Public Safety Reports

Police Operations and Data Analysis Report, Morgan Hill, California

the event of litigation that MHPD officers have been adequately trained and equipped to reasonably

and appropriately use force.

CPSM recommends the two policy statements noted above (300.5 and 300.5.1) be combined to

clarify that documenting and reporting force are governed by the same criteria, eliminating “nature

of the incident” statement from (300.5). In addition, the policy regarding the duty to intercede

(300.2.1) should be revised to include a requirement that an officer observing the use of force

under any circumstance be required to report the observed use to a supervisor. CPSM also

recommends a change where policy and practice differ. The force policy states, “when a supervisor

is able to respond to an incident” (300.7); however, according to MHPD management, supervisors

are required to respond to all use-of-force incidents and conduct an appropriate investigation. The

policy revision should reflect current practice.

MHPD utilizes a Critical Incident Review Board (CIRB) for the examination of force incidents. The

CIRB can be convened at the discretion of the Chief of Police and generally consists of a sergeant

and two officers. By policy, the board is empowered to conduct an administrative investigation into

the circumstances of an incident. The board can have officers present information to the board and

can request that the employee appear before the board. The board does not have authority to

recommend discipline, but may make a finding that the involved employee’s actions were either

within policy or a violation of policy. The board’s findings are forwarded to the Chief of Police and

the employee’s division captain for appropriate action. CPSM believes the CIRB’s policy authority to

initiate an administrative investigation and determine findings, separate from any MHPD

management administrative action regarding the same use of force, creates a potential for

significant conflict. In practice, the CIRB was created to evaluate use-of-force incidents from a

training perspective and, where appropriate, recommend training for the involved officer and

department members as a whole. CPSM concurs with the envisioned utilization of the CIRB;

however, policy must be revised to reflect the board’s true, intended scope of authority and

responsibility.

MHPD does not utilize a computer-based force tracking system. MHPD employs the Executive

Information Services platform as a management tool within various areas of the department, but

the use-of-force module is not utilized. Documents resulting from a force investigation are stored by

the Chief’s administrative assistant. The assistant also maintains statistical records of the

department’s use of force. The documents and statistical information are available for management

review as needed; however, no periodic force management reports are produced to provide MHPD

command staff the ability to review departmental or individual trends in the use of force.

Management records provided to CPSM indicate 23 use-of-force incidents occurred over the last

two years, with 19 of those occurring in 2015. MHPD staff attributed the increase to more criminal

activity in the city as a result changes to sentencing laws (Prop 47 – AB 109) and the current

climate of public/police relations nationwide. The fact that the current tracking software is

underutilized needs to be resolved, especially with MHPD’s focus on growth. CPSM recommends

this module or a suitable replacement be implemented as soon as possible. MHPD’s current staff

size and use of force totals may be manageable now, but with anticipated growth, the