Cotati City Council
Agenda Staff Report
Item type: REGULAR AGENDA (ACTION)
To: City Council
Subject: POLICE ADVISORY AND OVERSIGHT OPTIONS
Date: May 28, 2024
Written by: Chris Simmons, Chief of Police
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council receive and discuss the attached report regarding police transparency, accountability, and community partnerships, and provide direction on the elements of a potential advisory/oversight model for the Cotati Police Department.
Background
Cotati City Councilmembers have expressed an interest in exploring additional forms of community involvement and oversight for the Cotati Police Department. Most notably, the reincorporation of some form of the currently inactive Cotati Police Auxiliary Commission (Commission) has been previously mentioned at Council meetings. This Commission has been inactive for almost thirty years.
Local Police Oversight Models
As described in detail in the Analysis/Discussion section of this staff report, State law requires various levels of independent oversight over all police agencies in California. In addition, all municipal police agencies also have local oversight. While every agency has local nuances, municipal oversight models can be generally grouped into four (4) categories, as summarized below. For all municipalities, the City Council inherently begins with authority over all functions of the City. Any committees or commissions formed by the City Council can either have an advisory function or could have specified City Council authorities delegated to it.
1. City Manager-City Council Oversight. This is the most common form of oversight in California, where the day-to-day operations of the police department are directly overseen by the City Manager. The City Council has both direct budgetary power and the ability to initiate investigations into any issue or incident deemed necessary. This model often includes some type of periodic public reporting of statistics to the City Council and includes all current State oversight laws, policies, and required trainings.
When needed, this model can include an independent investigator who is initiated by the Police Chief, City Manager or City Council.
2. Chief/Police Advisory Committee. These can vary widely in duties, but generally are advisory in nature only and the City Council does not delegate any investigatory or budgetary authority to the committee. In addition to regular public reporting of statistics, this model generally is used to provide a forum for direct citizen feedback with the Police Chief and senior City leadership on a variety of police programs and community concerns. On one end of the spectrum is a Chief’s Advisory Committee and the other end is a more formal City Council appointed advisory committee, but the differences are primarily in method of appointment and Brown Act meeting requirements, not committee functions. Some examples include the City of Walnut Creek, City of Cotati (inactive), City of Novato, City of Sausalito (inactive) and the currently forming Petaluma Public Safety Advisory Committee.
3. Independent Police Auditor. While this can be part of other models on an as needed basis, in some cases the City Council creates a separate city department staffed with permanent staff or hires contractors in an on-going basis under an “Office of Independent Review” or “Independent Police Auditor”. Larger police agencies often have their own internal affairs divisions, but this is distinguished by the addition of separate staff or contractors to do additional oversight, which is typically reported back to the City Council on an annual or periodic basis. This model can be expensive, depending on the breadth and frequency of audits. Some examples of this include the City of Fresno, City of San Jose, City of Palo Alto, City of Petaluma and City of Santa Rosa.
4. Police Oversight Commission. This is the least common type of police oversight and is typically the result of high-profile police issues. In a staff survey of cities in California, this model appeared in less than 5% of all cities. Under this model, the City Council generally delegates investigatory duties and grants a budget to these bodies to conduct investigations using authorized personnel. This model is typically very expensive in terms of direct costs of investigators and attorneys as well as the required support staff.
Some well-known examples are the City of Oakland, City and County of San Francisco and City of Los Angeles.
While similar models exist for the county sheriffs’, the sheriff departments are fundamentally different from municipal police agencies in their management structure. The Sheriff is an elected official and not subject to any oversight other than the voters. The Board of Supervisors typically has budgetary authority but no investigatory ability, so investigations are the purview of the Sherrif. However, both municipal police agencies and county sheriffs are subject to a variety of other investigatory requirements under State law, as described in more detail under the “Analysis/Discussion” portion of this staff report.
Examples of Advisory/Oversight of Municipal Police Agencies in Marin and Sonoma County, with select other Bay Area agencies provided to illustrate other potential models.
1. City of Cotati, Population 7,500 (Police Auxiliary Commission) a. Created in 1975, revised in 1987 and again in 1995. NOT ACTIVE b. Stated Purpose: “To act as a liaison between the community, the Cotati police department, and the city council, To implement and maintain community based safety programs, such as neighborhood watch, bicycle safety and earthquake preparedness, To have the chairperson or another commission member participate in the oral board interview process for the position of police officer, To make recommendations relating to the implementation of programs and/or projects that affect public safety in the community.”
c. Membership: Five (5) members, “appointed” by the Mayor, subject to approval by majority vote of the City Council. One member can reside outside city limits, but must be within the sphere of influence, per the General Plan. Criminal screening required so that members don’t have criminal history or felony convictions.
d. Selection Process: Not defined, requires Mayor to put forward nominees for majority vote of the City Council.
e. Term: Two (2) years. No limit on terms.
f. Meeting Frequency: Regularly, no less than every two (2) months. g. Removal: By the Mayor, subject to majority vote of the City Council; or by a majority vote of the City Council. Automatic termination if absent for three (3) consecutive meetings or four (4) meetings during a 12 month period, unless absences are excused by a majority vote of the committee. h. Meeting Format: Brown Act meetings.
2. City of Sausalito, Population 7,100 (Citizens Advisory Review Board [CARB]). a. Created in 1998, NOT ACTIVE.
b. Stated purpose: “Enhance citizen understanding of the process of submitting, processing and responding to citizen complaints regarding police officers; Add a citizen perspective in developing or revising police policies or practices perceived to infringe on civil liberties and civil rights; Receive quarterly reports from the Police Department concerning the type, number and disposition of citizen complaints; Recommend alternatives for investigating complaints alleged to infringe upon civil liberties and civil rights; Make a report, at least annually, to the City Council on its work.”
c. Membership: Five (5) community members appointed by the City Council. Must be residents of Sausalito.
d. Selection Process: Interview by full City Council, Mayor or Councilmember can nominate and vote “yes” on one candidate, each nominee must get at least 3 votes to be selected.
e. Term: Two (2) year terms. No term limit.
f. Meeting Frequency: Quarterly.
g. Removal: By majority vote of the City Council, automatic removal if unexcused absence from three (3) consecutive meetings, or a breach of confidentiality. h. Meeting Format: Abides by general procedures of City Council committees, Brown Act committee
3. City of San Rafeal, Population 60,000 (Police Advisory and Accountability Committee). a. Created by the City Council in June 2023 following a police incident in the Canal area of San Rafeal. CURRENTLY ACTIVE.
b. Stated purpose: “An advisory committee to the City Council to improve public transparency and accountability with respect to the San Rafael Police Department and provide greater community participation in making recommendations on police department policies, practices, and procedures.” c. Membership: Seven (7) community members appointed by the City Council; may include up to two (2) alternates. Endeavor to reflect community diversity. Must be San Rafeal residents, minimum age of 18, except one youth member, aged 17-
26. d. Selection Process: City Council subcommittee conducts initial interviews, finalists interviewed by full City Council.
e. Term: Four (4) year terms, no more than 2 consecutive terms allowed. f. Meeting Frequency: Monthly
g. Removal: Two (2) unexcused absences or six (6) absences in a term for any reason constitutes voluntary resignation.
h. Meeting Format: Abides by general procedures of City Council committees, Brown Act committee.
4. City of Pleasant Hill, Population 34,000 (Police Chiefs Advisory Panel) a. Created in 2024. CURRENTLY ACTIVE.
b. Stated Purpose: To provide a forum for discussions regarding community/ police concerns and allow for greater transparency and communication with the community. Established under the direction of the Chief of Police, the objective of the Panel will be to act as a resource for the Chief in working with the community to form strategies, develop community policing concepts, increase public awareness, bolster engagement, improve transparency, and identify best practices.
c. Membership: Maximum of fifteen (15) members. Must be residents, business owners/employees or individuals intimately involved in an organization that specifically serves the Pleasant Hill community. Looking for diverse backgrounds.
d. Selection Process: Application and staff interview panel. Ability to pass a background check that ensures no felony convictions or misdemeanor convictions within a year of application, no open litigation or claims against the City of Pleasant Hill, ability to be impartial and unbiased.
e. Term: Three (3) years. Term extensions will be considered on an individual basis based on community needs and at the discretion of the Chief of Police. f. Meeting Frequency: Quarterly, or more frequently as needed. g. Removal: Members may be removed for cause prior to the end of their term at the discretion of the Chief of Police. Additionally, members who fail to attend three regular Panel meetings in a year may be considered to have vacated their position and may be replaced.
h. Meeting Format: Not a Brown Act body, advisory body established under the direction of the Police Chief.
5. City of Walnut Creek, Population 69,000 (Chiefs Community Advisory Board) a. CURRENTLY ACTIVE.
b. Stated Purpose: The Chief’s Community Advisory Board is a resource for the Chief to help with: Community policing strategy, Increasing public awareness, engagement and transparency, Identifying best practices. Our goal is to have a broad spectrum of view points represented.
c. Membership: Maximum of fifteen (15) members. Members must be Walnut Creek residents or Walnut Creek business owners. Looking for diverse backgrounds.
d. Selection Process: Selection from the pool of applicants by the Chief of Police, a community representative and the City’s Communications and Outreach Manager.
e. Term: Two (2) years. Term extensions will be considered on an individual basis based at the discretion of the Chief of Police.
f. Meeting Frequency: As needed.
g. Removal: Members may be removed prior to the end of their term at the discretion of the Chief of Police. Additionally, members who fail to attend three regular Panel meetings in a year are considered to have vacated their position and may be replaced.
h. Meeting Format: Not a Brown Act body, advisory body established under the direction of the Police Chief.
6. City of Novato, Population 52,000 (Police Advisory Review Board). a. Created in 1992. CURRENTLY ACTIVE.
b. Stated Purpose: The Board is to provide for community participation in Police Department policies, procedures and practices. Further, the Board may recommend the establishment of educational police/community relations programs. If authorized by the City Manager, including corresponding funding to hire an investigator, the Board may conduct investigations into citizens’ complaints.
c. Membership: Seven (7) community members appointed by the City Council.
Must be Novato residents except one (1) member, who can be from one of three zip codes designated for Novato. No officer or employee of the City is eligible. d. Selection Process: Applications reviewed twice per year, appears to be selected in a public meeting by a majority vote of the City Council. e. Term: Two (2) years. No limit on terms.
f. Meeting Frequency: Quarterly.
g. Removal: By majority vote of the City Council. Considered resignation if three (3) consecutive meetings are unexcused by the majority of the committee. h. Meeting Format: Brown Act meetings.
7. City of Petaluma, Population 59,000 (Public Safety Advisory Committee [PSAC]). a. Created in 2024. CURRENTLY ACTIVE.
b. Stated purpose: To serve as an advisory body to the City Council and a community resource for the City of Petaluma in the formation of strategies, development of community policing concepts, increasing public awareness, and addressing police/community relations regarding the public safety of the entire community. The PSAC is intended to provide a forum for discussions of community public safety concerns and to represent a broad spectrum of viewpoints.
c. Membership: Six (6) community members, one (1) City Council member liaison.
Community members must be residents of Petaluma for 1 year, or business owner in Petaluma in good standing for 1 year. Current or former members of the Petaluma Police or household members are not eligible. Attorneys representing or witness for criminal/civil cases involving law enforcement are not eligible.
Persons who have active, pending criminal proceedings, are on parole, probation, or post-community release supervision, or who have prior criminal convictions for violent felonies or other crimes involving moral turpitude are ineligible. appointed by the City Council.
d. Selection Process: Application and appointment by the City Council. e. Term: Four (4) year terms. Two (2) term limit.
f. Meeting Frequency: Monthly or bi-monthly, as needed. g. Removal: By majority vote of the City Council, automatic removal if unexcused absence from three (3) consecutive meetings, or a breach of confidentiality. h. Meeting Format: Brown Act committee
8. City of Santa Rosa, Population 177,000. The city has hired an Independent Police Auditor (IPA) to review Police Department personnel complaint investigations and take personnel complaints about the Police Department. The IPA also conducts audits of policies, practices, and records, conducts community outreach, and annually prepares and presents a report to the Public Safety City Council Subcommittee and the City Council.
The three-councilmember Public Safety Subcommittee is charged with reviewing public safety issues, annual reports, and after-action reports for Police, Fire, and Emergency Services. However, this group has not met since 2020, so is effectively dormant.
Sausalito is the only municipality with a population comparable to Cotati that staff was able to find that had some type of advisory/oversight model. Like Cotati, it was also deactivated.
However, Sausalito varies from Cotati in that they have much greater financial resources, with a General Fund budget approximately two times larger than Cotati.
All other municipal police departments in Sonoma County, including the cities of Sebastopol, Rohnert Park, Healdsburg, and Cloverdale use the City Manager-City Council model of oversight without separate advisory or oversight bodies. The cities of Windsor and Sonoma are contract cities with the Sonoma County Sheriff, so are subject to the Independent Office of Law Enforcement Review and Outreach (IOLERO).
History of Cotati’s Police Auxiliary Commission
On February 18, 1975, City Councilmembers ratified a separate commission to provide additional functional oversight over the Cotati Police Department. The commission consisted of five board members who were appointed by the Mayor, subject to approval by the City Council.
Board members served two-year terms (up to two consecutive terms max), with a Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, and Secretary (elected by Commission board members for one-year terms).
Meetings were once a month and open to the public.
Specific duties included,
• “To act as a liaison between the community, the Cotati Police Department and the City Council.”
• “To have the Chairperson or her/his delegated Commission member be a member of the oral board(s) for all police officers, reserves, and Chief of Police.” • “To have the Chairperson or her/his delegated Commission member attend personnel sessions when they involve police disciplinary action.” • “To make recommendations concerning policies, practices, and procedures in relation to the Cotati Police Department and other law enforcement agencies within the City of Cotati.”
• “To receive complaints directed against the Police Department, make proper investigation, and then make recommendations to the Chief of Police regarding disciplinary procedures.”
On October 27, 1987, duties of the commission were redefined, presumably in part due to labor laws and privacy statutes related to the protection of employee personnel files and administrative investigations. The commission was then assigned the following duties, • “To act as a liaison between the community, the Cotati Police Department and the City Council.”
• “To make recommendations concerning policies, practices, and procedures in relation to the Cotati Police Department and other law enforcement agencies within the City of Cotati.”
• “To make recommendations regarding programs to encourage preservation of life and property such as neighborhood watch.”
• “To make recommendations regarding programs and/or projects that improve delivery of police services to the Cotati community.”
On May 24, 1995, the duties of the commission were again redefined, eliminating the duty of the commission to make recommendations concerning policies, practices, and procedures in relation to the Cotati Police Department and other law enforcement agencies within the City of Cotati. In 1995, the duties consisted of,
• “To act as a liaison between the community, the Cotati Police Department and the City Council.”
• “To implement and maintain community based safety programs, such as Neighborhood Watch, bicycle safety, and earthquake preparedness.” [exact verbiage modified from 1987]
• “To have the Chairperson or another Commission member participate in the oral board interview process for the position of Police Officer.” [verbiage added back from 1975] • “To make recommendations relating to the implementation of programs and/or projects that affect public safety in the community.” [exact verbiage modified from 1987] In 1995, the Advisory Commission was renamed the “Police Auxiliary Commission”. Records from that time indicated that meetings of the Commission were poorly attended by the public and that, “…several [Commissioners]…wanted to be involved with personnel complaints and investigations,” despite restrictions under state law. When Ordinance 638 was adopted, the intent was to clarify the mandate from City Council, conform with state laws, and encourage this citizen body to work with the Police Department as a liaison with the community. According to City records, several Commission members resigned at that time and the City Council decided not to appoint a new Commission. The Commission has been dormant since then.
In 2000, the concept of re-activating the Commission was again discussed at City Council. At that time, the primary citizen concerns appeared to be speeding downtown and updating the citizen complaint process. Those issues were addressed by staff and the City Council declined to re-activate the Commission after discussing the item at length. The existing ordinance, last modified in 1995, is attached to this staff report for reference.
Analysis/Discussion
Current Accountability Measures
There are numerous ways in which police agencies participate in and are subject to various laws, provisions, and efforts that increase transparency and accountability. Currently, some of the Cotati Police Department’s accountability measures include the following:
• Racial and Identity Profiling Act (RIPA) stop data collection and annual reporting • SB1421 + SB16 (amended PC 832.7). Requires police records relating to officer use-offorce incidents, sexual assault, and acts of dishonesty accessible under the California Public Records Act within the prescribed timeframes.
• SB2 (PC 13510). Established peace officer certifications, requires “serious misconduct” reporting to the State and potential peace officer decertification. • AB481/GC 7070. Mandates military equipment funding, acquisition and use authorization by governing boards (Less Lethal Shotgun + Command Vehicle) • Internal Affairs Investigations – Independent investigations by impartial outside investigator
• Annual Police Chief’s Report (presented to City Council and posted on City website) • Mid-Year report (presented to City Council)
• Police Policies posted on City website (Lexipol)
• Police Training Manuals posted on City website
• Police Weekly Event log posted on City website
• Police Monthly Statistics posted on social media
• On-line complaint portal on website (goes to City Manager, Human Resources Director, and Chief of Police). Complaints are also taken by email, phone, in person, or via a physical complaint form.
• Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) audits (specifically assigned regional coordinator site visits/audits)
• Periodic high risk policy review audit by independent police auditor (e.g.: Pursuits; Use of Force; Evidence)
• Civil Grand Jury (Sonoma County) - reviews all Officer Involved Shooting (OIS) report summaries submitted by the District Attorney to confirm proper protocol is followed • Sonoma County Law Enforcement Chief’s Association (SCLECA) County-wide Chief’s and DA Protocols for Critical Incidents and guidelines for release of camera footage per SB1421 and AB748.
• Sonoma County District Attorney (SCDA) involvement, oversight, and review of criminal matters and all protocol-related critical incidents • California Attorney General (AG CA) State Attorney General involvement and oversight of all officer-involved shootings resulting in the death of an unarmed civilian (AB1506). • Body-Worn Cameras (BWCs) and in-car cameras
• AB748 (GC 6254 (4)(A)(i)). BWC recordings of critical incidents released after 45 days • Budget/Strategic Projects & Priorities – public disclosure on how taxpayers’ dollars are spent
• City Council (as routine oversight and another conduit for community communication) • Community Policing surveys,
Cotati Police Training
Additionally, the Cotati Police Department focuses on enhanced training, policy development, and personnel hiring standards that are above and beyond minimum POST mandates. Sending Cotati peace officers to this additional training is a significant financial investment by the City, as it requires larger training and corresponding overtime budgets. However, this commitment results in staff that are among the best trained police officers and dispatchers in the United States. POST and additional training includes the following:
POST
• Principled Policing in the Community
• Professionalism and Ethics
• Cultural Diversity/Discrimination
• People with Disabilities
• De-Escalation and Use of Force
• Victimology/Crisis Intervention
• PREA Prison Rape Elimination Act
• Recruitment and Selection – Hiring, Background, and Psychological requirements (POST standards)
• POST Entry Level Law Enforcement Test battery (PELLET B) • POST Police Academy. 20 weeks (Santa Rosa Intensive Academy); 800+ hours; 42+ learning domains
• Field Training Officer (FTO); POST regulated with standardized evaluation guidelines. +Probation (one year)
• Routine Employee Evaluations
• AB89 (coming 2025) – “Modern Policing” degree / education, or BA degree.
Additional Cotati Police Policies and Trainings
• Implicit Bias / Bias Based Policing
• De-Escalation
• Use of Force
• Discriminatory Harassment
• Mental Health & Crisis Intervention (SAFE partnership) • Unhoused Persons / Homelessness
• Communications with Persons with Disabilities
• Community Relations
• Standards of Conduct
• Off-Duty Law Enforcement Actions and Conduct
• Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation
Summary of Community Outreach Efforts
In addition to the many accountability efforts, laws and regulations, and training and policy developments the department abides by and performs, the Cotati Police Department also fosters community outreach efforts, and plans on adding to these endeavors over the coming years. A list of some of these efforts include the following:
• 6 Beat meetings #1 (February 2024)
• Thomas Page tour of PD (February 2024)
• Thomas Page non-profit campaign - 6th grade project (March 2024) • Thomas Page meet the Chief, with Officers + Dolly (April 4, 2024) • Thomas Page STEAM and Literacy Night – book reading (April 10, 2024) • SSU Community Partners Meetings (April 15, 2024)
• SSU Game Night (April 16, 2024)
• Butter & Eggs Day Parade – Petaluma (April 20, 2024)
• Drug Takeback #1 (April 27, 2024) = 41.23 lbs.
• Women in Public Safety Day (April 27, 2024)
• Apple Blossom Parade – Sebastopol (April 27/28, 2024) • Cinco de Mayo - Santa Rosa, Mitote/Roseland (May 5, 2024) • Cinco de Mayo - SOMO Village, Rohnert Park (May 5, 2024) • Healdsburg Future Farmers Twilight Parade (May 23, 2024) • Pride Parade Procession – Santa Rosa (June 1, 2024)
• Juneteenth (June 2024)
• Coffee with a Cop + Coffee with Dolly (June 2024)
• Camp Cotati (June 2024)
• Kids Day Parade (July 2024)
• National Night Out (August 6, 2024)
• Hi-Lo Drill (September 2024)
• 6 Beat meetings #2 (September 2024)
• SSU Guest speaking CJA department (September/October 2024) • Drug Takeback #2 (October 2024)
• Rotary Holiday Toy Drive & Xmas escorting Santa (December 2024) • Warm Clothing Drive - SSU & RP PDs (December 2024)
• Social Media posting
Summary
Considering all the aforementioned transparency, accountability, and community partnership efforts the Cotati Police Department is currently involved in, the question staff was exploring was what role a separate citizen body could assume to further community partnerships and accountability in a constructive way. Staff studied numerous models of advisory/oversight around the state to determine practices that could conceivably be implemented given the limited staffing and resources of a small City.
As outlined in the Background section of this staff report and presentation, oversight models can vary in size and robustness, are often scalable, and require varying degrees of staffing and budgetary considerations that can reach hundreds of thousands, to upwards of millions of dollars.
For this reason, models that included delegated budgets and delegated powers were determined to be infeasible for a small city.
Staff primarily focused on models that were advisory, as staff believe these models are more likely to be feasible in the context of limited staffing and resources. The Chief’s advisory committees carry the least administrative burden and provide a forum for direct and frank discussions between committee members and the Police Chief. While this can accomplish the functions of direct community feedback/recommendations on policing, they are not required to be public meetings and the committee members are selected by City staff. This type of model relies on the ability of the City Council to take action to address crises when they arise.
By contrast, if the City established an advisory committee, it would carry more administrative burden to maintain. Similar “small city” committees (Cotati and Sausalito) are both inactive.
Based on experience with other committees, finding members to serve on the committee may be difficult. However, if the City Council desires to create a separate citizen body for this purpose, an advisory model would be run as a Brown Act meeting and is likely to be perceived as more transparent by the community. City Council involvement in member selection would also make it more likely to be trusted in times of crisis.
Based on prior City Council feedback and a review of the models that could work in Cotati, staff recommends that the City Council consider the following recommendations:
Community-Police Advisory Group
• Advisory only. No delegated investigatory or budget authority. • Duties. Development of community policing concepts, increasing public awareness, and addressing police/community relations regarding the public safety of the entire community. Detailed discussions, as permitted by law, to consist of:
o Notable Crime Trends, enforcement initiatives
o Use of Force – Statistics, types, summaries, reasons
o Complaints – Statistics, allegations, summaries, findings/outcomes o Notable Community events & Engagements, receive input/suggestions on ways to better engage with the community and provide assistance. o Arrest & Crime Statistics – summaries of notable incidents/contacts o Trainings
o Participation in interview panels for the Police Chief • Membership
o 5 members. Required to be a Cotati resident or Cotati business owner in good standing. Encourage members to be diverse: business community, resident, faithbased community, gender, race. o Selection by application and interview panel. The interview panel could consist of one or two councilmembers, city manager and police chief. o 2-year terms, with staggered initial terms. Removal by majority vote of City Council. Include provision for automatic resignation if member is unexcused for a defined number of meetings as well as a number of consecutive meetings. o Minimum requirements and training for commission members: ‘ride along” after selection, cannot be city employees or household, disqualification for felony conviction, crimes/incidents of moral turpitude, attorney involved in cases with law enforcement, involvement in criminal/civil cases with the City of Cotati. • Recommended Meeting Frequency
o Quarterly, with special meetings more often as needed. • Brown Act vs. Not Brown Act
o Committees created by a formal action of the legislative body (e.g.:. City Council) is a Brown Act body, so this type of body is subject to the Brown Act. o Brown Act meetings are public and noticed , with meeting minutes taken.
However, it is anticipated that members will not be required to provide financial disclosures to the FPPC or enroll in mandated trainings.
It is recommended that this group report at least annually to the City Council on its activities.
If the City Council directs staff to create an advisory committee or modify the existing committee, staff will return with an ordinance that incorporates City Council feedback at a future meeting.
Financial Considerations
Depending on the next steps taken and what model or combination of models might ultimately be considered and utilized, the financial impact to the City of implementing, enhancing, and maintaining an advisory group or commission could be substantial. Independent oversight and auditing entities can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, often topping millions of dollars, depending on the size, scope, and authority of the commission.
If the City Council directs staff to develop an ordinance for a police advisory group substantially similar to the staff recommendation, staff believe that this can be accommodated within the existing staffing and budget. Nevertheless, even this advisory group will result in increased staff commitments that will not be available for other city operations or projects. Expected staff time commitments include managing the advisory group, running meetings, increased data extraction, analysis, formatting and reporting. Although the addition of the new records analyst position has greatly helped to streamline the process of mining and charting some limited data and information, the continuous mining of data and the analytics associated with providing enhanced details of such data, particularly if it expands over time, will have greater financial impacts in the future, potentially requiring additionally funded positions or designated funding streams to contract-out to those firms able to achieve more robust data reporting and analysis.
Environmental Issues
This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a project which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, pursuant to CEQA Guideline section 15378.
Attachments:
Cotati Police Department Advisory presentation