Here is the transcript with speaker names added based on the provided context and the meeting’s dialogue. [0:09] Elliott Payne: Good morning. Welcome to the joint audit committee and city council meeting for April 22nd, 2026. I'm Elliot Payne and I'm the chair of the audit committee and president of city council. I want to offer a friendly reminder to all members, staff, and the public that these meetings are broadcast live to enable greater public participation. [0:29] Elliott Payne: These broadcasts include real-time captioning as a further method to increase the accessibility of our proceedings to the community. Therefore, all speakers need to be mindful of the rate of their speech so that our captioners can fully capture and transcribe all comments for the broadcast. We ask all speakers to moderate the speed and clarity of their comments. At this time, I'm going to call to order this joint meeting of the city council and the audit committee. I will start this meeting by ensuring we have a quorum of the audit committee adopting our agenda after which I will do the same for city council. The clerk will now call the role to verify we have a quorum of audit committee members. [1:06] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Committee member Chugtai is absent. Englehart. [1:08] Member Englehart: Here. [1:09] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Hosebine. [1:10] Member Hosebine: Present. [1:11] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Omar is absent. Williams. [1:14] Member Williams: Present. [1:16] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Vice chair Singleton. [1:17] Vice Chair Singleton: Present. [1:19] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Chair Payne. [1:20] Elliott Payne: Present. [1:22] Casey Carl (City Clerk): There are five members present. [1:25] Elliott Payne: Let the record reflect that we have a quorum of the audit committee. With that, the agenda for today's meeting is before us. I'll ask for a motion from a member of the audit committee to adopt the agenda. [1:35] Member Hosebine: So moved. [1:37] Vice Chair Singleton: Second. [1:38] Member Williams: Second. [1:39] Elliott Payne: All right. That's been moved and seconded. The clerk will call the role. [1:42] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Member Hart. [1:44] Member Englehart: Present. [1:46] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Posine. [1:47] Member Hosebine: Present. [1:50] Member Hosebine: Aye. [1:51] Member Englehart: Aye. [1:53] Casey Carl (City Clerk): There you go. [1:54] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Williams. [1:55] Member Williams: Aye. [1:56] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Vice Chair Singleton. [1:57] Vice Chair Singleton: Aye. [1:58] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Chair Payne. [1:59] Elliott Payne: Aye. [2:00] Casey Carl (City Clerk): There are five eyes. [2:01] Elliott Payne: That carries and the agenda is adopted. The clerk will now call the role to verify we have a quorum of city council. [2:13] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Uh Mr. President, uh we might need to pause for one moment. It looks like we've got a captioning issue. Hold on one second. [2:25] Elliott Payne: One moment. [4:48] Elliott Payne: The clerk will now call the role to verify we have a quorum of the city council. [4:53] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Thank you, Mr. President. Before I call the role, I'll just note um the captioning did not get to the beginning of the meeting, but I will just summarize very quickly that the audit committee did convene its meeting and we have a quorum uh present. So I will now call the role to uh verify a quorum of the city council. Council member Whiting is absent. Council member Chowry. [5:15] Aurin Chowdhury: Present. [5:17] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Stevenson. [5:18] Soren Stevenson: Present. [5:19] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Rainville. [5:20] Michael Rainville: Present. [5:21] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Vita is absent. Palmisano. [5:24] Linea Palmisano: Present. [5:25] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Chavez. [5:26] Jason Chavez: Present. [5:27] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Warren is absent. Schaefer. [5:30] Elizabeth Shaffer: Present. [5:31] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Wanssley. [5:32] Robin Wonsley: Present. [5:33] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Chai is absent. Vice President Osman is absent. President Payne. [5:37] Elliott Payne: Present. [5:38] Casey Carl (City Clerk): There are eight members present. [5:40] Elliott Payne: Let the record reflect we have a quorum. With that, the agenda for today's meeting is before us. I will ask for a motion from a member of the city council to adopt the agenda. [5:48] Michael Rainville: So move. [5:49] Aurin Chowdhury: Second. [5:51] Casey Carl (City Clerk): The clerk will call the role. Council member Chowry. [5:54] Aurin Chowdhury: Aye. [5:55] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Stevenson. [5:56] Soren Stevenson: Aye. [5:57] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Rainville. [5:58] Michael Rainville: Aye. [5:59] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Palmisano. [6:00] Linea Palmisano: Aye. [6:01] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Chavez. [6:02] Jason Chavez: Aye. [6:03] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Schaefer. [6:04] Elizabeth Shaffer: Aye. [6:05] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Wanssley. [6:06] Robin Wonsley: Aye. [6:07] Casey Carl (City Clerk): President Payne. [6:08] Elliott Payne: Aye. [6:10] Casey Carl (City Clerk): there are eight I's. [6:11] Elliott Payne: That carries and the agenda is adopted. Uh members of the audit committee we have one item before us today. Uh before we take that item on I want to make a motion to refer the workforce optimization study from Monday's meeting to the city council for further study. [6:30] Elliott Payne: Uh can I get a second to that motion? [6:32] Member Williams: Second. [6:34] Elliott Payne: All those in favor say I. I oppose say nay. [6:36] Elliott Payne: The eyes have it and that item will be forwarded to the city council. Uh for our item today, uh this is a presentation of a report on the afteraction reviews assessing the city's handling of the shooting of Davis Muri and the death of Allison Lucer. Robert Timberman, the city auditor, will join us to give that report. Welcome. [7:03] Robert Timberman: Thank you. Good morning, Chair Payne. Good morning, audit committee. And good morning, city council. My name is Robert Timberman, and I have the honor of being the city's city auditor. It's a responsibility that I do not take lightly. Today, we will be presenting the results of two afteraction reviews related to the death of Allison Lucer and the shooting of Davis Matri. [7:28] Robert Timberman: First, I want to explain a little about my office. The office of city auditor is a logical place to perform this review since it is the only function across the city enterprise that was established by voters to be structurally independent of both the administration and city council. [7:49] Robert Timberman: The office of city auditor is in fact structurally independent as it reports neither to the council or the administration but to you the audit committee which is required to have a majority comprised of Minneapolis community members. The office of city auditor has jurisdiction over city council and over each board, commission, committee, department, officer, employee, and other agency who must cooperate with any audit or inquiry and furnish any information that the auditor requests. It is the duty and obligation of my a office to conduct examinations of city operations to improve the management of city policies, functions, and programs. [8:33] Robert Timberman: The Office of City Auditor's mission is to strengthen public trust in city government by delivering independent object excuse me objective and riskinformed oversight assurance and advisory services. We safeguard public resources by identifying risks, promoting accountability, ensuring compliance, and supporting effective and transparent city operations. [8:56] Robert Timberman: We follow strict strict generally accepted auditing standards including the US government accountabilities offic's government auditing standards and the institute of internal auditors global internal audit standards. More information about our office can be fi found through the URL on the bottom of this slide. [9:20] Robert Timberman: On June 1st, 2025, the Office of City Auditor formally engaged Hogan Adams PLLC through contract to conduct an afteraction review of two case files that the Minneapolis Police Department investigated between July 2022 and October 2024. [9:40] Robert Timberman: Both cases involved extensive interactions between MPD and the alleged victims, an escalating pattern of criminal conduct perpetuated against the victims, and multiple police reports as identified in the office of city auditors request for proposal and contract with Hogan Adams. The primary purpose of these two afteraction reviews was to collect sufficient and detailed data as to allow for departmental and city leadership level analysis and subsequent adjustments to training policies and procedures or processes. [10:18] Robert Timberman: The scope of this review included compiling and reviewing information related to each case, interviewing stakeholders, analyzing the facts, policies, and laws applicable to each case, identifying positive practices, and areas for learning and improvement, including any instances in which a city department did not comply with established policy or law. [10:43] Robert Timberman: and we developed recommendations to improve the city's response to similar incidents in the future. The scope of this review did not determine whether individual city employees violated policy or otherwise in wrongdoing. [10:58] Robert Timberman: Further, this review was not a criminal investigation and no recommendations are made in this report that should be construed as an opinion for consideration in favor or against criminal prosecution. I will briefly transition the presentation to Vana Hogan, a principal attorney at Hogan Adams, who will discuss the methodology that we use to perform these two afteraction reviews. [11:28] Elliott Payne: Welcome. And I'll also note that we've been joined by Council Member Vita. [11:39] Vana Hogan: Thank you, Robert. Uh, and thank you, Chairman Payne, audit committee members, and members of the city council. As Robert said, I'm Vana Hogan and I was the lead attorney at Hogan Adams, uh, working on these afteraction reviews and preparing the report on the reviews. [11:53] Vana Hogan: Two associates in my firm, Samantha Hermson Sanchez and Ellen Courier, worked on these reviews along with me and our parallegal, Diana Hand. We worked very closely with the office of the city auditor conducting most interviews together and meeting regularly to discuss progress on the reviews. [12:13] Vana Hogan: As part of the our review, the office of the city auditor requested, received, and forwarded the following information regarding both the Mouri and Lucer cases to Hogan Adams for review. MPD police information management system reports or police reports. MPD phone logs and relevant email correspondents, Minneapolis Emergency Communication Center community computer aided dispatch reports and 911 call audio recordings. [12:46] Vana Hogan: The audit team made MPD bodywn camera footage available to us to view. And in addition, we compiled compiled publicly available court documents and news articles related to these case files. In all, we reviewed approximately 49,000 pages of documents and reviewed more than 25 hours of bodywn camera and other video footage. [13:10] Vana Hogan: The Office of City Auditor team members also reviewed and summarized an additional 50 plus hours of bodywn camera footage. We conducted many interviews as part of this review process. Hogan Adams and the auditor team interviewed MPD Chief Brian O'Hara twice and Henipin County Attorney Mary Morardi once in connection with both cases. [13:40] Vana Hogan: We conducted interviews with 10 other people in connection to the Moturi case, including Davis Mouri, an assistant Minneapolis city attorney and MPD officers who were involved in responding to and investigating police reports involving the Moturis. [13:56] Vana Hogan: We also contacted current and former neighbors of the Muris and were able to interview one of them. We interviewed 22 people in connection to the Lucer case, including relatives of Allison Lucer, an assistant Minneapolis city attorney, an American Indian community specialist with the city, a cornerstone victim advocate, employees of the Henipin County Domestic Abuse Service Center, and MPD officers and staff who are involved in responding to and investigating police reports involving Miss Lucer and Miss Lucer's death In both cases, we interviewed we conducted multiple interviews with some of the subject. [14:38] Vana Hogan: We did face a few limitations such as early resistance from several MPD officers who requested the involvement of the police officers federation in Minneapolis. This disrupted the anticipated timeline of the afteraction review process, but ultimately the office of city auditor was able to resolve concerns and coordinate interviews with most of the MPD officers we wished to interview. [15:04] Vana Hogan: There were four officers that we had hoped to interview who we were not able to interview either because they had left the department or were on extended leaves of absence. Another issue that limited our aptton action reviews is that the office of city auditor does not have authority to directly access Henipin County records related to these cases such as the Henipin County Medical Examiner's report on Allison Lucer's death. The Henipin County Attorney's Office did voluntarily share some records with us and we were able to obtain other county documents that were held in MPD's possession. With that, I'll turn it back over to Robert. [15:56] Elliott Payne: Uh before you begin, I'll note we've been joined by Council Member Warren. [16:00] Robert Timberman: All right, Chair Payne. Thank you. Uh I'm briefly going to run through the executive summary that's in the report. Um, and I'd just like to mention that uh, the report is set up in a manner where it has an executive summary that provides some very general highlevel bullet points of the the findings uh, related with this uh, afteraction review. Then the lengthy report of the afteraction reviews broken out by uh, Mr. Matur's case and then Miss Lucer's case. We have some appendices within the report that go into timelines and further uh identify the findings and the recommendations. Uh and then MPD's response to the findings and the recommendations is also at the back of the report. Um so what I'm going to cover right now is the executive summary, a high-level overview. Um but just know that we are going to then step into the details of each case and the details of each finding and recommendation. [17:02] Robert Timberman: One of the overarching themes that we identified was MPD's response capacity was limited during the time of both of these cases. Delayed response times occurred due to staffing shortages, heavy call loads, shift change gaps, and other strategic uh issues as as understaffing and resources lead to. In the Muri case, uh those led to slower responses and that reduced the opportunity to intervene as the threats from Mr. Sache escalated. In the Lucer case, delays compounded an already strained domestic abuse investigation. [17:47] Robert Timberman: A second theme we identified was more localized to responding officers ability to provide accurate policy and legal information to victims. We observed that some officers demonstrated inconsistent understanding of critical legal and procedural tools such as the distinction between harassment restraining orders and orders for protection warrant execution limits and the 72-hour rule which we cover in much more detail in the report itself. [18:16] Robert Timberman: We also provided an analysis of other procedural and legal distinctions in appendex three of the report. These differences in understanding may have influenced arrest decisions, case escalation, and the accuracy of information provided to victims. [18:33] Robert Timberman: Additionally, on the Lucer case, differing views on crime lab involvement highlighted a need for more consistent protocols. Another theme we identified was related to MPD's case documentation, evidence gathering, and case continuity. [18:52] Robert Timberman: Reporting practices varied wild widely, including incomplete witness statements, missing victim forms, inconsistent injury documentation, and the inconsistent use of police report workflow flags for bias, weapons, or repeat conduct. In the Murray case, documentation of officer follow-up was inconsistent, reducing situational aware awareness across shifts. And in the Lucer case, incomplete early documentation weakened later investigations. [19:27] Robert Timberman: Next, internal and inter agency lapses in communication developed into a theme as our work progressed. Information did not consistently reach officers or investigators across units or shifts, which resulted in missed opportunities for case escalation. [19:43] Robert Timberman: For example, in the Muri case, a gun threat report was not escalated before he was shot on a later date. We learned from both MPD's chief of police and the Henipin County Attorney that the two had not communicated for many months. [19:59] Robert Timberman: We also had learned that the Henipin County Attorney's Office has attempted in a few instances to reestablish working relationships with MPD. Top level disconnects like this influence expectations, coordination, and operational alignment. [20:16] Robert Timberman: Strained relationships at senior levels create a ripple effect through the organization. I am pleased to share that both Chief O'Hara and County Attorney Morardi have agreed to a regular cadence of meetings going forward to discuss complex and sensitive case cases such as those involving multiple calls for service that tend to lead to difficult resolution. [20:42] Robert Timberman: Another theme we identified that frankly uh had predominant influences on both cases was messaging from MPD leadership that was either inaccurate or lacked sufficient vetting to ensure that the information being communicated aligned with the intent of the messaging. [21:00] Robert Timberman: Although we did not find any ill will to these misstatements, they unfortunately played into long-standing distrust among communities disproportionately affected by violence. [21:15] Robert Timberman: Finally, we identified a theme of some strong contributions and efforts made by individuals within the police department. Officers often demonstrated strong situational awareness, deescalation techniques, victim safety focus, and a desire to f facilitate advocacy connections. [21:35] Robert Timberman: Many officers showed initiative through return visits, directed patrols, and efforts to improve victim safety. Others communic excuse me others communicated empathetically and professionally with victims and families during calls which demonstrated practices that build confidence and trust. Several officers applied standards accurately and communicated them clearly to victims under challenging circumstances. [22:05] Robert Timberman: As you will see in MPD's response to our findings and recommendations, corrective actions were implemented across many of the areas of concern while these reviews were still underway. [22:20] Robert Timberman: At this time, I'm going to transition into more specific case details related to the shooting of Davis Mati and associated calls between uh Muri and Sawek to 911 and the police. Uh this escalating harassment from John Sek was reported regularly. Uh I do want to at this time just warn the folks that are listening that there is sensitive information uh in both the Muri case and the Lucer case that we will be describing. [23:14] Robert Timberman: This is a timeline of select events in the Muri case, including the first 911 call, which was on October 11th, 2023, and subsequent calls to 911 before MPD submitted felony charges at the beginning of April 2024. [23:14] Robert Timberman: Shortly after, on April 8th, 2024, Mr. Murray obtained a harassment restraining order against Mr. Sache, the same date as a call alerting officers to a fight in progress between the two men. During the summer into the fall of 2024, there were more calls to 911, including four reports of a knife, one of which on July 2nd, 2024 led to Mr. Sachuk being charged by the Henipin County Attorney's Office with a felony on July 10th, 2024. [24:09] Robert Timberman: It's important to note that MPD through individual officer initiative and through a localized community response team regularly drove by Mr. Sichek's property or parked their squads in the vicinity monitoring efforts taken with hopes of making an arrest outside of the home of an otherwise recluse individual with known mental health concerns. [24:09] Robert Timberman: On October 23rd, 2024, Mr. Murray was shot. We learned that SWAT immediately began 24-hour monitoring of Mr. Sache's home. And on October 27th, 2024, the physical SWAT operation began to affectuate Mr. Sache's arrest, which occurred in the early morning hours of October 28th. This around the clock monitoring of Mr. Sachuk's home was not shared with the public at the time. In all, the Muris made 38 calls to 911 between October 23 and October 24. [24:50] Robert Timberman: These calls were to report alleged ongoing harassment from Mr. Sachuk. They led to gross misdemeanor and felony charges and two additional warrants for Mr. Sachuk's arrest. MPD repeatedly told Mr. Maturi that officers were unable to arrest Mr. saw because he always retreated inside his house when they responded to calls or drove by the area. [25:14] Robert Timberman: Some officers believed that they were not legally authorized to enter Mr. Sachek's house on an arrest warrant without an additional search warrant. Others explained that the risk to officer safety was too great to justify entering a private house to execute an arrest warrant for misdemeanor level crimes. [25:33] Robert Timberman: In September 2023, Davis and Caroline Muri moved into their home on Grand Avenue in Minneapolis. Their next door neighbor at 3527 Grand Avenue, John Sach, had been the subject of numerous complaints by other neighbors over a period of years. Mr. Sache had an active misdemeanor warrant for his arrest for his arrest when the mater's allegations of harassment. He had also been the subject of prior harassment restraining orders from additional neighbors. Previously, Mr. Sache had been charged with seconddegree assault against a police officer in 2016, but was found not competent to stand trial, and he was subject to a temporary civil commitment the same year. On October 11th, 2023, Mr. Murray and Mr. Sek discussed a tree on their shared property line. Mr. Sache became upset that Mr. Mr. Mur intended to trim back or cut that tree. Later that day, Mr. Murray made the first two of many 911 calls to report that Mr. Sache had yelled racial slurs at him and threatened him if he touched the tree. Mr. Sache allegedly had set up a sprinkler to spray water on the side of the Murray house, causing water damage. [26:51] Robert Timberman: Officers turned off the sprinkler and were later called back the same evening because the sprinkler was on again. On this second call, officers took the hose and inventoried it at the property and evidence, but no criminal charges were filed based on the incident. [27:11] Robert Timberman: Through the fall and winter of 2023 to 2024, Mr. Sache allegedly continued to yell at and harass the Muris when he saw them outside their home. Mr. Sache, who is white, frequently yelled threatening and ra racially charged comments at Mr. Mati, who is black. In February 2024, Mr. Muri called MPD to report an incident from December 2023 in which Mr. Sache charged at and threatened him. On March 1st, 2024, Mr. Mur reported an incident where Mr. Sache approached him holding a gardening tool and threatened him. On March 11th, 2024, Mr. Murray reported property damage and harassment to the Minneapolis Police Department. The corresponding police report noted Mr. Sachek's pattern of racially charged harassing and threatening behavior. Although allegations of abhorrent and racist comments were made on multiple calls, this was the only report in the case that was flagged as involving racial bias. MPD forwarded the March 1st, 2024 and March 11th, 2024 police reports to the Henipin County Attorney's Office and recommended felony charges. [28:13] Robert Timberman: The Henipin County's at county attorney's office declined to file those felony charges. So subsequently, the Minneapolis City Attorney's Office charged Mr. Sache with gross misdemeanor harassment. By this point, MPD officers had advised on a few occasions that Mr. Muri or Ms. Mati obtain a harassment restraining order against Mr. Sachuk, which he did on April 8th, 2024. On that same day uh that Mr. Muri obtained his uh HRO. Officers responded to a 911 call from a witness regarding a physical alteration between Mr. Murray and Mr. Sawek. When they arrived, officers found Mr. Murray on top of Mr. Sawek restraining him. The officers that responded were not yet aware of the history of the dispute between Mr. Sek and Mr. Murray or the harassment restraining order. Once separated, Mr. Sawek refused to identify himself. He was not detained while officers attemp at attempted to identify him. And when the officers questioning him stepped away briefly to talk to an EMT, Mr. Sek retreated into his house. [29:41] Robert Timberman: Had Mr. Sache been detained and identified, officers would have learned of the open warrants warrants and harassment restraining order. Mr. Sache's harassment continued to escalate through the spring and summer of 2024. [29:59] Robert Timberman: Mr. Mur made numerous police reports about Mr. Sache's behavior, including allegations that Mr. Sache yelled threats at the muris whenever he saw them outside their home and directed racial slurs and racially charged comments at Mr. Muri. that he continued disrupting the material sleep by making loud noises overnight. that he dumped urine, feces, and garbage onto the matri's yard and into their mail slot, on their house multiple times. That he threw objects at Mr. Murray from the upstairs window of his house. That he spat at Mr. Mati and he brandished a knife at Mr. Murray on at least four occasions. In response to these incidents, MPD patrol officers would respond to the mater's home, take a report, collect evidence if applicable, including pictures of property damage and footage from the material's security camera or cell phones. [31:02] Robert Timberman: Officers would typically attempt to make contact with Mr. Sek, but he never answered the door. On June 21st, 2024, precinct leadership notified officers that the HRO against Mr. Sache had been served by publication and asked the Minneapolis Emergency Communication Center to extend an alert in the dispatch system to continue notifying responding officers about the HRO for future calls regarding Mr. Sek. [31:32] Robert Timberman: After that, MPD began issuing citations to Mr. Sawek for violating the HRO. The Henipin County Attorney's Office also charged Mr. Sawek with felony threats of violence. In July 2024, a localized MPD community response team was assigned to surveil Mr. Sichek's house and arrest him if officers of observed him leave. We were told that officers conducted over 20 drivebys and visual observation details of various lengths in addition to the incidents in which MPD officers responded to the Muria's 911 calls. Although none of these efforts resulted in an arrest. On October 14th, 2024, Mr. Muri called 911 to report that Mr. Sache had leaned out of his window and aimed a firearm at him. This report was not escalated internally within MPD or forwarded to the Henipin County Attorney's Office for charging at the time of the incident. Less than 10 days later, on October 23rd, 2024, Mr. Muri was transported by ambulance to the emergency room for a suspected heart attack. [32:41] Robert Timberman: When he arrived, providers discovered a gunshot wound in his neck and a bullet lodged in his spine. And they notified MPD that Mr. Mur had been shot. Miss Murray reported to MPD that Mr. Mur had interacted with Mr. Sache earlier that day and she suspected Mr. Sek shot Mr. Murray. Miss Miss Mur provided home security video videos to MPD showing when Mr. Muri fell to the ground after being shot, but the video did not capture a suspected shooter. Henipin County Attorney charged Mr. Sache with attempted murder the following day. MPD set up 24-hour surveillance of Mr. Sache's home while its SWAT team completed the risk assessment process for an arrest operation. The SWAT team led an arrest operation beginning on October 27th, 20 uh 24 and brought Mr. Sache into custody around 1:30 a.m. on October 28th. [34:06] Elliott Payne: Uh before you get into it, I'll note we've been joined by Council Member Whiting. [34:11] Robert Timberman: Thank you. Our review identified 15 recommendations related to the Muri case. MPD through the chief of police provided a detailed response to all findings and recommendations which can be found at the back of the report. With finding one, we found that MPD officers did not review information disseminated to them about Mr. Sache's ongoing harassment before responding to a physical alteration between Mr. Mati and Mr. Sachuk on April 8th, 2024. Our recommendation is to develop a policy requiring officers to review information and alerts using in squad resources such as PIMS and CAD while in route to respond to an incident. The police department's response was that they will develop a policy for officers to review information and alerts using squad resources when safe and feasible to do so and will not reduce response time for calls involving threats to life safety. Technology solutions will be researched by the Professional Standards Bureau that will allow a single officer in a squad car to complete this research with only a few keystrokes to minimize a longer response time. The date of planned implementation on this recommendation is November of this year. [35:24] Robert Timberman: The second finding is that several incidents in the summer and fall of 2024 were either not assigned to an investigator, not escalated to leadership or forwarded to the Henipin County Attorney's Office or both. The recommendation is to develop a procedure for case escalation either within MPD, the Minneapolis County or I'm sorry, the Minneapolis City Attorney's Office or the Henipin County Attorney's Office when a threshold number of calls regarding a specific individual or address have occurred. MPD's response was that crime analysts are currently tracking neighbor troubles weekly and forwarding them on a police information management system, PIMS. uh and and this is through a recurring report form. Neighbor-to- neighbor mediation pilot program uh is jointly developed with the NAACP. [36:19] Robert Timberman: This has been completed. Patrol officers and localized community response team members did not create incident reports or otherwise document every driveby and visual observation detail that they conducted. Our recommendation was that MPD develop a procedure for documenting driveby and visual observation details, including dates, times, and resources utilized to better track and document department efforts. MPD said that a directive will be implemented for officers to use directed patrol nature code that will track details and poss and probable cause pickups conducted in Vizet. The date of planned implementation is active and should be uh completed by May 2026. [37:10] Robert Timberman: The fourth finding is that responding officers did not consistently designate that alleged offenses involve bias uh and or weapons in the general offense information section of police reports. The recommendation is to reinforce expectations through policy and training for designating bias and weapons involved in incidents within police reports. MPD's response is that the chief will send out an administrative announcement reminding officers of the expectations regarding this recommendation. The training division will stress the importance of checking proper codes and pimps and the chief's notification memo was updated to ensure notification is made when a biased crime occurs. [37:54] Elliott Payne: I'll also note we've been joined by council member Chuck Tai. [37:57] Robert Timberman: Finding five officers had varying levels of knowledge about applicable laws, policy, and resources. Our recommendation is to incorporate additional training for officers to better understand the law, policy, and procedures related to HRO's. The difference between an HRO and an OFP, resources available to help a victim apply for an HRO, service requirements for temporary and permanent HRO's and HRO hearing notices, remedies for HRO violations, and the limitations of HRO's. MPD said the training division will work with the city attorney and victims advocates to conduct remedial training incorporated in current roll call trainings. This is being actively implemented. Officers had a varying level of knowledge about applicable laws, policies, and resource resources. We recommend that MPD incorporate additional training for officers to better understand the law, policy, and procedure related to the execution of arrest warrants and search warrants. They should include provisions on how to communicate what is legally and procedurally unallowable. We recommend that they develop anformational web page and contact point for members of the public who have questions. MPD is currently drafting a new warrant policy. The community can provide feedback via the policy resource hub located on the Minneapolis Police Department's website. Stops, searches, citations, and arrest policies are actively being worked on through the settlement agreement requirements. [39:33] Robert Timberman: Finding seven, staffing shortages contributed to longer response times and low morale among officers. We recommend address staffing shortages identified in patrol and investigative units to improve response times and increase MPD's capacity to respond to similar incidents in the future. MPD said that the MSTAP meetings have added a requirement for inspectors to explain outliers in the response time standards, that they've added a full-time lieutenant to manage citywide calls for service, and reallocate personnel across borders to improve response times. A booking element was created that manages jail and hospital wait times has contributed to improved response times by 911 responders. A designated squad car was created to cover the gap times between shifts and a prohibition on attending the regular duty roll calls decreased the wait times of callers with in progress violence. The chief mandated that officers specific requirements in responding to calls uh to reduce the response times. These measures along with a campaign of roll call appearances by chief's office have resulted in CFS response times being at their lowest since early May 2020 when the MPD was staffed with over 860 sworn personnel. Uh in MPD's response, they have an appendix that lists a number of the special orders and chief's orders. Uh they've also included a graph showing response times to priority one and priority 2 calls. uh and they noted that this recommendation was completed prior to the report being sent. [41:21] Robert Timberman: MPD announced that it would restaff the violent criminal apprehension team which could help with executing high-risisk arrest warrants in the future. Our recommendation is to do just that to provide the appropriate staff and resources to VCAP. MPD's response is that the chief created VCAT starting March 22nd of this year. Multi- agency group uh focused on assisting investigators pick up suspects and locate key witnesses. VCAT also assists with locating and arresting people with outstanding warrants. This has been completed. [41:57] Robert Timberman: Finding nine inexperienced supervisors contributed to longer response times. Our recommendation is consider lateral hiring options to increase the availability of experienced individuals for investigative and leadership positions. MPD responded that they hired a lateral deputy chief from uh I believe the the federal uh Bureau of Investigations in January 2026. Current lateral hires are at the officer rank have been assigned into investigative positions. They have a um a bit of a wall with the collective bargaining agreement that limits hiring civil servants at ranks of sergeant or lieutenant. Training for new supervisors will be prioritized as they transfer in and out of patrol and investigator procedures. SOPs are being updated for investigators. This is all being actively implemented. [42:51] Robert Timberman: 10. A backlog of unexecuted warrants exists in Henipin County, including the uh city of Minneapolis. We recommend considering the coordination of efforts with county and state law enforcement agencies to manage warrant backlogs. VCAT includes inter agency work, which will expand over a period of time. MPD said this is marked as completed. [43:13] Robert Timberman: Finding 11. Our review indicated that officers manually comp uh compiled calls and reports relating to Mr. Sawek and Mr. Mr. Muri, we recommend that MPD implement changes to the CAD and VizNet system to automatically group calls related to the same individual or address and compile information from related calls. MPD is actively working on this, committed to using modern technology to assist and improve their uh policing efforts. Their professional development bureau is exploring technology solutions that officer or sorry that office offers this level of flagging and information sharing. [43:52] Robert Timberman: Finding 12. Our review indicated that dispatchers manually enter a flag for repeat calls, alerts for certain addresses or individuals and the like. The recommendation is to implement changes to the CAD and Vizet system to automatically flag repeat calls involving the same individual or address and calls involving an individual with an outstanding warrant or harassment restraining order. MPD said the patrol bureau will collaborate with uh mech and expand the capability to flag addresses associated with repeat violent calls, extending this authority to all sworn members rather than limiting it to supervisors. This is actively being implemented with a target completion date of June this year. [44:30] Robert Timberman: Finding 13. The Henipin County Attorney's Office declined felony charges and referred the case to the Minneapolis City Attorney's Office in April 2024. Our recommendation was to develop a written procedure for contacting the Henipin County Attorney's Office to ensure appropriate charging and prosecution at an earlier stage for cases involving multiple incidents with the same perpetrator and victim. MPD's response was that the investigations bureau will update investigative SOPs to require documentation of discussion between investigators and prosecutors regarding charges for suspects. They will create an early referral procedure for prosecutors for certain types of cases, repeat victims and weapons. And they will research uh technology platforms that can flag cases for multiple victims and suspects. The department is researching solutions and actively working on this. [45:31] Robert Timberman: My apologies, I did not have that on the screen for you. The 14th finding is that blue cards uh which are what officers leave with victims and witnesses on almost every case. Uh that includes the case number, a listing of many victim resources. Uh and we also include an example of a blue card in the fourth appendex of the report. Uh but those blue cards contained outdated contact information and resources for victim advocate groups. Our recommendation is to update and simplify information for victims contained in those blue cards. MPD said that the investigations bureau will update the blue card with resource information quarterly and that they are actively implementing this. [46:21] Robert Timberman: Lastly, Chief O'Hara and County Attorney Morardi reported a breakdown of communication between MPD and Henipin County Attorney's Office leadership. Um, we learned that the Henipin County Attorney had attempted to reestablish communication and working relations prior to this review and we recommend that these efforts continue and now be led and driven by MPD because we can only make recommendations within the city. We recommend that MPD work to repair communications between MPD chief and county attorney through a mutually agreed upon mechanism such as weekly email update exchanges or monthly meetings to discuss recurring issues such as repeat calls. The chief is committed to working with a regular cadence of meetings with the Henipin County Attorney was their response and this is being actively implemented. [47:23] Robert Timberman: Chair Payne, I would like to leave it up to the audit committee if you would like to ask questions about the Muri case or uh any general questions before we move into the Lucer case. [47:31] Elliott Payne: Uh one thing I'm trying to do is manage time. Um and we also want to make sure that we get an opportunity to publish this. Uh colleagues, I know that some of you have some a board meeting to go to. Do we want to try to get through the presentation or do you want to keep some questions brief right now so that we can make sure we have time? [47:55] Member Hosebine: I agree with your time issue. [48:06] Elliott Payne: Okay, let's wait. [48:07] Elliott Payne: All right. All right. Let's continue. [48:08] Soren Stevenson: Sorry. I would advocate we spend as much time on this as we need to get it done. I feel like this is more important than anything coming after. [48:14] Elizabeth Shaffer: Council President Pin, I agree with Council Member Stevenson as well. This is an important topic and I hope that if we are going to be able to ask questions, we should all be able to ask questions. This is something that really matters to us. Thank you. [48:26] Robin Wonsley: Uh, Council President, just for logistical purposes, um I know I also like to spend time on this, but I do know the concern is managing quorum so that we can so do we have a sense of when people are trying to leave that will put the rest of us in a place where we can't dive deeper into this presentation, ask um questions. [48:55] Elliott Payne: I think as long as we have at least a quorum of one of our bodies, we should be okay. [48:58] Robin Wonsley: Oh, perfect. Awesome. Uh, Mr. Clerk, is that correct? [49:03] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Mr. President, I I think because this matters really kind of in the purview of the audit committee, I would suggest that we need a quorum of the audit committee to uh continue and to ensure the report is published before the city council can really continue discussing and taking further action. [49:25] Elliott Payne: Let's let's let's get through uh the uh Lucer case and then take questions. [49:28] Robert Timberman: Very good. Thank you, Chirping. I will now transition to uh details related to the domestic abuse calls made by or on behalf of Allison Lucer. Domestic abuse perpetuated by her on or sorry, domestic abuse perpetuated by her on-again off-again partner Charles Foss and ultimately details related to Miss Lucer's death and MPD's subsequent investigation. [50:01] Robert Timberman: As you can see on this timeline, which is also appendix 2 within the report, Miss Lucer or those close to her made many 911 calls between July 2022 and February 2024 to report domestic violence allegedly perpetuated by Charles Foss. In fact, there were at least nine calls made by Miss Lucer and three additional calls made by a family member or neighbor. Allison Lucer was a 47year-old Native American woman and longtime Minneapolis resident and she was found dead in her apartment on February 22nd, 2024. [50:41] Robert Timberman: As I mentioned, in the nearly two years leading up to her death, she made at least nine calls to 911, accusing her on-again off-again boyfriend, Charles Foss, of domestic abuse. Miss Lucer's final 911 call occurred on February 17th, 2024, a follow-up to a previous 911 call and police report on February 13, 2024 when Mr. Foss reportedly hit her on her right temple with a closed fist and put his arm around her neck before fleeing the scene. [51:18] Robert Timberman: Because Miss Lucer's 911 call came in roughly a half an hour after the Minnesota statutory 72-hour rule expired, MPD officers reasoned that Mr. Foss could no longer be arrested and escorted him out of Miss Lucer's home. The majority of Miss Lucer's formal police reports detailed felony level assault allegations. Only a small number of those led to subsequent investigations by MPD and none resulted in formal criminal charges against Mr. Foss. [51:58] Robert Timberman: 5 days later on February 22nd, 2024, Miss Lucer was found dead in her apartment after what appeared to be several days of bodily decomposition. Miss Lucer's body showed signs of subddermal hematoma, an accumulation of blood between her brain and skull, and her blood test showed the presence of methamphetamine and fentinol. The Henipin County Medical Examiner ultimately declared the cause of death to be from a subddermal hematoma and that the manner of death was undetermined. In the days and weeks following the discovery of Miss Lucer's body, her family and friends and community advocates urged the Minneapolis Police Department to arrest Mr. Foss for her alleged murder. [52:46] Robert Timberman: Miss Lucer's case was assigned to the MPD homicide unit, which ultimately submitted the case to the Henipin County Attorney's Office for charging. MPD and the Henipin County's Attorney's Office both maintain open cases related to Miss Lucer's death to this date. As of the date of this report, the Henipin County Attorney's Office has neither charged Mr. Foss um or formally decline charges, and we are aware they have assigned investigative resources to this case. [53:20] Robert Timberman: Regardless of future charging decisions related to Miss Lucer's death, it's important to clarify that Mr. Foss is not currently a threat to the community as he has been sentenced to state prison for more than 8 years for unrelated but similarly violent offenses. [53:41] Robert Timberman: With the Lucer case, we have 22 findings and recommendations and we will structure them and go through them the same we did with the Murray case. The first is that once a felony gone on arrival investigation is complete and gone on arrival meaning that when there is a call that the the suspect is no longer on the scene. Uh these are typically related to domestic abuse uh types of cases. But once a felony gone on arrival investigation is complete, investigators will usually, but not always submit it to the Henipin County Attorney's Office for charge and consideration. [54:20] Robert Timberman: Despite being marked for a rush warrant, the investigator did not submit the investigation of the July 30th, 2022 report to the Henipin County Attorney for charging consideration. We recommend that MPD add a written protocol that all domestic abuse gone on arrival cases that are investigated must be submitted to the uh Minneapolis City Attorney's Office or the Henipin County uh attorney's office for charging consideration. MPD said that investigations bureau will require all GOA domestic cases to be assigned by the next working day when reported. They will require all domestic assault cases be submitted to the Henipin County Attorney's Office regardless of victim cor cooperation for charging decision. This is actively being implemented and will be complete this uh in the next month and a half. [55:19] Robert Timberman: The second finding, especially during the gap period when shifts change, the decision of whether to call the crime lab involves the discretion of multiple potential MPD supervisors who may not be physically present at the scene. Officers are now trained to gather and document a great deal of evidence that was once considered the responsibility of the crime lab. Some interviewees within MPD nonetheless expressed a desire to change the existing policy to require crime lab responses to uh DOA cases like Miss Lucers to ensure that victims of domestic abuse whose deaths may be the result of one or more overlapping causes are treated with an abundance of care and caution. [56:03] Robert Timberman: Our recommendation is that MPD require all DOA cases with a history of domestic abuse be processed in one of the following two ways. first that they are treated as a crime scene with forensic evidentiary collection by crime lab professionals or that when the MPD investigative unit determines that the crime lab is not necessary for the complete and effective collection of evidence that that investigator contact the crime lab, explain the determination, and document the crime lab's approval of that determination. and that that investigatory unit remain on the scene until all available and relevant evidence is inventoried. What this recommendation means is that a DO case DOA case with a history of domestic abuse that comes in during a gap period must either be treated as a crime scene or the responding officer must stay on the scene until the investigative unit comes online and arrives to the DOA scene. [57:11] Robert Timberman: I will note that this recommendation as well as a a couple of others are in line with some legislation that's being contemplated uh at the state level right now um that would be named Allison's Law. There are some um details within that that uh a media outlet um wrote an article about probably a month and a half ago. Um, and it actually has the the draft bill language. Um, I don't know the status of that bill, whether or not that will be heard and moved forward this year or next. Um, but there is some nice movement at the state level that aligns with some of these recommendations. [57:56] Robert Timberman: In response to the finding, the chief has already required the lieutenant of homicide to send a team to the scene with cases when a dece uh deedent when there is a history of domestic violence. This expectation has been communicated. [58:14] Robert Timberman: The third finding is that stalking by a suspect with a domestic relationship with the victim falls under the domestic abuse protocols for responding officers. Stalking uh but stalking is typically investigated by the sex crimes unit and several officers demonstrated a misunderstanding of the statutory elements of stalking which provides valuable arrestable offense for the abusers of victims like Miss Lucer. Our recommendation is to revise policy to treat certain types of felony stalking as a domestic abuse offense which must be routed through and investigated by the domestic assault unit. Specifically, our recommendation is to treat felony stalking offenses that result from multiple incidents of domestic assault within the statutory time frame as domestic abuse offenses both in terms of response protocols and investigatory follow-up. MPD said that the investigations bureau will meet with Henipin County Attorney's Office to discuss implementation of separating stalking cases from domestic stalking cases. this is actively being implemented. [59:18] Robert Timberman: Another finding is that Chief O'Hara had uh has already implemented several beneficial policy changes for domestic abuse response, but more are needed to fully address the needs of victims like Miss Lucer. We recommend implementing the draft SOPs for domestic violence investigations that were recently proposed by Chief O'Hara. MPD said that the investigations bureau is updating the investigative SOPs to establish documentation requirements for all investigations prior to closing the case. Uh they are updating the policy manual to reflect the chief's memo that implemented several efforts of domestic abuse response and protocols and this is actively being implemented. [1:00:00] Robert Timberman: The fifth finding is that investigations may hit a wall when victims stop participating or responding to investigators. So other admissible evidence should be gathered when responding to a domestic abuse call to bolster subsequent chargeability. We recommend requiring officers to offer and when appropriate strongly recommend EMS services to ensure domestic abuse victims are not minimizing injuries dealing with invisible drain brain trauma or otherwise while also creating a stronger body of admissible hearsay evidence should a victim become uncooperative with prosecution. Officers should inform victims whether they are eligible for EMS or other medical services free of charge. MPD said that the training division will ensure training will require sworn members to strongly encourage EMS and advocacy services per the domestic assault pilot project which will be expanding citywide soon. They said the coordination of training for the citywide domestic assault pilot project is in progress. [1:01:01] Robert Timberman: Our sixth finding is that American Indian women face disproportionately high levels of violence and MPD has a wellocumented history of bias towards the urban native population. This is a phrase from the DOJ consent decree. MPD policy requires responding officers to identify witnesses, but requiring statements from witnesses at the scene would provide valuable admissible evidence for subsequent prosecutions. To clarify, the policy requires identification but not statements. In two instances, a family member of Miss Lucer could have been interviewed and a neighbor could have been interviewed for additional evidentiary statements. [1:01:43] Robert Timberman: Our recommendation is to implement policies consistent with recommendations in the global rights for women report, which I believe was published in in 20 2022. Thank you. [1:02:00] Robert Timberman: Um, and those findings uh called for a mandated training aimed at recognizing and mitigating issues of explicit and implicit bias towards certain demographics of victims and adapt communication with victims based on that training and add written protocols that witnesses including 911 callers, neighbors who may have overheard the domestic abuse and those who the victim may have made statements to regarding the domestic abuse must be thoroughly interviewed on scene, including documentation of their contact information. MPD said that domestic protocols are instructed in the academy and at inservice departmentwide training in their basic report writing training. That the training division will add multicultural remedial uh remedial training to the current procedural justice implicit bias and active bystander law enforcement uh training in 2027. The training component is also expanded under the settlement agreement and the consent decree that they are working to um create updates based on. Uh the cultural community mentors will continue to be assigned to officers in training in the academy and continuing academy training program of requiring recruits to learn different cultures and present their findings to their classmates. This is actively being implemented. [1:03:17] Robert Timberman: The seventh finding is that officers are required to gather available evidence at the scene, but are hesitant to engage in proactive policing. Officers can, but don't typically consider alternative possible arrestable offenses. The decision of whether to assign a felony GOA case to an investigator is highly dependent on information in the police report. We recommend that MPD ensure through documentation of property crimes uh any through the documentation of other property crimes with any accompanying domestic abuse offenses. MPD said that the training division will incorporate requiring officers to strongly encourage EMS and advocacy services. investigations bureau will include the ongoing domestic assault protocol that is being implemented from a pilot to a city-wide program and that training modules will be coordinated to ensure efficiency. This is actively being implemented. [1:04:17] Robert Timberman: Finding eight. The July 30th, 2022 report uh that was filed after a call uh to Miss Lucer's residence was marked for immediate submission to the Henipin County Attorney's Office for a rush warrant. That direction from a dask prosecutor to MPD was not followed by the domestic assault unit. Our recommendation is to ensure that the assigned desk prosecutor's recommendations are followed with respect to prioritizing investigations of certain gone on arrivals and that submitting cases without investigation for uh warrants when requested. MPD said the investigations bureau will develop a means of prioritizing cases according to the set recommendations of repeat suspects and victims and weapons calls. They will update the investigative standard operating procedure to ensure coordination and communication between investigators and prosecutors are occurring on a regular basis and they will provide guidance to sworn personnel on Henipin County Attorney's Office recommendations related to domestic assaults including the requirement to follow those recommendations. They will require all rush warrants to be immediately assigned. The department is currently researching solutions on how to implement this. [1:05:33] Robert Timberman: Nine is that several officers seem confused about the intricacies of the 72-hour rule, and the public has shared that confusion with respect to Miss Lucer's case. Officers share a common desire to serve victims of domestic abuse and provide available services to them. The recommendation is to require officers to attend in-person training on responding to domestic abuse. GOA cases, including training on the 72-hour rule for domestic abuse misdemeanor arrests and best practices for communicating with and interviewing victims and providing services to them. Uh we recommend that they discuss how this training can be implemented as a post a state level training as well as inhouse within MPD. Again, we cannot make recommendations to the county or the state level, but MPD certainly can work on driving those conversations. MPD's response is that the training division will be adding to the 2027 annual training curriculum these recommendations. They will be adding training on new domestic policy once the policy is in place. And the chief's memo included this change in their cops alert, which is the keeping our police safe alert uh similar to a be on the lookout uh type of alert that goes out to squad cars. Um, that alert policy I know has been updated and these other items have are in the works. [1:06:59] Robert Timberman: Finding 10. While Miss Lucer did not volunteer additional allegations during her February 17th, 2024 interaction with MPD, best practice would include questioning Miss Lucer to see if any additional criminal activity had occurred since the February 13th incident. New allegations like Miss Lucer being fearful of Mr. Foss or being physically or verbally assaulted by Mr. FOS may have given rise to a new arrestable offense. We recommend requiring officers to be trained to analyze any potential arrestable crime when a domestic abuse suspect is present on arrival, especially in cases of repeat offenders. This includes considering crimes outside of those spec specifically named by the victim, such as considering burglary as a possibility on a weaker uh or a a strangulation call. uh engaging in detailed questioning of victims to rule out or establish any potential domestic abuse related offenses. MPD said that the training division will be adding to its 2027 curriculum these recommendations that any uh they will be adding training on d new domestic policy once the policy is completed. [1:07:56] Robert Timberman: Finding 11 is that Chief O'Hara received incomplete and inaccurate information related to Miss Lucer's cause and manner of death, which he relied upon in making problematic public statements. Our recommendation is to ensure that public statements are not made before written official documentation is obtained supporting those statements, especially with respect to medical examiner conclusions and reports. MPD said that their public information officers are responsible for reviewing information prior to release. They will institute a quality control process to ensure all information is reviewed for accuracy. It is noteworthy that MPD did not obtain the official medical examiner's report for its homicide investigation until we requested a copy from them nearly two years after Miss Lucer's death. The investigation had previously relied on information shared over the phone, which led to a literal game of telephone, ultimately relaying inconsistent information to the chief of police. [1:09:14] Robert Timberman: Staffing shortages have plagued MPD for years, including a severe staffing shortage of domestic assault unit investigators. We recommend the prioritization of hiring investigators in the domestic assault unit, including the exploration of lateral hires from different police departments. MPD recently hired a deputy chief from the FBI in February of this year. Lateral hires at the officer rank that have been placed into investigative assignments. Um they did note and and I said this earlier, but the collective bargaining agreement limits some hiring practices for lateral hiring. Uh they will prioritize training for new supervisors as part of onboarding. Uh they have brought on a civilian case investigator and sworn member were added to the domestic unit and domestic Ga cases are assigned to additional investigators outside of the domestic unit to ensure these cases receive appropriate attention. [1:10:12] Robert Timberman: 13. It is common practice but not required to research suspect information history on the way to a call. uh officers ability to do so is highly dependent on information provided by 911 dispatchers. We recommend implementing changes to the CAD and VizNet system to associate previous related calls and compile information from all calls. The Professional Standards Bureau will be exploring technology solutions that allow a single officer in a squad to complete research without obstruction or safety issues. MPD is hoping to have this complete by November 2026. [1:10:44] Robert Timberman: 14. It is common practice but not required to research suspect information and history on the way to a call. Officer's ability to do so is highly dependent on information. I think is this the same finding. I think it is. We'll go to 15. Um, officers share a widespread desire to serve victims of domestic abuse and common frustration with the feasibility of connecting victims to available services. Victims may become increasingly unwilling to participate in the prosecution of their case when they hit roadblocks in uh accessing services. We uh recommend exploring the feasibility and costs of a pilot program to test the use of domestic violence advocate who concurrently works with police officers, responds to all GOA domestic abuse calls, and works with victims on site to fill out orders for protection and provide other resources. This will allow police to move in onto the next call while at the advocate remains with the victim working on paperwork and safety planning. This advocate would respond to the scene only after officers had confirmed the suspect was no longer on site. Uh they would report back to the audit committee. Uh we we asked that MPD report back to the audit committee once the feasibility and costs of such a pilot program have been analyzed. MPD said that they will coordinate with the office of community safety to explore these options with a target date of November this year. [1:12:10] Robert Timberman: Finding 16. The prominent issue with the investigation of the February 27th, 2023 report was that excessive amount of time that had passed between the date of the incident and a charging decision by the Henipin County Attorney's Office, albeit a deferral rather than a charge or declination, which greatly exceeded HCAO's policy for charging timelines. I want to point out we did not assess Henipin County Attorney Office's policies, procedures, practices as that is not within our purview. Uh and so the recommendation with this is to be driven by MPD to work with the Henipin County Attorney's Office to work on implementing a charging timeline for domestic abuse GOA cases that would require a deferral to happen in a shorter time frame than that required for charging and dismissal, allowing investigators to gather additional evidence in a shorter window of time after uh the incident report. MPD said the investigations bureau will require regular check-ins with Henipin County Attorney's Office and the assigned investigators. They will improve coordination between investigators and prosecutors, especially early on. They will create a follow-up timeline for investigators according to these recommendations and that they have recently added to their MSTAP meeting uh investigative commanders to brief charging decisions and outcomes on significant cases. [1:13:46] Robert Timberman: Finding 17. Officers expressed an interest in hearing feedback from prosecutors regarding potential evidentiary issues that made the case less chargeable in order to better document or gather evidence, learn uh going into future calls. The recommendation is to engage in training with the domestic assault unit of MPD to discuss what makes a case chargeable or not chargeable and what evidence to look for and submit to Henipin County Attorney. The training division will be coordinating and incorporating the new domestic policy was MPD's response and that they are actively working on that. [1:14:22] Robert Timberman: Finding 18. Based on officer input, developing a notification system where prosecutors follow up with the arresting officer and briefly explain their decision to charge, release, and or ask for a certain amount of bail for a suspect may have a positive impact. Sorry. Rather than MPD response, this should uh be recommendation that MPD work with the Henipin County Attorney's Office to create a process by which arresting officers can obtain uh optional updates on the result of their arrest um and any evidentary issues that lead to declination of charges. MPD said that the investigations bureau will implement a system of coordinating investigations and prosecutors weekly. They will create performance metrics for investigators. They will have discussions with the Henipin County Attorney's Office to assign prosecutors as liaons. They will notify sworn members if they want a case followup and patterns of case declines could be addressed in training or a memo to departments to improve services. MSTAD is already capturing positive highlights of effective police work, including cases that have been charged. The department is currently researching solutions for active implementation. [1:15:46] Robert Timberman: Finding 19 MPD leadership and the Henipin County Attorney's Office leadership have experienced a strain and uncooperative relationship for years, which has created a negative trickle down effect in MPD ranks. As I mentioned, the Henipin County Attorney's Office has attempted to reach out on a couple occasions to strengthen or rebuild relationships. We are now asking MPD to take the lead and participate in those conversations to repair respectful communication between the chief and the county attorney through mutually agreed upon mechanisms such as weekly or monthly email updates or quarterly phone call updates. MPD said the chief is committed to working with a regular cadence of meetings with the Henipin County Attorney. [1:16:44] Robert Timberman: Finding 20. We're getting close. We have 22. Officers share a widespread desire to serve victims of domestic abuse and a common frustration with the feasibility of connecting victims to available services. Victims may become increasingly unwilling to participate in the prosecution of their case when they hit roadblocks in accessing services. We recommend that the blue card be updated with current resources and information, including contact information specific to domestic abuse victims resources. This may be included on a separate and unique card for domestic abuse victims if it's less burdensome or more feasible to develop. Card should have a step-by-step information guide for victims to follow, not just a list of phone numbers. The idea is to make this as easy as possible for victims to follow through on. MPD said the investigations bureau is updating the blue card with resources. They're exploring developing a domestic resource card and educating the community on domestic victim services already available online. [1:17:48] Robert Timberman: 21. With the well-known historical backdrop of violence against Native American women and MPD's documented bias towards the urban native population, public comments by MPD regarding violence against Native women are heavily scrutinized and should be held to a high standard. We recommend that MPD require is required to issue a letter or other statement to the family of Miss Lucer apologizing for public misstatements related to the medical examiner's findings and report. MPD recently issued a statement to the Lucer family which they included in their response appendix N. Early in our work, after several conversations with members of the Lucer family and various advocacy groups, it became clear that one of the primary requests was for a public apology from the Minneapolis Police Department and specifically the chief of police related to MPD's handling of this case and specifically related to his words at early press conferences. [1:18:59] Robert Timberman: Although there is a lot of past pain and current unknowns about about the future of this case, there is a real opportunity for forwardfocused conversation. I'm pleased that we received commitment from both the chief and the family of Miss Lucer that they would be willing to meet. And as I mentioned earlier this week or late last week, they did have this meeting. Chief O'Hara followed up with a public statement that specifically stated, "I am grateful to Allison's family and to community members who met with us and are willing to continue to work with us on Allison's case, as well as improving our response in domestic violence in general. I am sorry for the harm caused by my words." That statement caused real pain to the family, to those who loved her, and to the broader community. I take responsibility for that impact. While I intended no harm and my comments were based on incomplete information provided to me, I recognize that intent does not lessen the harm. While I know we have high legal burden to overcome, we are committed to continuing forward with a fresh look on this case and continuing to enhance our response to domestic violence in general. We are asking anyone in the community who may have information regarding this case to come forward. [1:20:26] Robert Timberman: Lastly, overall, the initial public response to Miss Lucer's death seemed to overly emphasize her substance abuse history as the underlying cause of her death, a trend which is all too familiar to indigenous organizations, advocates, and community members who are justifiably weary of public officials overlooking or underinvestigating the deaths of native women who experienced disproportionate rates of violence and murder compared to other demographics. Those statistics are particularly troubling in Minneapolis, where law enforcement has a recent documented track record of discriminating and perpetuating bias against the urban native population. The recommendation related to this finding is to create an American Indian community liaison position at an executive level who is responsible for citywide advocacy and response. Minneapolis police said they will speak to the mayor's office regarding this recommendation and are actively pursuing a resolution. [1:21:48] Robert Timberman: I want to thank Mr. Muri and the family and friends of Allison Lucer who participated in this review. Your stories, accounts, and evidence made clear the urgency of addressing a system in need of repair. They are stories and accounts that intersect with those we hear about in other tragedies such as the death of Mariah Samuels. Many of the real and perceived gaps in the investigation into her domestic abuse and death parallel those of Miss Lucer's. It is not lost on me that justice delayed is painful. And I hope that for Miss Samuel's family, the murderer's recent conviction brings some closure. My hope is that connections strengthen and that the same sense of justice can ultimately be realized by Mr. Murray and the family and friends of Miss Lucer. [1:22:55] Robert Timberman: I also want to thank the officers and leaders within MPD and at the Henipin County Attorney's Office who spoke candidly with us, including the chief of police and including the Henipin County Attorney. Many of you expressed a genuine commitment to serving our community. You shared your frustrations with what is not working well and offered thoughtful ideas to improve an imperfect system. I want to recognize our contracted partners at Hogan Adams. Your tireless work, expertise, and balanced guidance enhanced the independence and objectivity of this review. Your lead on writing the report certainly has resulted in some meaningful and timely recommendations. And finally, I offer my sincere appreciation to the staff of the office of city auditor who have carried this work forward. Your commitment to public service is admirable and does not go unnoticed. [1:23:56] Robert Timberman: These reviews highlight opportunities for the city and for MPD to strengthen how high-risk situations are documented, escalated, and addressed. While the cases examined were tragic and distinct, the lessons drawn from them point to systemic improvements that can enhance safety, coordination, and decision-making across future responses. Implementing the recommendations in this report can help ensure that individual efforts are supported by clear structures, consistent practices, and strong leadership alignment. Continued progress will require sustained attention and collaboration across the department and its partners. By addressing the issues identified in these cases and building on the promising practices already underway, the Minneapolis Police Department and the city of Minneapolis can move toward a more responsive, transparent, and resilient public safety system. Our hope is that this work contributes to lasting improvements that better serve all residents. With that, chair, we will stand for questions. [1:25:04] Elliott Payne: Thank you, Mr. Timberman. Um, I'm going to try to manage a few things here procedurally and timewise. Uh while we have our quorum of both bodies here, I'm going to make sure we get our motions done and then I've confirmed that we have a quorum of audit that is flexible so that we can have a robust conversation. So I'm going to try to get these motions done and then we'll go into discussion. For our audit committee, I'm going to direct uh the clerk to receive and file this report and then I would like a motion to publish this report. Is there a member that can make that motion from the audit committee? [1:25:40] Member Hosebine: So moved. [1:25:41] Vice Chair Singleton: Second. [1:25:45] Elliott Payne: Moved and seconded. Uh the clerk will call the role. [1:25:47] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Member Chug Tai. [1:25:49] Aisha Chughtai: Aye. [1:25:50] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Angelhart. [1:25:51] Member Englehart: Aye. [1:25:53] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Hosbine. [1:25:56] Member Hosebine: Aye. [1:25:58] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Williams. [1:25:59] Member Williams: Aye. [1:26:00] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Vice Chair Singleton. [1:26:01] Vice Chair Singleton: Aye. [1:26:02] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Chair Payne. [1:26:03] Elliott Payne: Aye. [1:26:03] Casey Carl (City Clerk): There are six eyes. [1:26:03] Elliott Payne: That carries. And then I would like for uh the city council to have an opportunity to further review and study this report. Uh and so can somebody make a motion to refer this item to city council? [1:26:19] Michael Rainville: So second. [1:26:22] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Mr. President, I as as president of the city council, you don't need to move to refer to the city council. [1:26:28] Robin Wonsley: Objection. [1:26:29] Elliott Payne: All right. Well, I I'd like to like get it into a committee for further study. So without objection, let's just refer this to the council to make that consideration. [1:26:45] Aisha Chughtai: Just to clarify, do you have to you have to suggest a committee that it goes to at this point or [1:26:50] Elliott Payne: I was hoping that we would have a conver further conversation about what what appropriate committee that would be. [1:26:58] Aisha Chughtai: Excellent. I also have a second point of order um just to help our discussion. It might be with so many members present. I would recommend that we use speaker management and our neighbors that don't have speaker management. Ask the council members that do to get into queue because it can get difficult to see further down into the deis and then we can manage a queue. [1:27:21] Elliott Payne: Okay, let's work that way. Uh let's go ahead and open up speaker management. I'm going to keep eyes if there's anybody who doesn't have it open yet that has a question. And then just to the members of the audit committee, if you're on our end over here and you want to get into queue, we can just put it in for you and then we'll let the chair know that you're the one that wanted to speak. [1:27:50] Jason Chavez: Uh, thank you, President P. Before I ask my questions, I want to take a moment to remember Allison Lucer. She was a daughter, a mother, a beautiful member of our community. And I want to be clear that the findings of this afteraction review represent a devastating pattern of what happens to missing and murdered indigenous relatives. In particular, indigenous women and girls go missing and face disproportionately high levels of violence. Sadly, too often their cases are met with indifference, delayed response, and outright dismissal by the very same systems meant to protect them. And I want to be clear that this case is no different. Allison's family has waited for answers and accountability for too long. And before I ask my questions, I just want to thank Jana, the Allison Lucer, for her relentless fight for justice and accountability and for not letting go uh and making sure that these answers come to light. I do have a question. On February 11th, 2025, K1 Leven posted an article about Chief O'Hara's comment regarding Alison Lucer's case where he said, quote, "I want to assure the public the MPD handled those cases in accordance with established policy and the law. I also want to emphasize that despite what's being said, our police officers and our investigation investigators care very deeply about finding justice for Allison and the very victims of crime in our city." Um, Mr. O'Hara also said in the Stars Tribune that someone dead and decomposed with needles everywhere is not a sign that a crime occurred. Chief O'Hara, welcome to the chambers. Would you mind answering if you still feel this way today? [1:29:33] Brian O'Hara: Council President, council member. Uh no, as the uh city auditor has said, I have met with family, met with community members. Um I have privately uh had conversation expressing my regret. The public statement was read here. Um I know uh I know our investigators have done some work after that meeting. I know the Henipin County Attorney's Office has done a lot of work over the course of that time. Um, and we remain committed. This remains an open homicide investigation. [1:30:16] Jason Chavez: Mr. O'Hara, I see the letter that you sent here that is a part of the review, but I still don't know what statement you said to Allison's family. Can you let the public know what statement you said to them? [1:30:30] Brian O'Hara: Uh, council president, uh, council member, um, that was a private conversation we had. Um, I don't have anything written or transcribed from exactly what was said. Um, but that that was a private conversation and the public statement was made subsequent to that. [1:30:47] Jason Chavez: Can you publicly apologize to Allison's family today? [1:31:00] Brian O'Hara: Yes, council president, council member. Yes, of course. Um, J is here. Jen, again, I apologize. I'm sorry. And we are committed to uh moving forward together. And I'm thankful again to Jana uh to other community members that she invited that were present with us, advocates for their willingness to have uh conversation with us and to move to move forward and try and improve things for the future. [1:31:23] Jason Chavez: Thank you. And Mr. O'Hara. Chief O'Hara, did you know that indigenous women face disproportionate high levels of violence and the MPD has a wellocumented history of bias towards the urban native population? [1:31:38] Brian O'Hara: Council President, council member, yes. [1:31:40] Jason Chavez: Did you know that a member of your police department uh was quoted in the media saying, "The fact that she is native bears no weight on how we investigated or handled this case." Do you agree with that? [1:31:49] Brian O'Hara: uh council president uh council member I I don't know the officer or uh the context of that. Um I understand of course that we all carry uh we all carry implicit bias. I understand of course uh that there is uh demonstrated history uh in general of disparit outcomes uh particularly for Native Americans in the community and yes we are committed to doing our part to try and make things better in the future. [1:32:41] Jason Chavez: I'll ask one more time because I don't think I got an answer to my question. A member of the Minneapolis Police Department said the fact that she is native bears no weight on how we investigated or handled this case. Chief O'Hara, do you agree with that with that statement after hearing this after action review or not? [1:32:41] Brian O'Hara: Council President, council member, um I I don't know who said that or the context. I don't I don't [1:32:51] Jason Chavez: It's your department. [1:32:53] Brian O'Hara: Yes. Um I can say that as the auditor mentioned, I do believe that people, many people in the police department were doing their best in both of these cases. Uh, and I do believe people had felt that way, but that does not mean that there aren't uh issues to correct. [1:33:10] Jason Chavez: Um, I'll pass it to the next person, but I'll ask one more time. Yes or no? Because I'm still not getting answer to my question. [1:33:16] Brian O'Hara: Council President, uh, council member, I'm I'm sorry. Uh, do you feel that way? I'm trying to be as accurate as possible. I do believe people were sincere in their efforts and although they may believe that that doesn't necessarily mean that there aren't things that we need to do differently and I believe that's the the most truthful and honest answer I can give you to that. [1:33:42] Jason Chavez: I think that's very telling. Thank you. [1:33:46] Robin Wonsley: Thank you, President Payne. Um, I also have a few questions, but beforehand, I just want to say mostly thank you to our community members as well as um the city auditor for fulfilling this request. Um, myself, I believe council president and council member Chavez brought this motion um last year um in response to the public outcry from our residents, specifically Allison Lucer's family. But I also think it's important to highlight victims that both preceded um during that time and even afterwards with Davis Mtori um being also one of the flagship um incidents that triggered our need to evaluate how are we truly handling both hate crimes and domestic violent cases and seeing the overlap there when it pertains to black, brown, indigenous and women or those experiencing intimate partner violence not receiving the high quality of public safety services that they deserve and that they pay for. Um, and I also think it's important to highlight Mariah Samuels though whose specific incident is not referenced in this report. The same findings that we just were um essentially explained uh or given an explanation of. um also dived into why she and her family didn't receive the service that quite literally could have saved her life as well. Um, so I just want to uplift um our our community members for constantly holding us accountable to then hold um our police department and other city leadership such as the mayor um accountable and making sure that we are responsive to you all's needs um and that there should be accountability when that's not had. [1:35:32] Robin Wonsley: And actually in light of that accountability, um I think you know that was a a positive uh step to request that uh Allison Lucier and her family and community receive a public apology. I also wanted to know where was that also for Davis Mator? um Davis Mator following um the publication and and media kind of frenzy around his case that all came from the fact that a warrant had not been executed um and he named he reached out as indicated in your report um over 11 times um to and I saw the emails myself not only just to MPD I don't think the timeline specifies the nature of of that outreach but there were emails where Chief O'Hara her where Mayor Jacob Fry and Davis Mator were all a part of and it was pleased for his life and there was one in particular where he named this man is one to kill me and in light of that Chief O'Hara I would say this is an opportunity for you in the media response to Davis Mtori there was a almost blaming of him for not coming forward so I would like to know what is the reconciliation efforts that's been made to Davis Mtori as Well, and if there has been also to Mariah Samuels, and I don't think your report includes that, but if someone or the chief could share a little bit about that. [1:37:06] Robert Timberman: Chair Payne, Council Member Wanley. Um, we believe that the media has reported on public apology to Mr. Mter. I'm not saying that that shouldn't happen here, shouldn't happen again. Um but it is also a a paramount demand that uh was specifically related to the Lucer case. Um Miss Williams in fact at the mayor's inauguration at your inauguration um stood at the front of that theater and handed the mayor a piece of paper and the first thing on it said we want an apology. That is why the focus here on this particular case was for that public apology. I do want to say and I I don't want to discount any uh any need or desire to ask the chief or the commissioner any questions. I do want to ask that we try to focus on what the audit uh team can answer today and what our consultants can answer today. I think you've taken a vote to move this to another committee and I think the chief and the commissioner have both committed to being at that meeting. Um that said, I will defer to you chair as to of course anyone you'd like to invite to answer uh members questions. [1:38:31] Robin Wonsley: Yeah, I would I mean we've already set a president with inviting up staff and I did make the note of why this was not part of your recommendations. From my understanding, there were as you highlighted public apologies made by the department related to Davis Mtori. very interested to know why that did not make it in the report in itself and if that could be a part of the reconciliation piece of building that trust that is referenced as a finding of what does it look like to do that truth and reconciliation if it's through public apologies not just the media but meetings with families and if that's something that could be spread across um MPD's response going forward. [1:39:16] Robert Timberman: uh Chair Payne Council member Wansley I agree with you I think this belongs in that same type of setting. I am just speaking primarily to logistics of of what we're um here to talk about and I also um think that there is a great opportunity for further collaboration with my office. We have a lot of ideas that have come from this. Um we shared 32 of them 22 37 of them uh today with you. But this is a conversation that we are more than willing to continue having with the council, with the audit committee, with the families u and not just the muris and uh Miss Lucer's family um and also the um police department. I think these conversations have to continue and as I mentioned my ultimate hope is that they move towards that future resolution. So I do agree with you. [1:41:16] Robin Wonsley: Looking at page 27, um I'm interested in audits evaluation of some of the kind of recommendations or responses that MPD submitted as followup. if you all are looking at if these are actually operational or are they essentially volunteer or inind services. I bring this up in reference to the neighborto neighbor mediation pilot program that I know in our public health and safety committee last year we received a update from this particular uh partner or NAACP specifically. Um and in that we learned that this has been somewhat of a program house under NAACP at that time. It was my understanding that MPD was funding it or that it was um essentially um a programmatic part of their program. So I'm I'm interested in how some of these these inind services kind of factors into like meeting the criteria of expectations in this findings. But yeah, I just wanted to get a sense if you were weighing that. Uh, Chair Payne and council member, can you please reference the page number? Was it the report page 27? [1:41:51] Robin Wonsley: Oh, I'm looking at the presentation. Sorry, slide 27. Um, it's related to findings uh finding number two. Uh, and again, MPD response to reference the neighborto neighbor mediation pilot program um as being some a way to respond to the recommendation of developing a procedure for case escalation either within MPD the uh Minneapolis city attorney's office or the Henipin County Attorney's uh office when a threshold number of calls regarding a specific individual or address have occurred. I only asked this because again I rec I from my understanding in their presentation this is an external organization. It's not clear how data is then coordinated if we're not funding them. So and it's not clear how then they relate to if not just MPD but the city attorney then Henipin County so that there is consistent and standardized tracking of this information so that escalation when it is happening can actually be um monitored. So, I just wanted to get a sense of uh it's I I thought this was already fulfilled, too. [1:42:35] Robert Timberman: Uh, Chair Payne, Council Member Wansley, that is certainly something that I would have to defer to MPD. This was the language of our finding and our recommendation based on the evidence that we had in our work. Their response though, we did not further look into those systems in place. Um but that is certainly something that I'd be willing to have a conversation with you as I get more information. [1:43:27] Robin Wonsley: Thank you. Then going to presentation slide findings number five. Um this might also be just followup um because I think there's this is a situation where I thought MPD's uh response was already happening through the domestic abuse project pilot that um is referenced in another part of your your presentation and report. But I thought this was work already underway um and had been happening based off of a presentation that we received from them. But it seems like that might not be the case here based off of this finding. [1:43:53] Robert Timberman: Which slide? [1:43:55] Robin Wonsley: This is finding number five, slide number 30. Whereas the recommendation to incorporate additional training for officers to better understand the law, policy and procedure related to harassment restraining orders, the differences between a harassment restraining order or a order of protection um and resources available to help victims apply for those type of things. And MPD response says the training division will work with the city attorney and victims advocate to conduct remedial training incorporated in current roll call trainings. And this is what I'm referencing of when we had that robust presentation from the domestic abuse project. I thought this was work that technically was already being done or underway. [1:44:22] Robert Timberman: Sure Payne. Uh and council member again those are responses from MPD and I would have to defer to them. [1:44:29] Robin Wonsley: Okay. So I don't are we doing staff memos essentially to council president pay so when we do have this conversation we can reference that. [1:44:38] Elliott Payne: I think it would be helpful to try to capture some of these questions for staff followup because I would like for us to be able to have a robust conversation with staff in front of city council. So that would help shape that conversation. [1:44:52] Robin Wonsley: Okay. I'll follow up with our clerks with those two those questions and any others that might have to be directed to MPD. Um the next one is related to slide uh 11 sorry uh 77. Um I wanted clarification on this one. This is finding 15. Coordinate with the office of community safety to explore options. And actually maybe one of our council members, specifically our budget chair, um, Aisha Chughtai might have a little bit more clarity on because I know you led on this specifically, but it says MPD's response, um, towards um, making sure that there's more expanded services uh, to serve victims of domestic abuse. Um NPD response says that they're going to coordinate with office of community safety to explore more options with this. Uh this is one where I I thought the body back in 2023 and by the body council we funded domestic violence navigators and I thought they have been absorbed in the police department to do exactly this the things that we are talking about but already knew was happening back in 2023. So, I just wanted to get a sense of uh it's I I thought this was already fulfilled, too. [1:46:11] Elliott Payne: Council member Tai, did you want to speak to that? [1:46:14] Aisha Chughtai: Uh yes. Uh through the chair. Thank you. um would love to to just um since we're in a public forum uh state really clearly that um as part of the um I want to say 2023 budget uh the city council um funded uh three domestic violence navigators and a supervisor for the domestic violence uh navigator team. Uh prior to that, there had been one domestic violence navigator for the entirety of the city uh managing a case load that that is quite literally impossible to manage. Um uh your your recollection is absolutely correct, Council Member Wanley, that uh in in the subsequent year following um this investment, all domestic violence navigators were moved into the Minneapolis Police Department so that they could have better access to systems like PIMS. Um and that to to date is the is the case that there are um today more domestic violence navigators than there there have been in in recent history um that that we can trace back. [1:47:26] Robin Wonsley: Thank you for that clarity. This might be also another area of followup and just to hear about the utilization or maybe the underutilization of those navigators cuz I I'm very confused to see explore more options with OCS when we gave the department a tool to do exactly this work um in the form of three FTE staff. Um, so I just wanted more clarity on what was happening with those navigators and essentially what is OCS's or the Office of Community Safety Leadership. Um, what are they what are these options that they're contemplating and if the navigators are a part of that? Um, with that, those are the only questions that I had. Again, I'll follow up with the clerks um with the the texts of those questions. And then again, I would say I'm also looking forward to having the fur or fuller robust conversation specifically with OCS and MPD themselves and also other impacted departments such as the city attorney's office. Um something else to name is we're currently playing tag around um a follow-up presentation be it in cow or the public health and safety committee um on this matter but also MPD's internal um investigation assessment that they did last summer um in response to Davis Mtori shooting. Um, so we're, this body passed a legislative directive also last year asking for that information since that was already done ahead of this uh, audit and ideally MPD and OCS will be given that presentation. Um, we're currently trying to solidify a date, but we also are making an opportunity to um, make sure that community members can come and see that presentation. also uh potentially have a public comment to also provide um your feedback and your thoughts on on the matter as well. So, I just wanted to highlight that there's other um intersecting items that were moving forward with in in uh compliments to this presentation as well in the next coming weeks. [1:48:12] Aisha Chughtai: Mr. President, I'm in Q for member Hosbine. [1:48:17] Member Hosebine: Thank you, Chair Payne. Thank you. I'm going to take a as a comm community member on the audit committee. I'm going to go a little audit related here. Um, and I um just wanted to highlight and elevate um Mr. Timberman, your comments at the beginning that audit is truly an an effort of public trust. And I want to thank you and your team of how this works. I know sometimes audit can feel um around the issue, but it really can lead to future um improvements even though they don't feel direct in the moment. So, I just want to really appreciate that. Um and thank you and your team for doing this and the um external auditors from an audit perspective. I have a couple of just general questions and maybe this is just to help folks that maybe are in the room that aren't aware of the audit process to help clarify what some of these findings and recommendations mean. Um one one um kind of high level question with both um afteraction reviews and the findings I'm not used to not seeing dates. So I see that there are some that are listed as completed, some that are actively implemented with a date and then there are some that are just actively implemented and then researching solutions. So I just wanted to understand the definitions of those four categories as these findings um are classified and then Mr. Mr. Timberman, if you could just talk like we usually see at audit committee kind of off um the standard meeting then what your role would be as your team's followup for each of these and tracking of these. I think that's just helpful for everyone in the room to know how these will be continued to be followed up on. [1:51:10] Robert Timberman: uh Chair Pay and committee member that that is a really good question. I I'm glad that you brought that up. So the the traditional process for an audit finding the path it takes is that we present it to the audit committee with recommendations. We have already reached out to management received their corrective action. So what you've seen today is the normal uh process and then what we do is we regularly monitor those findings for resolution. So uh at the end of an audit like you see with this we complete the work we send the result to the audit. We ask for a corrective action plan that addresses every recommendation. Um we we cannot tell them what to write. We do suggest on what they include such as dates of planned implementation such as what unit what individual may be responsible for that. Um and then as our regular tracking um before every audit committee every two months we follow up with management. We understand uh or or gain an understanding of progress. Um and so for this particular audit it will be the same thing. We will follow up on all 37 uh recommendations. Um the the question about dates especially for those ones that are uh marked as complete that is again not a format that we ask for but I think that kind of brings to light that when we follow up on the ones that are considered open and are still active. Um we'll make sure to get some additional detail on those but know that these 37 findings although a couple of them cross over. So, I think we counted it. It's about 30 or so um unique findings that uh we will follow up with the audit committee and report back on those. [1:53:16] Member Hosebine: Perfect. And in terms of the ones that don't have dates associated, will that be part of that followup before each audit committee? [1:53:23] Robert Timberman: I certainly will try to include that. And in fact, uh as a part of the new report that we committed to the audit committee for June, um we will try to incorporate that within that report as well. [1:53:33] Member Hosebine: Perfect. Thank you for that. And um on another note just back to kind of community trust um and in your executive overview um and also on slide 14 um public communication and community trust as a community member on this I really hope that as we continue to follow up there's additional highlight of that effort because all of this falls apart without that. Um, and I would say in appendex N of the report, which is the um, MPD response, that feels like a piece that continue maybe still needs to be continue to um, be advocated for with the MPD. And I just um I'm not as uh well-versed as the council on how we move forward with some of these things, but I um I do see a few of these findings and responses as possible um avenues for the audit committee and the audit team to maybe look at in addition to the standard audit work. And um I would like to just as we move forward with these recommendations um flag a few of those that really are around that public trust um piece um to ensure that we're having appropriate responses um and interaction on those. And I think that would also be in line with some of the other comments made where there's other paths that all um converge on this and I think we can continue to work on that um in June and in future audit committees. [1:54:56] Elliott Payne: Thank you. Uh before I call in, council member Stevenson is going to check with the clerks. I know you've been working furiously to get it uploaded to limbs. Do you know if that has been completed? [1:55:07] Casey Carl (City Clerk): Uh chair Payne, yes, it has been completed. Um I just emailed all the council members uh with the links. It is uh the report and the presentation are both online and limbs. They're in two separate files because this is a joint meeting of the audit committee and the city council. Um, I'll read the legislative file, the council file, just since that's maybe a little bit more uh commonly accessed. It's file 2026-0000453, but either way, the reports can be accessed both directly from today's council agenda and the audit committee agenda. [1:55:40] Elliott Payne: Thank you for that update. I know that we ran out of the printed copies in the chambers. So, for anybody following along, you can now read the full report. Uh, Council Member Stevenson. [1:55:47] Soren Stevenson: thank you. Um, I first want to start off by um thanking uh Mr. Muri and his family and friends for their advocacy on his case. Uh, same goes for uh the family of Allison Lucer and the community at large as well as the family and community around Mariah Samuels. Thank you for your advocacy. We really wouldn't be here uh having this discussion without you. So, I I I really really appreciate that. Um, I wanted to thank the audit staff. Uh this is this is a good body of work. Thank you. Um I'm I'm happy that you're here in our city and I'm happy that you put this together. Thank you. Um I have a ton of questions and comments and things to dig into and I think much of that we'll get into at a later date when this comes before the city council, but I have a a few things I wanted to flag uh for staff um so that we can have a a a better conversation later. Um and a couple questions for audit while you're here. The first is um you had mentioned early in the report on Mr. Mur's case that you had spoken to uh most but not all officers that you wanted to speak to. Can you um talk about that a little bit and are there officers that you are still wishing to speak to or or what blocked you from speaking to them? [1:57:45] Robert Timberman: Uh Chair Payne, uh Council Member Stevenson, great question. Um yeah, we we did run into some frustration with um not being able to talk to a few officers. Um I will say that after we got through some um some coming to understanding with the police department and specifically the the Minneapolis Police Federation. Um we had great cooperation from individual officers, leaders within the organization. Uh, in fact, we had uh the chief and the commissioner, the the chief specifically put out a a policy directive to communicate with us. Um, the officers we were unable to speak to. One of them had left the department and we do not have authority to uh subpoena testimony. Uh, and three others were on extended leaves of absence. And so for the same reasons we were unable to speak with them. Um I do think that um you know in both the Lucer and the Muri case we we still had very thorough response uh and cooperation from MPD. Uh I I will say that I would have liked to have talked to a couple of those that we were unable to. [1:58:33] Soren Stevenson: Okay. Um, in the initial time when you were having trouble speaking with the officers, do you have any specific recommendations about how the city council or what policies could be put in place to guarantee that future audits don't have this trouble? [1:58:51] Robert Timberman: Uh Chair Payne and Council Member Stevenson that's a really good question and you're thinking like an auditor here because um the the recommendation as you noted is to create something. The response is we've created it. Um, audit often comes in, but we should not be uh we should not be the first. Um, every department within the city needs to manage their own risks. They need to manage their own expectations. Uh, and that includes the police department. And so it it's it's beyond just this one recommendation. It's with all policy. It's with all procedures. And this is specific to how reports are being completed. um there needs to be an internal mechanism if not um and I think MPD to an extent does have this um so to get to the specific answer I think that's a a question for for someone else but um I would say that from audits perspective if there isn't that review within the department itself that's problematic um and um you know it I hate to say this, but people shouldn't rely on audit to find mistakes. [1:59:38] Soren Stevenson: Okay. Yes. Please reach out to my office when you're ready for a city ordinance. I'd love to help champion that with you. Um, I have a question that first came up during finding four on Mr. Mat's case, but then was basically a question I had for all the following findings as well. Um, and maybe also for the the questions I just had. And that's basically um what what accountability is being done to make sure that this is followed. So in finding four uh the recommendation reinforce expectations through policy and training for uh designating bias and weapons involved in incidents within police reports. Um there's some good responses from MPD here. It says active implementation, but I I want to know whether this is a question for you or maybe it's a question for the police chief. I'm not sure. um what what are we going to have on the back end for after this is implemented if it is not followed in the future what will happen? [2:01:51] Robert Timberman: Chair Payne and Council Member Stevenson that's a really good question and you're thinking like an auditor here because um the the recommendation as you noted is to create something. The response is we've created it. Um, audit often comes in, but we should not be uh we should not be the first. Um, every department within the city needs to manage their own risks. They need to manage their own expectations. Uh, and that includes the police department. And so it it's it's beyond just this one recommendation. It's with all policy. It's with all procedures. And this is specific to how reports are being completed. um there needs to be an internal mechanism if not um and I think MPD to an extent does have this um so to get to the specific answer I think that's a a question for for someone else but um I would say that from audits perspective if there isn't that review within the department itself that's problematic um and um you know it I hate to say this, but people shouldn't rely on audit to find mistakes. [2:02:29] Soren Stevenson: Okay. Yeah. Um, Mr. O'Hara, I don't know if you want to address this now or you want to mark this as something to come more prepared with for our next conversation, but I'd like to hear from you either now or later um about what accountability measures are going to be put in place or are currently in place um for these different findings. [2:02:53] Brian O'Hara: Welcome, Chief. Council President, council member, uh thank you. Uh yes, there's a lot uh obviously uh dozens of findings. We will be meeting internally uh each week to track implementation. There's a variety of people who are responsible for different parts of it. Um some of them I know there was mentioned earlier with dates and things like that. Some of them involve technology that needs to be researched. Uh so that's why there's some distinction with that. uh and some of the responses have multiple things that we need to do to address it. So that's why one may be completed another one is is actively being implemented and then once things are um implemented and in policy uh if someone were to violate it then it's the standard disciplinary process. [2:03:40] Soren Stevenson: Okay. Um, maybe in the next uh the next time we come back and talk about this if you could come ready to talk about issues with the standard uh disciplinary process um and ways in which the council could intervene to improve that process. We had a private discussion about this so you'll remember. So anyways, please come ready to uh to talk about that so we can have concrete things that we can do to improve our city. [2:04:08] Brian O'Hara: Yes, council president. Thank you. [2:04:20] Elliott Payne: Member Engelhart. [2:04:24] Member Englehart: Yes, I want to echo what uh council member Chavez and Stevenson have said and I appreciate the family and community holding public officials and all of our entities accountable including coming to inauguration and demanding that apology. uh specifically a little bit more information on I mean I did hear the answer that the four individuals that were not able to be interviewed um was there any you felt like you got robust enough uh answers but it in what where would it have tied in if they would have been able to be interviewed and then also in in these interviews and and the relation to the police federation and um representation and that sort of thing. Were were these interviews done in the like in the realm of a formal investigation where they received Tennyson and Gity warnings and and that sort of thing so they could be used for followup if there is accountability in terms of performance management up to an including discipline. [2:05:26] Robert Timberman: Uh Chair Payne and committee member um good questions. So I'm going to start with your second question and that is um these were not used with Tennyson and Gity and that is going to be and has been the office of city auditor standard practice. Um I I can provide you some historical context on this and documentation because it was a very difficult process to work through some of the the concerns that the federation had. Um and I will say that audit uh our role is not to perform labor relations investigations. Our role is not to perform criminal investigations. Uh our role is to get accurate, transparent and truthful information into the public's hands. Uh it is to look for policies and procedures and laws that are being violated and to uh draw attention to those. and it is to find internal controls that are lacking. And so we really had to come into this review uh with the same mindset and the same methodology that we do with all of our audits. That said, with the the four individuals we were unable to speak with. I do think that um by and large we got all of the information that we wanted. I will share that I think that if we had spoken with some of those individuals, it may have crossed into um questions about individual um activity. Uh and I I can't answer what they would have told us, what information we would have gotten. So it it would be really speculative speculative of me to to say that it would have helped or it would have hurt the invest or our uh actual audit. Um what I can say is that um with with a couple of them I'm I'm just very frustrated that we weren't able to speak with them. um one in fact um before they left the city told us they would not speak with us and we missed that opportunity. [2:07:28] Member Englehart: Thank you and thank you for that answer and and for your work. So uh would the nature of the interviews or investigation if there was to be performance management done in the realm of labor relations that would have to be a separate investigation and would any of what was um gathered be able to be used for that? [2:08:15] Robert Timberman: Chair Payne, uh, committee member the the audit report we try to write to, uh, speak for itself, the presentation and the report. And so that of course could be used however it needs to be used, whether that's by the families, by the media, by the council, by the administration. But ultimately uh our service is to point out the the findings and the recommendation to improve process within the administration. Um that said, we have to separate anything that is individually identifiable for those reasons. um because this is not a labor relations investigation and so um no in theory there should be no connection. [2:08:54] Member Englehart: Thank you. Um could you identify the contract bargaining agreement language that limits the lateral hires and and that for at some future date? It's reference, but article and section would be helpful. [2:09:10] Robert Timberman: Uh, Chair Payne, I I think that's a good one to add to the follow-up list for MPD. I I don't know that. Um, and quite frankly, I'm kind of curious myself. [2:10:39] Member Englehart: Okay. And then, uh, in appendix F, page 16 of the appendixes, it very clearly states um, you know, that it can be grounds for discipline um, if it's not followed. But that's uh so failure to follow policy. Actually, it's on page 18. I'm sorry. Uh but I do not see that throughout the rest of the policies that have been updated and are in review. And in order to hold my day job, where I'm on leave from right now is I represent state employees under the same law that um is why police federation has collective bargaining. And we have to be clear about consequences of not following these policies. And I'm wondering why it's not throughout. I only see it in the one in the one policy in terms of um failure to follow policy. [2:10:39] Robert Timberman: Uh Cher Pay and committee member, I think that uh is another great followup uh for MPD. Um I agree. I see it on one and I don't see it on all. Uh possibly it is clearly articulated in the contract. Um but I it it makes me wonder why one and not others. So that's a flag. [2:10:39] Member Englehart: Do we know why MPD did not receive or ask for the medical examiner examiner's report until audit asked? [2:10:49] Robert Timberman: Chair Payne and committee member I do not. [2:11:16] Member Englehart: that might be a future follow-up question. And um then just on to Davis Matoui, why do we do we have any more information on why officers stepped away to talk to why couldn't one officer stay in contact with Sachuk um on the April 8th of 24? And why wasn't the 14th um was there a reason given why it wasn't escalated or forwarded? [2:11:45] Robert Timberman: Uh, Chair Payne, Council Member Ang or uh, Committee Member Anglehart, uh, as far as stepping away, the responding officers in that case um, didn't they were not aware of the, um, HRO, they were not aware of the existing warrants um, when they arrived on scene. And, um, when they arrived on scene, it it was an active physical altercation. And so they were uh securing the scene, ensuring that the the two folks that were uh fighting were um were separated um at that time. I would suggest and I am not a police officer, but I would suggest when there's an active fight that um that the individuals would likely normally be detained uh until they're identified. That did not happen in this case. Um, I don't know why. Um, but they also until he retreated back into his home did not know the history that if he goes into his home, he's never coming out. Um, and so I mean I I look at it from two angles and and one is could they have done something differently? Yes. Did they have any idea what they were coming up against? No. So, it it's I don't want to second guessess the individual officers in that case, but I do think that there was an opportunity um and maybe an opportunity to to educate on future cases that this is why it is so important to detain um while you identify. And I there was another part of your question about a specific date. [2:13:13] Member Englehart: Yeah. On the 14th of October with Davis Muri. Why um why was that not escalated or forwarded on the timeline? See the the gun call the 911 gun call on October 14, 2024. Got it. [2:13:34] Alan Courier: Would you like me? [2:13:57] Robert Timberman: Yes. Thank you. [2:14:02] Alan Courier: Sher, this is Alan Courier from Hogan Adams. Thank you, chair, council member. Um I will just repeat uh Mr. Timberman's statement. Um we don't know the reason the individual um patrol officer who responded to that case did not escalate it but our interviews indicated that leadership was not aware of it. So um at the lower level of patrol officers at some point there was an oversight that's why it didn't get escalated. [2:14:42] Elliott Payne: Council member Chuck Ty. [2:14:54] Aisha Chughtai: Thank you. Um Mr. President, I want to start by um expressing a sincere gratitude to uh you, Mr. Auditor, uh your team, and um the the folks at Hogan Adams. Um, you know, I'll speak to this as a as a survivor of domestic violence myself, but you know, every aspect of um of of that type of harm is tragic. And in in these cases or in this case in particular, but really both of these cases um they're they're every aspect equally is tragic, right? to to ask for help so many times and not receive it and for Mr. Muri to uh to pay the price of of being so um so deeply harmed and uh experiencing such violence and um honestly being lucky to be alive um and for for Miss Lucer um that she paid the the ultimate price with her life. Um, and I think I think a part of uh the tragedy of these experiences is that um that the suffering happens in silence and it happens without the light of day. Um, and I want to thank you for helping shed some light into the truth of what happened. Um, that has confirmed really what what the families and loved ones uh and community members of of these individuals have told us all along that they were wronged, that they were harmed, and that it was a failure at a systemic level. Um, thank you. [2:16:41] Aisha Chughtai: um a few questions and I think I'm going to um I don't have my thoughts organized enough to go through each case separately, so we'll have to go back and forth a couple times here, but I want to start with um the officers that you were not able to speak to. I want to just confirm a few things. Um, am I understanding correctly that there are four officers that you were not able to speak to that you would have otherwise um been interested in in doing so? [2:17:12] Robert Timberman: Uh, Chair Pay and committee member, that's correct. [2:17:12] Aisha Chughtai: And of the four, three are on leave and one has separated from the city. [2:17:14] Robert Timberman: Chair Payne, committee member. Yes. [2:17:17] Aisha Chughtai: Okay. Excellent. Thank you. Um, I'll first start with the three that are on leave. Is what is there anything that you are able to tell us about the form of leave as in is this disciplinary leave or is this uh leave that um these officers have a right to through state laws like uh medical leave or whatnot? [2:17:44] Robert Timberman: Um I don't believe I can answer that question. I'm going to defer to the audit committee's uh city attorney representative to let me know if I can answer that question. [2:18:04] Joseph Jensen: Of course, Chair Payne, uh, members of the audit committee, city council, Joseph Jensen, assistant city attorney, uh, through the chair, member Chug Tai, I don't believe it would be appropriate to answer that on the record, but we can look into it. [2:18:35] Aisha Chughtai: Excellent. So, I I I think it would be really I would like to know what what form of leave. So, if there's a way for you to communicate that, um, I I would really like to to receive that information. I I don't need to know the details. I just want to know what form of leave. [2:18:35] Joseph Jensen: Of course. [2:18:35] Aisha Chughtai: Thank you. Um, okay. So, we'll come back to Auditor Timberman. Um, of my understanding is there the the officer that separated from the city was a sergeant who um was assigned Miss Lucer's case. Is that accurate? [2:18:57] Robert Timberman: Uh, Chair Painting, committee member, I can't answer that question. [2:19:02] Aisha Chughtai: Okay. Um can you tell me my so again I'll say my understanding is the that that particular officer who has separated from the city um that they separated from the city approximately one month after the chief's directive um to cooperate with um the city auditor's office um was was issued in that month that passed in Queen. Um, am I understanding correctly that you your office attempted to contact uh that officer to to speak with them? [2:19:41] Robert Timberman: Uh, Chair Paying, committee member, one of the four officers we were unable to speak with. I don't remember in that window that you just described. Uh, I don't remember the exact date of when it occurred, but yes, we reached out to an officer who um gave us a one-s sentence answer that said, "I'm not going to participate." Uh, I do you mind if I elaborate just a little bit on why I can't answer questions? [2:20:09] Aisha Chughtai: Yeah. Yeah, please. [2:20:09] Robert Timberman: Chair Payne, it's really important to the Office of City Auditor to be as transparent as possible. That is something that is a a virtue of our office to help build trust within the community. We like all of us when we have information that we are unable to share because of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, I would be violating the state law if I shared certain information. Um, and so although I would love to share this information, um, I think that some of it, as you've alluded to, is available in other resources. Um, and it's probably in some of the same resources where I learned of it. [2:20:46] Aisha Chughtai: Sounds good. Thank you. I think uh an administrative followup for the police department would be um to understand for the officer that um has since separated certainly um but uh refused to meet with or cooperate with um the city auditor's office as part of this afteraction review. whether the the police department um disciplined that that um that clear uh violation of of a superior officer's um uh directive. So, I'd just like to know if any um if any disciplinary action was was pursued for the officer that that refused following the chief's uh directive. Um okay, this is this is really helpful. Thank you. Um I would I think this is a conversation we have started um in the audit committee this week. But I I think um as part of traditional audits and the way that audits like this are uh are presented to the audit committee and then uh subsequently published. Um, usually they they follow that that same um template that you have outlined here today where you will um describe a a finding or a uh a risk um and how you and some you know some thought logic and and some additional supplementary information as to how you reach that that conclusion. Um and then you'll include a uh a management response and and that's over here too. Um what is can you can you help illuminate for the the two bodies here and for the public what is the mechanism um through which you verify uh the the accuracy or the truthfulness of management response in this case of MPD response. [2:22:49] Robert Timberman: Uh Chair Payne and committee member Chug Tai uh that's a really good question because I didn't get to that with my last response. Um, we do ask for documentation and so like what MPD provided, they provided their response and then they provided a number of uh appendices to evidence their response. We do the exact same thing when we follow up. We we do not we we trust but verify that is a audit uh phrase that is commonly used. [2:23:16] Aisha Chughtai: Thank you. So in that vein, um I I think something that really struck me um in reading this report is um because there the the nature of both of these cases is different. Um that the the findings and recommendations that you provided uh in both cases are are different. um they touch similar themes at times, but one recommendation that came out of both, you know, almost verbatim was the the tone at the top and the breakdown of relationship between the the chief of police here at the city of Minneapolis and the um city or and the Henipin County Attorney. um that that I think is is really compelling as uh the common theme between both of these uh cases in this in this afteraction review. The management response or the MPD response to that uh I think is something along the lines of the chief uh having a willingness or an openness to being in communication with a relationship with uh the the Henipin County Attorney. I would imagine that's the kind of thing that um there there isn't additional verification for. But uh as we were as we were sitting here receiving this information um you know I I reached out to the chief of staff to the um to the county attorney and asked you know if there are uh regular meetings or any type of standing regular communication that is happening between the chief and the county attorney. And um and the chief of staff's response was no, that is not happening right now. And so uh followup that I have for for uh for the police department uh Mr. chair um and and clerks is I would like the police department to um give us some further information as to whether uh whether any regular communication like what is recommended um like weekly emails uh monthly phone calls um whether the that has been pursued uh by the chief and uh what the plan is to um move forward with that type of communication. Um, you know, there these two tragedies happen in part as you have found in in this afteraction review because of the breakdown of communication between the Hanniban County Attorney's Office and the Minneapolis Police Department from the top and then that trickles down. Um and and I find what I find unacceptable right now is is that um all all this time into into this process and yet um no regular communication happens between these two leaders that is that is paramount um to to saving the lives of residents in our city. Um, and clerks, please let me know if you want me to make that more concise and and send that over to you. Um, I think my next question is for um Hogan Adams, actually. Um there are I think very early on in this report on page three there's some mention of uh some um documents from uh the county that you were unable to um obtain like you you were able to receive a lot of documentation through MPD. Um, is there anything you weren't able to receive as part of your review because it was it was not in your jurisdiction to be able to ask for that information from the from the county. [2:27:00] Vana Hogan: Uh, looks like we just lost the chair. Uh, but committee or I guess we've got uh the vice chair and uh committee member Chai. Um, we were ultimately able to see pretty much everything that we wanted to see. Um, we would have loved to have talked to people at the medical examiner's office, but that was outside our jurisdiction, but um, because the police department did ultimately get a copy of the medical examiner's report, that was able to be reviewed by the team. [2:27:39] Aisha Chughtai: Excellent. Thank you very much. Um Mr. Timberman, just a few more questions for you. I I apologize. And um it struck me and I can see from the report and the slide deck that it struck you too uh that the police department did not request um the medical examiner's report until the July of 2025 while you were undergoing the um the afteraction review and uh you asked for that information and learned um from the department that they had yet to ask for uh from the medical examiner. Um I I think that that detail really broke my heart um in in that this this ongoing investigation of of um the death of Allison Lucer was was being discussed publicly and yet the police department had uh failed to request this basic piece of information um which which confirms that the cause of um Miss Lucer's death was the injury to her head. Um, as you were discussing this with as you were discussing this with uh personnel, did you come to understand at all what the rationale was for not asking for this information from the investigative unit? [2:29:06] Robert Timberman: Uh Chair Payne and committee member Chugt Thai. I'm glad you asked that because that level of detail uh is in the report itself and I think that there's some value in sharing that. Um, so our understanding is that on a a DOA case where where there is a a deceased individual and the police or or emergency medical services arrives um that uh when it is believed that it is a natural death, a death caused by drugs um that MPD may not always need to investigate the case. In this case, that transitioned into a murder investigation. Um, and what we were told is even in cases like this, the investigator may not always get the medical examiner's report, which as baffled as you are, I was. Um, I think that there may be no legal requirement for them to do so. There may be no um you know professional standards requirement for them to do so. But it's striking that when there was confusion about cause of death, manner of death, unknowns about manner of death, that through the investigation, through the start of a what would end up being a lengthy audit that it wasn't until nearly two years after her death that MPD themselves had a copy of that. Um, I’m a layman, right? So, maybe they have an answer for that. Um but that being said, um it it certainly provided the evidence necessary to corroborate the fact that information that was shared with the media was inaccurate, that information that was shared with the family was inaccurate, and that the classification or or description of Miss Lucer being a drug addict or dying from a drug overdose was not supported by the Emmys report. Had we not seen the Emmys report, I would have had a lot more questions coming into this meeting. So, I am glad that um certain individuals within the police department fought tooth and nail to get us a copy of that because as Miss Hogan said, we do not have insight into county records. But MPD as the investigating body, as the investigating agency, absolutely has a right to that. and by way of our city charter we then do. Um I think it would have been very problematic had we not been able to verify that. [2:34:48] Robert Timberman: Stafford shortages... (technical gap)... [2:35:41] Aisha Chughtai: Uh, auditor, before I move on. Charles Foss is currently uh in a Minnesota correctional facility and his anticipated release date is somewhere around 2030 I believe. Um are you aware or I'm I would imagine auditors did ask the department about this uh as it relates to their open investigation ongoing investigation into the death of of Miss Lucer. Are you aware if if the police department or any investigator in the department has interviewed uh Mr. Fost to establish something like as basic as his alibi on on in on the days that that um that led up to the death of Miss Lucer? [2:36:18] Robert Timberman: Chair Payne. Uh committee member Chuck Tai. Yes. uh officers, investigators early on did uh in fact um attempt to interview Mr. Foss at least twice um and he invoked his fifth amendment rights both times. [2:36:37] Aisha Chughtai: Understood. Wow. Okay. And then um in Mr. uh Mur's case, this is my last question. Um I think on page 10 of the report there's there's reference to um and I think what you're what you're establishing in the findings that you're presenting in the leadup to this is um what whether a search warrant was needed um for for officers to enter into u Mr. Sach's home um to arrest him when there was a when a warrant was um issued for his arrest. Um, and then I think the report goes on to say that uh obtaining a search warrant to enter a suspect's home is certainly best practice because it reduces the risk of litigation and allows the police department time to assess the safety risks of entering the suspect's home to execute the warrant. It is not unlawful, however, to enter a suspect's home to execute an arrest warrant in certain situations. Um, do you as as you were completing this afteraction review, did you get an understanding as to why the the department did not pursue uh a search warrant to be able to execute here? [2:37:55] Robert Timberman: Uh, Chair Paint and Committee Member uh, Chugt Thai, I I got a real sense after watching many, many interactions on body warn camera that the individual officers responding um, took great effort to find creative solutions to um, to affectuate an arrest. Um, I think that uh the officers also demonstrated that through my observations that they are likely trained very significantly on infringing upon individuals constitutional rights. Um, in addition, I think they are trained very heavily on uh officer and community safety. Um and whether I I agree or not with their decisions. Um, ultimately an individual officer who makes a decision to go into somebody's house to execute an uh an arrest warrant without a search warrant or even um to follow somebody into their home in hot pursuit. the risk is on that individual officer on whether they've violated somebody's constitutional rights and so I can to an extent understand uh some apprehension there. I will say that is why the the rising concern is um lack of escalation in certain cases. Um, I do think that everybody within that particular precinct was well aware of what was happening and they were making efforts um to monitor that home. Um, but I think there was more that likely could have been done. I think legally there was more that could have been done uh when it comes to that, but there's also that fine balance that MPD knew that Mr. saw check was uh a potential harm to himself or to others. Um and that came out when the the SWAT team ultimately did affectuate the arrest. Um there was a lot of conversation um through the media and the community that MPD did nothing for 5 days. I think that is um again not true. I think that it was not shared widely that MPD was monitoring Mr. Sawek's house 24 hours a day. Um, and during that time they were doing their standard risk assessment. I will tell you the SWAT team has procedures, the SWAT team has policies. I it is probably one of the areas within this review that I feel very comfortable saying they've got their stuff together. Um and so the time that they took I truly believe was necessary to assess that risk. So I would say that is the level of risk assessment when you know somebody is violent, when you know somebody has mental health concerns um and it is a a shut in. I I think the level of care that they went or that they had going into executing that arrest warrant and that search warrant was was warranted. Um were there earlier cases where maybe they could have gone in in hot pursuit following him? Yes, probably. Um but again I I am not the trained expert in in police tactics. Um I just know that what I heard from SWAT was was very informative. [2:44:02] Elliott Payne: Thank you, Mr. President. Council member Promisano. [2:44:19] Linea Palmisano: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um first, both of these are such sad and tragic events in our city and I am so sorry to these families. My heart goes out to all of you. Um, most of what I am thinking in this moment is simply a reflection and some clarifying questions from having gone through police audits for many years. Um, what my colleagues know all too well in our day-to-day roles is how often neighborto neighbor and domestic disputes demand enormous amounts of city time. uh that includes our council offices and also at times when things get escalated our police department and for years and years I've inherited some pernitious situations from my predecessor 13 years ago that still are ongoing today. Um I'm going to work to keep my focus and questions directly on the audit since that is the unique opportunity for council members not in audit committee here to have today. We can have more discussion later but um we know quite a lot about Mr. Murray uh because in his because of what has happened to him he's reached outward. He's reached out to all of us. He's reached out to others to get his voice and his story heard. We know quite a bit less about Mr. Sachuk. Um, we know that Mr. Sachuk was a known recluse with severe mental health issues. Um, I think you mentioned in the beginning of your presentation that he was seen as unfit for trial and civily committed a long time ago. Um, I am curious because of the way this presentation opened, were there any calls from Mr. Sache in these incidents or was that outside the bounds of his typical behavior? Um, because from what I've read, and we've all just gotten this report, so I haven't read all of that yet. Um that I'm I'm just curious because these are neighbor these start as neighbor to neighbor situations. [2:46:43] Robert Timberman: Uh Chair Payne, Council Member Palmisano, I do not recall ever hearing of a call that Mr. Sek made to 911. Um I can't say that it's never happened, but I would certainly recall if that were the case. Um, so no, I don't think it was a part of the pattern that this was both neighbors making complaints on each other. [2:47:05] Linea Palmisano: Um, we have a great deal of training in the p in the police department in the past decade or so, maybe longer, for officers on things like interactions with mentally ill individuals. Um, when MPD arrives and finds two people in a physical altercation, um, I think I saw it said Mr. Sawek was bloodied and on his own property. Um that's not a violation of a restraining order by Mr. Sek. Um MPD's rightful first motivation when they arrive is getting these two individuals apart. My understanding was it think I I was just leafing through here was that neighbors had called because there were two men fighting in a front yard. Um, in my own experience of neighbor calls to 911 about mentally ill individuals, in those cases their neighbors living in community, um, MPD handles these mentally ill residents very carefully and very cautiously. Um, and now we have other options like BCR that dispatch can call and ask for support if and when they're not seen as dangerous to themselves, dangerous to other people. Um, Mr. SE certainly was just going to acknowledge that he needed a police response. Um, are there any findings here in your work that would help further policy development in terms of MPD's work in the community with mentally ill individuals? [2:48:37] Robert Timberman: Uh, Chair Payne, Council Member Palmisano, that's a really good question. Um, and I'm I'm gonna let Hogan Adams speak to this to see if it is it's certainly not a a written finding in our report that specifically focuses on that. Um, but I want to also give them an opportunity to share their thoughts on it. Um, I do know in relation to this case, my understanding is that um, the responding officers didn't know Mr. Sawek had um, mental health issues when they arrived. Mhm. Uh they didn't know that until after he had retreated back into his home. Um and so I believe they were responding to a fight in progress or um you know a I I don't even I I wouldn't even say a a neighbor to neighbor fight. They what we read was fight in progress. Um and so when they arrived um Mr. Muri was restraining Mr. saw check. I think the bloodied on his own property, I mean, I've seen or read that as well. Um, but I think that for this particular case, the responding officers wouldn't have known that Mr. Sache was Mr. Sache and that he had mental health issues. Um, if you don't mind, I'd like to to give it to the attorney who specifically reviewed this case, um, because I think they might have some insight onto thoughts related to recommendations for managing uh, folks in the community with mental health issues. [2:50:18] Linea Palmisano: And I do want to say I I don’t think that officers should be in a position to diagnose. Obviously, they can only respond to what they’re seeing when they show up. Thank you. [2:50:31] Alan Courier: And again, I'm Alan Courier. I'm one of the associate attorneys at Hogan Adams, Chair Payne, uh, Council Member Palmisano. Um, with respect to your question, as as Mr. Timberman said, there are no written findings or recommendations related to police response to um, suspects who have or are suspected to have a mental illness. Um I recall from some of our interviews with MPD leadership that um while Mr. Sawax uh suspected mental illness was a factor that affected their risk analysis. Um any of the factors they considered, for example, his history of um violent behavior, including a history of um violent behavior against police. Um the potential that he owned weapons, including knives and a firearm, at least one firearm. um and his um his habit of retreating into the home. All of those were factors that even individually if the other factors weren't present would have made um an arrest operation a high-risisk operation. So I think the part of um our reasoning in not directly addressing any um recommendations related to arresting or interacting with mentally ill suspects is that Mr. Sach's mental illness was not the sole factor that created the obstacle to arresting him. Um, in terms of suggested recommendations um in the Sawac Moti case, I know that there is, um, an embedded social worker in the fifth precinct. Um, and I believe there are embedded social workers in all the MPD precincts that are able to work with um both victims and um suspects and can make contact with suspects who might have mental illness. However, that at this point is um completely voluntary and in this case, I know um Mr. Sache did not want to have any interaction with police and did not want to interact with a an an embedded social worker either. That might have made a difference in this case. Um but that is um unlike involuntary civil commitment interactions with the embedded social worker are voluntary and just had no impact on this case because he didn't want to engage. [2:53:14] Linea Palmisano: It does. Thank you. Thank you. [2:57:11] Elliott Payne: Council Member Warren. [2:57:21] Pearll Warren: Thank you, Chair. Um, auditor, thank you for for your report and I want to um say that my heart truly bleeds for these families and for families who continue to experience um perpetual violence within our communities whose cries go unanswered and and the response is delayed in the urgency of what is happening in our community as a victim and survivor of domestic and sexual violence. I know exactly what this place feels like and it's not a comfortable place. Um, and I just, you know, I'm my heart is saddened and I'm not going to get emotional on this DAS. Um, but I do want to talk about um the audit and the the responses that were made um to these families. I want to start off with the uh case summary for Mr. Muri's case um slide 20 and it states that they moved into their home September of 2023 and then on October 11th, Mr. made a 911 call to report that this individual um was was yelling racial slurs at him and threatened him about a tree. Um it said that that this individual already was the subject of numerous complaints by other neighbors. Okay. So, there was a homeownership exchange, right? You stated in your audit that the previous homeowner had a harassment order against this individual and that the new homeowner was reluctant about obtaining one because the calls went unanswered. You didn't know that somebody else had bought the house and moved into the house and was a a new subject of what was happening. So this property and this individual should already have been on your radar because he was in a dangerous onset to the community. Period. Okay. So when we talk about the 5-day waiting period for him to be arrested after the offense had occurred, it was more than five days. We're talking about multiple years of violence that had perpetuated and haunted this community by this individual. Let's start there. [3:00:57] Pearll Warren: Now I want to look at slide um number 27 finding number two and um slide 29 because they're both on the same page of of information that you've shared with us about this not being assigned to responding officers constantly that's showing up there. It's not being assigned. It's not being assigned. It's not being assigned. it's not being assigned and the negligence of what happens in a pre-brief and debrief when officers change shifts. How does that work? Because when there's a shift change and there's a pre-briefing and a debriefing of what happened in a previous shift for officers that are on duty, then information should be relayed to individuals about what the climate of the community is at that moment. And if there's multiple police calls that are coming in to this address, not only is it reported as a problem property to the city, but it's also reported as a problem property with the police department because they're getting constant calls from that neighborhood from onset of ongoing activity. So the fact that Mtori neglected to file an HRO because of the negligent history and the failure to response by MPD even though they knew the previous history of the former owner and having the previous history of harassment orders that had been implemented in that community from said perpetrator um from neighbors and also victimizing this this community as a whole. MPD had a fidiciary responsibility to that community to immediately escalate what was happening and neglected to do so. So that disheartens me. That makes me extremely sad because this is not foreign behavior. This should not have ever gotten to this point in ever. There's not a reason that that you could tell me that it that it should have ever gotten to this point just based on the history. We got to look at the historical context. Mr. Mouri was a new resident in this space, but the history continued to perpetuate in that same area for an over extended amount of time. So, um that that angers me and I just want to point that out. So, whatever needs to be done to remedy the historical and and include the historical context when you're looking at situations involving victims or victimized neighborhoods or neighbors or community members when they're telling you constantly over and over again there's a problem. We look at the execution of arrest warrants. You were talking about you didn’t want to violate his fourth amendment rights or whatever the situation was. It says the fourth amendment of the United States Constitution pro prohibits law enforcement officers from engaging in unreasonable search and seizure um and states that no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation. You had plenty of affirmations from individuals throughout the community that said that probable cause was in place for a warrant to be issued for you to go up in there because you not only provided a disservice to Mr. Muri, but you also provided a disservice to the perpetrator who was in mental health crisis clearly. Okay. and there was a history of him being civically committed or having whatever, couldn't stand trial in previous cases or whatever. So, the history was there. It was already a known fact. And I think because he was a Caucasian male, it wasn't made an area of priority. And that is what has me Fanny Lou HR tired of it being a drawn line of separatism of where value is placed when you look at predetermining factors of who's making the complaint. So that hurts me to my core. At the same time that that this situation was going on, there were numbers of other issues and complaints that were coming through around that same geographical area about individuals who are in mental health crisis that are terrorizing the neighborhood and nobody does anything about it because they're white males. Because they're white males. And that needs to stop. like I don’t know what ordinance or law needs to be written into whatever but somebody need to get somebody's cousins under control. [3:05:37] Pearll Warren: Next I want to pay attention to finding slide five. Um, slide 57. Finding five, slide 57 and finding um um seven still in in the in the in the case of our our beloved sister uh Miss Allison. Um, I think it’s great that we have these domestic violence nav navigators um working with our our police department, but my question becomes is how bad does domestic violence have to get for it to be taken seriously? Um because in fear, if you’ve ever been a victim of domestic or sexual violence, there is a fear that riddles through your body, through your soul, into your core that makes it difficult for you to tell your truth because in so many ways you blame yourself for the outs that you didn’t take. So it it disheartens me to hear and to see in the findings of these slides that when victims stop responding or participating in investigations that you’re saying that it is difficult to move forward with that investigative con uh process. Here it is. Our beloved sister had multiple calls to the police department and her family also pleaded on her behalf just the same. With that being said, there was full cooperation of people who were reaching out for the safety, health, and welfare for her that could have allowed again the probable cause existed there because there were the community complaints. This 72-hour period of time does not institute the police going on a manh hunt for these individuals. I know because I was assaulted and reassulted within that 72-hour period. Okay? And nobody was out running around searching and looking for them. Okay? They were not looking on a manhunt. They wasn’t going to their mama’s house, they cousin’s house, where they hang out at, and all of these other things in order to get this violent perpetrator off the street. And now this individual is in jail now for a crime that he committed towards somebody else because during that 72-hour period of time, nobody was looking for this individual. So he had the freedom and the liberty to go out there and perpetuate violence on somebody else. Shame. Shame that pains my core. Shame. I am upset because I know what it’s like to be on the other end of that 72 hours. I don’t know what it’s going to take for people to get get this stuff right and and what the the training the whatever the case is. But all of this information is and I thank you for your audit, but it’s it’s disgusting because what it does is it tells on the negligence. It tells on what fell below between the cracks and that there is a lot of work that needs to be done. It’s a lot of work that needs to be done. I’m not saying that it’s going to be fixed overnight, but it saddens me and it hurts me to my core to know that we continue to lose victims. We continue to to to um to to fail our neighbors in this capacity and that cries for help fall on deaf ears, especially when it comes from individuals in black and brown communities. And I I I I just really I really want better. I really want our police department to do better. I just do. I really want there to be a better working relationship between our chief and the county attorney. I don’t know if it’s Mary or whomever it may be, you know, because I know there’s going to be a change of arms. But I’m talking about that relationship needs to be tight as a frog’s bottom. for everything that comes from our investigators who who investigate crimes, who are looking into information of things that happen without our community. They need to be communicating and pushing for the charge of these crimes. They need to be pushing for the warrants with these things because sometimes the victims can’t speak. And just because my voice is silent doesn’t mean that I am invaluable. Just because I’ve been silenced out of fear or out of death does not make me invaluable. It doesn’t. So, you got to do better. You have to do better. I’m speaking to my chief here and Mary Mororti know that I’ve already checked her. She knows that. I really want better for our community and I really really really really truly want the relationships that we are fighting so hard to ensure that they exist within our departments across departmentally to exist and be stronger. whatever that needs to happen because that’s the only way we gonna be able to effectively heal from situations like this. Thank you. [3:11:06] Elliott Payne: Thank you. Um I have council member Whiting in queue. [3:11:29] Soren Stevenson: Well, I don't know. Maybe council member Whiting needs to go as well. [3:11:32] Jamison Whiting: I'm just in queue for uh committee member Williams. [3:11:38] Soren Stevenson: Okay. Well, thank you. Um I got to get to agenda settings soon, so I I gotta leave. Um just a a couple of things. One, we’re talking about uh DOA. We There was just something talking about DOA. Um and you were mentioning overdose deaths and that that wouldn’t be looked into um necessarily as a homicide. um you have no control over this, but I just want to flag that um looking into overdose deaths uh at the with urgency would be extremely valuable for our city and our community. Um and I I think those um those should warrant some kind of investigation whether we’re uh arresting the people who sold them the drugs or the network that got the drugs into their hands. Um, secondly, you mentioned the contract issue of civil servants not being able to be hired at the sergeant level. Um, I just want to flag for everyone here that the next time we have a contract negotiation, this is something we got to fix. We got to be hiring more people in. Um, and you know, you can go into the military, you have a master’s degree, you have a a different degree, you go into the military and you go into the officer level. Um, so yeah, this this is something we got to fix. [3:12:53] Soren Stevenson: Next, um, I was hoping to hear from the chief. What mechanism are you using? Is it monthly emails or monthly meetings with the Henipin County Attorney? [3:13:14] Todderick Barnette: Welcome to uh Todd Barnett, Commissioner of Community Safety, uh through the chair, um Council Member Stevenson. This is something that uh Chief O’Hare and I have been talking about, um over the last couple of days, it’s going to be incumbent upon me to reach out to uh the county attorney, Mary Morardi. have a um relationship uh professional relationship with her prior to coming here uh that I think can be helpful in mending um uh this professional relationship where communication can happen more frequently. I’m not sure um what her thoughts are about how frequent uh the meeting should take place, but um I told Chief O’Hara I thought that um it would be beneficial if I do um the outreach for that. [3:13:59] Soren Stevenson: Okay. That sounds great. I’ll put in my two cents. I think a monthly meeting would be great. I have monthly meetings with people who I disagree with. Um it’s just important to do. Um, next I wanted to ask, maybe this is a legal question. I’m not sure. There is there has been a lot of talk both on this body and in the community that the reason that officers were not able to arrest uh Mr. Sachuk much much earlier is that because of the banning of no knock warrants, they were not allowed to go get him in his home. I just want to clarify. Does anyone I don’t know if the auditor, the attorneys, I don’t know the chief. Does anyone know um was there a a significant legal barrier where it was impossible to to go into Mr. Sachuk’s home? [3:15:03] Robert Timberman: uh Chair Payne, and uh Council Member Stevenson, I don’t know that there was any discussion uh related to no knock warrants in this case. Um, so I would have to defer to MPD on on whether or not that was in consideration. That did not come up to my knowledge in our conversations. We did have conversations generally about no knock warrants. Um, and no knock warrants are very clearly um restricted, regulated. Um, and that is certainly something that is is commonly understood across the MPD. Um, as far as the the last part of your question, I mean, I I really think it it came down to individual officers have to make a decision. Um, and I get a sense that the training is you’re not going to go in there and and potentially violate their Fourth Amendment rights. And I mean, that is again, that is just factual that I’m sharing with you. And it’s not my opinion on whether that’s right or wrong. Um but that is the observation that we made is that um officers seem to rely heavily on not violating Mr. Sache’s Fourth Amendment rights in this case. [3:16:20] Soren Stevenson: Yeah, thank you. Um I’m I’m happy that officers are thinking about uh people’s fourth amendment rights. Um, to me it just seems logical that somebody higher up or they would have instituted some kind of process in order to alleviate Fourth Amendment concerns but also arrest him. Um, it’s my understanding, the reason I I brought this up is because it’s my understanding that there are many ways in order to alleviate those concerns and also arrest him before having shot somebody. Um, and so I I’d just like to hear I don’t know if this we should mark this down for staff followup, but I’ I’d like clarification about uh whether I am correct and B whether that is commonly known in MPD and and what the you know I I just want to know more about this because we need we need people apprehended before uh before they they shoot our neighbors. Um and then I have uh one more question uh and then one well two comments. The first uh when it came to finding 12 in Allison Lucer’s case um I don’t have that in front of me but I was curious uh there it talks about a lack of investigative capacity in MPD. Is this an area where civilian investigators could fill that gap? And do we have either contractual or ordinance issues that would prevent that? [3:17:51] Robert Timberman: Uh, Chain, Council Member Stevenson, that is my understanding is it’s the same issue that we’ve uh discussed already as far as coming into sergeant, lieutenant type of levels. Um, most investigators are sergeants. Uh, and there are lieutenant level investigators as well. Um, and so I do believe it’s the same contractual issue. [3:18:13] Soren Stevenson: Okay. Is there state law that prevents a a civilian investigator from having uh that kind of role? [3:18:18] Robert Timberman: Not to my knowledge, but I don’t know. [3:18:22] Soren Stevenson: Okay. Also flagging that for my colleagues. We should the next time we negotiate a contract deal with this as well. Um, and then two comments. One for many people listening who are uh and feel free to sit down. Um for those who are familiar with uh Techlay Sunberg’s case, comments that were made here would be very frustrating. I hear you. Um and also just a suggestion, a lot of these findings talk about better documentation. Um I’ve have some experience from the medical field where documentation is both a very important thing and also a barrier to seeing more patients. So, I I completely empathize that officers have many things to do and documentation can be um could theoretically uh bog them down. Uh what if we had CSOS act as scribes for officers? That seems I don’t know if they could get uh uh you know, credits in their in their degree for doing that. scribes in the medical field sometimes get that sort of thing. But that seems like an an excellent way of of alleviating documentation concerns while getting really good documents. Um and that’s all for me and um thank you Mr. President. I got to leave. [3:19:40] Elliott Payne: Member Williams. [3:19:44] Member Williams: Uh thank you Chair Payne. Uh Mr. Timman I will make this brief. I know you’ve been here for a while but I just want to get some clarification from an audit lens. um just understanding both uh how we came to some of the recommendations and then the next steps throughout um both of the cases and the recommendation it talked about things like updating procedures lot of references of training um documentation as we just mentioned is that addressing a compliance issue by the officer meaning there’s something there that’s not being followed um is addressing a comprehension issue, meaning that they may or may not understand it, or are we simply saying that there are not a procedure that exists that would have um helped in these situations? [3:20:27] Robert Timberman: Uh, Chair Payton, committee member Williams, that’s a good question. I think it’s all of them. I think that there are instances in these findings where um the officers responding, you know, could benefit from a a refresh on the training and on what the procedures are. Uh one example that comes to mind is is how officers work with victims. Um especially victims of domestic violence. I think officers are heavily trained on personal safety, officer safety, um, and get significantly less training on how to talk to people, how to work with victims. I know that council member Palmazano talked to this that early on in training there’s there’s extensive um, training on this. I don’t think there’s a lot of tabletop exercises, if any, that further that through an officer’s career. Um, and so when it comes to some of the recommendations, it’s certainly training related. It certainly uh could be compliance related, but in many of these cases, it’s it’s just not written into the procedure, and it should be. [3:21:50] Member Williams: And and then as we think about I know we’ve talked about the dates to follow up going forward. Is this part of your office’s continuous review process? So yes, we’ll look when when we have some of these dates at the end of the year, two years, three years. Is this part of your overall scope uh going forward to ensure these are being looked at and adjusted as necessary prior to issues um coming up? [3:22:20] Robert Timberman: uh chair and coun or and committee member. Yes, I might not be understanding your question fully, but they are going to go on to our standard list of findings and recommendations that we track, monitor, and follow up on. Um and so we will regularly be providing the audit committee with updates on these. As far as continuous beyond that even, um I think that it it depends on progress, I would say. [3:22:47] Member Williams: And then my final question and this might be just a nomenclature um situation. We typically when we talk in our audit committee you have a finding and then there is an understanding that what you are then telling the office needs to be done or they’re going to take responsibility for not doing that and any you know any consequences that are associated with that. Are these recommendations um suggestions of of adjustments or are these recommendations an expectation that things are going to change based on what you have documented here? [3:23:20] Robert Timberman: Uh chair and committee member. Uh that is a very good question and it gets into the weeds of what audit is and what audit does. Um recommendations are called recommendations because typically that’s that’s the extent of the leverage that audit has. The city council and the audit committee and the office of city auditor communicate them as expectations. I think it is ingrained within the culture within the city of Minneapolis that audit recommendations are expectations. [3:24:03] Member Williams: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [3:24:03] Aisha Chughtai: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, first I think I’ll note an administrative um followup here from uh the Office of Community Safety and and the Police Department. Um, you know, I just went back and double checked and I remember in early March, March 4th, uh, the police department came before the the committee of the whole to present on the effects of Operation Metro Surge. in that conversation um or in the discussion that day. Uh it was uh brought up by me asking questions um of the of the chief around engagement with the Henipin County Attorney’s Office. And back in early March, the chief mentioned that he would be meeting with the commissioner and they would be proactively engaging uh with the the county attorney’s office. So it it just concerns me that we are here now uh nearly 2 months later and that is still something that is being planned for some unknown date in the future. Um I find that to be quite unacceptable. So, if the um if in the administrative follow-up the police department the the police department and the office of community safety can address what their concrete plans are for engaging with the county attorney’s office and for the chief to be meeting regularly with the county attorney as was uh outlined in this afteraction review for both cases. um as a a as a paramount need to ensure the safety and well-being of our residents and to prevent deaths as tragic as uh Allison Lucer’s that that it is paramount that the chief of police and the county attorney have regular communication. So, please outline exactly what your plans are to engage with the county attorney. And please, for the love of God, let’s not sit here 2 months later with future plans still being considered as to how to reach out to the county attorney who over and over again publicly states to this body and to the media um that that she continues to try to reach out and meet with the chief on a regular basis to uh to Noville. So specify in great detail exactly what your plans are to engage with the county attorney, exactly what you are going to propose about a regular cadence of communication between these two leaders. Thank you. [3:26:09] Aisha Chughtai: Now, uh a follow-up question for for Mr. Timberman. Um earlier uh you were responding to a question about the medical examiner’s report and I think you said something along the lines of uh expressing gratitude for members in the Minneapolis Police Department who I think you used the term fought tooth and nail to ensure um that a part of the afteraction review included examination of the medical examiner’s report. Um, can you please elaborate on that and uh why who who did who did members of the Minneapolis Police Department have to fight tooth and nail to obtain such such a document? [3:26:55] Robert Timberman: Chair and uh committee member, that’s uh thank you for asking for that clarifying question. When I say tooth and nail, sometimes it’s very difficult for us to get documents or information and again we did not have direct purview into um the Henipin County Medical Examiner’s records. We sought to get a copy ourselves. They cited Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. We said, "Yep, we figured." Um, and we followed up with uh the administration of the the Police Department and um, Assistant Chief Blackwell assigned out to an individual to work with the Henipin County Medical Examiner’s Office. um and through through a a circle I think worked also with the Henipin County Attorney’s Office, but we were bothering him daily. And so when I say tooth and nail, it it’s more that we were putting a lot of pressure on him to get it and when he got it, it was like, I got it. I’m excited. So that was a casual comment and I do apologize. [3:28:02] Aisha Chughtai: No, no, it it it’s so helpful to know. I I thought uh yeah, just wasn’t sure what the context was there. Thank you for providing it and doing so in this public forum. [3:28:18] Aisha Chughtai: Thank you, Mr. Chair. [3:28:18] Jamison Whiting: Thank you, Chair Payne. Um just kind of a few quick questions for you. Uh Mr. Timaran, I think specifically as we talk about um the relationship between uh MPD uh and internally here with both the chief and uh internally at at the city kind of apparatus. um their relationship with the Henipin County Attorney’s Office generally. Um I think it might be helpful if you could kind of speak to both if if possible kind of either the breakdown of that relationship and then the the kind of the the repair of of of that harm um between both offices. [3:28:57] Robert Timberman: Uh Chair Payne and Council Member Whiting. Um I want to first say something I haven’t but I believe is in the report and that is at the officer and investigator level and at the uh assistant attorney level and uh staff attorney level. It was shared by both the chief and the county attorney that communication is fantastic. Relationships work well. We heard that from investigators. We heard that from um from a lot of people that we spoke with. So I think it’s important to not categorize a breakdown in relationship across the two offices. Um that said, a breakdown and and when you think about internal controls from a true audit perspective, tone at the top is paramount. It’s the top, right? And when there is lack of communication, collaboration, and even reports in the media of we don’t talk to each other and we don’t like each other. Um it it’s beyond a normal professional working relationship. Um, I think Council Member Chugt Thai said something that I’ve tried to say and that I will uh just reiterate is that uh the the county attorney’s office has tried reaching out. Um I mean that was made very clear to us on a number of occasions. Um, I don’t know other than in our interviews, um, that there has been a breakdown in communication as to what caused that. Um, I can’t speculate. I think those may be even private feelings between those two individuals. Um, but I think that from an audit perspective, I am pleased that they both have demonstrated a willingness to get over it. And I think that for the benefit of the residents of Minneapolis and I think that for the benefits of future victims, it has to happen. [3:31:21] Jamison Whiting: Thank you, Mr. Mr. Chimberman. Yeah, I think it’s it’s it’s helpful to understand, right? It seems like it is a a breakdown both from um kind of on within the MPD and then also um at the Henipin County Attorney’s Office as well. And so I think somebody I think all of us probably sit here on the committee would love to see uh that relationship uh be uh repaired u and and if there are things that we can do to help uh establish and continue that relationship, please um let us know. uh particularly I guess as it relates to kind of a second question here um really kind of from the case summary and the timeline I think I’m I’m having and I will grab just uh particularly on in the case of Davis Muri uh the kind of for was that April 5th 2024 when Henipin County attorney denied the felony charges up uh with the upwards of I think 11 plus calls to 911 on kind of it was that in your findings, Mr. Timberman, was that an evidentiary standard? Was that a a lack within a police report? Like, where are we kind of seeing those misses? Um, for I mean, I would assume it was probably an evidentiary standard, but it looks like it went from not a felony charge, but then was charged at a gross misdemeanor level um from for the city attorney’s office here, Minneapolis. [3:32:45] Robert Timberman: Yeah. uh chair and council member, I think that’s a pretty good speculation. We don’t have a lot of information to share on that. Um typically those decisions are not public information. Um and so I don’t know off the top of my head, but what I do know is that is not public for me to share is those those decisions that are made on not charging. Um, what I can share is I was very pleased that Minneapolis has the structure in place to uh identify that this this charge was not moved forward and so we’re going to do it. [3:33:41] Jamison Whiting: helpful and and I guess in your time both here in the city of Minneapolis and elsewhere um when you see the Henipin County Attorney’s Office as larger prosecutors u and county attorneys broadly in other jurisdictions did those decisions uh charging decisions impact um MPD’s ability or other jurisdictions ability to bring forward uh or I guess willingness and want to um bring forward uh other charges in similar situations with the same uh defendant or I guess the yeah I guess it would be the defendant there. [3:34:25] Robert Timberman: Uh chair Payne, council member, I I think I understand your question and and it’s getting at kind of a cultural um breakdown and and we get into that into the report. But we did see um instances where cases were not charged because of this uh mindset that um it it’s not going to be charged. And what I feel good about in that situation is I’ve heard both from the chief and from the county attorney that strongly said they just they need to file them. I mean, if there’s a crime, you file the charges. And so that is where that trickle down of perception really affects an organization. Um you know your staff attorneys, your assistant um county attorneys, your investigators, they all might get along really well, but if there’s any belief that well they’re just not going to do this, so I’m not going to do this. That’s a cultural problem and that’s a cultural problem that leadership can fix. [3:35:49] Jamison Whiting: Great. Thank you. Uh that was my uh last question and I would just note I think there is a consensus uh probably a unanimous consensus among this body u that there has been a deep failure um both in our our kind of criminal justice system across multiple bodies. Um, and I think it is is our job as council members, as as as committee members, um, to ensure that we continue to to kind of bring um to light the issues and and the kind of systemic issues that we see both here in this report um, and encouraged by um, our our public safety leaders both in Henipin County Attorney’s Office and um, here with MPD uh, acknowledging uh, those failures and and wanting to move forward in a way that um, uh, make sure that we don’t have uh continued uh failures and loss of life due to to that. So, thank you. [3:38:14] Elliott Payne: Member Hosebine. [3:38:14] Member Hosebine: Thank you, Chair Payne. Um more of a wrap-up comment. Maybe I you don’t have to wrap up. People can keep going, but I know we’ve all been here for a long time. And thank you um to everyone that’s here in this public forum for this. I want to just acknowledge that audit is a path. It’s not the only path and there are so many other pieces that need to continue moving forward and I want to thank Mr. Timberman. You’ve been the focus of most of this commentary um from these um this joint session. Um and I want to just appreciate that you aren’t this the the the doer for a lot of these um next steps. So, thank you for being the re the recipient of all of this today. Um, and I would say just as council joined us today in this joint session, if there are um, additional follow-ups on these reports that are happening at council, that’s one thing that I think I personally on the audit committee want to be a part of and see how we can support on audit committee as well. And I think one thing that was I’ I’ve been so um kind of holding on to from Monday’s audit committee meeting is the fact that there’s going to be this amazing new process for tracking stakeholders and really demanding um true followup from the owners of these. So Mr. Tam, you’ve noted like that audit has a certain set of responsibilities and this report is a lot of that. you also are taking on that enterprise risk management that the city does not have right now and we I want to thank you for doing that because that is above and beyond the scope of the charter and I am grateful that we have this charter and this audit committee to do that but without that higher level um enterprise risk management that’s where these things would go we talked about escalation we talk about what happens next we don’t have that yet so that’s just want to keep that for this full body at top and I would say as um I know there are a lot of things that are being sent to staff. Um I think we can look in June and at other meetings for the audit committee of what really the recommendations mean. There wasn't time to dig into each of those today. Um but I’m really grateful for the airing of all this and the public’s attendance and almost four hours in still being here. Um this is really important and um I look forward to the committee and um council finding the right places for these within the city. [3:40:44] Aisha Chughtai: Mr. President, one more administrative followup for for the clerks. um given the cause of death identified in the Henipin County Medical Examiner’s uh report um of the death of Miss Allison Lucer. Um is the case is the investigation that that is um still ongoing within the police department um being uh investigated as a homicide? That’s all. Thank you. [3:41:23] Elliott Payne: Thank you. And seeing no one else left in queue, I just again I want to thank Mr. Timberman for leading this really challenging work. And again, you took this on on your like literal first day on the job. Um, and I want to thank all of the family members and advocates who brought us here. So with that uh we’ve completed our business today and with nothing further to come before this meeting without objection both the meeting of the audit committee and the city council are hereby adjourned.