Transcript We’re now live. Thank you for joining us today for our discipline matrix ad hoc committee meeting. The time is 6:0:2. We have our chair, Ricardo Garcia Costa, who is in transit. We have our captain Bridal Hubbard, and we have deacon Reginald Lyles. Let me see if there’s anyone else in the audience that we should acknowledge. We have 1 participant from our from the public, miss Bridal. Welcome. And, we’re going to get started. I’m gonna turn it over to captain Hubbard. Alright. Thank you. Hello, everyone. I we’re gonna start with, like, we left off last week talking about custody of prisoners, and I’m sure that will take up most of our time this evening. But I do wanna go back to 38470. If you can see my screen here, subversive organizations. I made some changes to it. I’ll read it again. No member employee shall knowingly join, affiliate with, or support any organization, group, or gang involved in illegal activities, or designated as subversive by a competent authority within the Oakland Police Department, including the chief of police, CPRA, or an authorized designee. Such groups include, but are not limited to, organizations that seek to undermine, disrupt, or overthrow any form of lawful authority, whether that authority be vested in federal, state, or municipal government, city councils, or or other recognized lows local governing bodies or laws and regulations legitimately established under the jurisdictions of California, the United States, or other lawfully constituted entities. Additionally, any organization engaging in illegal acts against public order and safety may be considered subversive. The designation of a subversive organization will be based on a preponderance of evidence demonstrating that the organization actively participates in activities intended to undermine, disrupt, or overthrow such lawful authority or commit illegal acts against the public welfare, Membership or affiliation for any purpose related to advancing lawful objectives is strictly prohibited, except when such involvement is essential for official duties supported by a lawful investigative purpose and authorized in writing by the chief of police or a designated official. A long 1 there. The main change here is right in the middle. It was requested last week that we expand on what lawful authority is. That 1 is subversive against and included federal, state, municipal, city, local laws, California, United States, etcetera. And, as I stated last week, California Post, you’ll see it here on the side. They have government codes that govern them. It doesn’t explicitly address affiliations with subversive organizations. But it does talk about being in good moral standing. So 1, assumably, would not be hired if they’re part of a subversive organization because that would not be considered in good standing. Questions on that section? Excellent. I I definitely appreciate the the hack at this. This is pretty, pretty layered. The 1 thing that’s kinda standing up to me is the area in the first paragraph at the end, the bolded area where it says designated as the the mercifully competent authority within the Oakland Police Department. Can we also the way it’s written right there, I have no problem with that. But in terms of law enforcement, can we also expand it to, like, any other kind of, like, law enforcement, you know, folks that are not whether it be, like, an FBI or federal agent. I mean, there might be, like, a submersive gang that’s in a database with the FBI that’s been located, but maybe OPD doesn’t have it on their radar yet or something. You know? Sure. Yeah. I mean, that that would be the only thing I would add on that, but that I like that. That that looks pretty good. But that probably won’t be my final I’ll write that better, other law enforcement IDs to include, maybe. Okay? Like, you know, DOJ, all that type of stuff, Ryan. Yeah. Okay. Alright. Well, if if an organization decided to to, to have a march and demonstrate against, let’s say, the Oakland Police Department for what they thought was some unfair practice or some decision made by some court or whatever, and they marched in the streets. Let’s say, like, it was the NAACP. That would be a legal act marching in the street. Could they be considered subversive? What is what are what is their I think if if it’s not illegal against public order or safety, I would say no. Well, you know, every demonstration that happened in the past was an illegal act. Every 1 of them. Either they had them trespassing, or, they were didn’t have a permit to march in the street or not. So what they were doing was illegal. There’s no question about that. And, so, you know, I you know, some of us may be so young that we don’t remember those days that we think we take for granted that, someone or a group exercising their, free speech and demonstrate it, I just don’t want them to be considered as being subversive. See, I thought the Suburbs Act was not against overthrow of lawful authorities. I thought being subversive was was overthrowing governments in cities, municipalities. You know, you know, I think you ought to have a right to be able to demonstrate against the police. If the police have done anything, as long as it’s peaceful, and you ought to be able to come out in the street and protest, for whatever reason you wanna protest. But if you’re out protesting, then you then now we say, hey. You’re a subversive organization. I thought subversive means overthrowing a government. And it seems like it’s blended here in my reading of it is, you know, just, being disruptive against the lawful authority. Well, as a police officer, I’m a lawful authority, And and people have a right to demonstrate against, the the police. Or maybe you think they don’t. So it appears that we’re hung up on seek to undermine or disrupt, if it just says overthrow. Is that Yeah. I don’t I don’t see I don’t I I think you ought to be able to disrupt. I think that’s free speech. I think that’s first amendment stuff. And, but I’m not trying to overthrow the government. I just think that the the police are acting in a way that I wish they did not act. But I don’t wanna destroy the government. I’m not subversive. I’m I’m a citizen exercising my first amendment rights. I don’t think there’s a disagreement on the citizen side. I think this speaks to membership like the officers. So do we want officers doing that? And if I’m if I’m hearing correctly, I’m a say okay. Go ahead. Go ahead. Okay. No. No. No. You go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. Okay. I yeah. Gotcha. An officer, an Oakland police officer, right, who’s off duty and demonstrated against a agency in Modesto that did something that was untoward. Can can we now say that this officer’s, is subversive? I don’t think he is. And I think he has a right to demonstrate if if he’s protest protesting against, you know, against, you know, spilling of oil in the bay or, environmental issues or fresh air, are you saying that if an officer does any of those things, they’re subversive? I don’t think they’re subversive. They I think they’re demonstrating, and I think they have a right to do that under the first amendment. And, so I think disrupting is, is a little too goes a little too far. Yeah. So as long oh, I’m sorry. Go ahead. That’s my I’m I’m I’m done. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. And then and along those same lines, I also agree with you. Like, where does like, a slippery slope. Like, where do we draw the line, or where do you go from, like, exercising free speech or the right to gather legally, right, to now you’re becoming submersive. Now you’re disrupting public order. Right? I mean, what if you had a peaceful protest and now folks end up breaking property and disrupting the bridge and shutting down the street? Now they’re doing illegal activity. Could that be interpreted as now you’re being submersive to, like, government order and law? Right? I don’t think you’d be I I think it’s wrong I think you’re right. To deem a police officer off duty exercising his first amendment rights. And and and for that person to be deemed subversive. I thought this this subversive would be being part of a group, you know, criminal enterprise, you know, some some gang that is making, you know, illegal activity or some group that wants to overthrow the government Yeah. Or overthrow law enforcement. I have a problem with that. Yeah. Like January 6th. Like January 6th. Thank you very much. That At what point at what point, captain Hubbard, just kind of on a side note, just I’m trying to just process stuff. If if a cop is just out exercising their free speech, you know, the example Dekelau said, like, let’s say, like, an oil spill in the bay and there’s, like, a group that’s protesting a oil company or, you know, has nothing to do with, like, law enforcement issues or anything like that. Right? And they’re out there exercising their speech. And then at some point, let’s say and and, again, I’m not saying I’m not suggesting that this is subversive, but just on a side note, in terms of just, like, illegal behavior, like, let’s say a group starts splintering off, breaking property, disrupting traffic, doing things that are basically, could be classified as, you know, you get cited for or arrested for. Right? At what point, not suggesting that it’s subversive, but at what point is an officer like, okay. Maybe I need to walk away from this situation because if I get photographs next to a person breaking glass, they identify me as OPD. This could now be a negative reflection or bridal real repute to the organization. Like, is there a point now that you have responsibility as an officer that, like, there’s laws being broken around you that you kind of, like, step away from that?...
