domain 20, Use 15 of Force, but nobody really can point to it. So that's 16 why we decided to put this curriculum together, a 17 four-hour curriculum, for the academy recruits in a 18 pilot program. 19 So we put the curriculum together and went out 20 there. And there's PowerPoints, there's videos, there's 21 learning activities. The students really, really 22 enjoyed it. We did a little critique at the end. We 23 had the students, just myself, and another consultant, 24 and we talked to them, and they really enjoyed the 25 de-escalation, and they also said it's very needed for 56 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 the academy. That was their feedback from both the 2 academies at Hancock Junior College and San Bernardino 3 Sheriff's Department. 4 So now we're going to -- some tweaks to the 5 curriculum. We're going to take it back to another 6 curriculum committee, and we're going to make some 7 changes to it, and then we're going to put it out to 8 another three academies for a pilot program. So that's 9 basically where we are right now for the de-escalation 10 part of the pilot program. 11 Thank you. 12 MS. MUNK: Good morning. 13 I'm Janna Munk, bureau chief for Training Program 14 Services. I had the honor of attending all three pilots 15 because none of my other law enforcement consultants 16 actually had the time to attend all three pilots. 17 So the -- the procedural justice, as you know, 18 we've been running the courses for in-service for quite 19 a while, and they're meeting a little bit of resistance 20 in the field on -- on looking at -- and talking about 21 procedural justice. 22 So the idea was, let's take it back to the academy. 23 Let's take it back to some open, fresh minds, before 24 they have an opportunity to be out in the field and be 25 exposed to cynicism and some of the other activities 57 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 that create some resistance to the course. 2 And what we wanted to do is provide them with tools 3 to protect their health and wellness and safeguard them 4 against cynicism. We're hoping to inspire dialogue 5 about controversial topics, like historical events that 6 affect modern day policing and our relationships with 7 the community; we also wanted to provide them with tools 8 to engage their public with; and to understand implicit 9 bias and recognize it in themselves and others when it's 10 occurring. 11 So first, what we did was put together a workshop. 12 I have a retired annuitant that's been running these 13 workshops for me. It's Rob Patrick. We brought in some 14 of the current instructors that are teaching the 15 in-service courses; we brought in some curriculum 16 designers that are MICC graduates; and we had community 17 members attend the workshop as well. 18 The results of the first workshop was the TTS 19 designed to create a framework for the academy pilot. 20 And the three courses were delivered -- they finished 21 up, actually, in January. And I had the opportunity to 22 talk to the students after each course, and it was 23 really refreshing to see how open they were about it. 24 They were really excited. They said, "These are just 25 the conversations we need. We want to be uncomfortable 58 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 now." We want to talk about how this impacts modern day 2 policing and what we can do to -- to best facilitate 3 better relationships within the community. 4 The instructors also had very positive comments 5 about it. But they also said, look, we need to do some 6 work, and here's what we're going to do is go back, 7 we're going to bring our workshops back together, and 8 look at how can we pare down some of the curriculum. 9 Because within eight hours, it was really tough to 10 deliver all of it. And the instructors, based on their 11 train the trainer, they didn't have enough time to 12 really digest the meaning behind implicit bias and the 13 science behind implicit bias and how to give the 14 students tools to deal with it. And they also didn't 15 have enough time to digest the historical context and 16 its implications. 17 Paring down some of the events that we've included, 18 and kind of focusing on deeper conversations is what our 19 focus will be for the workshops, and then we will create 20 a workbook also to support the material. We plan on 21 running the pilots again to make sure we fine tune them 22 in a way that they could be a regular part of the 23 academy, and go from there. 24 Any questions on the Procedural Justice Pilot? 25 (No response) 59 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 MS. MUNK: Thank you. 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: It sounds like a terrific 3 idea, to have gone back to the academy and to start 4 again there and then take -- move it forward. So 5 delighted you did that. 6 Thank you. 7 MS. MUNK: Based on their enthusiasm, I think it 8 was. 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yep. I'm sure. 10 MS. SANDOVAL: So I think, to wrap this up, the 11 pilot program is going very, very well. It's exceeding 12 our expectations, and I think that we can only build 13 from here. 14 Janna's group has worked with the Basic Training 15 Bureau, so it's a cross -- it's an actual POST event. 16 It took us a while to get it started. But now that it 17 started, it's rolling, and I think we're on the right 18 path. 19 Does anybody have any questions about the pilot 20 program itself? 21 (No response) 22 MS. SANDOVAL: And I do appreciate all of your 23 support in getting this going, so thank you very much 24 for that. 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 60 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 We're going to take a pause before we go on to 2 Consent Item 5. 3 And I am going to ask Commissioner Barcelona to 4 introduce himself. 5 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: I've been a police officer 6 since 1981, a deputy sheriff; and then a state 7 investigator in the last 20 years, a special agent with 8 Justice. I'm president of the California Statewide Law 9 Enforcement Association, chairman of OC Cops as well. 10 And I'm happy to be here. 11 Thank you. 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: This is all you want to say 13 about yourself? 14 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: That's it. 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: A man of few words. We're 16 delighted to have you here. Thank you. 17 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: Thank you. 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Now we're going to go on to 19 Consent Item 5. 20 At this time I will call upon Law Enforcement 21 Consultant Rosanne Richeal, Basic Training Bureau, and 22 AED Maria Sandoval again, to provide us with a report on 23 basic course testing, remedial training, and retesting. 24 And this is presented, again, for information only; and 25 no action is required. 61 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 MS. RICHEAL: Thank you, Madam Chair. Good 2 morning, Commissioners. 3 The presentation that I'm about to give is actually 4 a report back from the October Commission, where Basic 5 Training Bureau was asked to look at reasons why testing 6 and retesting of students and recruits in the 7 academies -- to try to obtain information on the failure 8 rates and how we could accomplish more success within 9 the academy. 10 So what we did as a Basic Training Bureau is, we 11 put together a survey, sent it out to all 41 academies, 12 asking questions from: Hours in the academy, when they 13 test, the weeks they test, the areas in which there are 14 failures, the areas in which there are successes. And 15 we took that information, put it into some data that I'm 16 going to present to you today, to give you an idea of 17 where we might be able to have room to maybe make things 18 a little better or help the academies and POST have more 19 successes in the recruits passing the academies. 20 So if you could move forward, please. 21 So before we started the survey, we needed to 22 understand what it is we were going to survey, and so we 23 established a mission statement with this. And within 24 the mission statement, basically what we looked at is -- 25 we wanted to establish recruit success in the academies; 62 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 we needed to identify and improve on best practice 2 testing methodologies and also training; and the biggest 3 thing is we have to continue to cultivate contemporary 4 and strategic solutions to assist with our RBC partners, 5 the Regular Basic Course. That means we have to open up 6 and continue to have the outstanding relationships that 7 we have now. 8 Go ahead. 9 So what I am going to speak to here is an overview. 10 We're going to talk about academy separation rates, 11 academy success rates, and what we found as academy and 12 also POST best practices to accomplish this mission. 13 So the survey basis, we -- when we sent the survey 14 out, it went to all 41 academies. However, we took the 15 information from the intensive academies because we 16 were -- they were a consistent academy, and we were able 17 to compare apples with apples, as opposed to trying 18 manipulate data for modular academies. And so it was 19 just easier to take the information from the intensive 20 academies, which is a total of 29. 21 We used calendar years 2017 through 2018. And of 22 that, the number of students and recruits that we 23 determined started with first day was 9,107. There 24 were -- the majority of the academies presented back or 25 gave us information back, the data that we compared with 63 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 our EDI shows that we only -- there's -- with EDI, 2 there's only 9,437 students. So we're only missing data 3 on about 300 students. So we feel like we have a really 4 good picture of what's occurring within the academies. 5 The number of students and recruits that did not 6 complete the academy came to 1,986. And again, I'll go 7 into reasons, what we discovered along the way. Because 8 we asked a little more refined question to get an idea 9 of where we are having these -- these non- -- I'm going 10 to call them non-completes. 11 So the survey questions -- there was 44 questions, 12 and the survey questions covered a comprehensive test; 13 RBC 1, 2, 3, and LD 34, which is first aid; the 14 scenarios; lifetime fitness; manipulative skills, which 15 was one of the biggest questions about why are people -- 16 so many people failing manipulative skills; report 17 writing; and remedial training and testing. 18 So of the percentage of that 9,107 students, what 19 we found in our survey was we had an 80 percent -- 80 -- 20 80.34 percent pass rate in the academies. So we're 21 doing fairly well. I mean, we have a great statistical 22 standard here. And I compared that as a nationwide -- I 23 looked at the Bureau of Justice statistics with regards 24 to other academies, and they had a survey back in 25 2011-2013, and the pass rate nationwide, predicated on 64 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 664 academies, was an 86 percent pass rate. 2 So within ours, I think we're pretty comparable to 3 other areas. 4 The non-completes was 15.20 percent, and I'll 5 explain what those entail. And the failure rate was 6 4.63 percent of the time in the academy. 7 So go ahead, please. 8 So of the non-completes, of that 15.2 percent, what 9 we found was, the majority of the time -- and this is 10 in -- the information up here is the most to least. So 11 the majority of the time, self-dismissals -- it's 12 3.2 percent of the time -- the student recruit said the 13 job just wasn't for them. They just found that once 14 they got there, it wasn't what they were looking for. 15 Next reason after that was personal reasons. 16 Others: There was cheating; criminal activity. 17 And the criminal activity was, there was a couple of 18 arrests when some of the students were going through the 19 academy. So that was the detailed portion of that 20 criminal. 21 In lieu of dismissal; no shows; family; and 22 military, which rounded out to about 0.02. So it went 23 from 3.2 percent being the top to the military. 24 Other areas, we found failing academy-specific 25 curricula, which is not POST required. That's 65 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 additional curriculum that the academies and presenters 2 put on themselves. Injuries, both academy and 3 non-academy; and then other for medical; perhaps they 4 got a job with another agency or other reasons outside 5 of that. 6 Go ahead. 7 Failures. So the non-complete by failure with 8 regards to the manipulative skills -- and I think that 9 was one of the questions that was -- that was asked, 10 that we tried to refine, is that firearms met the 11 highest threshold; scenarios was next; and EVOC, being 12 the third; and so forth. 13 But if I can just add to that and add a percentage 14 which is not on there. So with regards to firearms, of 15 that 9,107 firearms, the percentage is 1.63 percent that 16 do not pass the academy because of firearms. So 17 although that is the highest articulated here in 18 comprehensive skills, the percentage is only 1.63. And 19 then lifetime fitness is really negligible, at 20 0.02 percent. 21 Go ahead. 22 I know a lot of times we get hung up on where are 23 the failures, where are the failures. But let's focus 24 on what are we doing right and how do we work and 25 continue to have open dialogue with our presenters to 66 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 make changes that are contemporary to what is occurring 2 in today's policing law enforcement field. 3 So what we found is, I had put out another 4 questionnaire asking the academies and the presenters, 5 if they have a pre-academy or an orientation. And of 6 the presenters, I got a about a -- I got a hundred 7 percent response, but about 50 percent of them put on 8 some form of pre-academy or orientation. I extrapolated 9 the information from all of those and came up with what 10 you find in the parentheses there, as to what type of 11 topics they discuss within the pre-academy or 12 orientation. 13 So some of them talk expectations. They go over 14 the learning domain workbooks; physical training; family 15 orientation; report writing; firearms orientation; 16 stress management; also resiliency, which I didn't put 17 up there; drill and ceremony; and preemployment; and 18 hiring process. 19 Of the reports back, I found that in 1993, Golden 20 West had already been delivering a pre-academy. And the 21 reason I articulated this way, to most present, is I 22 found in the information that was returned to me, in 23 2013 is when presenters and agencies started ramping up 24 pre-academies. So there was kind of a lull in between 25 there. A few would do it here and there, but now that's 67 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 kind of becoming a trend, if you want to call it that. 2 And then to present, we still see that increasing. 3 It varies: One day -- obviously I can surmise that 4 that's an orientation day -- and then up to about six 5 weeks. And I found, with a lot of the data in between, 6 there are -- the pre-academies are ranging about two, 7 three, four weeks. This one, six week, is the most 8 lengthy. And then I would also ask, do they find that 9 they are seeing an increase in success rates. And most 10 of the reports back says -- said that they were, 11 although they weren't really tracking the information. 12 So this was just based on what they believed was 13 occurring POST pre-orientation or orientation or 14 pre-academies. 15 Go ahead. 16 So academy best practices, offering a pre-academy, 17 an orientation, we found one agency that counsels, 18 actually has a psychologist and a team of folks that 19 counsel the students who fail, to kind of help them 20 through what the failure was. 21 And then also, allowing for tailored remedial 22 training for the recruit to test without any kind of 23 standardized restraints. Because obviously each failure 24 comes with it an individual and a human being that 25 reacts and responds to a failure differently. So we 68 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 don't want to tie that to any kind of constraints; at 2 least that's not what the academies were representing. 3 POST best practices is creating an environment for 4 open and honest dialogue. Obviously building -- 5 building trust and respected relationships is the key to 6 any relationship. 7 We provide continuous training through seminars, 8 webinars, and consortiums. And then we've also 9 implemented the POST online network, the 10 director/coordinator network, which is on our POST 11 website for directors and coordinators. That they can 12 go on to that website and post some of their best 13 practices; they can post questions. There's a 14 discussion board. If somebody' asking, "Hey, are you, 15 as an academy, doing this? Does anybody have 16 information on that?" And that's also a way that we, at 17 POST, push out information to our partners. 18 And then GoToMeeting discussions. We're starting 19 to implement GoToMeeting discussions so that we don't 20 have to -- if we don't have to do a lot of travel, but 21 we can get people together because of that, then we want 22 to make ourselves available to have open discussions in 23 that format. 24 Okay. 25 And then lastly, we came up with this as a bureau. 69 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 When we were going through the Commission minutes last 2 time and the meeting, there was a discussion on how and 3 who is responsible for communicating whether or not a 4 recruit is failing, so that a department head doesn't 5 get the infamous phone call at the very end that says 6 your recruit failed. And they had no knowledge or -- 7 that this recruit was even floundering, at best. 8 So we came up with what we call a communication 9 triangle. 10 And if you notice in there, POST is not in there, 11 because, in this representation, you have the presenter 12 or the agency and the recruit. They are all responsible 13 for having a conversation with each other throughout the 14 academy, so there should really be no surprises when 15 somebody does not complete an academy or fail out for -- 16 for different reasons. 17 In addition to that communication triangle, there's 18 actually a handout, and we can pull it perhaps -- pull 19 that up, I think -- that's okay. If we can't find it, I 20 also have it here in a handout that articulates what 21 is -- what the communication triangle is comprised of. 22 So if you would like me to hand it out, I can do that so 23 you can see. 24 And then, while she's looking for that -- well, 25 here it is, right here. 70 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 And again, this -- this communication triangle is 2 really just a method or a reminder that everybody has a 3 role in the success of a recruit. And, again, nobody 4 should be caught offguard or surprised. 5 So if you could scroll down. 6 So we broke it out to -- we'll just stop right 7 there with the presenter. 8 We broke it -- we made it super simplistic, so you 9 could just look at it and remind yourself, that's right, 10 I do have a responsibility in this recruit's success. 11 And so with regards to the presenter, you engage in 12 regular and open, honest dialogue, just like we do at 13 POST, with an agency, for the purpose of recruit 14 progress; and then same for the recruit for individual 15 progress; and then, again, we want to build a 16 transformational alliance between all involved parties. 17 If you go down to the recruit, what the recruit has 18 in -- has individual responsibility across the board. 19 Right? They -- they need to also communicate if they 20 are having struggles or problems because, ultimately, 21 that is our person that is going to be our next officer 22 on the street or our next officer in the other areas -- 23 in sheriffs' departments or municipal policing. 24 So at that point, that pretty much ends my 25 PowerPoint presentation. 71 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 The next slide would be a questions slide. So we 2 can kind of go to that -- that piece right now. If 3 anybody has any questions. 4 Yes, Commissioner Bui. 5 COMMISSIONER BUI: Thank you for your presentation. 6 MS. RICHEAL: Yes, ma'am. 7 COMMISSIONER BUI: This concerned me a little bit 8 ago when I realized that a recruit who, for instance, 9 attended, let's say, the Sacramento Police Department 10 Academy, and failed the chute, with that same score, 11 they could have possibly passed an academy within the 12 same county. 13 And so I asked for this report, which I appreciate. 14 Thank you very much. 15 So I want us, as an agency, to be able to create 16 the best opportunities for our recruit success 17 without -- by still maintaining our high standards. 18 From what I understand, there's legislation that's 19 already, I guess, being crafted, related to our testing 20 process, maybe requiring us to go from two remedial 21 opportunities to three. 22 So by us already jumping the gun -- not jumping the 23 gun, but starting our own process, interim process, in 24 terms of how we're testing, I think this is good for us. 25 And I think -- Manny, could you speak about -- 72 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 about that legislation? 2 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: I can. 3 COMMISSIONER BUI: I hate to put you on the spot, 4 but you did mention it to me. 5 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: I will -- I will do my 6 best. I think you are going to hear subsequently from 7 our legislative consultant, Meagan Catafi, on it. But 8 there was a bill that was introduced, I believe, on 9 Saturday or late Friday evening in the Assembly that 10 basically requires three tests for affiliated students, 11 if I'm not mistaken, for firearms and for EVOC. 12 And it also crafts -- the end of it basically says, 13 this can also be used for nonaffiliated students. So I 14 think it's going to apply, potentially, to everybody, 15 that they will get three opportunities for firearms and 16 for EVOC. It doesn't go into remedial training. It 17 just specifically says, give them three opportunities 18 for the test, as opposed to the two that we require. 19 COMMISSIONER BUI: Thank you. 20 MS. RICHEAL: So are you concluded? 21 COMMISSIONER BUI: Yes. Go ahead. 22 MS. RICHEAL: So if there are no other questions, 23 one of the things that we plan to do with this 24 information, obviously -- 25 Oh, yes, sir. 73 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: Do we have a bill number? 2 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Meagan, do we have the 3 bill number? I know it's Assembly -- 4 MS. RICHEAL: Assemblyman Lackey. 5 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: -- Member Lackey. 6 332. 7 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: Thank you. 8 COMMISSIONER BUI: I'm sorry. One other question. 9 MS. RICHEAL: Sure. 10 COMMISSIONER BUI: Do we know the reason behind the 11 bill, why they initiated that? 12 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: I believe Ms. Catafi 13 has reached out to Assemblymember Lackey's office. We 14 haven't heard back yet. They did not consult with us. 15 So we're waiting to hear back. 16 We -- if I may -- if I may interject, also, we've 17 had a lot of discussion internally about remediation and 18 how remediation is done. I don't know if that's what 19 caused this. But I think that is a constant 20 conversation that we have to have in terms of how 21 remediation is being done. 22 I don't know if there was a certain event that 23 caused this. But as soon as we find out, I can push 24 something out to you in the form of an e-mail, I 25 believe. 74 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 COMMISSIONER BUI: Thank you. 2 MS. RICHEAL: So if I could just add, obviously the 3 information that we have -- it does us no good to 4 compile this information and statistics if we don't do 5 something with it. 6 So we're going to present this information, and I'm 7 already in discussion with our presenters currently. 8 We're going to present it at our consortium in March. 9 We are also going to present each presenter that gave us 10 information, their statistics as compared to the whole, 11 so they can see where they are at. 12 And one of the things that I have already found 13 just in my discussion is the process of reporting back 14 and answering survey questions has revealed to some of 15 the presenters that, hm, we don't even have a process 16 for tracking this, and maybe we internally should look 17 at tracking this information for our own purposes so 18 that we can perhaps make some adjustments or changes 19 along the way. 20 So I think the survey and the request for the 21 information has prompted larger discussion. It's given 22 us a lot more -- it's given us a starting point so that 23 hopefully we can come up with some, you know, further 24 information as to how we can find our passing rates 25 increasing as opposed to decreasing. 75 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I have a question about the 2 pre-academy. 3 I heard from Commissioner McMahon about the zealous 4 pre-academy that San Bernardino has. And I think I 5 understood you to say that there are no statistics that 6 show that the pre-academies increase the number of 7 graduates. 8 So do you have anecdotal information about that? 9 Has any academy kept statistics? 10 MS. RICHEAL: Presently, we don't. And I don't 11 know that any academy had thought to keep statistics. 12 But based on the present conversation, I can guess that, 13 from the future (verbatim), that might be one of those 14 data points that folks will start looking at for the 15 future, to make a determination on whether or not there 16 is a factual and statistical increase in that. 17 But for the most part, everybody stated in their 18 comments -- some didn't know. Right? And that also 19 could be, because of turnover in the academies and maybe 20 pass along information and no direct database to receive 21 that information from. 22 But at this point, no, but we have a great 23 discussion going with it. 24 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 25 Yes, Commissioner. 76 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: That's a fantastic 2 presentation. I really appreciated that triangle of 3 dialogue and responsibilities. 4 I am -- I am interested in knowing what we're 5 solving for here, just in terms of, I think we can all 6 agree that this career is not for everyone and that the 7 academy does, you know, reveal that. 8 I -- when I heard the number 80.34, I think that 9 was actually pretty good. It exceeded my expectations 10 in that category. 11 Do we have a sense of what metric or improvement we 12 would feel that we had to move the needle in such a way 13 as to enhance success or how we maybe measure up against 14 other states or -- and I'm certainly not asking for 15 additional staff work. I am just wondering if we know 16 that. 17 MS. RICHEAL: Well, I think the original question 18 was based off of remedial training and whether or not, 19 when a student takes the initial test, how much time do 20 they get for remedial training. What type of remedial 21 training we get. And I can offer up -- I have 22 statistical data right here, if you would indulge me for 23 a moment, that I could give you that information right 24 now to show you that remedial testing does work. And so 25 I will provide that. 77 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 So the initial -- 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Before you do that. 3 MS. RICHEAL: Yes, ma'am. 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Would you define "remedial 5 testing"? Because I can think of three or four 6 definitions of what that could be, in my mind. 7 MS. RICHEAL: So remedial testing is when the 8 recruits take the original POST test, a test that is by 9 POST. And then if they fail that test, they get one 10 opportunity, by regulation, to retest. And if they do 11 not pass the retest, then, again, by regulation, they 12 are out of the academy. 13 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: And, again, a quick question: 14 In your statistics you are about to give us, do we know 15 whether there's an been an hour in between the new test 16 or whether there's been training in between the new 17 tests or days in between? Because that would be a 18 salient issue, I think, in determining whether the 19 remedial was helpful. 20 MS. RICHEAL: I have a chart for that also. 21 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Great. Chart away. 22 MS. RICHEAL: I will chart away. I will chart our 23 path. 24 So in the first chart, the initial failures, as a 25 percentage of total students, again, based off the 9,107 78 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 students, with the physical fitness test, it's 0.1 2 percent of the time that a recruit fails initially. 3 Report writing, it's 1.2 percent of the time. 4 Comprehensive, which are the RBC tests 1, 2, 3, and 5 34 -- Learning Domain 34 is 2.4. 6 Scenarios is 16.4 percent of the time. 7 Firearms is 16 percent of the time. 8 Arrest and control is 21.9 percent of the time, and 9 that's the highest in the initial percentage of 10 failures. 11 EVOC is 12.1 percent of the time. 12 Now, with a -- the retest failures, we have, again, 13 with the physical fitness portion -- so the original is 14 1.1 percent; the retest is 0 percent. 15 Report writing. Original was 1.2 percent; the 16 retest is .1 percent. 17 Comprehensive test. 2.4 percent; 0.2 percent. 18 Scenarios. We had 16.4 percent; 1.3 percent. 19 Firearms. 16 percent. On the retest, it's 20 1.6 percent. 21 Arrest and control is 21.9 percent; .4 on the 22 retest. 23 And then EVOC is 12 percent on the initial test, 24 12.1 percent; and 1 percent on the retest. 25 The information we received back from the 79 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 presenters with regards to the hours of remedial 2 training -- and, again, nobody had a set standard of 3 hours, so this is a compilation of all put together and 4 an average basis. 5 So in the physical fitness portion, the number of 6 hours on the retest that are provided remedial training 7 is 2.4 hours; firearms is 13.7 hours; report writing is 8 2.8 hours; the comprehensive test is 5.6 hours; 9 scenarios is 4 point -- or 4.0 hours; arrest and control 10 is 4.0 hours; and EVOC is 7.7 hours. 11 So the data is showing -- and obviously, again, 12 with any statistical data, there's room for a margin of 13 error in the compilation of that data. 14 But on the surface, it's showing that the remedial 15 test and the remedial hours associated with that test 16 are helping immensely in the increase in pass rates and 17 success rates for our students in the academies. 18 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: I would just like to add, as 19 a retired -- I see retired Sac PD Sergeant Elmo Banning 20 is in the crowd. And as a person who personally enjoys 21 some EVOC remediation training, I can say, yeah, it does 22 work. And thank you, again, Elmo it turned out okay. 23 MS. SANDOVAL: One thing -- I do think it's 24 important to mention that I still think -- and I -- and 25 I think that Manny agrees with me on this -- that there 80 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 is some work that needs to be done on this. 2 I found out the other day that somebody was 3 remediated at midnight:30 for firearms. I'm not sure 4 that's okay. So we need to look at whether there are 5 guidelines or just some cursory look to talk to the -- 6 to the consortium in March about, do we need to say, get 7 ahold of the agency before you wash somebody out? Do we 8 need to say, remediate somebody five minutes after they 9 fail the test is proper? 10 But I think it does -- it is going to cause us a 11 little bit more work, but I think it's work that needs 12 to be done because I think we can improve these rates 13 even more. I don't think that shooting on a remediation 14 at midnight is okay. So I think that we need to do 15 some -- a little bit more digging. I think that the 16 chart that Rosanne has put together is -- is 17 comprehensive, but there's still room for improvement. 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 19 Any other questions or comments? 20 (No response) 21 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Thank you so much. 22 MS. RICHEAL: Thank you. 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I am about to introduce 24 President Tim McGrath, but I would also like to point 25 out that Former POST Commissioner Ron Lowenberg is here 81 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 with him today, and that Ron is now the dean of 2 instruction at the academy. 3 So welcome, Ron. 4 MR. LOWENBERG: Thank you. 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: And as to President Tim 6 McGrath, he's president of Golden West College in 7 Huntington Beach. President McGrath will address the 8 topic of college monies as they relate to running a law 9 and fire academy. President McGrath began his tenure at 10 Golden West College in June of 2018. Prior to that, 11 President McGrath served as vice president of 12 instruction for nine years at the San Diego Mesa College 13 in the San Diego Community College District. 14 He is an experienced leader who brings a strong 15 record of innovation to Golden West College. 16 Welcome, President. 17 MR. McGRATH: How I do make the slides go forward? 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: You don't have to. She's not 19 in the dark web. You got it. 20 MR. McGRATH: I pushed. Perfect. All right. 21 Well, thank you for having me. 22 The first part of the presentation, I'm going to 23 pretend that you know nothing about how community 24 colleges are funded. 25 And with that, I'm going to give you a quick 82 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 enrollment. So for the next ten minutes, you are going 2 to be deans at my college to understand enrollment 3 management, because, at the end of the day, the 4 enrollment management runs how a college operates, and 5 if the programs within our college don't break even, 6 then that's an issue for us. 7 What's unusual about community colleges and most 8 people -- 9 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Sorry. President 10 McGrath, the button is just for the microphone. 11 MR. McGRATH: Oh, okay. 12 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: You will have to 13 signal, and they will move it for you. Thank you. 14 MR. McGRATH: Now I'm good. 15 What most people don't understand about community 16 colleges is that when the economy is good, our 17 enrollment falls off the side of the table. And the 18 reason that it does is that students would rather work 19 than go to college. 20 When the economy is bad, students come back to 21 college to get additional skills for the workplace, and 22 so they come rushing in when it's the worst times 23 usually for our funding. 24 So as you can see, for the last couple of years, 25 our enrollment has dropped to the point where we are 83 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 about a thousand FTS below base. 2 How we are funded -- oop, go back to the previous 3 one. 4 How we are funded is FTS is a full-time equivalent 5 student. And what that means is, one student taking 15 6 hours a week for two semesters over 17 and a half weeks 7 divided by 525. That 15 hours can be 15 students taking 8 one unit, five students taking three, but the 9 accumulation of the 15 over two semesters equals an FTS. 10 So in our world, one class that meets three times a 11 week, for 16 weeks, with 35 students, would equate to 12 3.63 FTS. So that's the key thing for us. 13 Next slide. 14 And how we are funded is, based on each one of the 15 units, we get a certain at of money. It used to be, all 16 of our units were credit, and all of our units, we 17 received about $5,500. 18 With the new funding model -- and that's why I'm 19 here -- our world has changed dramatically. So now, 20 where we used to receive 5500, we're receiving 3700 per 21 credit hour. Special admits, which is dual enrollment, 22 where we offer college classes on high school campuses, 23 we receive 54; incarcerated prison programs, we receive 24 5400; enhanced noncredit -- and that is an option for us 25 to do our academy, so you need to be aware of that. 84 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Noncredit, we receive full funding. But in a credit 2 class, over 16 weeks, there are course objectives. 3 And if William is taking my class at the end of 16 4 weeks, I evaluate him on the objectives of the class and 5 give him a grade. In noncredit, it's called 6 competencies. So William could take a class and master 7 the competencies in five weeks; it could take me two 8 years. You never fail a noncredit class. What you do 9 is you reach competencies. 10 If we switched -- which I wouldn't recommend. But 11 our CG academies to noncredit, we would receive full 12 funding, but you could never fail anyone out of the 13 academy; you would just keep giving them opportunities 14 to improve. 15 In my old world, if I received 8900 as a campus, in 16 FTS at 5400, my budget will be $48 million. In my new 17 world that's starting right now, I receive $3,700 per 18 FTS, which is $33 million, and that's a difference of 19 $15 million. 20 So my new world, to make up the difference between 21 that, is based on student success rather than students 22 taking classes. And so that is -- for all community 23 colleges in the state, this is a huge change for us and 24 this is our new reality. 25 Next slide. 85 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 So to make up the difference, here are the ways for 2 student success that we make up the difference: 3 Associate degrees. For every associate degree that 4 I grant, we get an additional $1,300; 5 The Promise -- those are first-time, full-time 6 students -- I receive another $333; 7 Pell Grants are for low-income students. I receive 8 another $500 if those students apply. 9 So for an associate degree that I grant, where a 10 student received a Promise and a Pell Grant, I would 11 receive an additional $2,153. 12 There are 15 colleges in the state that offer 13 baccalaureate degrees. None of them are CJ at this 14 moment. ADT, or transfer degrees, and CJ programs do 15 not qualify. 16 If I give a credit certificate, and that's what CJ 17 academies are giving, I receive an additional $880. 18 So the $3,400 -- I receive an additional 880 for 19 each one of the graduates. 20 Promise. And we have very few -- in fact, I 21 checked our financial aid. We have less than -- than 22 5 percent of our students in our academy that qualify 23 for the Promise first-time, full-time, because most of 24 them come to us with degrees and previous college 25 experience. And so far, none of our students qualify 86 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 for Pell, because they are coming with -- either working 2 adults or they don't meet the financial requirements. 3 CTE programs; most of our CJ programs are not CTE, 4 but I can pick up another $440 per degree or 5 certificate. If they transfer to a four-year 6 university, I get 660. None of the CJ programs right 7 now transfer. There is no additional -- when you are 8 done with the academy, you get a job. 9 Completion of transfer level math and English, I 10 have already got them. They already have math and 11 English so I don't pick up that. And attaining original 12 living wage, I collect another $440. Most of the 13 students that come to us already have jobs, so they 14 don't qualify for this as well. 15 So the reason I point this out is, right now, my 16 full funding is at the FTS level, which has dropped to 17 the $3400 rate. 18 The only additional student success money that I 19 would get from this is the credit certificate, possibly 20 if we change to CTE, 440, so it's probably another 21 $1,300 to make up the difference. 22 Let me show you the impact: 23 So this is our criminal justice. So here's the 24 cost of running a program on our campus. 25 Next one. 87 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 So it's too small to read. 2 But go to the next slide, and I will give you the 3 highlights. 4 So for a class size of 31 students, we receive -- 5 they do 1010 hours. I collect 59.6 FTS. 31 times 1010 6 divided by 525, at the apportionment of 3727, means that 7 I generate an apportionment -- that's what the State 8 pays me -- for this class, $222,000. 9 And if you went back to the previous one, you would 10 see the cost for me to run the program, for this class, 11 is $364,000. That means I am losing $142,000 for every 12 academy that I run on campus at this apportionment rate. 13 We used to run three academies each year. We're 14 down to two now. And if you lock me in, I would say I 15 don't know how much longer that we can continue. 16 And if you went back to the previous slide, where 17 you saw my campus, I'm down $15 million. And my campus 18 has about 11,000 students. The campus I came from, 19 Mesa, had 25,000 students. Up and down the state, we 20 are all down and we are all being hit by the budget, and 21 I have to make up the difference somehow. 22 Next slide, please. 23 Next slide. 24 So here are the possible ways I could pick up some 25 additional money. Credit certificates is 880. The 88 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 completion of nine or more CTE units, possibly. 2 Attainment of regional living wage, possibly. And so I 3 took between the two of those. Let's say I get one of 4 those, but I have to get it for every one of the 5 students to hit the 1320. 6 Next slide. 7 So you would see, if I hit one or the other, I get 8 additional 1320 on top of the apportionment rate that I 9 receive. I am probably not going to hit any of the 10 Promise or Pell Grant additional student success 11 funding. 12 And so next slide. 13 So you can see, with the additional funding of 1320 14 on top, I lose $64,000. Much better, but I can tell 15 you, in my world, I can't afford very many programs 16 where I am losing $64,000. And if I run two 17 academies -- and Ron is a really nice guy -- that's 18 $130,000. That means I'm not running English and math 19 and psychology and, and, and. So at the end of the day, 20 we have to make some really difficult decisions. 21 I can also say, in the Golden West community, 22 Huntington Beach -- really, of Orange County -- Golden 23 West is known for our academy. You go anywhere in 24 Orange County and you say "Golden West," and the first 25 thing that comes out is the amazing criminal justice 89 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 program. They know our facilities. The pictures you 2 saw. 3 And so for me to come here now and say, here's my 4 reality, knowing that a number of students in Orange 5 County know the college, even though they are not going 6 to go through the CJ program, because of the excellent 7 work, impacts me dramatically. But this is my new 8 world. 9 Next slide, please. 10 So I didn't want to come and paint a picture 11 without some possible solutions for you as well. 12 So the first one is, the POST requirements for 13 instructional personnel in each academy class. When you 14 put requirements on me -- not on Ron, but on me -- that 15 I need to have X number of instructors in a class over 16 and above one, each one of those is an additional cost. 17 Now, I know there are safety; there are all kinds 18 of requirements. And I'm not discounting those, but I 19 am saying, from an economic sense, when I run a 20 psychology class of 35 students, there is one 21 instructor, and that is the personnel cost. 22 We have a number of classes that have four or five, 23 even six instructors in the class. That changes the 24 personnel costs dramatically, and that affects my bottom 25 line. 90 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 The next one would be -- and I strongly recommend 2 this -- that collectively, we -- we meet with the 3 chancellor's office regarding academy accreditation 4 requirements and costs versus the new funding formula. 5 If the State wants us to, and we do an amazing job 6 training cadets to be officers, the new funding formula 7 with the success measures does not meet the work that we 8 do. And I could do all kinds of magic, but, at the end 9 of the day, there aren't enough success measures that 10 our students hit to even come close to the $5,700, which 11 is the full funding that I get in all the other classes. 12 The next one is meet with the legislators; let them 13 know about the impact of the new funding formula. 14 And I certainly understand the new funding formula 15 and why it was implemented. Taxpayers want there to be 16 success for our students. If you are going give us -- 17 your hard-earned tax dollars, there needs to be 18 accomplishment at the finish line, and I certainly 19 understand that, and the community colleges will step up 20 and meet those demands. 21 But in this program, I can't jump high enough to 22 meet the new standards with the new funding formula and 23 maintain probably more than one or two academies. With 24 that, I know the rest of the college is carrying this 25 program. So meeting with the legislators is a 91 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 possibility. 2 Raise costs to police agencies to offset new 3 funding formula. I will let you deal with the police -- 4 you can fight that battle. But at the end of the day, 5 there's going to come a time for me to run this program. 6 I'm going to have to reach out to the other police 7 academies and say, here is the cost for us to do this 8 and for me to break even. I'm not making money, by any 9 means. But for me to break even, it's going to cost you 10 more to send people to us. 11 The other one: Examine parity between agency-based 12 academies and community college-based academies. That's 13 an option we certainly can work with. Right now, we're 14 not playing on a level playing field, but that's an 15 option as well. 16 And then the other, I was hoping that with the best 17 and the brightest in the room, that we could come up 18 with solutions. 19 What I want you to hear from me -- I am by no means 20 pulling the plug. But by all means, I am letting you 21 know that my house is on fire, and if my house is on 22 fire, then every other CJ program in the state, their 23 house is on fire as well. And there will be programs -- 24 I put $5 on the table right now -- that will close, 25 because, economically, they no longer can continue to 92 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 fund a program that is losing the dollars that we're 2 losing. 3 Next slide. Oh. 4 So I can go back to Golden West and you guys 5 certainly can talk about it. I'm more than willing to 6 answer any of your questions. 7 But above all, what I want you to hear from me is, 8 I want to partner with you -- not throw rocks between 9 each other -- and say, at the end of the day, how 10 collectively, from a state perspective, not from Golden 11 West's perspective, but, from a state's perspective, are 12 we going to deal with this issue to maintain the quality 13 of the training of the police officers in the state. 14 Thank you. 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Well, that was certainly 16 devastating information for all of us. 17 Let me ask you that -- what is probably a very 18 obvious question: Have you approached the legislators 19 and the Governor on increasing the amount that city 20 colleges, community colleges, can get? 21 MR. McGRATH: We -- all of us have. But our issue 22 is, it just has been implemented. 23 And the response is yes, but give it some time to 24 see how the funding model works out, and then let's take 25 a look at it. 93 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 And the colleges have three years -- it's a 2 three-year rolling period to take what we did and roll 3 into the new funding model. 4 But for police academies, no, we have not. And 5 we're faced with fire; we're faced with nursing. There 6 are a number of other programs in a similar situation. 7 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: And I am just curious, was it 8 this Governor or the former Governor? 9 MR. McGRATH: The previous Governor. 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: So no one has approached this 11 particular Governor -- 12 MR. McGRATH: No. 13 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: -- on the subject. 14 MR. McGRATH: No. 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. 16 Other -- other ideas or thoughts, Commissioners? 17 COMMISSIONER GARDNER: Thank you for the report, 18 sir. 19 I wanted to ask you to expand a little bit on the 20 parity issue that you referred to between agency 21 academies and the college academies. 22 MR. McGRATH: Some -- do you want to address it, 23 Ron? There's kind of David and Goliath. I brought 24 Goliath with me to help with... 25 MR. LOWENBERG: Well, facts not in evidence that 94 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 I'm Goliath, but -- so I think what we're talking about, 2 as it relates to parity between college-based academies 3 and agency-based academies is that -- most of you in 4 this room know, at least those in policing -- that 5 agency-based academies use, typically, their own 6 personnel. 7 So a deputy could be easily -- using a sheriff's 8 department, as an example, a deputy could easily -- not 9 easily. But end up being assigned to the academy as a 10 special assignment, much like being assigned to a 11 detective bureau or somewhere else in the agency. 12 So that salary of that -- that recruit training 13 officer, that instructor, is borne by the agency. 14 In the case of a community college-based academy, 15 those instructors, most of them, and the recruit 16 training officers come from our training partners. So 17 in the case of the regional criminal justice training 18 center at Golden West College, we have -- recruit 19 training officers from the Orange Police Department, 20 from the Huntington Beach Police Department, and so on 21 and so forth. Those folks are paid by the college. 22 And so the difference that you couldn't see, 23 because the print was too small -- the difference 24 between costs for Golden West to put on the academy is 25 much higher than that is for an agency-based academy. 95 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Does that answer your question? 2 COMMISSIONER GARDNER: It does. Thank you. I just 3 didn't want to assume that's what you were referring to. 4 MR. LOWENBERG: Correct. Thank you. 5 COMMISSIONER GARDNER: Thank you. 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes, Commissioner. 7 COMMISSIONER LONG: On that point, the parity that 8 Kevin refers to, what kind of difference are we talking 9 about, just roughly, you know, you say that it costs? 10 And then, on top of that, what's the rough, you 11 know, difference in cost? And then, secondly, I'm sure 12 most of, you know, I don't -- in terms of output, what 13 are the numbers in terms of the agency academies versus, 14 say, Golden West and the privates? 15 MR. LOWENBERG: Well, as it relates to the output, 16 I can tell you, based on POST's definition of student 17 success, which is successful completion of the academy; 18 successful completion of the probationary period; and 19 still being in law enforcement five years later, Golden 20 West has the highest rate of success. So we're very 21 proud of that. 22 I can't speak for other academies. 23 As was pointed out in the earlier report, we do 24 have a very comprehensive pre-academy orientation 25 course, which prepares our students for the academy; 96 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 and, in many cases, we counsel those students to maybe 2 think about remediating themselves, by going across 3 campus and taking an English composition class, for 4 example, so they can pass the POST reading and writing 5 test. So we think our success rate is extremely high, 6 and that's one of the reasons. 7 As it relates to the cost differences, I'm probably 8 not the best person to give you that information. I -- 9 I believe that our costs are high, comparatively, 10 because of the reason I indicated earlier, and we 11 believe it's in the best interest of our students to 12 make sure that we meet the POST standards as it relates 13 to the number of recruit training officers on campus, 14 related to the size of the class. We also think it's 15 very important from a safety perspective to, in the case 16 of firearms, live firearms, to have a ratio of 17 instructors to students be as high as 2:1. So you can 18 see how that multiplies the costs significantly between 19 an agency-based academy and a college-based academy. 20 MR. McGRATH: If we have to pay the instructor, 21 there's also a 22 percent increase because we have to 22 cover benefits and retirement on top of that, according 23 to our CBA. So even if everyone paid the same, in 24 addition, because we're paying, there's a -- 22 percent. 25 So immediately, we would take 22 percent off of the -- 97 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 the cost. 2 COMMISSIONER LONG: And maybe just -- I was trying 3 to get a -- like, a percentage of, say, in a -- in a 4 year, that -- from agency academies to private 5 academies, like Golden West. Where do the bulk of 6 the -- of the graduates come from? Are they coming out 7 of agency academies or are they coming out of... 8 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: If I may, Commissioner 9 Long, I'm going to give you an estimate. I believe it's 10 about 60 percent; or departments, about 40 percent. Or 11 colleges -- you saw the numbers in the previous 12 presentation -- of about 5,000 individuals going through 13 the academy. 14 And while I have the microphone on, if I may 15 interject on one of the questions you posed, 16 Commissioner Long. 17 So one of the other issues that we face with the 18 colleges, that they have brought forward to us, in terms 19 of the cost, is, there's certain mandated training that 20 instructors have to go through before they can teach at 21 a community college. 22 Well, the -- the Penal Code does not allow for us 23 to reimburse those individuals that go through the 24 mandated training. So, for instance, one of the recent 25 discussions we've had is through RTO instruction, you 98 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 must go through the RTO classes to be an RTO in an 2 academy. Well, because they are coming from departments 3 but they are not working for -- they are kind of on 4 loan, so to speak, but they are not -- they are not 5 performing their job duties at Golden West or other 6 colleges on behalf of the department. They can't seek 7 reimbursement for that; they can't submit a TRR. We 8 can't pay for their instruction costs. So Golden West 9 has to pay for those, whereas, if they are coming from a 10 department, we reimburse that. 11 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: I have a question: Ron, 12 I just wanted to confirm, the staff officers at the 13 academy, they are -- they are employees of the agency at 14 the time that your academy and staff officers are being 15 employed by the community college? 16 MR. LOWENBERG: Correct. 17 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: And is it -- is it 18 reimbursed to the agency or is it -- they are being -- 19 they are on offduty time when they are working? 20 MR. LOWENBERG: The -- the staff officers that are 21 working for us are working for us. It's our salary, 22 they are on our dime. And the agencies are reimbursed 23 for their trainees. That reimbursement goes to the 24 agency, not to the academy. 25 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Okay. So the officers 99 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 are on their -- their -- they have completed their 2 40-hour workweek. 3 MR. LOWENBERG: Correct. 4 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: They are being paid 5 extra money. 6 MR. LOWENBERG: Correct. 7 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Okay. So one of the 8 potential options you asked for others of theirs is 9 reaching out to agencies who do sponsor recruits and 10 saying, you need to -- much like an academy in San 11 Bernardino, you need to start supplying staff officers 12 on your dime to reduce our costs. 13 MR. LOWENBERG: Absolutely. 14 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: So -- okay. Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: And just to add a bit of 16 perspective, we've had a partnership with our community 17 college for 50 years. So our basic academy is funded 18 primarily through the General Fund. But we also train 19 our ongoing CBT for our officers as well, as the range 20 is included as well. 21 The partnership we have with the community college 22 helps offset some of the costs, so we get FTEs based on 23 the number of -- of students that we run through. 24 Depending on the availability of FTEs from the college, 25 we can also run our use of force training, our 24 hours 100 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 every year, through the college as well and get 2 reimbursement. If that's not available, the primary 3 focus of our FTEs is used to fund the basic academy. 4 As to your point, we do have TOs that are on loan 5 from other agencies. They donate them to our academy, 6 and we do the training for all the law enforcement 7 agencies in our county, as well as other counties if we 8 have room. We can turn out a hundred each academy class 9 and we run four classes a year. 10 Numbers are a little bit smaller now, as we don't 11 need as many folks. But there was a time when we were 12 running -- starting classes with about 110 and 13 graduating in the 90s. 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 15 Yes, Commissioner. 16 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Yeah. One more. 17 And the -- the sheriff brings up a good point: 18 Most of the academies that are agency-based rely on FTS 19 revenues to help support those academies. So it's not 20 just the community colleges that are going to be 21 financially impacted. It's all the academies, including 22 the in-service part. So this is a big deal. And, 23 again, it's one of those that may need to rise, later 24 on, to some subcommittee of the Commission to tackle 25 this one, because it's going to impact everybody, not 101 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 just the community colleges. 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Anything else on this? 3 (No response) 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you, gentlemen. 5 MR. LOWENBERG: Thank you. 6 MR. McGRATH: Thank you. 7 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Just to give you a 8 window into how we're going to be moving forward, I'm 9 going to ask that the last consent item be called. 10 Then we're going to briefly break for lunch. There 11 is lunch that is served upstairs. Thank you, Sheriff 12 McMahon. But I'm going to ask you to take ten minutes 13 to get your lunch and bring it back here. Otherwise 14 we're not going to be close to being able to leave at 15 2:00 or 3 o'clock. So after the consent item, we'll 16 break, we'll get our food, and everyone but Commissioner 17 Long can eat their lunch, and he can make a presentation 18 on the budget. 19 So at this time, I will call upon Legislative 20 Liaison/Public Information Officer Meagan Catafi to give 21 a report reflecting new laws and legislation impacting 22 POST. I think this is the first time you will be 23 addressing us. 24 So welcome. 25 MS. CATAFI: Thank you, Madam Chair, Commissioners. 102 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 I know some of you are looking at me and you are like, 2 "I think she looks familiar." No, I'm not at the wrong 3 meeting. I came from the California Police Chiefs 4 Association. I spent the last seven years there. When 5 I began at Cal Chiefs, I was their program coordinator 6 and their legislative coordinator. I just wanted to 7 kind of tell you who I am so it can kind of tie into how 8 I'm here today. 9 So when I began at Cal Chiefs, they had a contract 10 lobbyist and a small committee of chiefs who kind of 11 went through all the legislation and took positions. 12 And I had had some legislative experience before I 13 joined there and started to kind of question why it 14 wasn't a more robust program for them. And so I started 15 in-house, helping them develop the committee, which I'm 16 proud to say now has so many members that they have to 17 cut them off. There's at least 35 if not 40 chiefs on 18 that committee. They ended up hiring an in-house 19 lobbyist to do all of their business, and I think that 20 Cal Chiefs is one of the leading law enforcement 21 associations that is a force to be reckoned with at the 22 capitol. So I'm very proud to say that I was a part of 23 that team. 24 As the association grew, however, I went in a 25 different direction and went on the training side. I 103 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 was their training manager for a good part of at least 2 five years of the seven I spent there. And training 3 with law enforcement is an absolutely passion of mine. 4 So when this position at POST opened up, I took it 5 as an opportunity to increase that awareness of training 6 in law enforcement and really pursue that passion I 7 have. 8 So you are not here to listen about me. 9 So as most of you know, the legislative process is 10 just getting underway for the 2019/20 session. They 11 came back into session on January 7th, which was also 12 the day I started at POST. 13 So the session right now, as it is, they have until 14 tomorrow at midnight. They -- I mean, the 15 Legislature -- has until tomorrow at midnight to submit 16 or introduce any bill. 17 So I can tell you that this week alone, at least 50 18 bills regarding law enforcement have come across my 19 e-mail. Reading them -- obviously, not all relate to 20 POST. But there are quite a few in the last, just, 21 several days that have popped up, that will affect us if 22 they go across the desk. 23 I'm only going to speak to you about a few of them 24 right now that have had some traction so far in the 25 Legislature, because there's still so much time in the 104 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 session that it's really hard to say where they will end 2 up. 3 So right now, there are a few specific topics that 4 are gaining some attention. One of them is gun violence 5 restraining orders. There are four bills currently on 6 these gun violence restraining orders specifically. One 7 of them will directly affect POST. That's AB 165 by 8 Assemblymember Gabriel, and this would mandate training 9 specifically on gun violence retaining orders in the 10 basic academy and for all in-service officers. We were 11 able to meet with them and they had some questions to, 12 you know, kind of how the academy works and how much it 13 costs to do in-service. 14 Director Alvarez and I met with them and had a 15 great conversation, and out of that conversation, they 16 notified me that they taking -- taken dispatchers out of 17 that mandated training. So still a little work to go on 18 that one specifically. 19 But I can also tell you that internally, staff -- 20 POST staff has started to work on a training video on 21 gun violence restraining orders to put into the academy, 22 if need be, and, obviously, make it online, available 23 for our in-service officers. 24 The next big topic, which is no surprise to anyone 25 in law enforcement, is the issue of use of force that 105 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 has come back up -- came in the form of AB 931 in the 2 last session, and it's come back for this session. 3 Dr. Shirley Weber has announced her bill, AB 392. 4 As I understand, it's the same bill that she introduced 5 last year in the form of AB 931. 6 I know that there were a lot of conversations that 7 occurred between law enforcement teams, associations, 8 you name it. Everybody was pretty involved in the 9 offseason to try to come to some sort of agreement with 10 her office, and, unfortunately, one wasn't reached. 11 So counteractively, a large group of law 12 enforcement affiliates came forward with SB 230, by 13 Senator Caballero, and this bill is different. 14 Obviously it's a little bit of a war on words between 15 the two items. But this one, 230, is different because 16 it will affect POST directly, in that it would mandate 17 that we develop some training specifically on that -- 18 there's about 13 items listed in the bill on use of 19 force. So obviously working with our law enforcement 20 affiliates on this, and we will definitely have to see 21 where this goes. It's definitely going to be an 22 interesting session. 23 And then the second to last item that's becoming 24 popular is dispatcher training. I have noticed a trend 25 in some mandates coming forward with relation to 106 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 dispatchers. The first bill is AB 680, and then the 2 next bill is AB 757. Both would mandate for dispatchers 3 on mental health, and the other one on human 4 trafficking. 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Let me just interrupt you for 6 a second. 7 We don't have some of these bills? Okay. 8 MS. CATAFI: Yes. 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: So we're stuck at 243 because 10 it's not up there. 11 MS. CATAFI: Correct. 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 13 Go ahead. 14 MS. CATAFI: Yes. The -- I apologize. The 15 legislation moves so quickly and -- 16 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: The rest -- we keep looking up 17 there. Stop looking. 18 MS. CATAFI: So the dispatcher training would be a 19 mandate of specific hours in regards to mental health 20 and human trafficking, continuing to have those 21 discussions and educating our lawmakers on those topics. 22 The next topic, which seems to be increasing in 23 popularity is hate crimes. I am assuming that because 24 of the audit that came out last year on hate crimes and 25 the lack of training that was noted in the audit, that 107 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 there are some -- there are several bills coming forward 2 now to address that issue. 3 So far, AB 301 is the one to watch. It's a bit of 4 a placeholder bill right now. But I can tell you what 5 that -- that author's office has already reached out to 6 us to have those conversations as to how POST can 7 assist. 8 Another one popped up late last night, so I don't 9 have that number yet, and I am still reading through it. 10 But I am expecting hate crimes to probably be another 11 hot topic this year. 12 And then the last bill I wanted to address was AB 13 332 that came up. And that -- as it stands right now, I 14 wanted to clarify the language, Manny, because -- so 15 this bill would authorize a law enforcement agency that 16 is sponsoring a peace officer trainee or an entity that 17 operates a peace officer training academy to permit a 18 peace officer trainee to have at least one but not more 19 than three opportunities to remediate the skills portion 20 of the learning domains relating to vehicle operation 21 and firearms proficiency. 22 So as Manny indicated, I have already reached out 23 to Lackey's office to see what the background is and how 24 we can work with them on this. And I have also spoken 25 to Cal Chiefs and the State Sheriff's Association to 108 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 just kind of get their pulse on the issue, and they were 2 not aware of this bill either. 3 So I'm looking forward to having that conversation 4 with Lackey's office and get a little bit more 5 background on that. 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: And for the last bill, does he 7 address the duration of time and the extent of the 8 remediation? 9 MS. CATAFI: No. 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: He just says "remediation." 11 MS. CATAFI: What I read is pretty much all that's 12 in there so -- 13 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: So that will be part of the 14 discussion, I assume. 15 MS. CATAFI: Yes. Absolutely. 16 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Other comments? Questions? 17 Yes. Commissioner Chaplin. 18 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: I just want to welcome you 19 to the team, Meagan. And I want to congratulate you, 20 Manny, on an exceptional hire. I had an opportunity, 21 with Meagan, as the program chair of the Cal Chiefs 22 Training Committee, and I have served as the chair for 23 the last several years, I can tell you, she's 24 exceptional, she's passionate about public safety, about 25 training, and it's just an excellent hire. Welcome to 109 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 the team. 2 MS. CATAFI: Thank you, Chief. 3 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you, Commissioner. 4 Any other comments? 5 Yes. 6 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Thank you, 7 Commissioner Chaplin. We -- we echo what you just said. 8 We're very fortunate to have Meagan on board with us. 9 Also, I believe, about a year ago, you asked -- the 10 Commission asked that we provide monthly reports on 11 legislation. I know we -- we did that and then we kind 12 of fell off the tracks a little bit in the fall. We 13 will get that going again. 14 I believe what you asked for are legislative 15 reports on -- on status of bills that are going through 16 that effect POST, not law enforcement in general. So 17 we'll continue that as we get a better foundation, and 18 Meagan gets some more time on her -- on her side. 19 MS. CATAFI: I will just add that if anybody has 20 any questions/concerns about any sort of legislation 21 that might be given to you or that you hear about, 22 please feel free to send me an e-mail and give me a 23 call. I would be more than happy to discuss any of it 24 with you. 25 Thank you. 110 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you so much, and 2 welcome. 3 Item K on the agenda is a consent item: It's a 4 Report on Course Certifications Statistics from 5 September 1st, 2018, through 12/31/2018. 6 Would anyone like a report on this? 7 (No response) 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Hearing none, Vice Chair 9 Baron, did the Advisory Committee have any comments on 10 any of the items provided in the consent calendar? 11 ADVISORY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIRPERSON BARON: Madam 12 Chair, yes, we did, on a few items, if you will allow me 13 to pull up my notes for you. 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Please. Thank you. 15 ADVISORY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIRPERSON BARON: Would 16 you like me to go through the list for you? 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Please go ahead. 18 ADVISORY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIRPERSON BARON: For the 19 Regulation 1052, we were in favor of supporting the 20 regulation. As for the changes in Basic Training 21 Course, we also were in favor. We concurred on it. For 22 the pilot program on 1052, the new Course Certification 23 Pilot Program, that -- that definitely got a big -- big 24 thumbs up, especially from me. So we were all concurred 25 for that one. 111 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 For the modifications -- I take that back. Skip 2 that one. 3 One of the things that there was recommendations on 4 was the procedural justice video we talked about. That 5 was -- there was a recommendation made by the chief -- 6 Chief Spagnoli to hopefully allow that to be a kind of 7 optional workaround for the chiefs of police or heads of 8 the departments. Rather than having to sit through the 9 program itself, to maybe watch a video or have a 10 different option for it. And I know that our executive 11 director stated that we will address that. 12 Madam Chair, that's the extent of our -- or our 13 review of the items on the Consent -- 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 15 ADVISORY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIRPERSON BARON: -- 16 excluding the subcommittee stuff. 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes. Later. Thank you, Vice 18 Chair Baron. 19 As that was the last item on the consent agenda, is 20 there a motion to approve the consent items? 21 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: So moved. Braziel. 22 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Second. McMahon. 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Comments? Questions? 24 (No response) 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 112 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 (Ayes) 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Opposed? 3 (No response) 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. It is now five to 5 12:00, so if you could grab your sandwiches upstairs and 6 be back here at 5 after 12. There are steps and there's 7 an elevator. We'll see you soon. Thank you. 8 (Lunch recess taken: 11:54 a.m. to 12:16 p.m.) 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. So thank you all. 10 I -- I did not mean to rush you, but I think you 11 will appreciate that when it's 2:00 and 2:30. 12 So let's start up again. 13 And Commissioner Long, thank you so much. And if 14 you could please start on the budget presentation. 15 COMMISSIONER LONG: Sure. 16 As many of you are aware, there has been a big 17 bump. There has been a -- basically a 60 percent 18 increase in the base budget of POST. I don't know that 19 I've ever seen a 60 percent increase in any base budget 20 in the state, so it's quite amazing. It's all General 21 Fund. 22 If you look at the first block up there, the 23 $74 million, and then you see that for proposed for 24 19/20, it's $81 million. That doesn't look like a 25 30 -- you know, a 33 million increase. But what you 113 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 really need to do, to understand the difference is, back 2 out that 25 million, which is the one-time money. So 3 the base -- it really artificially inflates the base. 4 If you back that 25 million out, it's not a $74 million 5 base. It's really like a $49 million base. Then to get 6 to 81, you are looking at a net difference of about 7 32.2 million. It's not the 34.9 million we keep hearing 8 about, because if you look under the budget authority 9 there, the third line down, we lose about two and a half 10 million dollars, $2.7 million from the State Penalty 11 Fund, which, as we talk about every Finance meeting, 12 continues to crater. And there's -- there's really no 13 particular end in sight right now. 14 So the fact that the Governor has stepped forward 15 and provided $34.9 million in General Fund to POST -- 16 now, the State is flush. There's no reason to think 17 that that $34.9 million increase will go away unless 18 some type of -- the bottom falls out and there's some 19 type of recession. I did mention the other day that 20 revenues, state revenues, are down about $2 billion in 21 February from projections, but there's every reason to 22 think that that will right itself in April and May as 23 the returns come in. 24 This is a -- really kudos to the -- our director 25 and his staff. You don't get a 60 -- 60 percent base 114 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 bump unless people think you are doing something right 2 or at least you are on the -- on the right track. So it 3 seems to indicate a real faith in the direction and the 4 MO of POST at the moment. 5 However, the thing to note -- and we'll go -- we'll 6 break down all of the -- the proposed increases, but the 7 thing to note -- Elena, if you could scroll up to that 8 note under the bottom there, so we can read that. 9 It's an important paragraph here. The budget 10 includes $35 million for increased peace officer 11 training. 12 Now, the verbiage here does not necessarily jibe 13 completely with the current spending plan. That's not 14 unusual. That's a budget change proposal. The 15 departments have to write to explain and defend how they 16 would spend the money. It's not unusual in February. 17 It's not unusual with a new Governor to amend these 18 BCPs, to change them, to drop them. 19 But as you will see here, this verbiage, keep in 20 mind as we go through what this $34.9 million will be 21 spent on. Since -- $20 million to make permanent the 22 one-time augmentation included in the 2018 budget; 23 that's 20 of that 25 million for de-escalation, CTI, 24 mental health, and so forth. 25 So, obviously -- and the Governor addressed this 115 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 specifically in the State of the State; he talked about 2 how we're going to use that new POST money for 3 de-escalation and so forth. 4 Also, then, 14.9 million to restore POST to 5 historical budget levels. 6 What you will see as we walk through the proposed 7 spending is they don't all tie directly to -- there's 8 not probably $20 million that's tied directly to 9 de-escalation and CIT and so forth. It doesn't mean 10 that it can't be; doesn't meant that it won't be. What 11 it does mean is the Governor has made these statements. 12 We know that the Legislature is looking for that type of 13 investment. 14 So as we move forward with the budget change 15 proposal, as we move forward into budget hearings, we're 16 going to have to be aware of the need to possibly, 17 likely, draw maybe a more explicit nexus between the 18 budget increase and de-escalation training. 19 So I think we can skip the State Penalty Fund 20 inexorable slide chart. It goes like that. Okay? And 21 it's still going like that. 22 So if we go to the next -- let's just go to the 23 director -- I think we have a PowerPoint presentation on 24 the -- on the spending. It is no color. I don't know 25 what you called it, Manny. There we go. There we go. 116 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 And so you can see, in broad base -- oops. Broad 2 brush strokes -- No worries. No worries at all. 3 You can see, in the -- in really, what -- under the 4 proposed 2019. Here's where your major spending 5 increases are to get to that -- to get to that 6 $34.9 million: It's 4.7 for administration; 24.5 7 million for local training and local assistance; 8 5.7 million for contracts. 9 And the next slide will -- we can start to break 10 these down a little more. 11 4.7 for POST. That's -- they get a million and a 12 half for 11 new staff positions. And $3.2 million for 13 IT, basically. 14 The next slide gives you a further breakdown, if 15 anyone wants to discuss the AGPAs and staff service 16 manager 1s. But these are just the specific staff 17 that -- they will get for administration. 18 The next slide, we get into the meat of the issue, 19 which is training, $5.7 million. And here's -- this 20 slide and the next with local assistance and 21 reimbursements is where I think you will see the most 22 discussion with the Legislature and the field and so 23 forth. 24 So a million-5, to update curriculum -- Manny, 25 correct me if I'm wrong, or you can add, obviously. 117 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Those are generally for legacy courses, Command College, 2 executive development, SLI, IDI, as well as 3 specifically -- and here's to that nexus -- 4 de-escalation scenarios for force option simulators, 5 which would clearly fit within the nexus that the 6 Governor and the Legislature is anticipating. 7 And then a million to restore the quality assurance 8 program, to audit courses, and then a million to restore 9 the IDI, which was suspended last year. That also, in 10 the write-up, in the BCP, includes specific nexus to CIT 11 and de-escalation and procedural justice. 12 And then 500,000 to restore the SLI training to 13 reduce that backlog. Where did that one go? There it 14 is. 500K. I guess there's about a one-year wait now, 15 and this will increase the annual presentations from 15 16 to 20. 17 And then the final 1.7 of that 5.7 is to -- online 18 courses and classroom-based training. This write-up, 19 the BCP, also explicitly draws a line to CIT and 20 de-escalation and procedural justice, again, which is 21 what the Governor's folks and the Legislature are going 22 to be looking forward, to a large extent. 23 The biggest chunk of the 24.9 is the local -- local 24 assistance and reimbursements. 25 First piece is 7.5 million to increase 118 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 reimbursements for basic academy. From 50 to $75 and up 2 to 800 hours, instead of the 664. I think this was the 3 first increase in -- since 1995 or something, in the 4 reimbursements for the basic academy. 5 Next is 8 million for backfill reimbursement. 6 Then $7 million to reinstate local reimbursement 7 plans and to develop two new plans that, with the 8 executive director's authority, will allow reimbursement 9 for regional training -- training plans. 10 Grants of up to $25,000, I believe, is what you are 11 looking at? 12 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: That's correct. We 13 would pay a presenter up to $25,000 to go present to a 14 class. 15 COMMISSIONER LONG: And the final piece of the 16 24.5 million is 2 million to increase EVOC 17 reimbursement, from a thousand to 2,000, assuming the 18 academy increases the hours. 19 So in a nutshell, this is -- the budget is 20 essentially made whole, plus this $34.9 million. The 21 challenge will be to protect it, to safeguard it, and, 22 for our POST folks, to artfully navigate the demands 23 from the field and the demands from the Legislature and 24 the expectations of the administration on how and where 25 this will be -- will be spent. There will be pressure. 119 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 The ledge analyst, who is very influential in terms 2 of shaping the budget just came out with their review 3 the day before yesterday -- largely neutral to 4 positive -- but basically saying what they will be 5 looking for -- and so will the Legislature -- will be 6 some type of measurable outcome to criteria to 7 determine, all right, what are you guys -- we're giving 8 you 35 million bucks. What is it that you are go do 9 with it and how are we going to know it worked? You 10 know? 11 And secondly, they do raise the issue -- 12 Legislature -- you can do whatever you want with this 13 money, basically. 14 So I think, from a POST perspective and the 15 expenditures that POST has laid out, the best defense is 16 a good offense. And I think that we have plenty of time 17 now for -- to get out front and to defend and make sense 18 of the appropriations as they are proposed. 19 So that, in a nutshell, is the -- before we get to 20 contracts, this is the budget -- the budget piece. 21 So Manny, if you have additional comments. 22 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Commissioner Long, 23 yes, if I may -- may address some of the points there. 24 So in terms of SLI, obviously that came up in the 25 morning with -- with Chief Kling. 120 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 So it does ask -- this will give us funding to do 2 at least 20. We're shooting for 22 SLI sessions, and we 3 will probably come back to the Commission on the 4 dispatcher side. So we have had six dispatchers that 5 are going through SLI right now. We feel like it's been 6 effective, and we're going to hopefully incorporate them 7 with your -- with your approval next fiscal year as 8 well. 9 In terms of EVOC, it does raise the reimbursement 10 rate for academy cadets or recruits going through EVOC, 11 from a thousand to 2,000. But the way we wrote the BCP 12 is that we wanted additional behind-the-wheel training. 13 Right now it's about four -- it's 40 hours, I believe, 14 of EVOC. Four hours in a simulator and about 36 in the 15 vehicle. So we're asking the -- the way we wrote the 16 BCP is that we will increase the funding with added 17 training for EVOC because we feel that that is one of 18 the areas that we hear about failures and complications 19 with, you know, the younger generation not driving as 20 soon as, maybe, some of us have. 21 The academy reimbursement. We've already started 22 to have some discussions within the state as to how 23 that's going to work with, I believe, DGS. 24 It would raise the rate that we reimburse per cadet 25 from, I believe, 4300 up to 7,000 and change. It gives 121 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 the ability to go -- it's $75 -- from 50 to $75 and 2 reimbursed for up to 800 hours. The minimum academy 3 right now, I believe, is at 720 or 740. So we want to 4 fully reimburse those academies for the training that 5 they are doing. 6 And then the staff positions are very, very 7 important for us. I know it kind of takes away from 8 some of the local assistance and some of the other 9 training. But as I mentioned yesterday, in the heydey 10 of POST, we had 134 positions. The way the BCP reads, 11 we look back 20 years and it was -- 20 years ago, I 12 believe it was at 131. And as we articulated in the 13 BCP, that's before EDI. That's before the learning 14 portal. And if you start adding up the staff that we 15 have to manage EDI, to keep track of every peace officer 16 and dispatcher and every single person that's taken a 17 POST class, their promotions, when they leave, their 18 certificates, it's -- there's a -- there's a -- there's 19 a significant number of people that work on that 20 full-time, as well as the learning portal, which is 21 probably 10 to 11 people that are assigned a hundred 22 percent of the time to the learning portal and learning 23 portal training. 24 And, again, we're operating with 118 people, as 25 opposed to 131 twenty years ago, when none of these 122 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 things existed. So it's been a challenge for us. So to 2 be able to get some additional staff to help with those 3 things and help further some of the de-escalation 4 programs -- for instance, there's one LEC position in 5 there for training program services, and we know that 6 it's going to be for some of these -- some of these 7 programs that the -- that the Governor has highlighted. 8 So these are important things for us, and hopefully 9 this thing will go through. 10 But that's it, Commissioner Long. Thank you for 11 allowing me. 12 COMMISSIONER LONG: As Meagan noted, budget 13 subcommittees will begin in earnest middle to the end of 14 next month, and you can bet that that is exactly what 15 their -- what the budget subs are going to be looking at 16 is this nexus, as well as the demands they are going to 17 hear from the field and others. So to the extent 18 that -- that we are unified and can present a balanced 19 case going in will be very important. 20 The other issue, Madam Chair, for -- for -- in 21 Finance was the review of the contracts. The Finance 22 Committee had looked at the -- individuals looked at the 23 contracts. The subcommittee voted to move them all, en 24 masse, to the full committee with a do pass 25 recommendation. And -- however you choose to handle 123 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 those at this point. 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. That's a timely 3 response. 4 Let's first deal with the motion to approve 5 Commissioner Long's Finance report. 6 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: So moved. Chaplin. 7 COMMISSIONER O'ROURKE: Second. O'Rourke. 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Any questions? Comments? 9 (No response) 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 11 (Ayes) 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Now we'll move on to the 13 recurring contracts. Commissioner Long just referred to 14 those. It's a little bit of a complicated process. 15 We'll be reviewing and voting on the recurring 16 contracts, by bureau. 17 So take a moment to review all the contracts under 18 consideration. Can you have those posted up there? 19 MS. FERNANDEZ: Yes. Those are the recurring 20 contracts. There is also a sheet of paper in front of 21 everybody that has them all listed. 22 COMMISSIONER LONG: Madam Chair, if I may. 23 Should also note that these are -- the proposed 24 19/20 is obviously based on this -- these -- the 25 increases being approved. 124 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Correct. 2 COMMISSIONER LONG: So we're basically voting on a 3 proposal. 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you for clearing that 5 up. 6 So take a moment to look at that. And what we're 7 looking for are conflicts. 8 So if there's a contract up for approval, which 9 could be considered a conflict of interest for you, 10 please abstain from the contract by number. 11 So Ms. Fernandez will call a roll for vote for each 12 group. When your name is called, and the item you have 13 identified is in the group, please say something like 14 abstain from Item Number 3, but "yes" or "no" on all 15 other contracts in the group. 16 Are there any questions before we begin? 17 (No response) 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. We begin with training 19 contracts for the Training Program Service Bureau, 20 Contracts Item 1 through 9. 21 Is there a motion to approve this contract? 22 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: Chaplin. So moved. 23 COMMISSIONER GARDNER: Gardner. Second. 24 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Ms. Fernandez, please do a 25 roll call vote. 125 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 MS. FERNANDEZ: Barcelona. 2 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: Aye. 3 MS. FERNANDEZ: Braziel. 4 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Abstain 1, 5, and aye on 5 the rest. 6 MS. FERNANDEZ: Bui. 7 COMMISSIONER BUI: Yes. 8 MS. FERNANDEZ: Chaplin. 9 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: Yes. 10 MS. FERNANDEZ: Donelan. 11 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Yes. 12 MS. FERNANDEZ: Doyle. 13 (No response) 14 MS. FERNANDEZ: Dudley. 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes. 16 MS. FERNANDEZ: Gardner. 17 COMMISSIONER GARDNER: Yes. 18 MS. FERNANDEZ: Long. 19 COMMISSIONER LONG: Yes. 20 MS. FERNANDEZ: McMahon. 21 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Yes. 22 MS. FERNANDEZ: Moore. 23 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Yes. 24 MS. FERNANDEZ: O'Rourke. 25 COMMISSIONER O'ROURKE: Yes. 126 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 MS. FERNANDEZ: Ramirez. 2 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Yes. 3 MS. FERNANDEZ: Smith. 4 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Yes. 5 MS. FERNANDEZ: Vasquez. 6 COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ: Yes. 7 MS. FERNANDEZ: Thank you. 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Next we have contracts for the 9 Training Delivery and Compliance Bureau. That's 10 Contract Items 10 through 11. 11 Is there a motion to approve these contracts? 12 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: Chaplin. So moved. 13 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Second. Braziel. 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Ms. Fernandez, please do a 15 roll call. 16 MS. FERNANDEZ: Barcelona. 17 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: Yes. 18 MS. FERNANDEZ: Braziel. 19 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Yes. 20 MS. FERNANDEZ: Bui. 21 COMMISSIONER BUI: Yes. 22 MS. FERNANDEZ: Chaplin. 23 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: Yes. 24 MS. FERNANDEZ: Donelan. 25 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Yes. 127 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 MS. FERNANDEZ: Doyle. 2 (No response) 3 MS. FERNANDEZ: Sorry about that. 4 Dudley. 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes. 6 MS. FERNANDEZ: Gardner. 7 COMMISSIONER GARDNER: Abstain, Number 10; and yes, 8 11. 9 MS. FERNANDEZ: Thank you. 10 Long. 11 COMMISSIONER LONG: Yes. 12 MS. FERNANDEZ: McMahon. 13 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Yes. 14 MS. FERNANDEZ: Moore. 15 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Yes. 16 MS. FERNANDEZ: O'Rourke. 17 COMMISSIONER O'ROURKE: Yes. 18 MS. FERNANDEZ: Ramirez. 19 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Yes. 20 MS. FERNANDEZ: Smith. 21 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Yes. 22 MS. FERNANDEZ: Vasquez. 23 COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ: Yes. 24 MS. FERNANDEZ: Thank you. 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 128 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Next we have contracts for the Basic Training 2 Bureau, Contract Item 12. 3 Is there a motion to approve these contracts? 4 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: Chaplin. I will make a 5 motion. 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is there a second? 7 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Moore. 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Ms. Fernandez, please do a 9 roll call. 10 MS. FERNANDEZ: Barcelona. 11 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: Yes. 12 MS. FERNANDEZ: Braziel. 13 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Yes. 14 MS. FERNANDEZ: Bui. 15 COMMISSIONER BUI: Yes. 16 MS. FERNANDEZ: Chaplin. 17 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: Yes. 18 MS. FERNANDEZ: Donelan. 19 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Yes. 20 MS. FERNANDEZ: Dudley. 21 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes. 22 MS. FERNANDEZ: Gardner. 23 COMMISSIONER GARDNER: Yes. 24 MS. FERNANDEZ: Long. 25 COMMISSIONER LONG: Yes. 129 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 MS. FERNANDEZ: McMahon. 2 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Yes. 3 MS. FERNANDEZ: Moore. 4 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Yes. 5 MS. FERNANDEZ: O'Rourke. 6 COMMISSIONER O'ROURKE: Yes. 7 MS. FERNANDEZ: Ramirez. 8 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Yes. 9 MS. FERNANDEZ: Smith. 10 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Yes. 11 MS. FERNANDEZ: Vasquez. 12 COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ: Yes. 13 MS. FERNANDEZ: Thank you. 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Next we have contracts for the 15 Learning Technology Resource Bureau, Contracts Items 13 16 and 14. 17 Is there a motion to approve these contracts? 18 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: So moved. Chaplin. 19 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is there a second? 20 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Braziel. Second. 21 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Ms. Fernandez, please do a 22 roll call. 23 MS. FERNANDEZ: Barcelona. 24 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: Yes. 25 MS. FERNANDEZ: Braziel. 130 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Yes. 2 MS. FERNANDEZ: Bui. 3 COMMISSIONER BUI: Yes. 4 MS. FERNANDEZ: Chaplin. 5 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: Yes. 6 MS. FERNANDEZ: Donelan. 7 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Yes. 8 MS. FERNANDEZ: Dudley. 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes. 10 MS. FERNANDEZ: Gardner. 11 COMMISSIONER GARDNER: Yes. 12 MS. FERNANDEZ: Long. 13 COMMISSIONER LONG: Yes. 14 MS. FERNANDEZ: McMahon. 15 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Yes. 16 MS. FERNANDEZ: Moore. 17 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Yes. 18 MS. FERNANDEZ: O'Rourke. 19 COMMISSIONER O'ROURKE: Yes. 20 MS. FERNANDEZ: Ramirez. 21 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Yes. 22 MS. FERNANDEZ: Smith. 23 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Yes. 24 MS. FERNANDEZ: Vasquez. 25 COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ: Yes. 131 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 MS. FERNANDEZ: Thank you. 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. That concludes the 3 Finance report and the recurring contracts. 4 Now we're going to move on to the rest of the 5 regular agenda. 6 Item E is a Report on Proposed Changes to the 7 Training and Testing Specifications for Peace Officer 8 Basic Course. 9 Would anyone like a presentation on this? 10 (No response) 11 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Are there any questions? 12 (No response) 13 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is there a motion to approve? 14 COMMISSIONER GARDNER: So moved. Gardner. 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is there a second? 16 COMMISSIONER LONG: Second. Long. 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Questions? Comments? 18 (No response) 19 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All those in favor? 20 (Ayes) 21 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Opposed? 22 (No response) 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. The next thing was for 24 President McGrath's report. And he has come and gone. 25 Next we have a request to modify language in Law 132 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Enforcement Code of Ethics. Item G is a report on a 2 request to modify the language in the Law Enforcement 3 Code of Ethics. 4 At this time, I would like to call upon the 5 assistant executive director, Scott Loggins, to provide 6 us with information on this item. 7 MR. LOGGINS: Good afternoon, Madam Chair. Good 8 afternoon, Commissioners. Good afternoon, members of 9 the audience. 10 This is a -- an issue that was brought forward to 11 this Commission back in October, and, at that time, the 12 Commission approved the recommended changes to the Law 13 Enforcement Code of Ethics. 14 Just to give a history of the Code of Ethics, an 15 abbreviated version, as we've gone down this road 16 before, Ethics was first addressed by the first 17 Commission meeting back in 1959. And then it's gone 18 through a series of transformations to the point where 19 the Commission actually created a Code of Ethics, I 20 believe, in the '60s or early '70s. And at that time, 21 the specific language included references to "man," 22 "mankind," and the word "God." 23 After the Commission approved this particular item, 24 it was forwarded through the formalized rulemaking 25 process, which requires a 45 window of opportunity for 133 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 members of the public to provide comment, good, bad, or 2 indifferent, and we received approximately 20 responses, 3 all of which were in favor of -- of either retaining the 4 terms "man" or "mankind" or retaining the word "God" in 5 the Code of Ethics. 6 POST's position on this is -- we are position 7 neutral, but nevertheless this has -- this has created a 8 stir of passion amongst many people throughout the state 9 of California, because it's a touchstone area of -- of 10 particular importance to a lot of people. 11 But I want to reassure the Commission, the intent 12 of POST staff when they brought this -- it forward was 13 strictly to ensure that every stakeholder, every 14 citizen, every law enforcement officer that is served by 15 the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and 16 Training is appropriately represented and given an 17 impartial ability to interpret and recognize their own 18 faiths when they take their respective Code of Ethics. 19 It was not any intent to discount -- discount 20 anybody's passion for their belief system, nor was it 21 any intent to be dismissive of any anybody's sense of -- 22 of their belief system or whatever higher authority they 23 believe, they attest to, or brings them a certain level 24 of comfort. 25 There have been some passionate comments made with 134 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 respect to this. One of them was from one of my 2 counterparts, a person I highly respect and consider a 3 good friend. And he brought up some good points. There 4 are references to God in oaths. There's references to 5 God in the California Constitution as well as the United 6 States Constitution. 7 But I will counter that with, there's a difference 8 between a constitutionally required oath of office, 9 which every peace officer has to take, whether it's the 10 United States Constitution or the California 11 Constitution. And there's a difference between a 12 voluntary pledge of allegiance that a commissioner may 13 ask audience members to participate in during a public 14 meeting. 15 I don't claim to be a constitutional expert. But 16 that same U.S. Constitution, as a First Amendment, 17 discusses things to the effect of the government -- in 18 face that we are part of the government -- shall not 19 create any -- will not create any establishment of a 20 religion. I think there's language that says nor will 21 we prohibit anybody from their free exercise thereof. 22 And POST's position is, we would like to have that 23 the latitude in that Code of Ethics, so that when 24 somebody attests their personal commitment -- which is 25 not a contract with POST, it's not a contract with the 135 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 agency. In theory, it's a contract with themselves and 2 whatever higher authority they seek comfort from, that 3 they will adhere to the Code of Ethics. 4 And what we ask for is the latitude so that 5 somebody who may have a belief system or whatever higher 6 authority he or she is, they can attest to that 7 particular being or whatever being brings them specific 8 comfort. 9 So in light of that, we don't want to infringe upon 10 that free exercise thereof. There was a comment made 11 yesterday that was very accurate. The current 12 attestation allows a student to vocally opt out of 13 saying the word "God." 14 And the concern we have is -- and, again, I'm not 15 an expert in -- in sociology. But there is a stigma, if 16 you are the one singular person that, during a vocalized 17 oath, opts out of saying a particular word, there's a 18 chance you could be stigmatized. One of the concerns we 19 brought up was forever that person will be stigmatized 20 as the person who failed to say "God" during the oath. 21 And we ask, since this is technically an 22 affirmation -- it's a promise to one's self or a promise 23 to one's belief system -- perhaps we can give them 24 opportunity to silently affirm to whatever belief system 25 they feel is important, rather than vocalize it. And we 136 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 believe, by doing so, we're better serving the 2 California public, all of the people that are within the 3 law enforcement community. And by removing the terms 4 "man" and "mankind," it still is a universal application 5 because the term "all" applies to everybody and is 6 entirely inclusive. 7 With that, I'd be more than willing to entertain 8 some comments or remarks. 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: One moment. 10 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Madam Chair, if I may. 11 Scott, can you explain why we're -- this is on the 12 agenda again if it was on the -- when it was on the 13 agenda in October? 14 MR. LOGGINS: Yes. 15 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Can you explain that? 16 MS. SANDOVAL: We decided to re-agendize it on, 17 basically, in the interest of being fully transparent. 18 During the rulemaking process, we did notice that 19 there was a technical error when we probably did not 20 properly disclose the specific language that was going 21 to be removed from the Code of Ethics. 22 Staff is of the belief that it was still properly 23 notified, but in -- in discussions with the Office of 24 Administrative Law, we thought it would be in the best 25 interest of POST, this Commission, and the public, and 137 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 law enforcement in general, if we fully were transparent 2 and re-agendized the item so this Commission can 3 entertain the -- or take into consideration the comments 4 that were made with respect to this particular issue. 5 And in this particular iteration of the agenda 6 item, we specifically discussed the three terms that we 7 recommended be removed from the Code of Ethics, which 8 was "man," "mankind," and the word "God." 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you, Assistant Executive 10 Director Loggins. 11 I know this -- you put a lot of work into this and 12 we all appreciate how charged this issue is and 13 appreciate your articulation of how we got here today 14 and where we are. 15 Let me tell you how we're going to proceed from 16 here. 17 The next person I am going to hear from -- I'm 18 going to be ask to be heard from is Mr. Mason [sic] from 19 the Advisory Committee so that he can tell you the 20 comments that were made yesterday by the Advisory 21 Committee. 22 ADVISORY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIRPERSON BARON: Thank 23 you, Madam Chair. 24 This topic was definitely discussed yesterday, and 25 we did have some differences in opinion also on the 138 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 table. I know that the topic is tough; it is emotional; 2 it is politically charged at times. 3 But the recommendation from the Advisory Committee, 4 from yesterday, was that there are options, that may be 5 consider -- the Commission can consider optional version 6 of the Code of Ethics. 7 But as far as the removal of the three terms, I 8 know that Advisory Committee was interested in agreeing 9 with removing of "man" and "mankind" but was a 10 stronghold on the term "God." They really wanted to 11 keep that on the Code of Ethics. That was the 12 recommendation from the Advisory Committee, knowing that 13 that is an option currently to be exercised by the 14 student or the officer taking the oath. 15 So the Advisory Committee would recommend that we 16 do remove "man" and "mankind" but kindly keep "God" in 17 the Code of Ethics. 18 Thank you. 19 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 20 Mr. Alvarez. 21 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: I just want to add one 22 clarifying point. 23 In terms of POST, we are neutral in this agenda 24 item. We are not advocating for the removal of the word 25 "man," "mankind," or the word "God." 139 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 But in the agenda item, we had to include that 2 language in the -- in the write-up, so to speak, to make 3 sure that we are compliant with -- with what OAL asked 4 for. So I just want to clarify, we are not advocating 5 for the removal of any of those words. 6 Thank you. 7 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Or -- or the non-removal of 8 any of those words. 9 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Or the non-removal. 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. 11 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Correct. 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: That's clear. Thank you so 13 much. 14 Okay. Exhale. 15 Who would like to speak first? 16 Yes. 17 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: Chaplin. 18 So I've been a member of the Commission since 2016, 19 proud member, I should add. And I got to tell you, the 20 only time I have ever walked away from a Commission 21 meeting disappointed was from our October meeting. Not 22 disappointed in our group or the thoughtful discourse we 23 had, but disappointed in myself for only abstaining from 24 the latter part of the removal of terms. 25 I, again, have no qualms about removing or changing 140 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 or modifying the terms "man" or "mankind." But I was 2 disappointed in myself for abstaining. I won't make 3 that mistake again. 4 I will be voting no on that, the removal of "God" 5 from the Code of Ethics. 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you, Commissioner 7 Chaplin. 8 Who else would like to say something? 9 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Well, I would love to go. 10 In the spirit of this being Black History Month, 11 one of the letters that were sent was somewhat sent to 12 me. As I learned that a pastor that sits on the 13 Commission board, as though that organization in King 14 County, whoever they may be, could not go to the website 15 and find my name or who I am is a further form of 16 disrespect to me, as a man, and me, as a Black American. 17 It was referenced earlier by Mr. Barnes, all men 18 are created equal. Thomas Jefferson penned that. 19 Thomas Jefferson also had slaves, who weren't given that 20 respect. 21 All men are created equal, quoted on the California 22 Constitution. Peter Burnett, who did not allow Blacks 23 or Mexicans in the state of California and wrote the 24 Chinese Exclusion Act. All this falls in the line of 25 disrespect of a Black person that sits on this board. 141 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 When we talk about implicit bias and the problems 2 with policing, this letter from King County demonstrates 3 that at the utmost and the problems with policing. 4 So I asked -- or I am asking, I would like to have 5 the original copy of this letter. I would like to put 6 it up on my wall, because that now means I have stepped 7 into a realm of the great Civil Rights leaders and being 8 disrespected by the police, in the same manner of 9 Bullhorn [sic] Connor, and how they treated Dr. King and 10 other Civil Rights leaders who spoke out in something 11 that was not popular. 12 Now, we were at -- we were at the Advisory meeting, 13 and they said, where did the words "In God We Trust" 14 come from? And if they would do the history on it, 15 Franklin -- Benjamin Franklin had it on his banner, "In 16 God We Trust." 17 Later, Francis Scott Key, in "The Star-Spangled 18 Banner," in the fourth stanza, which none of us know, 19 it's included, "In God We Trust." 20 1931 under the -- at the time, the most racist 21 President, Woodrow Wilson put it into law, put it on the 22 bills in 1931. In 1956, it went on the bills. 23 So one asks, as a Christian, the whole thing is 24 trying to make this a level playing field. 25 As we ate dinner the other night, I sat and watched 142 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 to see how many other commissioners, as they got their 2 dinner, actually prayed to a God, to say that they were 3 concerned about a God. Many of them, if they prayed, it 4 was silently and to themselves. 5 As we start this meeting, we never pray to anyone. 6 Yet, when I do invocations at city councils and county 7 board meetings, we pray to gods, with no problems. 8 So as we asked ourselves, is this a Christian 9 nation, and what does the Bible say, according to those 10 in King County -- please take it back to them. 11 Matthew 5:33, "Again, you have heard that the 12 ancients were told, 'You shall make no false vows but 13 shall fulfill your vows to the Lord." 14 34: "But I will say to you, make no oath at all: 15 Either by heaven, for it is the throne of God; or by 16 earth, for it is the foot stool of his feet; or by 17 Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King; nor 18 shall you make an oath by your head, for you cannot make 19 one hair white or black." 20 37 says, "But let your statement be 'yes' and your 21 'no' be 'no.' Anything beyond this is evil." 22 James 5:12 says, "But above all, brethren, do not 23 swear, either by heaven or by earth or with any other 24 oath, but your 'yes' be 'yes' and your 'no' be 'no.'" 25 He goes on to proclaim, in Matthew 23:16, "Woe to 143 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 you, blind guides who make these oaths. Whoever swears 2 by the temple, that is nothing, but whoever swears by 3 the temple is obligated." 4 So whenever you hear the word "woe," it's a curse 5 upon you. 6 So as a Christian, it says, how shall they know us 7 but by the love we show one to another? It nowhere says 8 anything about your Christianity or your walk with God, 9 about swearing an oath. 10 For those of you who are married, you did not swear 11 an oath to God. You said "in the presence of God," 12 because he's an all-seeing God. 13 So nowhere by the traditional Christian tradition 14 does it say, so my attempt is to even the field. We 15 have people in this community who are Jehovah Witnesses, 16 who because of this oath cannot become a police officer 17 or consider going into law enforcement because they are 18 not allowed to swear these oaths. So it is a form of 19 blocking people. 20 So for us to be more inclusive, is what I am -- all 21 I am trying to attempt to do. And I wish my brother 22 that sits next to me, as he was going through something 23 a few months ago, and it's come out in court about the 24 $2 million lawsuit settlement. I could have probably 25 helped him navigate that. And the fact is that, 144 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 regardless of their sexual orientation or what they are, 2 they are our brothers and sisters. 3 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Wait until the train passes. 4 COMMISSIONER MOORE: They are our brothers and 5 sisters. And all of us being heterosexuals and coming 6 from the 21st Century, we don't understand it all. But 7 they all are God's children and are to be loved and 8 respected. And He says, when He comes back, He will set 9 it straight. 10 So as we try to go implicit -- implicit bias, as we 11 try to get the full understanding of how to treat people 12 equally and respectfully, we have to tear down the old 13 banners of the standard that was given during the time 14 of a racist American history. And part of that is 15 understanding our history and dealing with the hurts and 16 the problems that are in our history and trying to make 17 them right. 18 And that's all we attempted to do -- I attempted to 19 say, is I will love anybody in here any less (verbatim). 20 And to my friend Laurie Smith, you know I have the 21 utmost respect for you and you know I will get upset and 22 I will say my peace and we will be at war, but I will 23 come back to you as a brother in love, and tell you, 24 "Hey, I respect you and still love you, because you are 25 God's child and I am charged to love you." 145 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 I am charged to be here, to try to show this police 2 department, in these training, how to be in the 3 communities of color and drop your cultural biases, your 4 historical biases, by the side, and reach out to 5 everybody as a son of God, and let everybody have the 6 opportunity to serve in these commissions; to remove the 7 glass ceiling in police departments and corporations, so 8 that women and LGBT can have the right to get these jobs 9 and sit on these panels and boards. 10 So before us today, this Commission is challenged 11 to level the playing field, despite the fact that people 12 want to build walls. And if America was America, 13 America would extend a loving hand and not be building 14 walls. 15 And there's another point -- I want you to look at 16 it. America was never America to me, because it never 17 has treated me on an equal playing field even though I'm 18 a commissioner on this job -- on this board. 19 Thank you. 20 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you, Commissioner. 21 And just to be clear, do you want to make a 22 statement about the words you think should or should not 23 be moved? 24 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Well, I believe that -- 25 that -- as I said, I believe last time -- I even looked 146 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 at my notes. I really don't -- I didn't sleep at all 2 last night. I kept waking up because this was 3 bothersome to me that it would be brought back up, as we 4 go into the 21st Century. 5 My God, the way I understand God is not any less. 6 He's still the God who sits high and looks low. And 7 anybody who confesses with their mouth and believe in 8 their heart that He died will be saved. That's my 9 belief. 10 So the word "God," by removing it, is not going to 11 make him little. The "God," "mankind," or by taking it 12 out and understanding that we have women in here is 13 disrespectful to me, as for a woman. 14 It's just, the statement has to be inclusive of 15 human kind, of all of us. So if a man is feeling 16 challenged in his manhood because he's no longer to put 17 down "mankind," he needs to understand that maybe he's 18 not marrying -- or he has to talk with his wife and how 19 his wife or his daughter might feel if she's left off 20 that panel. 21 So all I am saying is, the word "man" or "mankind" 22 should be removed. "Humankind" would be acceptable, 23 more than anything. But we can be inclusive of all of 24 us in humanity until the marchers come. 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: And to the word "God"? 147 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 COMMISSIONER MOORE: "God," I would say we can 2 strike. 3 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Remove the word "God." 4 COMMISSIONER MOORE: As we have -- as previously in 5 the minutes from October. 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Thank you. 7 Mr. Long. Chair -- excuse me. Commissioner Long. 8 COMMISSIONER LONG: I was just clearing my throat. 9 But as much as I don't want to follow that type of 10 eloquence -- 11 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yeah. 12 COMMISSIONER LONG: -- I would associate myself 13 with my colleague's remarks. 14 I think it's clear to me that the No Religious Test 15 Clause of the U.S. Constitution states that these oaths 16 are prohibited. It's clear to me, the Supremacy Clause 17 then bounces back and says -- has largely said that 18 states requiring oaths are invalid. 19 The California Constitution explicitly says that 20 no -- other than your oath to the Constitution, no other 21 oath, declaration, or test shall be required as 22 qualification for any public officer employment. 23 And I don't believe that opting out obviates that 24 issue, nor do I think opting out is -- is fair. 25 As my colleague said, to call someone out that way, 148 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 there have been studies on whether we should remove 2 "God" from jury oaths. And based on the premise that 3 surveys have shown that wide numbers of people -- not 4 majorities, but over 25 to 50 percent believe that any 5 type of morality has to be associated with theism. So 6 immediately, it calls someone out as to -- many people, 7 in many people's mind is they are somehow deficient 8 morally or there's a problem. 9 There's a reason for a separation of church and 10 state. 11 Now, I say this as someone -- I think I said last 12 time. I have a couple of degrees from theology, from 13 Santa Clara, from St. John's University. I have a 14 master's degree in theology. 15 I have no problem with theism. I have no problem 16 with God. 17 But my faith -- as my colleague has said far more 18 eloquently than I will, my faith is my faith and my 19 faith is not challenged by whether or not we observe the 20 separation of church and state. 21 So I would certainly be in accord with Jeth's 22 removing, obviously, references to "man" and to "God" in 23 this oath, yeah. 24 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Who else would like to be 25 heard? 149 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Yes. Commissioner. 2 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Ramirez. 3 I would just like to say that my sentiments are 4 with Commissioner Chaplin. I don't understand why we're 5 taking the word "God" out just because someone else 6 doesn't want to say it and that they are going to feel 7 alienated or whatever. We're all adults. If we choose 8 not to say the Pledge of Allegiance, we just don't say 9 it. I don't think that -- I would hope that the other 10 people standing next to us isn't, like, oh, wow, he 11 didn't say the Pledge of Allegiance; like, I am going to 12 treat him different. 13 If you choose not to say the word "God," don't say 14 the word "God." But why are we removing that from the 15 people that do want to say it? 16 So I will be voting yes to leave it in. 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you, Commissioner. 18 Yes. Commissioner. 19 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Unfortunately, I was 20 required to leave a bit early last Commission meeting so 21 I missed all of the discussion that occurred, obviously, 22 at the last meeting. 23 But in reviewing the agenda prior to this, I 24 noticed a couple of things. First off, we do the Code 25 of Ethics as more of a ceremonial deal at the -- at the 150 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 academy graduation. 2 I personally swear in the members of our 3 organization with the oath that was talked about earlier 4 today. "I do solemnly swear to support." And we end 5 that with, "So help me God." 6 As I read this Code of Ethics -- and correct me. 7 I'm -- maybe I'm not sure. Is it required? 8 (No response) 9 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Okay. So we do it at the 10 graduation. 11 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I nodded. I'm sorry. The 12 answer is yes. 13 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: I guess it is a requirement, 14 and we do it at graduation. 15 But it's the entire class saying it all at once, 16 and they say it on their own. So if somebody opted out, 17 like is given in that opportunity, where that saying 18 "God" is optional, and if they choose not to do it, no 19 one would know, in the way we administer that Code of 20 Ethics in our academy graduation. But I think that 21 that -- for those that are interested, I think it's an 22 important part. 23 And so I support leaving "God" in there, as an 24 option. 25 Now, the "man" and "mankind" and -- you know, I 151 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 could take it or leave it. But, you know, if it stayed 2 in there, stayed in there. And I'm a big fan of not 3 fixing something that's not broken. 4 But I'm not sure exactly what was driving this. 5 And if we get sued, I guess that's an issue. 6 But, ultimately, I'm -- I'm in favor of leaving 7 "God" in there and I will take it or leave it on the 8 "man" and "mankind" part. 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you, Commissioner. 10 Other commissioners? 11 Yes. Commissioner Braziel. 12 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Kind of a point of 13 clarification. If we look on the attachment, it shows 14 the requirement for the Code of Ethics removed. 15 Is that part of the conversation? 16 MR. LOGGINS: Commissioner Braziel, no. That 17 should not -- that would be a technical error. 18 The -- the intent is to still administer the Code 19 of Ethics with the changing of those three terms or 20 however -- what direction the Commission wants to go. 21 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Okay. So Resolution 22 1013 stays. It's not removed -- 23 MS. SANDOVAL: That is correct. 24 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: -- as is pointed out in 25 our agenda. 152 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Okay. 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Anything else, Commissioner 3 Braziel? 4 (No response) 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Other comments? 6 (No response) 7 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: So I have some thoughts I 8 would like to share. 9 This is a very charged issue; people feel very 10 strongly about the word "God." One could argue that 11 that is reason enough to remove that word from an oath 12 that people have to take in order to be employed in this 13 extraordinary profession that we are members of. 14 The academy graduations that I've been to, they -- 15 they do all say the oath together. They rehearse it 16 together. They say it out loud. And it would be 17 obvious to anyone standing near anyone who didn't say 18 the word "God" that they didn't say it. 19 Assistant Executive Director Scott Loggins pointed 20 out that people could form an opinion about someone 21 because they didn't say the word "God," and given how 22 people feel so strongly about that word, given that when 23 you join law enforcement, you join organizations where 24 you are dependent upon your life, that the people who 25 you are with support you, understand you, you become 153 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 part of what sociologists call a "tribe." 2 And to have your first moment of that tribe be a 3 moment where you stand out and you stand out in a very 4 obvious way, that upsets people. That's a way to start 5 a career that may not be the accommodating career, 6 especially a career in law enforcement now, where we are 7 having retention and recruitment problems. 8 More and more -- we have to reach out to more and 9 more people in our community, not just because of our 10 numbers, but in order to create justice. We need to 11 ensure that people are -- all kinds of people are being 12 represented in our law enforcement agencies in order for 13 our law enforcement agencies to be just. And those are 14 people that believe in God, people that don't believe in 15 God, men, women, or people that are gender-neutral. 16 I think it starts in this room, if we are going to 17 truly be who we say we are going to be and embrace all. 18 This is not a pledge. This is not a dollar bill. 19 This is -- if someone wanted all their life to become a 20 law enforcement officer -- and I think that was true for 21 all of you -- certainly true for many of the law 22 enforcement officers that I love in Santa Barbara 23 County. For this to be a hurdle they have to 24 experience, does seem to be a melding of government and 25 church. 154 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 As Commissioner Long said, people's own feelings 2 about God are -- they are entitled to them. I'm 3 entitled to mine. Mine are irrelevant in this room, 4 completely irrelevant, because we speak on behalf of the 5 people who are leaving academies and who are beginning a 6 new profession. We have to be bigger than our own 7 feelings. We have to see what are we doing and how will 8 it affect our community, a just community. 9 I just leave you with this thought, that we have to 10 be inclusive, and sometimes that's uncomfortable. But 11 that's who we are as a Commission. 12 I would say that we should eliminate "man," 13 "mankind," and the word "God." And if people choose -- 14 as Assistant Executive Director Loggins mentioned it -- 15 to say that to themselves, that's the way people said 16 prayers last night before dinner. It didn't need to be 17 something that separated them from the person next to 18 them. 19 Other comments? Yes. 20 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Ramirez. 21 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Commissioner. 22 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: I just want to say one last 23 thing: I think by removing it, we're being opposite. 24 We're giving a stigma to the people that do want to say 25 it. So now we're making them uncomfortable because they 155 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 do want to say it. 2 So, you know, all these years, it's never been an 3 issue. Now it's an issue, all of a sudden, and I think 4 that we're being reactive. 5 We're everybody's Commission, not just the people 6 that don't want to say it, not the people that want to 7 say it. So I don't understand -- 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Commissioner, wait one moment 9 until the train passes. 10 This would be the longest train ever. 11 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: My thought process, gone. 12 How about this way. 13 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Anyway, I was just going to 15 say, I'm not a practicing religious person. I believe 16 in God, but I'm not a practicing religious person, and I 17 still don't believe we should remove it. 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I think it's -- several people 19 left the meeting last time and had some feelings and 20 thoughts after the meeting. 21 I believe you all voted your conscience last time. 22 I believe you are all voting your conscience this time. 23 I just want to make sure that everyone has had a chance 24 to speak if they want to speak. So if we could just 25 take another minute for you to check your soul and see 156 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 if you have something to say. 2 Yes. Commissioner Vasquez. 3 COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ: Thank you, Madam Chair. 4 First, a clarification. 5 Will we take the three words one by one with a 6 vote? 7 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: We certainly can. 8 COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ: Okay. 9 And then the second thing is, I'm a little 10 confused -- and probably with the time frame that we're 11 approaching, we don't have a time -- we don't have the 12 time to debate it. 13 But I'm -- I'm a little confused in regards to, if 14 our applicants, during the application process, which 15 could take three months to nine months, depending on 16 many, many different factors -- I don't recall any 17 questions or reference to their God, their religion, or 18 what they practice. If I'm wrong, someone please 19 correct me. 20 The last is "man," "mankind." I understand and 21 support taking that out. 22 The word "God," in my opinion, should stay in, and 23 I will vote yes. 24 Thank you. 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you, Commissioner. 157 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Commissioner Donelan? No. I'm sorry. I thought 2 you -- yes. 3 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: I think every one of us here 4 is making a decision, in many respects, in the context 5 of our own personal frame and our faith, our background. 6 And I'm very proud of the fact that this nation is a 7 secular nation and this state is secular. 8 I lived in a sectarian environment, where my faith 9 meant I was disqualified to serve as a police officer. 10 When I came to America, no one asked me my faith. I 11 have no interest in sharing what my faith is with anyone 12 else. I was just here to serve the citizens of the 13 community I signed up for. 14 I am disappointed that it's 2019 and we're debating 15 this now, and it should have been done decades ago. And 16 I am also disappointed in how some folks' personal 17 context is inferring our secular society should be 18 something less than that. It should be secular. 19 It shouldn't impact on your particular religion; it 20 shouldn't impact your faith. This is a secular society, 21 where we go out there and we serve the community, 22 regardless of their faith, regardless of race, and this 23 particular document envisaged that by removing those 24 three words. 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you, Commissioner 158 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Donelan. 2 Anybody else? 3 (No response) 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. I'm going to follow the 5 lead of Commissioner Vasquez. Let's take each word. 6 So I am looking for a motion now to -- if it's 7 appropriate -- to remove the word "man" from the oath of 8 office. 9 Is there a such a motion? 10 COMMISSIONER BUI: Bui. Move. 11 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Second. Donelan. 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Any questions or 13 comments? 14 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: I have one. 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Please. Thank you, 16 Commissioner Barcelona. 17 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: Is it -- are we going to 18 replace it with anything? Or is it just going to be 19 removed right now? 20 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: That's a fair question, and we 21 discussed this last time. 22 We actually saw that the removing of the word "man" 23 and the removing of the word "mankind" did not affect 24 the description of the oath; just taking those words 25 out. 159 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: So the oath would -- by 2 removing those two, the oath would be all inclusive, of 3 all people. 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Correct. 5 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: Okay. 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: There would be no agenda in 7 the oath. 8 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: Okay. 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you for asking. 10 Anything else on -- so there's a motion. There's 11 questions. There's comments on the word "man." 12 Any other questions? Comments? 13 (No response) 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 15 (Ayes) 16 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Against? 17 (No response) 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Is there now a 19 motion -- 20 MR. LOGGINS: Madam Chair, may I just clarify. 21 Just clarify, we're addressing the Code of Ethics, not 22 an oath of office. 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I'm sorry. Yeah. And matter 24 of fact, let me -- 25 MR. LOGGINS: Thank you. 160 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Let me clear this up a little 2 bit. It's the lawyer in me. 3 We previously had a vote, and we are going to have 4 to have a motion, I believe, to, would it be, remove 5 that vote? Cancel that vote? 6 MR. DARDEN: Right. 7 So the Commission had already voted to remove these 8 and -- both "mankind" and "men." 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: And "God." 10 MR. DARDEN: And -- and "God," correct. However, 11 that was done in two separate votes. So the issue was a 12 procedural one with the issue involving "God" because 13 the question was whether or not that had been 14 sufficiently announced on the agenda. So that's really 15 why we're back here, is to give the public an 16 opportunity to comment on it. 17 So my recommendation would be, for each one of 18 these, if you wanted to address, for example, "mankind" 19 first; and then the word "men," second; and then "God," 20 third, that it's understood, either expressly or by 21 implication that what we're doing is rescinding the 22 previous vote, which is what we have to do; and then 23 this is a new vote, since this entire item has been 24 re-agendized. 25 So effectively it's -- we have to rescind the prior 161 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 vote, because there already was one, and then this is a 2 new vote, which is being replaced at -- replacing the 3 prior vote. This new vote is what would be sent to OAL 4 for implementation into regulation. 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Do we have to explicitly 6 rescind the vote? Or is it implicit when -- if we vote 7 in contract or in the same? 8 MR. DARDEN: I think it's better if we explicitly 9 include it. 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. So let's start again. 11 And we need a motion, if you think it's 12 appropriate, to rescind the prior vote, which would have 13 eliminated the word "mankind." 14 Is there such a motion? 15 COMMISSIONER BUI: Bui. Motion. 16 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is there a second? 17 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Ramirez. Second. 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Discussion? Questions? 19 Comments? 20 (No response) 21 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 22 (Ayes) 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. That was for "mankind." 24 I was going in your order. 25 Okay. Now, is there a motion to remove the word 162 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 "mankind" from the -- I want to make sure I'm getting 2 this right. It's the oath of office. Excuse me. The 3 Code of Ethics. Not oath of office. Excuse me. 4 Is there a motion? 5 (No response) 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Let me repeat it. 7 Is there a motion to remove the term "mankind" from 8 the law enforcement Code of Ethics? 9 COMMISSIONER MOORE: So moved. Moore. 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is there a second? 11 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Second. Donelan. 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Comments? Questions? 13 (No response) 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 15 (Ayes) 16 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Opposed? 17 (No response) 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Now, is there a motion 19 to rescind the prior vote to rescind the term "man" from 20 the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics. 21 MR. DARDEN: It's "men." 22 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: And it's not "man." It's 23 "men." Let me say it again. 24 Is there a motion to rescind the prior vote to take 25 out the word "men" from Law Enforcement Code of Ethics? 163 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Move. 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is there a second? 3 COMMISSIONER LONG: Long. 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Discussion? Questions? 5 (No response) 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: In all in favor? 7 (Ayes) 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Opposed? 9 (No response) 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. So quick summary of 11 where we are. We have rescind the prior vote on the 12 terms "men" and "mankind." We have voted to rescind the 13 terms "man" [sic] and "mankind" from the Law Enforcement 14 Code of Ethics. 15 Is there a motion to remove the word "God" from the 16 Law Enforcement Code of Ethics? 17 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Moore. 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I'm sorry. You want to 19 rescind -- you are asking about the rescind first? Is 20 that why you raised your hand? 21 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Yes. I want to make 22 sure we -- 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yeah. I think that's a good 24 point. 25 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: I want to make sure 164 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 we -- 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Right. 3 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: -- vote and then rescind 4 the vote. 5 MR. DARDEN: Right. That's -- 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes. Yeah. 7 MR. DARDEN: That's right. 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: The only reason I was pausing 9 on that is because we didn't -- that wasn't agendized. 10 But let's be careful, and let's do it your way, 11 Commissioner Braziel. I think it's the more careful 12 way. 13 So the first question is, is there a motion to 14 rescind the prior vote to take out the word "God" from 15 the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics? 16 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: So moved. 17 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: Second, Chaplin. 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is there any discussion? 19 Comments? 20 (No response) 21 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 22 (Ayes) 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Opposed? 24 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Aye. 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I'm sorry? 165 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 COMMISSIONER MOORE: No. 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. You're good. 3 So that -- so that passes. 4 Okay. Now we're at the point where -- is there a 5 motion to remove the word "God" from the Law Enforcement 6 Code of Ethics? 7 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Moore. 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is there a second? 9 COMMISSIONER BUI: Bui. 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. 11 MR. DARDEN: And I believe it would be "before 12 God." Is that right? Dedicating myself to my chosen 13 profession, so it would removing the words "before God." 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: "Dedicating myself to my 15 chosen profession." 16 MR. DARDEN: Right. So it would be removing 17 "before God." 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Counsel's correct. It's the 19 term "before God." 20 Okay. Let's again be careful. 21 Is there a motion to remove the term "before God" 22 from the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics? 23 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Moore. 24 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is there a second? 25 COMMISSIONER BUI: Bui. 166 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Discussion? Questions? 2 I'm thinking the more careful way to do this, so 3 that we don't -- so there's no question about everyone's 4 vote is to do a roll call. 5 MR. DARDEN: Yes. I agree. 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: So I am going to ask you to 7 please do a roll call on this question. 8 Is everybody clear what we're voting on now? Any 9 questions or comments about the procedure or the terms? 10 (No response) 11 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Hearing none, I will ask you 12 to take roll call. 13 COMMISSIONER LONG: (Inaudible) -- 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes. 15 COMMISSIONER LONG: (Inaudible) -- 16 THE COURT REPORTER: Mike. Mike. Mr. Long -- 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yeah. The motion now is to 18 remove the terms "before God" from the Law Enforcement 19 Code of Ethics. 20 A vote of "yes" would mean that you are voting to 21 remove the terms "before God." 22 A vote of "no" would mean that you are not asking 23 that those terms, "before God," be removed. 24 Is that clear? 25 (No response) 167 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Great. Thank you. 2 Roll call, please. 3 MS. FERNANDEZ: Barcelona. 4 COMMISSIONER BARCELONA: No. 5 MS. FERNANDEZ: Braziel. 6 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: No. 7 MS. FERNANDEZ: Bui. 8 COMMISSIONER BUI: Yes. 9 MS. FERNANDEZ: Chaplin. 10 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: No. 11 MS. FERNANDEZ: Donelan. 12 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Yes. 13 MS. FERNANDEZ: Dudley. 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes. 15 MS. FERNANDEZ: Gardner. 16 COMMISSIONER GARDNER: Yes. 17 MS. FERNANDEZ: Long. 18 COMMISSIONER LONG: Yes. 19 MS. FERNANDEZ: McMahon. 20 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: No. 21 MS. FERNANDEZ: Moore. 22 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Yes. 23 MS. FERNANDEZ: O'Rourke. 24 COMMISSIONER O'ROURKE: No. 25 MS. FERNANDEZ: Ramirez. 168 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: No. 2 MS. FERNANDEZ: Smith. 3 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Yes. 4 MS. FERNANDEZ: Vasquez. 5 COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ: No. 6 MS. FERNANDEZ: Thank you. 7 Do you want me to count? 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Please. 9 MS. FERNANDEZ: The noes is one, two, three, four, 10 five, six, seven. 11 Yes: One, two, three, four, five, six, seven. 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I think we will have to -- 13 Doyle. I think what we have -- I will discuss it with 14 Counsel, but I believe -- 15 MR. DARDEN: If it's tied, it doesn't pass. It has 16 to be a majority of the votes cast. 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. So the answer is, if 18 it's a tie, it doesn't pass. It has to be a majority of 19 the votes passed. 20 So, therefore, the words "man" -- excuse me, "men" 21 and "mankind" will be removed from Law Enforcement Code 22 of Ethics, and the word "God" or "before God" will stay 23 in the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics. 24 I want to thank all of you for engaging in this 25 conversation. We all knew it was going to be a 169 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 difficult one. And I appreciate the fact that everyone 2 voted their conscience, their heart, and trusted all of 3 us to hear what it was you had to say. 4 Thank you very much. 5 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Madam Chair, if I may. 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes. Yes. Commissioner 7 Moore. 8 COMMISSIONER MOORE: On the first part of that 9 letter there, whichever one is the original letter, I 10 still would like to have that original letter, if that's 11 at all possible. 12 And I do expect more out of the police 13 departments -- Hanford and those others. Instead of 14 just using a form letter and copying it, they should 15 have the manpower to write their own opinions, instead 16 of accusing this board of being moved by some -- as it 17 says, that the POST board was moved -- groupthink. It 18 seemed like this letter was more groupthink in the fact 19 that they didn't even bother to change the word "I" to 20 "we." So just simple grammar things they could have 21 corrected to make it more inclusive, that it was coming 22 from a group and not one individual that obviously led 23 these groups to write this letter shows a little lack of 24 individual thought. Is that what we were accused of not 25 having? 170 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 But thank you. I would like the original letter, 2 if that's at all possible. 3 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 4 And -- and Assistant Executive Director Loggins is 5 nodding his head, so it sounds to me like you're going 6 to get that. 7 MR. LOGGINS: Yes, we could provide that to you. 8 Yes, sir. 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. We're going to take 10 a -- listen to me, my friends -- a five-minute break. 11 It is 1:20. Please come back at 1:25. Thank you.

12 (Break taken: 1:20 p.m. to 1:31 p.m.) 13 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Let's start up. 14 Again, I want to thank you all. And I think that 15 Commissioner Moore talked about loving everybody and 16 that we all were going to get past all this and love 17 everybody. And I think he saw what became our future. 18 There is a lot of love in the room and appreciation for 19 your opinions and our belief in this tremendous 20 organization and the officers we serve. 21 Now, let's go on to -- Item H is a Report on 22 Proposed Changes to Commission Regulation 1052, 23 requirements for course certification, the pilot 24 presentation, and the great question. 25 Would anyone like a presentation on this item? 171 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 (No response) 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: If not, having heard -- no. 3 Is there a motion to approve? 4 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Motion to approve. Smith. 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Second? 6 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Second. Ramirez. 7 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Questions? Comments? 8 (No response) 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 10 (Ayes) 11 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Opposed? 12 (No response) 13 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: The motion passes. 14 Item I is a Request for and Amendment to Commission 15 Regulation 1015, Reimbursement, Creating Plans IV and -- 16 excuse me, V and VII -- VI and VII -- sorry -- Regional 17 Training. 18 At this time, I would like to call upon Assistant 19 Executive Director Scott "Loeggins" to -- Loggins to 20 provide us with a report on this item. 21 Welcome back, Scott. 22 MR. LOGGINS: Thank you. 23 Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Commissioners. This 24 is going to be a less entertaining topic and much 25 easier. 172 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 The -- as with the previous item I discussed, this 2 item was actually approved, to a certain extent, at the 3 October '18 Commission meeting. 4 In October '18, we approached your Commission and 5 asked for the authority for the executive director 6 and/or his designee to implement a Plan VI Reimbursement 7 Program. 8 The reason for that is, under the current 9 construct, there are a variety of -- of reimbursement 10 plans that worked very well in the past. 11 And when we created this Plan VI and brought it to 12 this Commission in October 2018, we were facing 13 catastrophic significant cuts and they resulted in this 14 reductions to our ability to administer training and 15 reimburse our stakeholders across the state of 16 California. 17 So the intent, when we brought Plan VI forward, was 18 to give the executive director and POST staff the 19 flexibility to modify the -- a reimbursement program to 20 regionalize training. And the reason for that is, under 21 the current construct with the existing reimbursement 22 programs, it's pretty much all or nothing, which 23 incentivizes the ability for officers to fly across the 24 state to travel to courses, and disincentivizes cost 25 savings measures. 173 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 With this new proposal in Plan VI, at the time when 2 we were facing some catastrophic cuts, by regionalized 3 training we were incentivizing the ability for chiefs 4 and sheriffs to host regional seminars so that they can 5 offer training to themselves and their neighboring 6 stakeholders and disincentivize the capacity for people 7 to be compelled to fly all the way to San Diego or vice 8 versa, from opposite ends of the state, in order to 9 travel to wherever the courses were being offered. 10 Part of the -- the issue that predicated this was 11 an idea from Commissioner Braziel himself, who argued, 12 it is far cheaper to travel a couple of instructors to 13 any of the corner of the sate and then train the cops in 14 their own backyard, rather than have 24 cops travel 15 across the entirety of the state to go to wherever the 16 two instructors were existing, so we took notice of 17 that. 18 In October of 2018, this Commission approved the 19 Plan VI proposal. When it went to the Office of 20 Administrative Law, they noticed a bunch of technical 21 errors in preexisting language, that you had not seen 22 before. 23 Those technical language -- issues were the order 24 of hierarchy; specifically how the items were lined and 25 numbered in regulation. And as complicated as that 174 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 sounds, the reason for that is so when regulation is 2 quoted in law, you can actually say it's a specific 3 letter or numbered subsection, versus, if you go to 4 page 4, you know, 11 paragraphs down, it's line 6. 5 So we ended up rescinding that. 6 In the meantime, we got the -- the good news from 7 the Governor's office and Department of Finance that the 8 Governor and the Legislature, it appears, have decided 9 to very generously restore POST budgets to its 10 historically higher levels. 11 So as we move forward, this new reiteration or 12 iteration of this agenda item is for this Commission to 13 approve the Plan VI, which you already approved. 14 In addition to that, approve a modification to Plan 15 VI, which we're calling Plan VII, in which we are 16 reinstituting backfill pay. 17 And the purpose of backfill pay is specifically to 18 address those smaller agencies or those 19 budget-constrained agencies where they simply cannot 20 afford to allow a police officer or a deputy sheriff 21 time off to go to school because somebody has to staff 22 the field. By offering the ability for them to utilize 23 backfill pay, POST can reimburse whatever costs are 24 needed or associated with the person who is working in 25 lieu of that officer who is attending training. 175 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 There are a few other technical changes that we 2 made other than the hierarchy of order, which is the 3 term I learned from the Office of Administrative Law. 4 There's one area of significant language. 5 In the first iteration of it, we referenced our 6 original funding source, which was the State Penalty 7 Fund at that time. 8 Given the fact that we are now looking at the 9 potential of receiving General Fund monies and/or other 10 sources of revenue, we specifically articulated, within 11 this particular iteration of a regulation, that we can 12 receive -- utilize State Penalty monies as well as any 13 other funds that are appropriated to us by the State of 14 California. 15 And the reason for that is to make sure that 16 whatever funds we ship out to the field comport with the 17 mandates that you would fall under with the Penal Code 18 so we can properly reimburse people. 19 The other technical issue, that is really not 20 substantive, as you may or may not know, we transitioned 21 away from a paper TRR process. TRRs are the mechanism 22 where an officer or a deputy sheriff or any attendee 23 gets -- their agency gets reimbursed for them to go to 24 training. We are transitioning into what we call an 25 ETRR process, where the student actually goes online and 176 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 processes that. We implemented that a few weeks ago and 2 have had phenomenal success. 3 We actually codified the utilization of the ETRRs 4 into this particular regulation, so it comports and is 5 on board with regulation. 6 With that, I would be more than willing to 7 entertain any questions that you may have. 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Any questions? 9 I think you explained that beautifully, and that's 10 complicated. 11 MR. LOGGINS: It is. Thank you. 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: It is. Any -- 13 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: I have one on the -- 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Please. 15 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: -- on the fly in the 16 ointment. 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Commissioner Braziel. 18 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Plan VII is designed for 19 the agencies to get backfill specifically for agencies 20 who are so small they get backfill specifically; is that 21 correct? 22 MR. LOGGINS: It's specifically for regions. 23 So as an example I will give, Yuba City, which is a 24 smaller department north of Sacramento. If they wanted 25 to host a DUI course and want to invite neighboring 177 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 agencies to go, but -- the backfill would be used for 2 those attendees so that the people can work behind them. 3 So to incentivize and give the Yuba Cities and 4 those Marysvilles, the smaller agencies, the opportunity 5 to make sure the field is still staffed, and it doesn't 6 negatively impact their budgets. 7 I don't think I answered your question. 8 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Do we have -- no, I 9 think you did. 10 Do we have checks and balances in place to make 11 sure? Because it's designed for that purpose -- 12 MR. LOGGINS: That is correct. 13 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: To where others are not 14 going to say, you know what? I'm an agency of a 15 thousand cops and I just want more backfill, so I'm 16 going to send my folks to those, and I want backfill 17 behind. 18 MR. LOGGINS: That is correct. 19 And there are -- there are some limitations; we 20 have specific mileage constraints as well. 21 So the idea with the Plan VI and Plan VII is, any 22 of our courses are still open to anybody. So that Yuba 23 City course, a member of Walt Vasquez's department can 24 go there. But since he is beyond the 150-mile limit, he 25 will be paying full bore for his -- his -- his officer 178 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 to attend that particular course, or vice versa. 2 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Perfect. Thank you. 3 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Any questions? Comments? 4 COMMISSIONER LONG: What is it? 1.5, 1.7 million 5 or something of the 34.9 that's to be used for this 6 purpose, right? To develop the two new plans? 7 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: I think the backfill 8 number is higher. I think it's 7 million -- 9 COMMISSIONER LONG: 7 million right. 10 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: -- it's taking. 11 COMMISSIONER LONG: Just -- just curious. 12 Is it -- assume the lion's share of that 7 million 13 goes to the actual reimbursement? Is there -- is there 14 some rough breakdown of that? I mean, it's not like 15 $2 million to develop the plan or anything, right? Is 16 it basically all that money goes to -- 17 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: It's passed -- 18 COMMISSIONER LONG: It's all pass through -- 19 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Excuse me. Yeah. 20 None of the money comes to pass -- it's for those 21 agencies, correct. 22 COMMISSIONER LONG: Thank you. 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Other comments or questions? 24 (No response) 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Thank you, Scott. 179 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Is there a motion to approve? 2 MULTIPLE COMMISSIONERS: So moved. 3 COMMISSIONER LONG: Second. Long. 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: That's not clear at all to the 5 reporter. 6 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: Braziel. Move. 7 COMMISSIONER LONG: Long. Second. 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Comments? Question? 9 (No response) 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 11 (Ayes) 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Opposed? 13 (No response) 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Hearing nothing, motion 15 passes. 16 Thank you. 17 Item J is a Report on the POST Innovations Grant 18 Program. 19 At this time, I will call upon Law Enforcement 20 Consultant Andrew Mendonsa, Management Counseling 21 Project Bureau, to provide us with a status of the 22 Innovations Grant Program. 23 Thank you. 24 MR. MENDONSA: Good afternoon. Thank you, Madam 25 Chair, Members of the Commission. 180 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 I will keep my comments brief. I am happy to 2 discuss this in more detail if anybody needs any more 3 detail. 4 As the Commission is aware, POST received 5 25 million in special augmentation. 5 million of that 6 was specifically set aside for the creation of what's 7 called an Innovations Grant Program. And the terms and 8 conditions of the grant program are spelled out in Penal 9 Code 13509, but I will sort of give you the highlights 10 of that. 11 The stated program goal is to reduce 12 officer-involved shootings. And at least for this 13 grant, the intent is for POST to make grants available 14 to community-based groups, law enforcement 15 organizations, even for-profit and not-for-profit 16 groups, in order to provide training or workshops in one 17 of five program topic areas. There's implicit bias, use 18 of force and de-escalation, cultural diversity, 19 community policing, and officer wellness. 20 We started the program in December. We held a 21 couple of community meetings. One was down here at 22 Golden West. We had another one in Sacramento to 23 solicit input on the RFP process. Our RPF for that 24 grant came out January 15th. It's expected to close 25 March 1st. We hope to start the award process by 181 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 April 1st. And then there will be a two-year 2 performance period on the grant. And then that will 3 give us a little bit of time to close it out. So it's a 4 three-year program total; two years of performance under 5 the grant. 6 Those are pretty much the high points. 7 Again, I'm happy to get into more details about 8 some of the requirements of the grant, some of the ways 9 in which it's structured, if anybody on the Commission 10 is interested in having those discussions. 11 This is sort of a high level overview. So if you 12 look, we are about midway through the top line there. 13 So OES has been very, very helpful. We have actually 14 contracted with them for some technical assistance. 15 This is not something we've done before, so we're having 16 to build up our grant making and granting authority 17 within POST. They have been very, very helpful in 18 helping us set up a lot of that structure. 19 We conducted the public hearings in December. We 20 finalized the requests for proposal mid-January, as I 21 said. Grant applications are due March 1st. I don't 22 yet know how many grant applicants we will have. I 23 won't know until, obviously, after the March 1st 24 deadline, but we hope to do the review and rating during 25 March, with the idea that we would be able to get awards 182 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 out, at least start the award process as of April 1st. 2 And then we're going to hold an awardee workshop. 3 Our expectation is, we're going to have a lot of 4 grantees who don't have much familiarity with POST, so 5 we've already scheduled a workshop to walk them through 6 the course certification process and to help them 7 understand the terms and conditions of the grant. We 8 will have quarterly progress reports, and then the -- 9 the grant period closes in 2021. 10 I will point out a couple of things, because I 11 think it's relevant for this grant: 12 65 percent of the funds are actually dedicated to 13 community-based organizations. So it's -- it's clear 14 from the language in the Penal Code that the intent is 15 that this is to -- to go out into the field for 16 training. 17 The grants are anywhere between 25 and 200 18 thousand. We're maxed at 200,000, which, again, was 19 written into the Penal Code. We have gotten some 20 feedback from some of the community groups that that's 21 impactful. It sounds like a lot of money, but in 22 training, it's not a lot of money. And so we have 23 gotten some feedback that that's limiting some of the 24 prospects for some of the training. 25 And with that, I will happily entertain any 183 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 questions anybody has about this program. 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Andrew, I have some questions. 3 MR. MENDONSA: Yes, ma'am. 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: You mentioned, I think it was, 5 five or six different categories. 6 MR. MENDONSA: Yes, ma'am. 7 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: One of them being officer 8 wellness. 9 MR. MENDONSA: Yes, ma'am. 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: How much -- will you then 11 divide the grants? Will you only have a certain number 12 in officer wellness? Or will you just look at each 13 grant and then make the determining factor about which, 14 in general -- 15 MR. MENDONSA: Sure. So -- so we asked that 16 question initially. The question was, do we have to 17 divide the 5 million equally among those five topic 18 areas and -- 19 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: That was a much more eloquent 20 way to -- 21 MR. MENDONSA: The answer to that was no. So if we 22 get stronger grants in certain areas, we can certainly 23 dedicate more funds to that. 24 My -- my expectation is that we're not going to 25 have enough grantees to completely exhaust the money. 184 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 There's a little bit of money set aside for 2 administrative costs. That's the money that we're using 3 to contract with OES to help us through some of these 4 processes. There's a lot of back-end work, quite 5 honestly, that's -- that's gone into, kind of, just 6 developing, you know, an electronics system for 7 accepting the grants and how are we scoring them and how 8 are we, sort of, making sure that we're being good 9 stewards of the money. You know, do we have the pieces 10 in place so that we can do site visits, things like 11 that. 12 But the bulk of the money is set aside to actually 13 go to the -- the people who are doing the training. 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. So just a thought from 15 the Commissioner. 16 I feel very strongly about the topic of officer 17 wellness and first responder wellness. I think that an 18 officer has to be as well as they can possibly be to 19 perform at their peak level when they come upon any 20 incident. 21 And when we talk about whether it's going to be 22 de-escalation, officer-involved shootings, seeing 23 someone with mental health conditions, whatever it is, 24 it -- the officer's state of mind will affect the 25 officer's ability to be at their very best. 185 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 MR. MENDONSA: Sure. 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: So when I think, in my mind, 3 of the basic foundation of how we can make a big 4 difference right now, it's, let's shore up the 5 foundation. Let's make sure our officers are as well as 6 they can be. 7 People who go into law enforcement go into 8 trauma-induced work. They go from one traumatic event 9 to the other. Sometimes there are events that are so 10 traumatic that cause a specific incident of 11 post-traumatic stress injury. 12 But, generally, just the stress of a shift, the 13 lack of sleep, the feelings that they feel of having 14 poor connections with communities or in attempting to 15 reach out, not getting a good connection. It's -- it's 16 all very exhausting. I'm not telling you anything you 17 don't know. 18 So my suggestion is that we really focus on 19 wellness, because now we have the opportunity to make a 20 difference to shore up public safety in our state. 21 MR. MENDONSA: So I might be able to speak to that 22 a little bit more. 23 One of the things that's frequently come up from 24 people who are interested in the grant is, do they have 25 to limit their grant applications to one of these five 186 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 topic areas? 2 The fundamental answer is yes, they do, for the 3 application purposes. 4 But we certainly recognize that these don't exist 5 in a vacuum. Right? You can't necessarily 6 compartmentalize officer wellness as distinct from, 7 perhaps, de-escalation. 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I agree. 9 MR. MENDONSA: There is -- there's very good 10 evidence that the more well you are -- if that's the 11 appropriate way to phrase it -- the better your decision 12 making capacity. And so what we've asked our grantees 13 to do is to try and draw those connections. 14 One of the things that has been challenging, and -- 15 and, again, we didn't write this language. But one of 16 the things that has been challenging is how are the 17 grantees going to show the connection between that and a 18 reduction in officer-involved shootings? 19 And so we've asked them to articulate that in their 20 grant applications, and we're putting it back on them. 21 We very deliberately didn't identify performance 22 measures for them in advance, because they -- it's 23 entirely conceivable that performance measures for a 24 cultural diversity course would be distinct from an 25 officer wellness course. 187 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 But what we have asked, and what we've been very 2 clear about, is our expectation that the grant 3 applicants are identifying the connection between a 4 reduction in officer-involved shootings and their 5 training, and that they are using either an 6 evidence-based or some evidence-informed decision making 7 process. 8 We're -- we're balancing that with the need for 9 innovation. And this is an area where we've kind of 10 talked about how -- how we do we get on that knife edge 11 between doing something, which is sort of traditionally 12 shown to be effective -- right? So if we're looking at 13 it from an evidence-based model versus allowing some 14 degree of innovation for maybe things that we haven't 15 thought of before. 16 I think this is a really exciting opportunity for 17 us to get some exposure to maybe some training or some 18 concepts that would not have come out of our usual, sort 19 of, processes. But we have to be careful that it's not 20 so innovative that it's wildly inconsistent with some of 21 our other training, inconsistent with officer safety, 22 inconsistent with community caretaking standards. 23 And so one of the things that we've done is, we've 24 built in the requirement to have any courses taught 25 under this. They have to be certified through us. And 188 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 it will give us the ability to sort of objectively look 2 at these courses, and not to be obstructionists, but to 3 give us a mechanism to keep track of the course, do some 4 QAP, to make sure that we don't have courses that are -- 5 that are really going off the rails. But, certainly, 6 you know, my intent is to give our grantees some 7 latitude. 8 And you tell us what you think is going to work. 9 And that the point about what works is complicated, 10 right? 11 You know, if we're looking at these -- sort of this 12 officer-involved shooting piece, it tends to be a fairly 13 rare event. So very, very small changes can appear to 14 be big swings that may or may not have anything to do 15 with the training. 16 So we're trying to sort of navigate how do we -- 17 how do we tie all these pieces together so that we can 18 really come up with a strong indicator of promising or 19 innovative training that works, that may be repeatable 20 throughout the state. 21 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: And I would argue -- and not 22 even argue -- that when we're talking about 23 de-escalation, a preconditioned de-escalation would be a 24 healthy law enforcement officer who hasn't gone through 25 a series of traumatic events and not had anyone help 189 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 that officer come to the other side. 2 And the same would be true with responding to 3 someone with some kind of mental illness. If an officer 4 is traumatized, it's a perfect storm: You have a 5 traumatized office -- officer and somebody with mental 6 illness. 7 MR. MENDONSA: Sure. 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: The situation is bound to get 9 worse. 10 So I think as we define terms like officer-involved 11 shooting, dealing with people with mental illnesses, and 12 de-escalation, that, in my mind, is a precondition. 13 MR. MENDONSA: Sure. 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. 15 MR. MENDONSA: And, you know, community policing is 16 not distinct from implicit bias. 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Exactly. 18 MR. MENDONSA: All -- all of these pieces tie 19 together. 20 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. 21 MR. MENDONSA: We're certainly aware of that. 22 But just as a structural scoring mechanism, we had 23 to identify these five topic areas. We have to get the 24 grants -- 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Got it. 190 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 MR. MENDONSA: -- to be applied in one of these 2 areas. But, certainly, the discussions we've had with 3 the potential grantees are -- they recognize that all of 4 these pieces sort of influence each other, so we ask 5 them to identify what their primary training is going to 6 be, and then speak to those other areas if it's relevant 7 for them. 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: And I would ask you to inquire 9 as to those other areas as well. 10 MR. MENDONSA: Sure. 11 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Other comments besides mine? 12 (No response) 13 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Any other questions? 14 (No response) 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you so much. 16 MR. MENDONSA: Thank you. 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: So I think we were just 18 thanking Mr. Mendonsa. 19 And now on to Item K, a Report on Course 20 Certification Statistics from 9/1/2018 to 12/31/18. 21 This was discussed at the start of the meeting. Thus, 22 we'll skip over it at this point and move on to Item L. 23 Was it, in fact, discussed? We're still moving along. 24 Item L is a report on the proposed changes to 25 Commission Regulation 1002 to support a new 191 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 certification process. This will remove the pilot 2 status and make the process permanent. 3 At this time, I will call up -- call upon Bureau 4 Chief Janna Munk, Training Program Services, to provide 5 us with a report. Janna. 6 MS. MUNK: Thank you, Madam Chair. 7 I will just wait for Elena to get my PowerPoint 8 going. 9 So I will just take you back in time a little bit. 10 A few years ago, it came to our attention that course 11 certification was not much appreciated and the amount of 12 time it took POST to get it done. So when Manny came to 13 POST and took over the executive directorship, he 14 directed us to take a deeper look at what are we doing 15 with our course certification, and asked me to take 16 control of it and kind of run with it. 17 So the first thing that we did -- Elena, if you 18 could move the PowerPoint. Thank you. 19 So what is it that we need to accomplish? Improve 20 source certification, technology, and processes. 21 The first thing that we did was a field survey to 22 find out exactly what were the issues with the course 23 certification process, and then pull together a variety 24 of subject matter experts across the state of California 25 to do a series of workshops. 192 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 After reviewing the survey and -- and taking into 2 account what surfaced at the workshops, the priorities 3 were, number 1, instructor résumés. They needed easier 4 entry and migration; 5 Number 2, course certification and shorter time 6 frames; 7 Number 3, improved consistency between consultants 8 and regions; 9 Number 4, course modifications, shorter time 10 frames; 11 And number 5, a process to resolve challenges 12 during course certification. 13 So the pilot works -- or the workshops that we did, 14 we talked about, like, what can we do to change these 15 things? What is within our grasp, through regulation, 16 to change? 17 And what we came up with was a new labor model. 18 Let's try using some admin staff to reduce the amount of 19 time it took the consultants to work on it. 20 Let's do some new budget guidelines and raise -- 21 kind of raise the bar on the budget so there were fewer 22 budgets that had to be submitted and it was easier to 23 submit them. 24 And let's divide it into two certification types. 25 If you have, say, an agency that wants to do their own 193 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 training, let's not make it so hard for them to get a 2 certification. 3 What I have done now -- so we're a couple years 4 down the road. We expanded the pilot from a couple of 5 regions to statewide over time. We got the 6 instructor technology -- or the instructor résumé 7 technology up and running. And what I did was took a 8 look at the results that we got for that. I can't even 9 read that. I'm going to have to get a little closer to 10 it. 11 MS. FERNANDEZ: Do you want me to try to enlarge 12 it? 13 MS. MUNK: Yeah, if you can. 14 So what I did was, I asked Computer Services Bureau 15 to go back and look on the statistics on the length of 16 time that it took to certify courses. And the first 17 measure I asked for was the six months prior to starting 18 the pilot process. 19 What we found was -- stay up there. There you go. 20 Thank you. 21 The presenters took 82 days to complete a 22 certification on a course. The consultants took 39. 23 The bureau chief took 16. And so that was the six 24 months prior to starting the pilot. That's how a total 25 of -- how long it took. And there was 126 194 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 certifications done during that time period. 2 Six months after the fact, before we implemented 3 any changes at all, what I thought was interesting was, 4 the presenters are now taking 103 days to complete a 5 certification. Our consultants had lowered theirs to 25 6 days. Bureau chief down to five days. And the actual 7 certifications were more; there was 208 completed. 8 And what I attributed that drop in terms of time on 9 our side to management saying, look, this is an issue. 10 The field has said we want it addressed. And so the 11 consultants were given some direction in terms of 12 priority. This is a priority. Let's shorten the time 13 frames on what it takes to certify these courses. 14 What we are looking at the next six months is the 15 implementation on the pilot. Well, we implemented only 16 three regions, but it really kind of grew outside of the 17 three regions. And what we see is presenters holding 18 firm. It's still taking them 85 days to certify their 19 own -- like, to get the work done to certify their 20 course. Consultants were down to 11 days to certify a 21 course. Bureau chief, 2. And we did 171 22 certifications. 23 When we went statewide, it continued to drop. 24 Presenter held their own. Consultants went down to nine 25 days. Bureau chief got a little lazy; they went back up 195 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 to four. And total certifications were 158. 2 And if you could scroll down a little bit for me. 3 And then here's what I thought was interesting: 4 The last six months was when we launched the new 5 computer technology for doing résumés, which made the 6 presenter's job a whole lot easier. So we went from 7 this steady state of how long it took a presenter to get 8 their course certified, in the 80s, and it dropped down 9 to 54 days. So that was significant. 10 Consultants are down to eight. So still coming 11 down. Bureau chief held at a steady four. And we had 12 209 certifications completed during that time period. 13 So that was pretty good. 14 If you could scroll over. 15 Here's modifications, which was also very 16 important. It's kind of similar. We started out kind 17 of high for modification. Presenters took 32 days. 18 Consultant, nine. Bureau chief, four. With a total of 19 988 modifications. 20 And we'll just jump down to the completion. 21 Presenter was down to 15, and I do think that was 22 from the instructor résumé technology. The consultants 23 were down to four, so more than half their amount of 24 time. Bureau chief, five. And 942 modifications. 25 So in conclusion, I think, you know, a variety of 196 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 things happened to improve the certification times. We 2 changed some of the regulations, gave some more 3 structure to the consultants and a little more direction 4 in terms of priorities. And we really helped our 5 presenters certify their courses. You like them, you 6 say, hey, vote yes on OAL changes. We really helped the 7 presenters with the technology, which has nothing to do 8 with regulation, but just us making it a priority. 9 So I'm here to -- staff says you should vote yes on 10 OAL regulation 1052 changes. 11 Any questions? 12 (No response) 13 MS. MUNK: Okay. 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is that Manny? 15 (Laughter) 16 MS. MUNK: No comment. 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: That's my only question. 18 Anybody else have a question or comment? 19 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: I have one comment. 20 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes. Commissioner Braziel. 21 VICE CHAIRPERSON BRAZIEL: First, I want to thank 22 Manny. When we started this process, he hooked me up 23 with the IT folks to go what -- what are the changes 24 we're making from a user end. 25 And then I just want to give you feedback, because 197 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 I'm getting feedback from the field. People are doing 2 courses and they are saying thank you, thank you, thank 3 you. Nothing but thumbs up from the people that are out 4 there doing the work, saying, whatever the changes are, 5 that we just love them. 6 So kudos to the staff for all the work they have 7 done. 8 MS. MUNK: Thank you for that. 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I'm hearing the same thing, 10 Commissioner Braziel. 11 Anything else? 12 (No response) 13 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Are you offended by the 14 drawing? Are you good with that? 15 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: I'm not sure who has 16 more gray hair. 17 (Laughter) 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Thank you. 19 And there's no motion pending so we're moving on to 20 the next one. 21 There is? Why do I have -- 22 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: So I will make a motion -- 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Stand by. Okay. You are 24 right. Not in the script, but there is a motion. 25 COMMISSIONER CHAPLIN: So sorry. It was Chaplin 198 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 with a motion. 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. And who seconded? 3 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: McMahon. 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Comments? Questions? 5 (No response) 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 7 (Ayes) 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Opposed? 9 (No response) 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Hearing nothing, motion 11 passes. 12 Okay. Item M is a report on the process of crisis 13 intervention, behavioral health, de-escalation, and 14 procedural justice training. 15 At this time, we will call upon Bureau Chief Janna 16 Munk, Training Program Supervised -- Services Bureau to 17 provide us a report on the progress of efforts to 18 increase training opportunities for specific 19 disciplines. 20 Bring it on. 21 MS. MUNK: I would first like to introduce Law 22 Enforcement Consultant Mike Radford. He's our newest 23 consultant in Training Program Services, and he will 24 report on the funding for crisis intervention and 25 de-escalation. 199 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 MR. RADFORD: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen 2 of the Committee. 3 We will start our brief PowerPoint here. 4 Again, my name is Mike Radford and I'm relatively 5 new in POST, so, again, with Training and Professional 6 Services. As the PowerPoint is starting -- go into the 7 first slide. 8 With the recent monies we received from DOJ, I just 9 wanted to cover what POST is currently doing to promote 10 the areas of crisis intervention and de-escalation. You 11 see 5 million for crisis intervention and the 10 for 12 de-escalation. 13 So in 2019, we put out a bulletin sending a 14 detailing -- detailing what POST is doing in their 15 efforts to encourage current presenters to present new 16 courses in mental health training and de-escalation. 17 And the requirements for courses to be modified into 18 Plan V. So our goal is -- was to certify existing 19 courses and allow opportunities for presenters to 20 develop new courses to address the topic they feel will 21 meet the need for their community and meet the need -- 22 and meet the minimum topics required to stay in 23 alignment with the academy pilots that was created. 24 POST also offered direction to certifying these 25 courses as Plan V. So as you may or may not know, Plan 200 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 V courses help relieve fiscal burdens by covering all 2 presenter costs for each course. This allows the course 3 to be offered tuition-free to students and it also 4 allows students to get travel and per diem for the 5 courses. So we're really trying to get the outreach 6 going. 7 By covering presenter costs, we hope to encourage 8 outreach to underserved communities as well. Many 9 agencies fall -- or, excuse me, fail to have the 10 opportunity to travel to obtain certain training due to 11 staffing, distance, or budgetary restraints. We're 12 trying to get these presenters to go to these areas 13 to -- to assist them. 14 And, most recently, since the bulletins were 15 published, $500,000 has also been authorized for agency 16 backfill pay. This is a very important because it 17 provides funds to cover agency overtime as they send 18 their officers to this important training so the 19 overtime costs while staff is away is now -- will be 20 covered. 21 So, to date, just to give some numbers, POST has 22 over a hundred certified courses that train law 23 enforcement officers in the areas of mental health and 24 crisis intervention. 25 Since the beginning of 2019, in our bulletins, we 201 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 have certified 11 crisis intervention courses, and they 2 have been modified to that Plan V course. And we have 3 many more with interest and we're working on modifying 4 them as well. 5 And online training videos also will hopefully be 6 completed by Learning Training Resources by the end of 7 the year. 8 Another -- that's all right. Just another point we 9 wanted to put out: 10 Most recently, a training video for dispatchers 11 called "Callers in Crisis" was just recently released, 12 and our numbers have received -- as of yesterday, we saw 13 that we already had 84 views of this training, to date, 14 with 110 already in -- in progress. So we're looking to 15 see that, continuing to move forward. 16 Thanks. 17 So just some total numbers: Since the 18 implementation of SB 11 and 29, we show 9,843 law 19 enforcement officers have gone through some sort of 20 crisis intervention training in 2016; 9,045 in 2017; 21 2,751 in 2018. 22 And we also found, between 2016 and 2018, 3399 23 attendees had attended the SB 29 FTO course, so those 24 were law enforcement officers that were either FTOs or 25 aspiring to be FTOs as well. 202 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 So moving just a little on our de-escalation. In 2 2018, as we heard earlier, POST staff and subject matter 3 experts did come together and develop the Academy Pilot 4 Course. The course is currently being presented in 5 three different police academies and more will be 6 coming. 7 There's five current POST-certified de-escalation 8 courses, and we're working with agencies to add more. 9 We have proactively started reaching out to private 10 presenters as well, and we're going to work with them to 11 try to develop and offer de-escalation courses. So 12 reaching out to agencies -- agencies such as California 13 Association of Tactical Officers, California Peace 14 Officers Association, and other private presenters, in 15 an effort to get our de-escalation more widespread 16 throughout the state. 17 So just kind of reviewing. Though we have seen a 18 large amount of law enforcement officers attend crisis 19 intervention training, essentially since 2016, law 20 enforcement has been voluntarily participating in mental 21 health training since 1998. So the numbers are -- 22 officers trained are very high. 23 Though, as far as de-escalation, being a new topic 24 for development, de-escalation is not new to law 25 enforcement. It's -- it has historically been discussed 203 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 in other topics, such as use of force and other domains. 2 So we look forward to promoting the training of these 3 important areas as we move forward. 4 So with that, I'd open it to any questions on this 5 particular subject before I turn it over to Janna. 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Are you also talking about 7 changing academy classes or are those POST academy 8 classes? 9 MR. RADFORD: This is all POST in-service courses. 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. And so would some of 11 those in-service courses be geared toward supervisor -- 12 at the supervisory level? 13 MR. RADFORD: Yes. There are -- there are some 14 crisis intervention courses for managers as well, yes. 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: So I recently taught at a CIT 16 class in Southern California, and a part of -- and you 17 can tell where I am going -- with that was officer 18 wellness, stress, trauma, awareness, so that supervisors 19 understood what stress looked like in a first responder 20 and responded to that. 21 I would hope, as part of this, we would consider 22 offering those same kind of tools to other supervisors 23 so they can, in fact, be supportive during traumatic 24 events. 25 MR. RADFORD: Agreed. 204 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Some of the more extended crisis intervention 2 courses do have some portion that does focus a lot on 3 officer wellness, though it's not all just for that. 4 They do carry a part of that in their curriculum. 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Let me ask Ms. Munk. 6 Janna, as part of the classes in the academy, are 7 these issues being addressed? Do you happen to know? I 8 don't mean to put you on the spot. 9 MS. MUNK: No. No at all. 10 So is de-escalation being addressed at classes in 11 the academy? 12 I think there's a little bit of it embedded in a 13 lot of the classes, but we've never identified it as a 14 subject matter topic, and that's the reason for the 15 four-hour pilot that we're running, is to start to tease 16 that out and focus on how important it is to think 17 about, as you arrive at a scene, how do you set up 18 the -- the conditions so that you can de-escalate the 19 scene and use it as an option to force, whenever 20 possible? 21 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: And, of course, my bias in 22 this is, if you keep officers well, that they will be in 23 a better position to respond to de-escalation, 24 officer-involved shooting, and deal with any mental 25 health participant. 205 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 MS. MUNK: Absolutely. 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 3 Other comments or questions? 4 (No response) 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. Thank you both. I 6 don't see a motion here. 7 MS. MUNK: Did you want me to talk about the 8 procedural justice then? 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes, please. 10 MS. MUNK: Okay. So in 2016, the Department of 11 Justice invited POST to partner with them to create an 12 eight-hour in-service course on procedural justice. 13 I wanted to give you a little -- with that course 14 came $5 million funding. 15 So I wanted to give you a little update on where 16 that course is today. So the current status of the 17 procedural justice course that DOJ developed with us has 18 24 presenters; they have offered 359 presentations of 19 the course; 7,307 attendees with 172 agencies being 20 represented at the course; eight train the trainer 21 presenters; 22 train the trainer presentations; and 459 22 attendees to train the trainer. 23 Now, the whole philosophy of this course was going 24 to be, let's focus on the train the trainer courses, 25 bring officers in from other agencies, train them, and 206 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 then they can take it back and teach their own agencies. 2 What should have happened with that is that the 3 agencies were offered Plan Vs, so that they got some 4 reimbursement for supporting their training. That did 5 not happen as much as we would have liked to. So now 6 one of the projects that we're working on, as we move 7 procedural justice forward, is presenter outreach on 8 retroactive Plan Vs. So the presenters that are doing a 9 lot of presentations, we're reaching out to them saying, 10 hey, would you like a Plan V for that? And can we pay 11 you as far back as July of 2018? 12 So an example of that has been San Francisco PD. 13 They have offered many, many courses. We have reached 14 out to them, and we're going to pay them for last year's 15 courses $50,000. And they will continue to receive a 16 Plan V. 17 Could you please go back to the last slide? That's 18 okay. 19 So some of the other projects we're working on, 20 besides just the delivery of the in-service course -- 21 we're reviewing and updating the in-service and train 22 the trainer course. 23 LTR is doing a training video that has scenarios 24 that are procedural justice driven that officers -- that 25 they will be able to show in the classes and have 207 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 conversations around. 2 And on learning -- and the on learn -- online 3 learning course is being developed for racial profiling. 4 We issued a bulletin similar to de-escalation and crisis 5 intervention in January. We're integrating CI -- or PJ 6 into other POST courses. We have the basic course pilot 7 going, and we're doing expenditure tracking. So I will 8 talk a little bit more about some of those in 9 particular. 10 So the procedural justice bulletin to the field, 11 we're going to continue to maintain our eight-hour 12 in-service course that we created with DOJ, but we've 13 opened it up to the field to come forward with 14 procedural justice courses, and we're offering them a 15 Plan V to deliver. We think that they will have a 16 little bit more agility. We're going to give them some 17 low student numbers that they can present a class to and 18 hope we can encourage them to get out into regions that 19 are underserved for training. 20 So student enrollment could be 15 to 30, fewer with 21 approval, and they may travel the course. 22 Here's some of the courses that we're integrating 23 procedural justice concepts into currently: 24 As you can see, we already have some completed. We 25 are super-happy to get Elizabeth Hinton teaching a 208 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Command College course now. The executive development 2 course is in process as well as the management course 3 and ICI. 4 What we're hoping to accomplish by the end of the 5 five years and when the funds run out, is that as 6 agencies move through these courses, they will be able 7 to see procedural justice from every viewpoint. What 8 does it look like when you are an investigator; what 9 does it look like when you are a supervisor; what does 10 it look like when you look at your agency; how should 11 it -- how should it be inside of your agency, not just 12 with your community relationships. 13 Keep going. 14 This is the animation I didn't intend. 15 So with the basic course PJ pilot, we already 16 talked about that. The training and testing specs are 17 completed, the initial three pilot courses are 18 delivered, and we'll be going back to fixing it up a 19 little bit, make it a little bit more palatable. 20 Next. 21 One of the most important things that we've 22 implemented within the last few months is, when we first 23 got this going, we didn't really have a good 24 infrastructure to support tracking the expenditures on 25 this -- on this fund. 209 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 And so I apologize; that's difficult to see. I 2 didn't think it would come up so blurry. 3 What we now have in place is a tracking mechanism, 4 where whenever funds are expanded for PJ, our 5 Administrative Services Bureau can actually identify 6 where -- which funds those are and where to put them, 7 which Fi$Cal codes use to withdraw off of the accounts. 8 So at the time that this was completed last week -- 9 and this will always be available on SharePoint for all 10 internal viewing. So all the bureaus can go in and say, 11 where are we at with our funds; how much have we spent. 12 Hey, I need this amount to do a project, so I'm going to 13 kind of pull these -- this amount of funds off so nobody 14 spends that. 15 In July of 2016, we started with $5 million. In 16 July of 2018, we had only spent $171,009, according to 17 our tracking mechanisms. I think it was a -- it was a 18 poor tracking mechanism that we had. 19 So at the beginning of last fiscal year, we had 20 $4,828,000 to spend. February 2019, just last week, we 21 spent $116,277 on -- of the funds. So already, within 22 just an eight-month period, we're almost up to what we 23 spent in two years. I think it's just a better tracking 24 mechanism. And we're on par. So at this point, we're 25 at 4,712 -- $4,712,000. Go on to the next one. 210 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 So we also have a mechanism for future 2 expenditures. With all of the things that I just talked 3 about, this is what we're looking at spending over the 4 next three years. 5 Some of these costs are absolutes already. The 6 racial profiling online training has been budgeted at 7 $417,000; the PJ scenario videos at 175,000; our SLI 8 update will be 55,000; San Francisco's retroactive plan 9 is $50,000. 10 And as you go down the line, you can see, I've been 11 very conservative in my estimates of what we'll spend on 12 these, but I have identified at least $1 million that 13 we'll be spending within the next three years on that, 14 which still leaves us plenty of money to fund classes 15 and other projects. 16 I think that's it. 17 Any questions on the procedural justice funds? 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Questions? Comments? 19 (No response) 20 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you very much. 21 MS. MUNK: Thank you. 22 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. The Advisory 23 Subcommittee. Vice Chair Artin Baron will report on the 24 subcommittee meeting held yesterday. Let me just 25 suggest, you don't need to re-report anything you 211 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 already reported. 2 ADVISORY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIRPERSON BARON: Thank 3 you, Madam Chair. 4 As part of our subcommittee meeting yesterday, we 5 obviously sat around and discussed what the Commission 6 had asked us to review as the roles and responsibilities 7 of the Advisory Committee. 8 And after further discussion, we -- we kind of 9 thought about options, how to help the Commission 10 better, and we started thinking of alternative schedules 11 to possibly meet. 12 One of the complaints that I had from the Advisory 13 Committee that I want to share is, as we come to the -- 14 to the meeting the day prior and we get the agenda, like 15 everybody else, a week or so prior, the Advisory 16 Committee felt that they did not have enough time to be 17 able to vet out the material and be able to share or 18 provide input enough at the meeting. 19 One of the things that we were hopeful in asking 20 for were a possibility of a meet prior to or get the 21 information prior to, to be able to vet it out, to 22 possibly work with POST staff to provide better insight 23 on the topics, and then be able to present that to the 24 POST Commission. 25 The idea of removing seats or replacing 212 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 organizations on the table was lightly discussed. And 2 as you can imagine, it was discouraged that the 3 recommendation from the subcommittee, at least when it 4 comes to Advisory panel we had, was to keep the 5 positions as they are, but, rather, if necessary, add. 6 And then offer the opportunity to have an advanced time 7 frame, if you will, or more time to vet out the topics, 8 have access to POST staff to discuss the material with 9 POST staff, and be able to provide a better insight to 10 the Commission. 11 Thank you. 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Do we have a motion to accept 13 the subcommittee report? Motion to accept subcommittee 14 report? 15 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: McMahon. 16 COMMISSIONER O'ROURKE: Second. O'Rourke. 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Questions? Discussion. 18 (No response) 19 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 20 (Ayes) 21 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Motion passes. 22 The Advisory Committee Vice Chair, Artin Baron, 23 will report on the Advisory Committee meeting held 24 yesterday. 25 This is, I believe, to address the issues -- is 213 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 there anything else -- anything else you want to 2 address, either in the subcommittee or the committee, or 3 do you feel like you said everything you want to say? 4 ADVISORY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIRPERSON BARON: As far 5 as the subcommittee, I'm good. 6 The Advisory Committee had the opportunity and the 7 pleasure of reviewing some awards, and we would like to 8 offer our recommendations to the Commission. 9 We actually had some applications sent in to POST 10 for the POST Excellence in Training Awards. And as for 11 individual, for the sake of time, I'm just going to read 12 the names unless the Commission wishes to hear more 13 about them. 14 The individual award was offered for Stockton 15 Police Department's Captain Scott Meadors. We did not 16 have a runner-up, as we did not have a secondary 17 application for that. 18 For the Lifetime Achievement Award was a police 19 captain from Vallejo Police Department, John Whitney. 20 For the Organizational Award, the committee picked 21 Visalia Police Department. 22 And as runner-up, it was selected for San Francisco 23 Police Department as the organizational. 24 And last but not least, for the O.J. "Bud" Hawkins 25 Exceptional Service Award, the committee had chosen 214 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 Sylvia Moir. I'm sorry. I messed up the name 2 yesterday. I'm finally not doing that. 3 And, you know, on a side note from the committee, I 4 want to share that a few of the Advisory members not 5 only complimented but were ecstatic at the work that 6 POST staff has done and is doing. And a recommendation 7 came out to share with Commission, that possibly the 8 Commission can consider having similar awards for the 9 POST staff themselves. They go above and beyond to do 10 all the hard work. They -- they truly perform at a high 11 level. They have been doing a great job for us. And it 12 would be kind of a -- irresponsible on our side to try 13 to compare them to people outside of the POST facility 14 or POST staff, as they compare them to police officers 15 on scene or in the -- in the field. So we figured if 16 would be -- if it's okay, the recommendation could be 17 given to consider an award for POST staff in -- as a 18 whole. 19 And, secondly, Chief Spagnoli reminded us that, you 20 know, we had very poor responses for the applications 21 for the excellence awards and the O.J. "Bud" Hawkins 22 Award. 23 Another recommendation was brought up to possibly 24 try to market for more opportunity, more areas where the 25 awards can be recognized. Agencies have more access to 215 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 it. More of a publication, publicizing opportunity for 2 us to market the opportunities for people to apply for 3 these awards would be appropriate. 4 Thank you, Madam Chair. 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Were you looking for a 6 response to the question about whether we could create 7 an award for POST employees? Or are you just wanting to 8 mention it? What was your thinking with that? 9 ADVISORY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIRPERSON BARON: You 10 know, I would say I would love to be responsible. I 11 don't know if that's appropriate. It was a 12 recommendation for the POST Commission to consider 13 developing an award system or award for the POST staff. 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I think there's no doubt that 15 POST staff deserves awards. I think the whole idea of 16 whether you want to inflict an award system on an 17 organization is something that should be carefully 18 considered by the organization. 19 So my suggestion is, we -- we hear it, we consider 20 it, and that Mr. Alvarez give that some thought as well. 21 ADVISORY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIRPERSON BARON: Thank 22 you, ma'am. 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 24 Do you want to say anything? Yes? Maybe? 25 (No response) 216 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Now we're up to 2 correspondence. The following correspondence was sent 3 from POST to POST from Damien Sandoval, Chairperson, 4 California Academy Directors Association, requesting 5 holding proposed restructure of POST Commission Advisory 6 Committee until collaboration discussions occurred. 7 From Steve Moore, CSSA, Immediate President, Former 8 Sheriff, Santa Joaquin County, requesting Sheriff Rick 9 DiBasilio -- that's D-I-B-A-S-I-L-I-O -- represent CSSA 10 on the Commission on POST Advisory Committee as 11 replacement for Former Sheriff Steve Moore. 12 From POST to Bill Ayub -- that's A-Y-U-B -- 13 Sheriff, Ventura County Sheriff's Office, expressing 14 deep sympathy over the tragic on-duty death of Sergeant 15 Ron Helus. 16 Adam Christianson, Sheriff-Coroner, Stanislaus 17 County Sheriff's Department, expressing deep sympathy 18 over the tragic on-duty death of Deputy Antonio 19 Hinostroza. 20 To Thomas Kan, Chief of Police, Gardena Police 21 Department expressing deep sympathy over the tragic 22 on-duty death of Officer Toshio Hirai. 23 To Randy Richardson, Chief of Police, Newman Police 24 Department, expressing deep sympathy over the tragic 25 on-duty death of Corporal Ronil Singh. 217 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 To Darren Pytel -- P-I-E-T-E-L-L [sic] -- Chief of 2 Police, Davis Police Department, expressing deep 3 sympathy over the tragic on-duty death of Officer 4 Natalie Corona. 5 And again, just to remind everybody, those are the 6 people that suffer on-duty deaths. 7 The following item is submitted for discussion: 8 Item P [sic] is a request for replacement 9 appointments on the Advisory Committee. 10 The first is request to appoint professor Kathy 11 Oborn to the POST Advisory Committee as replacement for 12 Representative Bradley J. Young. 13 I can tell you that the Advisory Committee -- who 14 was going to be part of it, what the process is going to 15 be -- is still in consideration. So I would probably 16 suggest that we hold off on that until we get clarity on 17 the Advisory Committee. 18 Any thoughts about that? 19 (No response) 20 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is there a motion to go 21 forward on that? To hold off on that? 22 (No response) 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Anybody want any chocolate? 24 (Laughter) 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I need a motion. 218 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 COMMISSIONER GARDNER: Gardner. I move that we 2 table discussion on this until we have further 3 information. 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. 5 Is there a second? 6 COMMISSIONER LONG: Second. Long. 7 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Discussion? Question? 8 (No response) 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in -- 10 COMMISSIONER O'ROURKE: Question: Do we have a 11 timetable? I think this is the third meeting we've been 12 passing on the Advisory Committee. So is there a 13 timetable we have in mind? 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: No. 15 COMMISSIONER O'ROURKE: Okay. I will take the 16 chocolate. 17 (Laughter) 18 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Can I have some 19 clarification on that? 20 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yeah. 21 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Just on that, you have two 22 other applications from -- 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Correct. 24 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: -- folks who fit the staff's 25 recommendation -- 219 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I agree. 2 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: -- and they also fit the 3 current structure for the Advisory -- 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: So what do you suggest? 5 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: I suggest that you put the 6 two cops on the Advisory Committee and then you -- you 7 go with and Commission Gardner's tabling of the motion 8 for the professor. 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I -- I suggest you put that in 10 the form of a motion. 11 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: I just made it. 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: But let's do it one by one. 13 Okay? 14 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Okay. 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: So moving on, there is a 16 request to appoint Chair Rick DiBasilio to the POST 17 Advisory Committee as replacement representative for 18 Former Sheriff Steve Moore. 19 Does anyone wish to discuss the nomination to 20 appoint Sheriff DiBasilio to Advisory Committee? 21 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: I will make the motion. 22 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: I will second the motion. 23 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Any discussion? 24 You know what? The motion is to appoint him, 25 correct? Is there -- and a second from Commissioner 220 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 McMahon. 2 THE COURT REPORTER: I didn't catch who made the 3 motion. 4 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: McMahon made the motion. 5 THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you. 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I thought actually Donelan 7 made the motion. McMahon seconded it. 8 Okay. For clarity purpose, McMahon made the 9 motion; Donelan seconded. 10 Any questions? Discussion. 11 (No response) 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 13 (Ayes) 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Any opposed? 15 (No response) 16 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Motion passes. Welcome, 17 Sheriff. 18 Okay. And there was another one. Where is the 19 other one? 20 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Commissioner Donelan. 21 Motion for PJ Webb. 22 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: And -- that's fine. I just 23 can't find it in my script. So bear with me. 24 MS. FERNANDEZ: I can't find it on the agenda 25 either, so I may have inadvertently left it off. 221 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: That would be the first 2 mistake you have made in this incredibly tense, busy 3 day. So I completely accept that. 4 And let me make sure that I have the correct name. 5 What is the name? 6 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: It's Philip Webb. 7 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Philip Webb. 8 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: PJ Webb. 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. So -- and he's with the 10 CHP, correct? 11 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: No. 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: What is he with? 13 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Los Angeles Schools Police, 14 and this was held over from a previous -- 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Right. 16 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: -- meeting. That's why it's 17 not on the agenda. 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: And that wasn't one of the 19 categories that we previously had. 20 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: As I recall, it was the 21 staff's recommendation, was having serving cops and -- 22 taking their seats on the Advisory Committee, and then 23 reshuffling was the discussion we had at the Commission. 24 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Why don't you make a 25 motion, and then we'll see what happens. Okay? 222 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Okay. I make a motion to 2 nominate PJ Webb for the Advisory Committee. 3 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Is there a second? 4 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Second. Ramirez. 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Who was the second? 6 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Ramirez. 7 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. Any discussion? 8 Questions? 9 (No response) 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 11 (Ayes) 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Opposed? 13 (No response) 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Motion passes. 15 Now, I thought there was a CHP. 16 COMMISSIONER O'ROURKE: He's retired. They're 17 going to resubmitting in May. 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Okay. So we're holding on 19 that? 20 Stand by. 21 New business. 22 COMMISSIONER DONELAN: Madam Chair, on the last 23 one, did we vote on Commissioner Gardner's motion to 24 table the original -- 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I think we did. We did. We 223 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 did. We did. 2 Thank you. And thanks for bringing it back. 3 Okay. We're going to go on to new business. I am 4 going to call upon Manny for a presentation. At this 5 time, I would like to call upon Executive Director 6 Alvarez to discuss new business items. 7 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Thank you, Madam 8 Chair. 9 Just for a point of clarification. I hate to keep 10 bringing the issue up, but the Advisory Committee, to 11 get some direction from you all as to what you would 12 like us to do between now and the next Commission 13 meeting with the Advisory Committee. Do we leave it as 14 is, and have the Advisory Committee immediately before 15 the next Commission meeting? Or would you like us to do 16 something with the Advisory Committee? 17 COMMISSIONER O'ROURKE: I would like -- the 18 discussion of having the meeting ahead of time and, you 19 know, two weeks or whatever prior. And I don't know how 20 cumbersome it would be, but maybe have a report included 21 with the agenda for the commissioners to see the pros 22 and cons as they vet out the information so we can be a 23 little better informed as we come into these. 24 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I may need to call upon Toby 25 for a discussion of that. If there is a meeting -- and 224 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 even if it's telephonic -- it may not be possible under 2 Bagley-Keene. But perhaps you could explain that to all 3 of us. 4 MR. DARDEN: Sure. Well, it would be possible 5 under Bagley-Keene. The -- if it's duly designated 6 subcommittee of POST and a quorum is meeting to discuss 7 business, then it's subject to Bagley-Keene. 8 So the Advisory Committee can certainly meet 9 beforehand. 10 I think the concern has been that sometimes the 11 agenda is not, you know, necessarily finalized until 12 very close to the meeting. So when the Advisory 13 Committee gets it, they have not had much of a chance to 14 discuss. 15 So if the fix to that is to push the Advisory 16 Committee back by a couple of weeks, that's certainly 17 doable. It just has to be agendized under Bagley-Keene. 18 And then the Advisory Committee could hold their 19 meeting, make their recommendations. If there was a 20 report, then, certainly, that report of that meeting 21 could be included within the agenda for the next 22 Commission meeting. 23 (Commissioner Chaplin left the meeting.) 24 MR. DARDEN: So I think it's doable. It is just a 25 matter of, it is a Bagley-Keene meeting. It's just got 225 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 to be agendized and open to the public and -- and run 2 according Bagley-Keene. But it's possible to do it. 3 And -- and then the question for you, Manny, is 4 just the issue of the -- you know, the -- the agendas. 5 Whether or not if you can get the agenda for the full 6 Commission meeting finalized, let's say, two or three 7 weeks beforehand, then the Advisory Committee would have 8 the ability to look at everything on the full Commission 9 agenda. 10 If not, then, you know, the Advisory Committee 11 could discuss whatever, you know, staff believed was the 12 issue for the upcoming meeting at the time. And then 13 you would just have to recognize that there might be 14 some -- some play there, where perhaps staff decides 15 that another issue needs to be added to the agenda, and 16 perhaps the Advisory Committee doesn't have the -- the 17 ability to address that. 18 But, you know, it's -- that's a compromise that 19 could work. 20 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: I can answer that, because I 21 work very closely with the executive director, and it is 22 put together at the very last minute; two weeks would be 23 impossible. Would you agree? 24 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Correct. 25 I believe what the Advisory Committee mentioned 226 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 yesterday, and Vice Chair Baron can articulate, is that 2 they would like to have input into how these agenda 3 items are created before they are created. Is that a 4 possibility? 5 MR. DARDEN: Well, staff does a lot of internal 6 work in order to prepare the agenda. So, I mean, I 7 think that in the normal business of what staff does, it 8 can do whatever it needs to do to determine what is 9 going to be on the agenda. 10 The question is going to be, if it's a designated 11 subcommittee that's doing the business of the 12 subcommittee, then that -- that's different. That's 13 something that would be subject to Bagley-Keene. 14 But just deliberation with the subject matter 15 expert or with someone within staff or whatever to 16 decide what should be on the agenda, that's what POST 17 normally does. 18 Does that help? 19 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Sure. 20 MR. DARDEN: Okay. 21 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: So if we're having 22 a -- just a hypothetical discussion on something we want 23 to do with the academy, there's no agenda item that's 24 been created. We just want some feedback from the 25 Advisory Committee. That can be done without -- 227 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 MR. DARDEN: No. That's -- that's different. 2 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Okay. 3 MR. DARDEN: Because -- because, again, if the -- 4 the point of the Advisory Committee is to -- is to 5 discuss and render those sorts of things, when you have 6 a quorum of that committee, then that's -- that's what 7 needs to be, so to speak, in the sunshine; that needs to 8 be done on the public agenda. 9 I thought you were just talking about, you know, 10 internal discussion or debate with yourselves or with 11 others about what items should go up on the agenda. 12 When it comes to the specifics of -- of, you know, 13 making those decisions, then that's something -- and 14 deliberating about those specific issues, that's 15 something, then, that would be subject to -- to 16 Bagley-Keene, and there would have to be a public 17 meeting for it. 18 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Okay. 19 MR. DARDEN: If that makes sense. 20 ADVISORY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIRPERSON BARON: Madam 21 Chair, may I ask a question? 22 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes. 23 ADVISORY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIRPERSON BARON: How 24 about in the sense of being able to be engaged with the 25 staff. If the -- the topics were sent out to individual 228 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 advisor members for opinion or response, would that 2 still constitute a problem? 3 MR. DARDEN: Yes. The answer to that is yes. 4 So the law, unfortunately, recognizes that you can 5 have what's called serial communications. So as long as 6 there's a discussion among a quorum of the members of 7 the body about a subject within that body's 8 jurisdiction, that's -- that's a meeting, and that's 9 something that has to be done publicly. 10 So you can't have one person talk to the next that 11 then talks to the next or, you know, that sort of thing. 12 As long as a quorum is involved and it's discussion 13 about a subject that's within the jurisdiction of the 14 body, it's subject to Bagley-Keene. 15 ADVISORY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIRPERSON BARON: So what 16 I am hearing is, there's no opportunity for us to 17 prepare and do work with the POST staff on these items. 18 MR. DARDEN: Well, no. I don't think that's right. 19 Because, you know, it's always possible for -- like, the 20 commissioners can get items in advance to -- the 21 commissioners here get the agenda items and the 22 materials, you know, ten days, whatever, before the 23 meeting to give them a chance to prepare. 24 Same thing could be true -- you are just talking 25 about a schedule issue, as I understand it. So if you 229 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 want to have the meeting two weeks beforehand, then you 2 can do that. You agendize it. You can get whatever 3 materials the Commission can give you prior to that 4 meeting, that's two weeks beforehand; make your 5 conclusions; that information can then come into the -- 6 into the full Commission meeting. 7 Does that make sense? 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Well, it doesn't necessarily 9 make sense, but it is the law. 10 MR. DARDEN: It's the law, right. 11 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Right. 12 COMMISSIONER BUI: I have a question. 13 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes, please. 14 COMMISSIONER BUI: So there was some discussion 15 yesterday. Randy Waltz, actually, I think, brought up 16 this idea. If I may -- 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: He's still here. 18 COMMISSIONER BUI: Okay. Well, he had a question 19 about whether or not we change the status of the 20 Advisory Committee from being the committee for the 21 Commission to a committee to advise POST staff. 22 Does that change the circumstances? Is that even 23 possible? 24 MR. DARDEN: Yeah. I actually don't think it does, 25 unfortunately, because it's still a designated 230 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 committee. The Commission has authorized the creation 2 of it. It's still doing, effectively, the business of 3 the Commission. 4 You know, it's -- it's a different issue -- as 5 we've discussed, it's a different issue if POST decides 6 that it wants to reach out to any subject matter expert, 7 at any time, on any given issue, it can do that. That's 8 not a designated subcommittee. 9 But if you have a designated subcommittee and it's 10 been created by action of the committee, and it's 11 meeting for the purpose of discussing something within 12 the jurisdiction of the Commission, then I think it's 13 subject to Bagley-Keene. It doesn't matter if they 14 ultimately report to the staff who then reports to the 15 Commission or if they report directly to the Commission. 16 I don't think that matters. Sorry. 17 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: But there is that subject 18 matter expert. And if we are consulting with subject 19 matter experts, we're within the law. 20 So back to the question: When is this going to be 21 resolved? I still don't have an answer, but I'm open. 22 Yes. Commissioner. 23 COMMISSIONER LONG: For, Manny, just a quick 24 question, a neutral question. But does this -- does 25 this not create resource issues for you if you are going 231 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 to have -- I know how much time you put into these 2 hearings and so forth, and these meetings. Would 3 that -- to what extent would that create -- if we had to 4 do, you know, another one, two weeks in advance. 5 Neutral in terms of how this affects POST, but I'm 6 concerned about your resources issue. 7 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Yes. I mean, if it 8 was an informal discussion with the -- or an -- I guess 9 the best way to characterize it is an informal 10 non-Bagley-Keene meeting with the Advisory Committee, to 11 have a discussion about what we're going to propose, 12 that would be easy, because we're already kind of 13 thinking things through and we're starting to formulate 14 the proposals or what you have asked. That would be 15 easy. 16 But if we do have to go the Bagley-Keene route and 17 formalize the meeting, it will be obviously more of a 18 challenge. Yes. 19 And I just -- I echo what -- what the Chair said. 20 We are literally pushing the envelope in terms of 21 pushing out those agenda items at the very last minute 22 because of the extensive research. There's -- sometimes 23 there's discussion with OAL prior to them as to how they 24 are going to get through. 25 They just take a lot of time. 232 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 So if I understand correctly, we either have the 2 option of -- or you have the option of requiring us to 3 do a meeting in between, that will be subject to 4 Bagley-Keene, or keeping it as is, between now and May. 5 And I get the feeling that you are saying just keep 6 it as is between now and May? Does that seem 7 reasonable? 8 (No response) 9 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Okay. That appears to 10 be the direction we have? 11 (No response) 12 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Okay. 13 I will move on, hopefully to some simpler topics. 14 For future Commission meeting dates, we wanted to 15 propose the following dates for next year, as we have to 16 start planning for them. So we propose -- we already 17 have the meeting scheduled through October; I believe 18 those will be addressed later on. 19 But we have to schedule the February 2000 -- the 20 2020 meeting, and we're proposing February 12th, 2020, 21 in San Diego County, if that is doable. 22 And then we're also proposing the next meeting 23 would be -- 24 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: The 12th is a Wednesday? 25 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Yeah. The 233 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 12th through the 13th. Obviously we have to refer 2 Advisory and the Finance -- 3 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Right. So -- so the 4 Commission would be on 13th. 5 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: 13th, correct. 12th 6 through the 13th, 2020, in San Diego County. 7 Potentially San Diego County; and then the next meeting 8 would be June 3rd through the 4th, 2020, in West 9 Sacramento; followed by October 21st through the 22nd, 10 2020, in West Sacramento. 11 So we would continue to try to -- for next year, to 12 do one in Southern California and two in West 13 Sacramento, if that is doable. 14 Are we good? If the Commission gives us that 15 direction, we'll move forward with it. 16 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Does anybody have any -- yes. 17 COMMISSIONER SMITH: So it's different than on our 18 agenda -- 19 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: No. That's the other -- 20 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Okay. 21 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Okay. Thank you. 22 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: We're about to go into the 23 future meetings. That's the future-future meetings. 24 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: So that's for the 25 future. And I do want to thank you, Sheriff, for 234 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 putting this thing on this time. I know that that's 2 been addressed yesterday and today. But -- 3 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: I thought we were coming 4 back next month. 5 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: I think there's a few 6 people that would like to do it here again. 7 And then the last thing is, pursuant to the POST 8 requirements, my performance review is supposed to be 9 done every two years. The last one was in June of 2017. 10 So I propose, if you want to do it, that it be done at 11 the May 2019 meeting. That -- 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Yes, we want to do it, and May 13 sounds fine to me. Anybody else? Sure. 14 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ALVAREZ: Okay. 15 If you would like me to prepare anything for that, 16 in terms of data or anything else, please let me know. 17 And that concludes my presentation, Madam Chair. 18 Sheriff Smith -- or Commissioner Smith. 19 COMMISSIONER SMITH: In the past, for performance 20 evaluations, there's been a committee. Does a committee 21 still exist? 22 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: A committee does not still 23 exist. 24 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Okay. 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: But I think there's certain 235 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 people, based upon their positions in the Commission, 2 that are automatically on the committee. 3 COMMISSIONER SMITH: 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: But I'm going to ask Assistant 5 Executive Director Loggins to look into that for us. 6 Still here? Will you? Do you know the answer now or 7 are you going to look into it? 8 MR. LOGGINS: I do not know the answer, but we will 9 find out. 10 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Thank you. 11 Okay. So now we have to decide if we're going to 12 approve the Executive Director's Report. 13 No. We don't have to. 14 It's getting long. 15 Okay. Yes, we do. If the Commission concurs, the 16 appropriate action would be a motion to approve the next 17 Commission meeting dates and locations. And those -- 18 you did. Or -- I'm sorry. We have the -- stand by. 19 It's written in different places. 20 Okay. We need a motion to approve the Executive 21 Director's performance review for May. 22 Is there such a motion? 23 COMMISSIONER SMITH: So moved. Smith. 24 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Second. Ramirez. 25 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Questions? Discussion? 236 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 (No response) 2 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 3 (Ayes) 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Opposition? 5 (No response) 6 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Hearing nothing, the motion 7 passes. 8 And we are also going to need a motion to approve 9 the dates that Manny just gave. 10 Is there such a motion? 11 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: McMahon. 12 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Second? 13 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Ramirez. 14 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Discussion? Questions? 15 (No response) 16 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 17 (Ayes) 18 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Motion passes. 19 So I think we also need a motion to -- which we 20 discussed informally, to decide what to do with the 21 results of the subcommittee's action. And I believe we 22 said we were going to continue that until our next 23 meeting. Okay. 24 Is there a such a motion? 25 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: Move. Ramirez. 237 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Second? 2 COMMISSIONER MOORE: Moore. 3 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Questions? 4 (No response) 5 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 6 (Ayes) 7 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: And opposed? 8 (No response) 9 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Hearing nothing, the motion 10 passes. 11 Okay. The upcoming Commission meetings -- the more 12 upcoming ones -- May 29th through 30th, 2019, is going 13 to be in West Sacramento. October 23rd to 24th, 2019, 14 also in West Sacramento. 15 And we are now going to adjourn to closed -- a 16 brief closed session. I am going to ask Toby to tell us 17 how we can best orchestrate that. 18 MR. DARDEN: There had been some discussion about 19 possibly moving upstairs. I don't think that it's 20 necessary for us to do that. It's going to be very 21 brief. If we can just clear the room, leave the 22 commissioners in, we can close that door. It's just 23 going to take a minute or two. 24 (Break taken: 2:43 p.m. to 2:45 p.m.) 25 // 238 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 (Closed session: 2:45 p.m. to

2 3:00 p.m.) 3 (Open session resumed: 3:00 p.m.) 4 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: The closed session has 5 concluded. We are now back in session. 6 Commissioners, is there anything else? 7 (No response) 8 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Hearing nothing, I will call 9 for a motion to adjourn the meeting. 10 Is there a motion? 11 COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ: So moved. 12 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Second. 13 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: All in favor? 14 (Ayes) 15 CHAIRPERSON DUDLEY: Meeting is adjourned. 16 (Proceedings concluded at 3:01 p.m.) 17 ---o0o--- 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 239 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731 POST Commission Meeting, February 21, 2019

1 CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER 2 3 I, KATHRYN S. SWANK, a Certified Shorthand Reporter 4 of the State of California, do hereby certify: 5 That I am a disinterested person herein; that the 6 foregoing proceedings was reported in shorthand by me, 7 Kathryn S. Swank, a Certified Shorthand Reporter of the 8 State of California, and thereafter transcribed into 9 typewriting. 10 I further certify that I am not of counsel or 11 attorney for any of the parties to said proceedings nor 12 in any way interested in the outcome of said 13 proceedings. 14 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand 15 this 12th day of March 2019. 16 17 18 19 20 /s/Kathryn S. Swank KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR 21 Certified Shorthand Reporter License No. 13061 22 23 24 25 240 KATHRYN S. SWANK, CSR, RPR (916) 390-7731