From: Hien Pham
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Agenda 3.3
Date: Wednesday, May 18, 2022 9:18:04 AM
You, city council members sure have so much time on your hands. What are you guys going to do to help curb the crimes that are rising in this city? The PD doesn’t need any more community oversight..it is a waste
of time. And are these individuals able to understand how the PD do their job? Let the PD do their job…you need to do yours as well. The SRPD is crucial to our city…they need to be more funded in order to keep us all safe.
Disgusted and disappointed citizen of SR.
From: Amanda Cincera
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Item # 3.3 SRPD Community Oversight Panel Date: Thursday, May 19, 2022 6:38:26 AM
Good morning,
I am writing to address Agenda item number 3.3, Community Oversight Panel for the police department. I do not believe a panel is necessary when we have just begun to employ the OIR group. The independent auditor has more than 20 years of experience in the field of independent oversight of law enforcement and has been incredibly hands-on thus far. OIR has full access to the police department's internal investigations process and is already tracking any allegations of misconduct at the inception of the investigation, and weighs in throughout the process.
An additional panel is excessive, especially when we have only given OIR six months in the position.
With the current, and impending, staggering staffing shortages our police department is facing, it seems the budget would be wisely spent on hiring more officers to protect our community, rather than employing yet another oversight entity.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Amanda Cincera
From: Roxy Warren
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Agenda item #3.3
Date: Saturday, May 21, 2022 10:06:44 AM
Please stop having an excessive amount of oversight for our Police. There is already an independent police auditor, and having MORE people who do not know the in’s & out’s of policing involved in oversight would be detrimental to the department.
Not only is it excessive, you keep tying the hands of law enforcement to the point they are literally unable to enforce the laws that are already on the books. Now you’re wanting to add even more ways to tie their hands. This is NOT a matter of oversight for the sake of better training or looking at ways to improve community engagement. This really would be community members who would be playing armchair quarterback making decisions that would severely limit the effectiveness of law enforcement in our community.
The independent auditor is enough. And also, stop wasting taxpayer money for useless committees.
Thank you,
Roxy Warren
From: Scott Capitani
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Agenda Item #3.3
Date: Thursday, May 19, 2022 10:14:39 AM
Absolutely disagree with this additional oversight. Stop wasting our money and start solving the actual problems that are getting worse by the year. Violent Crimes have skyrocketed, you basically ignore petty crimes, so now it is everywhere as these criminals know there are no repercussions, and talking about everywhere, HOMELESSNESS is completely out of control.
I should not have to worry that my kids want to go downtown, but I absolutely do now that our city is so out of control with these problems.
Time to start focusing on getting tougher to solve these problems and NOT creating another layer of bureaucratic
unnecessary oversight. This is a complete waste of
resources and a true sign of misaligned priorities of our local leadership.
I am truly ashamed of the actions of our State and Local City Council the past decade. Stop making Sonoma County and California worse.
TIME TO BE TOUGH ON CRIME AND START SOLVING THE
HOMELESSNESS CRISIS.
Stop blaming and creating problems for those that
actually are trying to help.
Scott Capitani, CPA
Capitani & Company
1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite #18
Santa Rosa,
CA 95401
Cell – 707-332-4622
email:
[email protected]
From: Keith R
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Police Oversight Meeting 5-14-22
Date: Monday, May 23, 2022 7:56:24 AM
Dear City of Santa Rosa,
Please continue police oversight of the SRPD. Even though they are probably the best LE agency in the County, a little outside observation never hurts anything, right? I would also hope that the City Auditor would have the ability to conduct investigations alongside the police dept., and come to an agreement about what happened
and what disciplinary measures
are in order, including subpoena powers that place witnesses/officers under oath during testimony.
The City can only increase its reputation for excellence in Government through the maintenance of this auditor program. May I also suggest a robust Citizen Review Board, to assist the auditor in investigations and maintain positive relationships with the greater Santa Rosa Community? I know the County has tried this, with little success, but CitySR can improve
the process as they adopt their own "Citizen Review Board." Thank you.
For Youth, Families, and Elders,
Keith Rhinehart
From: anita lafollette
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] police oversite
Date: Monday, May 23, 2022 11:24:40 AM
The city council should look at the current policy to put homeless persons or others into jail when they have a 5150.
The jail does not have adequate mental health services to care for a mental challenged person who is going through a crisis and is called a 5150. They just sit in a cell and are not even asked about their current crisis. Anita LaFollette, MFT
From: colleen oneal
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Police Oversight
Date: Monday, May 23, 2022 4:32:38 PM
Council Members: I was aghast when the City Council fired the police department auditor a couple of years ago primarily, so far as I could tell from the reports, for advising the city council that line officers found it difficult to do their jobs (and felt helpless) vis a vis the homeless situation.
I know the city has spent more money since the pandemic (primarily federal money I assume) on homeless services.
The underlying problem remains: there is very little middle, low and very low income housing available. And even less being built. And the only thing that is going to end homelessness is housing. People can talk all they want about drug addicts and alcoholics in the homeless population but we all know .... there are way more HOUSED drug addicts and alcoholics than there are homeless ones.
And it is generally NOT the cause of
homelessness but a symptom. (Oops! I seem to have gotten side-tracked on the related homeless issue.)
Other than some lip-service after the SRPD performed so abysmally during the Black Lives Matter demonstrations ...I have seen NO movement toward dealing with police oversight (in the 20 years since the Human Rights Commission recommended that the City do so).
And it is not necessary to invent the wheel here.
There is ample information and help
available from the national oversight organization (NACOLE) and from the local oversight organization (CLEAN).
There are a number of relatively new City Council members .... what are YOU prepared to do to actually move this forward - beyond the 'study' stage - because there really isn't much to
study. That's been done, repeatedly.
Thank you for your time.
Colleen S. O'Neal
Attorney at Law
988 Kenmore Ln.
Santa Rosa, CA 95407
(707) 696-8514
From: slamont
To: City Council Public Comments
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Police oversight
Date: Monday, May 23, 2022 4:53:44 PM
Council members -
I was very happy to see that the City hired Mr. Corr, someone with considerable background in NACOLE. As someone who has been following oversight since Andy Lopez was killed and who has attended almost every meeting of IOLERO's Community Advisory Council, I have watched the County completely ignore the standards set forth by NACOLE. So, this is a refreshing turn of events.
As someone who met several times with Bob Aaronson, the previous IPA, I really liked his practice of regularly meeting with officers to discuss problem incidents and run through with them how they might have handled the situation differently. As I understand it, he had them ponder the problem themselves, giving them agency in the change that might be necessary. I believe that he also did many ride-alongs.
Aaronson's office was in the Police Department, something that normally would have bothered me, but with someone like Aaronson, it was clear that he could maintain his independence, while really getting to know the officers.
But then the City totally blew it. Aaronson reported the morale issues in the department that the City's homeless policy caused. They (and many of us in the public) did not understand the value of moving the homeless from place to place by conducting sweeps - a policy that is still in place. That report elicited a few childish hissy fits on the part of City Council members and Aaronson's contract was not renewed. The Council, in fact, insulted the officers by refusing to consider their morale issue. They insulted the public, which wants better treatment of homeless people. It's not often that a council insults both law enforcements officers and the public at the same time, but that Council managed to do it.
Your new IPA must have the ability to criticize Council policy if a policy inhibits the ability of the Police Department to improve its policies and procedures and its relations with the public. What happened to Aaronson, the officers and the public should never happen again.
I also want to see a true engagement of community. Though there was never enough publicity (because there was never enough money or staff), the meetings under IOLERO Director Jerry Threet were an excellent model.
Though there were times for formal public comment, the public could also engage the CAC during discussions. The public could make recommendations for areas of study and that happened several times. The public could also attend Ad Hoc Committee meetings. Public input greatly influenced some of the recommendations made to the Sheriff's Office. All that ended when Director Navarro took over and the draconian measures she put in place caused much of the public to fade away.Those of us who were very involved are quite sure that she was hired to shut down the public. Sheriff Essick, and Supervisors Rabbitt and Zane had all said that no such component should exist. They came close to getting their wish. I hope there are no City Council members who agree with them.
If anyone wants to know the history, I'll be happy to provide it.
That said, I look forward to tomorrow's presentation and I hope you will be more engaged than I have ever seen the Board of Supervisors.
Susan Collier Lamont
Santa Rosa District 2