REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION (CPRC) FRIDAY, MARCH 20, 2026, 3:00 PM AUSTIN CITY HALL, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, ROOM 1101 301 WEST 2ND STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701 The Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, please call or email Ryan Alvarez at 512-974-9090 or Ryan.Alvarez@austintexas.gov. CURRENT COMMISSIONERS: Carlos Alfonso Greaves, Chair Ruben DeLaPaz Terry Flood Christopher Harris Lee Peterman Celesta Williams AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL Laura Cortes Franco, Vice Chair Darrick Eugene Marissa Johnson Lauren Pena Kathryn Russell Speakers who sign up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approval of the minutes of the Community Police Review Commission regular-called meeting of February 27, 2026. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. 3. Staff briefing regarding progress of work with the Police Technology Unit on an internal drive for the CPRC to access case files. Staff briefing regarding updates related to Austin Police Oversight, including an overview and key highlights; administrative and operational updates; commission support and follow-up; community engagement; policy highlights; and upcoming items and priorities from Director Gail McCant. DISCUSSION ITEMS 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. interactions with federal Discussion of how the Community Police Review Commission could participate in public outreach events conducted by Austin Police Oversight (APO). Discussion of a recommendation to the Austin Police Department (APD) to create a public immigration authorities for public dashboard of all APD transparency. Discussion of Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) requirements for CPRC commissioners and use of a shared drive for case review. Discussion of CPRC Workflow and any potential changes to the process. Discussion of Commissioner Review Working Groups A, B, and C’s progress, experience, & recommendation templates. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. For assistance, please contact the Liaison or TTY users’ route through 711. A person may request language access accommodations no …
Community Police Review Commission – Meeting Minutes Friday, February 27, 2026 COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION (CPRC) REGULAR CALLED MEETING MINUTES FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2026 The Community Police Review Commission convened for a regular-called meeting on Friday, February 27, 2026, at 3:00 PM at Austin City Hall, Council Chambers (1001), located at 301 West 2nd Street, Austin, Texas 78701. Carlos Greaves, Chair, called the Community Police Review Commission meeting to order at 3:02 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Carlos Greaves, Chair Ruben De La Paz Darrick Eugene Terry Flood Lee Peterman Kathy Russell Commissioners Absent: Laura Cortes Franco, Vice Chair Christopher Harris Lauren Peña PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL Peter Hunt spoke about a January 5 incident in South Austin in which APD officers responding to a disturbance reportedly identified an ICE administrative warrant for a woman at the scene and referred her to ICE, after which she was taken into custody and deported. He suggested the CPRC consider conducting a community review of the interaction to determine whether proper procedures were followed and noted that a formal complaint may not be possible since the individual involved is no longer in the country. He also raised broader concerns about APD policies related to administrative warrants. Judy Bradford presented testimony on behalf of a community member identified as “MTL,” describing a racially motivated attack near her home that was not reported to police due to fear and distrust of law enforcement. Ms. Bradford stated that this fear may discourage residents from reporting crimes and asked the Commission to review claims that officers may not always distinguish between judicial and administrative warrants. Ian McAdams spoke about concerns regarding cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. He stated that local police do not have independent authority to 1 Community Police Review Commission – Meeting Minutes Friday, February 27, 2026 detain individuals solely for civil immigration violations and raised concerns that such actions could present constitutional issues. Mr. McAdams encouraged greater transparency regarding any operational or financial impacts related to coordination between local law enforcement and federal immigration agencies. Jim Crosby read testimony from a community member named “Donna” regarding a September 2024 traffic accident after which she was reportedly arrested, taken to jail, and later placed on an immigration hold. The testimony stated she remained detained for several months and experienced significant personal and family hardship, raising concerns about the arrest and detention process. Chanda …
Community Police Review Commission – Meeting Minutes Friday, February 27, 2026 COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION (CPRC) REGULAR CALLED MEETING MINUTES FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2026 The Community Police Review Commission convened for a regular-called meeting on Friday, February 27, 2026, at 3:00 p.m. at Austin City Hall, Council Chambers (1001), located at 301 West 2nd Street, Austin, Texas 78701. Carlos Greaves, Chair, called the Community Police Review Commission meeting to order at 3:02 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Carlos Greaves, Chair Ruben De La Paz Darrick Eugene Terry Flood Lee Peterman Kathy Russell Commissioners Absent: Laura Cortes Franco, Vice Chair Christopher Harris Lauren Peña PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL Peter Hunt spoke about a January 5 incident in South Austin in which APD officers responding to a disturbance reportedly identified an ICE administrative warrant for a woman at the scene and referred her to ICE, after which she was taken into custody and deported. He suggested the CPRC consider conducting a community review of the interaction to determine whether proper procedures were followed and noted that a formal complaint may not be possible since the individual involved is no longer in the country. He also raised broader concerns about APD policies related to administrative warrants. Judy Bradford presented testimony on behalf of a community member identified as “MTL,” describing a racially motivated attack near her home that was not reported to police due to fear and distrust of law enforcement. Ms. Bradford stated that this fear may discourage residents from reporting crimes and asked the Commission to review claims that officers may not always distinguish between judicial and administrative warrants. Ian McAdams spoke about concerns regarding cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. He stated that local police do not have independent authority to 1 Community Police Review Commission – Meeting Minutes Friday, February 27, 2026 detain individuals solely for civil immigration violations and raised concerns that such actions could present constitutional issues. Mr. McAdams encouraged greater transparency regarding any operational or financial impacts related to coordination between local law enforcement and federal immigration agencies. Jim Crosby read testimony from a community member named “Donna” regarding a September 2024 traffic accident after which she was reportedly arrested, taken to jail, and later placed on an immigration hold. The testimony stated she remained detained for several months and experienced significant personal and family hardship, raising concerns about the arrest and detention process. Chanda …
Review Structure & Workflow: Operational Review Pipeline Step 1: Simultaneous Transfer of IA Cases • All completed IA-reviewed cases that are forwarded to OPO will also be transmitted concurrently to CPRC. (§ 2-15-3 D.1) • CPRC will receive access to case summaries, timelines, and investigative status for every case to assess the effectiveness of the OPO and suggest improvements (§ 2-15-3 D.6) Step 2: Preliminary Assessment by Working Group • The Case Review Working Group will identify priority level of cases as: “high”, “medium”, or “low” based on: • Cases approaching the 12-month statute of review limitation • High-visibility or community-sensitive cases • Cases undergoing active adjudication or requiring rapid analysis • CPRC will track review timeliness, case aging trends, and disposition equity to evaluate impact. • • Every Monday a batch of up to 10 identified cases will be submitted to the CPRC Identified cases will be submitted to Chair and Vice-Chair Chair and Vice-Chair. • Within 48 hours, these cases will be assigned and accessible to the full commission staff for formal review, preparation, and deliberation. Step 3: Full Commission Review • CPRC will review no more than 25 cases per month • If a Commission Review Working Group does not meet a consensus on any given case then another Commission Review Working Group will also review it until a consensus is met based on the majority. Community Police Review Commission (CPRC) 2025 Case Review Working Group PURPOSE: CPRC Working Group Establish Case Review Working Group composed of 3 to 5 CPRC to complete a preliminary review and priority identi�ication of cases as “high”, “medium”, or “low” submitted to the Chair & Vice- Chair every Monday for 48-hour full commission review assignments. 1 Community Police Review Commission (CPRC) 2025 Commission Review PURPOSE: CPRC Working Group Establish Working Groups to fully review the cases as identi�ied by the Case Review Working group. Each commissioner will serve in at least 1 Commission Review Working Group with a minimum of 3 commissioners per group. If a Working Group does not meet a consensus on a recommended course of action after reviewing a case, then the case will also be reviewed by the remaining groups until a consensus is reached. 1
