Microsoft Word - Oceanside Justice Package 2020.docx -

Please enable JavaScript to view the full PDF

OCEANSIDE JUSTICE PACKAGE 2020 The following recommendations set in the Oceanside Justice Package 2020 request that the City of Oceanside: 1) Modify OPD's policies and procedures to satisfy the 8 Can't Wait Model - OPD's current policies and procedures as advertised on OPD's social media platforms and website on June 5th, 2020, are not sufficient to satisfy the policy standards set by the 8 Can't Wait campaign. 2) Establish an independent, transparent, and funded Citizens Review Board to oversee incidents of police misconduct and use of excessive force - As recommended by the San Diego County Grand Jury on May 25th, 2016, and supported data. 3) Create a Race and Equity Commission for Oceanside - The City of Oceanside acknowledges that the history of discrimination in the United States of America continues to affect the privilege and/or lack of opportunity for people in the City. - The City of Oceanside acknowledges that equity occurs when differences such as race, ethnicity, religion, gender, economic status, sexual orientation/gender identification, veteran status, marital status, language, age, disability, etc. do not determine a person’s economic, social, or political access. 1 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 Oceanside Justice Coalition Analysis and Recommendations to the Oceanside Police Department, City Manager, and City Council July 2020 8 Can't Wait Campaign's Oceanside Police Department’s Recommended Policy and Procedures on the Ban Current Policy and Procedures on the Ban of of Chokeholds and Strangleholds Chokeholds and Strangleholds “Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds “Volume I, Section 501.05 Use of Force Prohibited. The use of force is not authorized under the following Neck holds are prohibited. Law enforcement officers circumstances: shall not use chokeholds, strangleholds, lateral vascular neck restraints, carotid restraints, chest a) The use of the arm-bar restraint, or any other compressions, or any other tactics that restrict oxygen hold that intentionally brings pressure against or blood flow to the head or neck. the trachea or windpipe of a person. b) The use of the Carotid Restraint. This is a complete ban on this use of force, regardless c) For purposes of punishment. of the situation.” d) For purposes of obtaining a confession, admission, or similar statement or assistance. e) If it exceeds a level of intensity reasonably necessary to accomplish the purpose for which it is approved. f) If it continues beyond the point where resistance or aggressive action has been overcome, or where further force is no longer reasonably necessary. g) If used to accomplish a purpose beyond the authority of the involved member.” Oceanside Justice Coalition Analysis: OPD's language is unclear and ambiguous. If the holds listed under items (a) and (b) are completely banned, then why do items (c) - (g) outline particular situations and/or conditions in which use of chokeholds are also not acceptable? It implies that there are some situations and/or conditions that the holds are acceptable, as long as (c) - (g) don’t apply. This creates ambiguity and provides exceptions to the rule. These exceptions further the problem as they can be used as interpretive elements to justify the use of such force. Therefore, if this is a complete ban, as recommended by 8 Can’t Wait, then the policy should be clear and definitive. OPD's policy should be unambiguous to the public similar to the language listed above in the 8 Can’t Wait Model, which clearly states it is a complete ban on this use of force, regardless of the situation. 2 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 8 Can't Wait Campaign's Oceanside Police Department’s Requirement of De-escalation Requirement of De-escalation: AB-392 Prior to using physical, non-deadly and/or deadly i. UOF conducted with respect for human force, all law enforcement officers must use proper rights, dignity and sanctity of human life. de-escalation techniques to decrease the likelihood that law enforcement officers will resort to force and ii. Deadly force used only when necessary in to increase the likelihood of cooperation between law defense of human life. Evaluate each situation enforcement officers and members of the public and use other available resources and [SFPD Policy, NOPD Policy]. techniques if reasonably safe and feasible Law enforcement officers shall employ effective communication techniques to engage with individuals iii. Decision to use force evaluated carefully and who are not compliant with orders by establishing thoroughly rapport, using the appropriate voice intonation, asking questions, and providing advice to defuse iv. Decision to use force made based on totality conflict and achieve voluntary compliance before of circumstances known or perceived by resorting to force options [SFPD Policy]. officer at the time without benefit of hindsight i. Where feasible, all law enforcement officers v. Recognition that individuals with physical, must determine whether an individual’s mental health, developmental or intellectual failure to comply with an order is the result of disabilities may affect their ability to one of the following factors [Seattle PD understand or comply with officers’ Policy]: (Medical conditions, mental commands impairment, developmental disability, physical limitation, language barrier, drug vi. Use objectively reasonable force to effect interaction, behavioral crisis, and other factors arrest, prevent escape or overcome resistance beyond the individuals control). ii. After evaluating whether the individual’s failure to comply with an order is based on one of the factor’s listed above, the law enforcement officer must then determine whether physical force and what level of physical force, is necessary and appropriate to resolve the situation in a safe manner. iii. Under no circumstances may a law enforcement officer use force on an individual for insolence, or for running away where the individual does not pose a current, active, and immediate threat to the safety of bystanders, other law enforcement officers, or the primary law enforcement officer. [Settlement Agreement between the U.S. DOJ and Cleveland PD] Oceanside Justice Coalition Analysis: OPD's policy does not provide a description or explanation of its definition of de-escalation. The 8 Can't Wait model clearly establishes the practices that are involved with de-escalation. The 8 Can't Wait Model provides a succinct list of de-escalation tactics that an officer should employ before resorting to force, 3 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 which enforces accountability and efficient reporting. By utilizing the 8 Can't Wait model, an officer will have to report whether or not they employed the listed de-escalation techniques before resorting to violence. Therefore, OPD should adopt a version of the yellow highlighted paragraph of the 8 Can't Wait model for the purposes of establishing exactly what de-escalation entails and the expectations that an officer should uphold before resorting to force. A second issue is that OPD's policy omits any form of language that suffices to meet the last paragraph in the 8 Can't Wait model (green highlighted). OPD policy lacks the green highlighted paragraph which further demonstrates OPD’s ambiguity by having specific language that prohibits use of force under particular situations and/or conditions. The primary objective of utilizing de-escalation tactics and adopting the 8 Can't Wait model is to avert use of force incidents in preventable situations. Thus, the use of force on an individual who is perceived by an officer as being disrespectful and/or who does not pose a threat should never be tolerated because it is a preventative situation that can be mitigated by employing the de-escalation tactics listed in the 8 Can't Wait model. By adopting the green highlighted language, OPD will have a clear stance on when use of force is prohibited. Hence, use of force should only be utilized after the listed de-escalation tactics have been employed. 4 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 8 Can’t Wait Campaign’s Oceanside Police Department’s Current Requirement of Warning Before Shooting Requirement of Warning Before Shooting The law enforcement officer shall issue a verbal Section 515.01 When a Police Officer May Use warning, when feasible, and have a reasonable basis Deadly Force. for believing that the warning was heard and understood by the individual to whom the warning is When the officer reasonably believes, based on the directed prior to using deadly force against the totality of the circumstances, that such force is individual. necessary for the following reasons: a. To defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person. b. To apprehend a fleeing person for any felony that threatened or resulted in death or serious bodily injury, if the officer reasonably believes the person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless immediately apprehended. c. When feasible the officer shall, prior to the use of deadly force, make reasonable efforts to identify themselves as a peace officer and to warn that deadly force may be used, unless the officer has objectively reasonable grounds to believe the suspect is aware of those facts. d. Officers shall not use deadly force against a person based on the danger that person poses to themselves, if the person does not pose an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person. Oceanside Justice Coalition Analysis: OPD's policy provides exceptions not found in the 8 Can't Wait model to the requirement of warning before shooting. OPD's policy utilizes the blue highlighted exception, "unless the officer has objectively reasonable grounds to believe the suspect is aware of those facts." The 8 Can’t Wait model does not have any such exception to the requirement of warning before shooting. OPD’s inclusion of the language of exceptions (“unless the officer…”) allows various elements of interpretations of what an officer deems objectively reasonable grounds. This would allow officers the opportunity and discretion to always state and claim that it was objectively reasonable that a suspect was aware that deadly force might be used on them. The requirement of officers to document how they came to the conclusion of the individual’s awareness is not explicit, leaving ambiguity, and furthers the problem of interpretation to justify the use of deadly force. Transparency is critical in officer related shooting incidents. When such incidents should occur, the “unless the officer…” portions in the OPD policy highly increase the probability of non-transparency, inevitably leading to distrust issues with the community. Moreover, the “unless the officer…” portions in the OPD policy allow for exactly the kind of individual officer discretion, and broad coverage under the law, that the 8 Can’t Wait model was structured to eliminate. Therefore, OPD's current policy will not suffice the 8 Can't Wait model on this matter unless the blue highlighted portions of the OPD policy are removed. 5 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 8 Can’t Wait’s Recommendation of Oceanside Police Department’s Current Policy on Exhausting All Means Before Shooting Exhausting All Means Before Shooting Require officers to exhaust all other alternatives, Volume I, Section 120.04 Use of Force including non-force and less lethal options, prior to An officer's use of force shall be in accordance with resorting to deadly force. To further the aim of law and established Department procedures. The minimal reliance on force, all law enforcement officer shall not use more force than is reasonable officers must carry on their person at all times at least under the circumstances. one less-lethal weapon. [Seattle PD policy] Volume I, Section 501.01 It is general policy of the Department that police officers and others acting under the authority of the Department are authorized to use only that degree of force which, based on the totality of the circumstances, is appears reasonably necessary to accomplish a legitimate and legal purpose. The use of any force is governed by the Department’s policy and procedure as it relates to a specific force option. The use of deadly force is authorized only when exercised in accordance with the provisions of the Department Firearms and Shooting Policy The use of the police baton is authorized only when exercised in accordance with the provisions of the Department Baton Policy. AB-392 i. UOF conducted with respect for human rights, dignity and sanctity of human life ii. Deadly force used only when necessary in defense of human life. Evaluate each situation and use other available resources and techniques if reasonably safe and feasible iii. Decision to use force evaluated carefully and thoroughly iv. Decision to use force made based on totality of circumstances known or perceived by officer at the time without benefit of hindsight v. Recognition that individuals with physical, mental health, developmental or intellectual disabilities may affect their ability to understand or comply with officers’ commands vi. Use objectively reasonable force to effect arrest, prevent escape or overcome resistance Oceanside Justice Coalition Analysis: OPD's policy does not state in any manner for the purposes of exhausting all other alternatives, “all law enforcement officers must carry on their person at all times at least one less-lethal weapon." [Seattle PD policy]. 6 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 The 8 Can't Wait model utilizes deliberate vocabulary such as, "must," "all," and "at all times," when establishing the requirement that officers carry on their person at least one less-lethal weapon. There have been cases where an officer only had their gun on their person, and no less lethal option was available for them to use. If their firearm is the only weapon on them, officers can state they were justified in using it. Thus, it is unlikely that an officer would effectively be able to exhaust all other alternatives, unless they were always expected and required to "carry on their person at all times at least one less-lethal weapon." Therefore, OPD needs to adopt the requirement that "all law enforcement officers must carry on their person at all times at least one less-lethal weapon." Without the addition of similar vocabulary inserted into the OPD policy, it will fail to suffice the 8 Can't Wait model. 8 Can’t Wait Campaign’s Oceanside Police Department’s Duty to Intervene Duty to Intervene All law enforcement officers must intervene when Volume I, Section 115.02 Duty to Report Misconduct they reasonably believe that a law enforcement officer is using or is about to use unnecessary or i. Members, who become aware of possible excessive force in violation of this mission and must misconduct by another member, shall report the incident to a supervisor. Failure to report immediately notify a supervisor. Any incidents involving the use of unnecessary or member who observes serious excessive force will result in disciplinary action. misconduct shall take appropriate [SFPD Policy] action to cause the misconduct to immediately cease. The fact that a Additional Duties: supervisor is present and not taking i. All members shall render and, if immediate action to stop the necessary, call for medical assistance and misconduct does not relieve other other aid to anyone in police custody who members present from this obligation. the members know, or has reason to Experience, rank or tenure are not factors know, is injured, and to anyone who in knowing the difference between right complains of injury. and wrong, and do not provide an excuse ii. The Police Department recognizes that for failing to take appropriate action. through early intervention it may be Although supervisors are responsible for possible to avoid the use of excessive investigating allegations of misconduct, force and prevent harm to the community. all department members are responsible In this effort, the Department will for preventing, in so far as they are able, implement early intervention systems to and reporting misconduct. The identify members who are at risk for responsibility to report misconduct begins engaging in the use of excessive force the moment the person becomes a and/ or other misconduct and to provide member of the Oceanside Police those members with retraining and Department. appropriate behavioral interventions, re- assignments or other appropriate consequences to eliminate that risk. Oceanside Justice Coalition Analysis: OPD's policy does not define the standard of "serious misconduct" or "appropriate action," it does not provide disciplinary measures for failure to intervene or report misconduct, and it is lenient in reporting standards. 7 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 The use of “serious" and “appropriate action” without defining the standards provides officers with an interpretive approach. There is a significant amount of leeway and flexibility as to when and how they may choose to intervene to stop misconduct they are witnessing. The term “serious” is very subjective and permits the opportunity for an officer to claim the misconduct wasn’t “serious” as a defense for failing to act. The 8 Can't Wait model states that officer intervention is necessary when an officer reasonably believes another officer is using or about to use unnecessary or excessive force. Thus, it is based on a reasonable standard. Officers understand this standard because it is the same standard utilized for stopping and briefly detaining a person on the streets, which is conducted on a routinely basis. OPD's policy also fails to state what procedures are deemed "appropriate action." Complying police departments of the 8 Can't Wait model, have used the following language to describe intervention procedures, "an officer shall immediately take reasonable action to attempt to mitigate such use of force. This may include verbal intervention or, if appropriate, physical intervention." OPD's policy does not comply with the 8 Can't Wait model because it fails to provide disciplinary actions for failure to intervene or report misconduct. The duty and responsibility to intervene and report misconduct carries little weight, if any at all, if the duty and responsibility is not supported by disciplinary actions for failure to do so. An officer involved in any such incident that fails to intervene or report misconduct is negligent in practice and a contributor to injury. In personal injury law, the elements of negligence are duty, breach of duty, actual and proximate cause, and damages. Thus, an officer's failure to intervene and/or report misconduct meets these elements. It is only appropriate that an officer is reprimanded for their negligence. Complying departments of the 8 Can't Wait model, have used the following standards in disciplinary measures, "Failure to report incidents of excessive or unnecessary force will result in disciplinary action, up to termination" and/or "failure to act may potentially expose an officer to criminal charges and/or civil liability." OPD's reporting standards provides too much flexibility. Hence, all members who witness misconduct or possible misconduct of another member shall immediately notify a supervisor in writing. One member shall not report misconduct or possible misconduct for others; each member shall be individually obligated to make their own report to a supervisor. In addition, making all members obligated to report the misconduct prevents any member from claiming they thought or assumed someone else reported the misconduct (this rationale is often used as justification for why they failed to say anything). Lastly, all misconduct or possible misconduct conduct shall be reported to a supervisor in writing within 24 hours of the incident. OPD currently does not provide this timeframe in their written policy. Without these obligations in place, the current OPD policy allows the possibility to notify a supervisor with the possibility of no documentation ever resulting. Thus, every notification as well as reports should be in writing. Therefore, OPD cannot state that the department's current polices meet the standards of the 8 Can't Wait model until it modifies the standards for duty to intervene and enumerate intervening procedures. OPD policy also needs to provide disciplinary actions for failure to intervene and/or report misconduct and obligate all witnessing members to provide written notifications and reports of misconduct to supervisors within a required timeframe such as 24 hours. 8 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 8 Can’t Wait Campaign’s Oceanside Police Department’s Ban Shooting from Moving Vehicles Ban Shooting from Moving Vehicles i. Officers shall not discharge a firearm at or into a Volume I, Section 515.03 moving vehicle unless the occupants of the vehicle are using deadly force, other than the vehicle itself, An officer should not discharge a firearm at or from a against the officer or another person, and such action moving vehicle except as reasonably necessary for is necessary for self-defense or to protect the other self defense or defense of another when the person; shall not intentionally place themselves in the suspect has used deadly force or when the officer path of, or reach inside, a moving vehicle; and shall meets the criteria as set forth in paragraph 515.01(b). attempt to move out of the path of a moving vehicle. Volume I, Section 515.01 ii. Moving into or remaining in the path of a moving When a Police Officer May Use Deadly Force. vehicle, whether deliberate or Inadvertent, SHALL NOT be justification for discharging a firearm at the When the officer reasonably believes, based on the vehicle or any of its occupants. An officer in the path totality of the circumstances, that such force is of an approaching vehicle shall attempt to move to a necessary for the following reasons: position of safety rather than discharging a firearm at a. To defend against an imminent threat of death or the vehicle or any of the occupants of the vehicle. serious bodily injury to the officer or another person; [Philadelphia PD Policy] b. To apprehend a fleeing person for any felony that threatened or resulted in death or serious bodily iii. Officers should not shoot at any part of a vehicle injury, if the officer reasonably believes the person in an attempt to disable the vehicle. will cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless immediately apprehended. iv. Officers shall not discharge a firearm from his or c. When feasible, the officer shall, prior to the use of her moving vehicle. Shooting accurately from a deadly force, make reasonable efforts to identify moving vehicle is extremely difficult and therefore, themselves as a peace officer and to warn that deadly unlikely to successfully stop a threat of another force may be used, unless the officer has objectively person. [SFPD Policy] reasonable grounds to believe the suspect is aware of those facts. d. Officers shall not use deadly force against a person based on the danger that person poses to themselves, if the person does not pose an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person. Oceanside Justice Coalition Analysis: OPD's policy terminology and language to describe its procedures in dealing with moving vehicles is problematic. OPD needs to modify the following in Volume I, Section 515.03: - “should” to “shall” and remove “reasonably” from “reasonably necessary for self-defense…” - “or defense of another when the suspect has used deadly force….” to “or defense of another when the suspect is actively using deadly force.” These modifications prevent use of deadly force against a person who previously used deadly force, which is a significant distinction from a suspect who is actually using deadly force at present time. 9 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 To adhere to the 8 Can't Wait model, OPD needs to add the following to its policy, “moving into or remaining in the path of a moving vehicle, whether deliberate or inadvertent, shall not be justification for discharging a firearm at the vehicle or any of its occupants. An officer in the path of an approaching vehicle shall attempt to move to a position of safety rather than discharging a firearm at the vehicle or any of the occupants of the vehicle.” In addition, OPD needs to add, “Officers shall not discharge a firearm from his or her moving vehicle. Shooting accurately from a moving vehicle is extremely difficult and therefore, unlikely to successfully stop a threat from another person and unnecessarily increases the risk of injury or death to unintended targets.” Lastly, OPD needs to insert the following sentence, “An officer shall not shoot at any part of a vehicle in an attempt to disable the vehicle." Therefore, OPD needs to modify and add the policies and procedures stated above in order to suffice the policies and procedures advocated by the 8 Can't Wait model. 10 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 8 Can’t Wait Campaign’s 8 Can’t Wait Campaign’s Use Of Force Continuum Use Of Force Continuum Establish a force continuum that restricts the most Volume I, Section 501.01 severe types of force to the most extreme situations It is general policy of the Department that police and creates clear policy restrictions on the use of each officers and others acting under the authority of the policy weapon and tactic. Department are authorized to use only that degree of force which, based on the totality of the LEVELS OF FORCE. Officers shall strive to use the circumstances, is appears reasonably necessary to minimum amount of force to accomplish a lawful accomplish a legitimate and legal purpose. The use of purpose, including levels of force lower than the level any force is governed by the Department’s policy and of threat. Officers shall not, under any circumstances, procedure as it relates to a specific force option. The use a level of force higher than the level of threat. use of deadly force is authorized only when exercised in accordance with the provisions of the Department i. Low Level Force. Firearms and Shooting Policy. The use of the police The level of control necessary to interact with a baton is authorized only when exercised in subject who is or displaying passive resistance or accordance with the provisions of the Department active resistance. This level of force has a low Baton Policy. probability of causing injury and includes physical controls such as control holds and other weaponless Volume I, Section 501.05 techniques. Use of Force Prohibited. The use of force is not authorized under the following ii. Intermediate Force. This level of force poses a circumstances: foreseeable risk of significant injury or harm, but is a. The use of the arm-bar restraint, or any other hold unlikely to cause death. Intermediate force will only that intentionally brings pressure against the trachea be authorized when officers are confronted with or windpipe of a person. active or assaultive aggression and an immediate b. The use of the Carotid Restraint. threat to the safety of officers or others. Certain force c. For purposes of punishment. options such as OC spray, impact projectiles, and d. For purposes of obtaining a confession, admission, baton strikes are intermediate force likely to result in or similar statement or assistance. significant injury. e. If it exceeds a level of intensity reasonably necessary to accomplish the purpose for which it is iii. Deadly Force. Any use of force substantially approved. likely to cause serious bodily injury or death, f. If it continues beyond the point where resistance or including but not limited to the discharge of a aggressive action has been overcome, or where firearm, the use of an impact weapon under some further force is no longer reasonably necessary. circumstances, other techniques or equipment, and g. If used to accomplish a purpose beyond the certain interventions to stop a subject's vehicle. authority of the involved member. [SFPD Policy] Oceanside Justice Coalition Analysis: OPD's use of force continuum does not describe the difference between low level force, intermediate force, and deadly force. Thus, it fails to clearly state and enumerate when each use of force shall be applied and the use of force options appropriate for each level. The 8 Can't Wait model clearly states and enumerates the different levels of force from low to deadly as well as describes what force options are available for each level. In contrast, OPD's policy does not provide a continuum of force from low to deadly, so it is unclear how OPD distinguishes clear policy restrictions on the use of each policy weapon and tactic. To eliminate this confusion and ambiguity, the 8 Can't Wait model details 11 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 its continuum an enumerated structure, which establishes a clear understanding of the different force options that are available to an officer depending on the level force that is necessary to employ. Therefore, OPD's policy lacks clear policy restrictions on the use of each policy weapon and tactic. In order, for OPD's policy to meet the standards set by the 8 Can't Wait model it needs to clearly state and enumerate when each use of force shall be applied and the use of force options appropriate for each level. 12 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 8 Can’t Wait Campaign’s Oceanside Police Department’s Require Comprehensive Reporting Require Comprehensive Reporting Require officers to report each time they force or Volume III, Section 801.01 threaten to use force against civilians. Duty to Document All Police Incidents. Comprehensive reporting includes requiring officers to report whenever they point a firearm at someone, Members are required to document all police in addition to other types of force. When an officer incidents on the appropriate report form. This applies points any firearm at a person, it shall be considered a to incidents resulting from citizen calls for service reportable use of force. Such use of force must be and to incidents resulting from the officer's personal reasonable under the objective facts and observation. circumstances. [SFPD Policy] Volume III, Section 840 i. To promote transparency and accountability of Use of Force Reporting. actions involving the use of force against civilians, law enforcement officers shall report any use of force When physical force is used, it shall be reported. involving physical controls when the subject is injured, complains of injury in the presence of Volume III, Section 840.01 officers, or complains of pain that persists beyond the use of a physical control hold. Shall also report any Any use of physical force (including a police canine use of force involving the use of personal body bite or vehicle pursuit) must be reported to a weapons, chemical agents, impact weapons, ECWs supervisor and the officer will include in their Arrest (i.e. Tasers). Vehicle interventions, K-9 bites, and or Officer’s Report the fact that physical force was firearm. used. ii. An officer shall notify his or her supervisor NOTE: Some of the specifics in the Use of Force immediately or as soon as practical of any reportable reports may include: use of force. A supervisor shall be notified if an - A clear, detailed description of the incident, officer receives an allegation of excessive force. including any application of weapons or restraints - The identity of all individuals involved in the iii. A supervisor shall conduct a use of force incident evaluation in all cases involving a reportable use of - The specific reasons for the application of force force. - Witness statements - Description of injuries PROCEDURE: OFFICER'S RESPONSIBILITY Any reportable use of force shall be documented in detail in an incident report, supplemental incident report, or statement form. Officers shall complete use of force reports fully and truthfully. Descriptions shall be in clear, precise and plain language and shall be as specific as possible. When the officer using force is preparing the incident report, the officer shall include the following information: i. The subject's action allegedly necessitating the use of force, including any threat presented by the subject; ii. Efforts to de-escalate prior to the use of force; and 13 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 if not, why not; iii. Any warning given and if not, why not; iv. The type of force used; v. Injury sustained by the subject; vi. Injury sustained by the officer or another person; vii. Information regarding medical assessment or evaluation, including whether the subject refused; viii. The supervisor's name, rank, star number and the time notified. Each law enforcement officer must submit a report without coaching or assistance from other law enforcement officers present during the incident. Oceanside Justice Coalition Analysis: OPD's policy fails to include that it shall be considered a reportable use of force if an officer points any firearm at a person. OPD's policy also fails to enumerate and provide the definitive information that an officer shall include in their incident report. OPD's policy makes no mention that anytime an officer points any firearm at a person, it shall be considered a reportable use of force. Compliant police departments with the 8 Can't Wait model have utilized the following language, "Any use of force or show of force by a member of the department shall be documented completely and accurately in an appropriate use of force report [Escondido PD Policy]." Because OPD's policy does not make this significant level of reporting a requirement, it clearly does not meet the 8 Can't wait Model. In addition, OPD's policy fails to enumerate and provide the definitive information that an officer shall include in their incident report. Specifically the following information must be included, "if there was a warning given and if not, why not," "the supervisor's name, rank, star number, and the time notified," and "each law enforcement officer must submit a report without coaching or assistance from other law enforcement officers present during the incident." Therefore, in order for OPD's policy to be comprehensive at the standard set by the 8 Can't Wait model, OPD needs to include the requirement that whenever an officer points a firearm at a person it shall be documented in a report. Moreover, OPD reporting procedures also need to be clear and enumerated with the following specific information detailed above. 14 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 OPD's Need for a Citizens Review Board as Recommended by the San Diego County Grand Jury on May 25th, 2016 and Supported Data The Executive Summary of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing states, “Trust between law enforcement agencies and the people they protect and serve is essential in a democracy. It is key to the stability of our communities, the integrity of our criminal justice system, and the safe and effective delivery of policing services.” In this same respect, police oversight will benefit the individual complainant as well as the entire community by promoting transparency, augmenting accountability, and developing trust with the community. On May 25, 2016 the San Diego County Grand Jury recommended that the City of Oceanside, "establish an independent citizen commissions for oversight of police behavior and determine the specific commission model with community input to ensure acceptance, independence, and accountability." The Oceanside Police and Fire Commission acts in an advisory capacity to the City Council on policy matters pertaining to safety, police, and fire, and other areas wherein the matter of public safety may be of concern. Thus, the present commission does not provide oversight of police behavior or evaluate use of force or misconduct complaints against officers. According to OPD's Use of Force Data from 2013-2017, there was an average of 130 Use of Force incidents during those 5-years. However, there were only 22 complaints reported and 0 complaints were sustained. It is possible that out of 653 Use of Force incidents reported between 2013- 2017 there could have been many more complaints made if the community trusted how police misconduct was evaluated. Hence, it is highly unlikely and questionable that out of 653 Use of Force incidents reported there was no police misconduct or excessive use of force in any of those incidents that would lead to disciplinary actions. On November 15, 2018, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which is a bi-partisan agency established by Congress in 1957 published the report Police Use of Force: An Examination of Modern Policing Practices. According to the findings in the report, "Repeated and highly publicized incidents of police use of force against persons of color and people with disabilities, combined with a lack of accurate data, lack of transparency about policies and practices in place governing use of force, and lack of accountability for noncompliance foster a perception that police use of force in communities of color and the disability community is unchecked, unlawful, and unsafe." Similar to millions of people across the nation, many of Oceanside's residents share this perception that police use of force in communities of color and the disability community is unchecked, unlawful, and unsafe. It is a naïve notion for city officials to believe Oceanside is not one police misconduct video away from intense public pressure and immense disapproval of local law enforcement. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Police Use of Force: An Examination of Modern Policing Practices report states, "Accurate and comprehensive data regarding police uses of force is generally not available to police departments or the American public. No comprehensive national database exists that captures rates of police use of force. The best available evidence reflects high rates of use of force nationally, and increased likelihood of police use of force against people of color, people with disabilities, LGBT people, people with mental health concerns, people with low incomes, and those at the intersections of these groups." Based on the Officer-Involved Shooting Review published in August of 2019 by the San Diego County District Attorney’s Office, which analyzed officer-involved shootings from 1993-2017, Oceanside was the location of 27 officer-involved shootings. Only the City of San Diego, which has a drastically larger population than Oceanside, had more incidents. Escondido ranked third with 21 officer-involved shootings, followed by El Cajon with 20 incidents, and then Vista with 19. Cities like Del Mar, Rancho Sante Fe, Solona Beach, Bonsall, or Romona only had 1 or 2 incidents. Between 1993-2017, OPD was involved in 19 of the 27 officer-involved shootings in Oceanside. That data shows that officer-involved shootings in Oceanside can and will occur. Thus, the data demonstrates that an officer-involved shooting occurs at least once a year in Oceanside. 15 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 According to the May 2020 SANDAG report Forty Years of Crime in the San Diego Region, Oceanside has the third largest population in San Diego County as of 2019 with 178,021 residents. Based on the March 2020 SANDAG report Arrests 2018: Law Enforcement Response to Crime in the San Diego Region, 4,907 arrests were made in Oceanside in 2018. In 2018, Oceanside averaged 13.4 arrests per day, which is the highest amount and arrest rate in all of North County and only behind cities like Chula Vista and San Diego. According to the May 2020 SANDAG report Forty Years of Crime in the San Diego Region, Oceanside's crime rate per 1,000 population jurisdiction was 24.99, which was the second highest in all of San Diego County. Because of Oceanside’s large population and high arrest and crime rate, it is likely that this amount of police interactions with the community will undoubtedly lead to an incident involving excessive use of force or misconduct. Hence, the greater the population and arrest and crime rate, the greater the probability for excessive use of force or police misconduct incidents to occur. Therefore, based on the data above and the prevalent significance of being proactive, it is imperative that the City of Oceanside moves forward with urgency to strategically construct an independent Citizen's Review Board for investigative and disciplinary oversight purposes of police behavior. Investigative and oversight responsibilities should include officer-involved shootings, complaints, excessive use of force, and misconduct. Moreover, The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Police Use of Force: An Examination of Modern Policing Practices report states, "Investigation and prosecution of use of force cases should be made as independent and public as possible. The agencies investigating and determining whether to move forward with prosecution should not have an ongoing relationship with the department. If a civilian review board is put in place to monitor police, its members should have real power over investigations, including subpoena power. All actions of the community board should be public." According to the San Diego Grand Jury and the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights a Citizen's Review Board needs to have the minimum following criteria to be effective: 1) Independent investigative body with independent legal counsel to support the Citizen's Review Board 2) Authority to subpoena and render disciplinary actions 3) All actions of the Citizen's Review Board should be public, including pending investigations 4) Prepare, submit, and publically publish annual reports of the Citizen's Review Board actions 5) Encourage and utilize citizen involvement in the selection process of Citizen's Review Board Members 6) Citizen's Review Board should be funded and financially supported as a public safety entity 7) Provide limited compensation for Board Members' time and involvement 16 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 This is not an official City of Oceanside Ordinance/legal document [Sample - Proposed Ordinance] ORDINANCE NO. _______________________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OCEANSIDE, CALIFRORNIA WHEREAS, the City of Oceanside acknowledges that the history of discrimination in the United States of America continues to affect the privilege and/or lack of opportunity for people in the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Oceanside acknowledges that equity occurs when differences such as race, ethnicity, religion, gender, economic status, sexual orientation/gender identification, veteran status, marital status, language, age, disability, etc. do not determine a person’s economic, social, or political access; and WHEREAS, the City of Oceanside is projected to obtain a majority-minority status, i.e., no racial or ethnic groups comprises a majority of the City’s population; and WHEREAS, the City of Oceanside is committed to recognizing and undoing discrimination of any type; and WHEREAS, low-income communities in the City of Oceanside are disproportionately communities of color; and WHEREAS, providing opportunities for the City and residents to engage, participate and support their community through unified and collaborative activities, programs, and collective citizen engagement, culturally diverse programs, business services, trades and entertainment is valued; and WHEREAS, all members of the Oceanside community offer distinct perspectives, e.g., life experiences, cultural backgrounds, ideas, and interpretations, that foster creativity, innovation, and economic growth; and WHEREAS, the City of Oceanside will benefit from the identification of potential inequities in City services, programs, human resource practices, and decision-making processes; and from encouraging and empowering multicultural appreciation on the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Oceanside will benefit from establishing a Commission of diverse residents to address inequities that impact quality of life for identifiable communities in the City, e.g., race, ethnicity, religion, gender, economic status, sexual orientation/gender identification, veteran status, marital status, language, age, disability, etc., as well as low- income communities in the City with regards to resource allocation, representation, health outcomes, and other disparities; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Oceanside now finds it appropriate to amend the City of Oceanside Code of Ordinances establishing a Race and Equity Commission. 17 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA: Section 1. Findings. The foregoing recitals are hereby found to be true and correct and are hereby adopted by the City Council and made a part hereof for all purposes and findings of fact. Section 2. Amendment to Code of Ordinances. The Code of Ordinances of the City of Oceanside, California, is hereby amended by adding the Race and Equity Commission as follows: § RACE AND EQUITY COMMISSION § SHORT TITLE. This subchapter shall be known, and may be cited, as the Race and Equity Commission Ordinance of the City of Oceanside, California. § DEFINITIONS. For the purpose of this subchapter, the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning. COMMISSION. The Race and Equity Commission of the city. CITY. The City of Oceanside. § CREATION; MEMBERSHIP REQUIREMENTS. (A) Creation. There is hereby created the Race and Equity Commission of the City. (B) Membership. 1. All Commission members shall be appointed by the City Council and shall serve without compensation. 2. The Commission shall be composed of seven members to serve two-year terms. 3. Each candidate for appointment as a member of the Race and Equity Commission shall be a registered voter of the city who has resided within the corporate city limits, or within territory annexed prior to the appointment, for at least twelve months preceding the appointment. The Race and Equity Commission shall, to the extent possible, be broadly representative of economic status, race, color, religion, gender, national origin, ancestry, marital status, physical or mental disability, sexual orientation and gender identity. 4. Commission members shall serve without compensation and shall not be employed by or hold any other position in city government. In addition to any other requirements prescribed by the City Council, members shall maintain the qualifications established by this section while in office. 5. Members of the Commission shall be limited to three consecutive full terms in office. A person who has served three consecutive full terms as a regular member may not again hold the same office until at least one term out of office has passed. 18 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 6. The term of office of Commission members is two years and shall commence on the first day of January 1, 2021. Initial appointments for establishment of the Commission shall be staggered and with partial terms. § ORGANIZATION. (A) Officers. The Commission shall elect from its members, at the first meeting of the Commission held on or after January 1 of each year, a chairman and a vice-chair, and may elect a secretary. Such officers shall hold office for terms of one year, or until their successors take office. (B) The Commission shall establish rules of procedure consistent with city ordinances, resolutions, and regulations. § DISMISSAL FROM COMMISSION. (A) Commission members shall actively participate in the Commission’s activities, and any member who is absent for two consecutive regular meetings of the Commission without valid excuse, as determined by the Commission, or moves one's residence outside the city limits, shall automatically be dismissed from membership. (B) No member of the Commission shall remain in his/her position after being elected or appointed to city, county or state board or office. § COMMISSION MEETINGS. (A) The Commission shall hold at least one regular meeting each quarter and shall fix regular meeting dates at a regular meeting place. Special meetings may be called as necessary. A majority of the Commission members serving shall constitute a quorum to do business. (B) All meetings shall be held in accordance with the California Brown Act (California Government Code, Section 54950) as it now exists, or as same may hereafter be amended or codified, to the extent of its applicability to the Commission. (C) Every regular or special meeting of the Commission shall be open to the public in accordance with the California Brown Act. § DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION. (A) The Commission shall serve in an advisory capacity and render recommendations upon request of the City Council to include, without limitation, as follows. (1) Create focused recommendations specific to Oceanside related to race, equity and empowerment issues. (2) Actively promote community awareness and education on the value of diversity. (3) Promote equity on the basis of economic status, race, color, religion, gender, national origin, ancestry, marital status, lawful source of income, physical or mental disability, familial status, sexual orientation and gender identity. 19 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020 (4) Develop recommendations for actions to strengthen policies, practices, services and programs. (5) Create a culture and framework of community equity, diversity and inclusion awareness efforts, programs and activities that are available and accessible to all community members. (B) The Commission shall provide upon request of the City Council coordination, collaboration, innovation and focus to development effective solutions to address race, equity, and empowerment issues. (C) The Commission shall provide an annual report to the City Council by January 31 of each year [beginning on January 31, 2022] and may be required to provide additional reports upon request of the City Council. Section 3. Repealer. This Ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Oceanside, and this Ordinance shall not operate to repeal or affect any other ordinances of the City of Oceanside except insofar as the provisions thereof might be inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance, in which event such conflicting provisions, if any, are hereby repealed. Section 4. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance is illegal, invalid, or unenforceable under present or future laws, the remainder of this Ordinance will not be affected and, in lieu of each illegal, invalid, or unenforceable provision, a provision as similar in terms to the illegal, invalid, or unenforceable provision as is possible and is legal, valid, and enforceable will be added to this Ordinance. Section 5. Effective Date. That this Ordinance will become effective on its adoption and passage by the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED THIS ________ day of ___________________, 2020. This is not an official City of Oceanside Ordinance/legal document [Sample - Proposed Ordinance] 20 Oceanside Justice Coalition Revised July 2020