HomeMy WebLinkAboutRichmond Mutual Aid InformationAGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM Department: Mayor's Office Department Head: Mayor McLaughlin Phone: 620-6503 Meeting Date: 1/10/2012 Final Decision Date Deadline: STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE: ADOPT a resolution directing the Chief of Police to carefully evaluate all requests for Mutual Aid that involve responding to civil unrest and empowering the Chief to decline Ito respond to Mutual Aid requests under certain circumstances — Mayor McLaughlin (620-6503) and Councilmember Ritterman (620- 6581). INDICATE APPROPRIATE BODY City Council ❑ Redevelopment Agency ❑ Finance ❑ Public Safety Public Standing Services Standing Committee Committee ❑ Housing Authority ❑ Surplus Property ❑ Joint Powers Authority Financing Authority ❑ Rules and Procedures Standing Committee ❑Other ❑ Local Reuse Authority ITEM ❑ Presentation/Proclamation/Commendation (3 -Minute Time Limit) ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Ordinance ❑ Other ❑ Contract/Agreement ❑ Council As Whole ❑ Grant Application/Acceptance ❑ Claims Filed Against City of Richmond ❑ Resolution ❑ Video/PowerPoint Presentation (contact KCRT @ 620.6759) RECOMMENDED ACTION: ADOPT a resolution directing the Chief of Police to carefully evaluate: all requests for Mutual Aid that involve responding to civil unrest and empowering the Chief to decline to respond to Mutual Aid requests under certain circumstances — Mayor McLaughlin (620-6503) and Councilmember Ritterman (620-6581). This item was continued from the December 6, 2011, meeting. REVIEWS/APPROVALS This item has been reviewed and approved by the FINANCE DIRECTOR, CITY ATTORNEY, and CITY MANAGER. AGENDA ITEM NO: J -l. OFFICE OF MAYOR GAYLE MCLAUGHLIN AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: November 22, 2011 TO: Members of the City Council FROM: Mayor Gayle McLaughlin Re: Informational report and resolution on Richmond Police Department and Mutual Aid Councilmember Jeff Ritterman and I met recently with the City Manager and Police Chief, expressing our concerns about aggression used by other police agencies in our region in response to various Occupy movements and asking for a report on our City of Richmond Mutual Aid Agreement policies. At this meeting, we asked the Police Chief to present information about this to the City Council. Attached is the Chief's report, along with a resolution for City Council consideration, developed in consultation with Chief Magnus. It is important that we, as a City Council, are clear on these agreements and provide meaningful input on them, as well as make a statement, as per the resolution, about the importance of carefully evaluating all Mutual Aid requests involving civil unrest situations that may come to the City of Richmond. It is extremely important that our values as a City Council and community are reflected in policies and actions taken and/or declined through Mutual Aid requests. Requested action: Adopt a resolution directing the Chief of Police to carefully evaluate all requests for Mutual Aid that involve responding to civil unrest and empowering the Chief to decline to respond to Mutual Aid requests under certain circumstances. 450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804-1630 Telephone: (510) 620-6503 Fax: (510) 412-2070 www.ci.richmond.ca.us November 17, 2011 Dear City Council Members and City Manager, Recent events associated with the "Occupy" movement have generated several questions and concerns about the Richmond Police Department's role in providing mutual aid to other jurisdictions. I have prepared a brief overview and analysis of how this process works and why the police and fire mutual aid system is so valuable to communities throughout the State, including ours. I appreciate your confidence in me as your Police Chief to make thoughtful decisions about how we respond to requests for mutual aid, as well as circumstances when the City needs mutual aid from other jurisdictions (which has happened many times in the past). If you have further questions about this topic after reading the information below, please feel free to contact me. Respectfully yours, Chief Chris Magnus What is "Mutual Aid"? Mutual aid among public safety agencies is based on the premises that no jurisdiction's police and fire departments have every resource they might need to handle certain emergency situations, large-scale incidents, or specific types of calls for service. Mutual aid provides a process through which public safety agencies can request assistance of various kinds from each other across jurisdictional boundaries. The premise of mutual aid is that participating departments recognize there is an unavoidable "interdependence" between agencies regardless of their size, budget, or resources. No one agency "has it all." Depending on the type of emergency, natural or man-made disaster, incident, or call for service, public safety agencies rely on each other for assistance. How does it work? A police or fire agency must first consider the type of situation or incident it is dealing with. Is it an emergency? Does the agency have the resources on its own, in terms of trained personnel and/or necessary equipment, to handle the situation? For example, before requesting additional officers, a police department must see if it can meet its own personnel needs by doing things like cancelling leave days/vacations and placing officers on alternative work schedules. Some situations, like incidents involving civil unrest or rioting, may merit the use of specially trained personnel. In both Contra Costa and Alameda Counties, police agencies throughout the county provide teams of officers (ranging in size, depending on the agency) that train together in the use of crowd control tactics. Collectively, these trained teams are referred to as a "Mobile Field Force" (MFF). To access the assistance of the County's MFF, a police agency must first put together a thorough "Operations Order" which details why mutual aid in the form of a MFF is needed, how the MFF will be utilized, the way personnel assigned to the MFF will be taken care of (basic necessities, such as food and rest periods, etc.), and other relevant information depending on the type of event. Other mutual aid situations may be as basic as a request by one jurisdiction to another for a particular piece of equipment that is needed in an emergency situation. This might involve the short-term use of a mobile command post or an armored vehicle, for example. The documentation supporting a mutual aid request must be submitted to the State Office of Emergency Services (OES) and to the County Sheriff's Department in the jurisdiction where the requesting public safety agency is located. Not every request for mutual aid is approved at the State or County level. If the Operations Order prepared by the requesting agency is inadequate or incomplete, or if the determination is made that a true emergency doesn't exist at that time, the request for mutual aid may be declined. "Opting Out" of a Mutual Aid Request A public safety agency may decline or "opt out" of a mutual aid request based on several considerations. These include: • Not having the requested resources; • Not being able to provide the requested resources based on local needs or limitations (such as an agency needing its personnel to handle local problems, being financially unable to provide the requested resource, etc.); • Other extenuating operational circumstances. The Contra Costa Co. Sheriff's Department has declined two requests for mutual aid fronn other agencies so far this year. The Richmond Police Department will "opt out" of a mutual aid request related to civil unrest if the Department believes it is probable its personnel will be put into a situation where the tactics that may be used are inconsistent with RPD's approach to deployment. In general, most public safety agencies, including the Richmond Police Department, try to provide mutual aid to other jurisdictions when requested to do so because they may need mutual aid themselves at some point. 2 Richmond P.D. Considerations When mutual aid is requested from the Richmond Police Department, each request carefully evaluated and the Department's Administration does its best to thoughtfully analyze the potential operational, procedural, and legal issues involved. These include things like: • Does the Department have the requested resources? • Can the PD spare the requested resources without jeopardizing the safety of our own community? • If the request involves the utilization of RPD personnel, does the Department have personnel who are adequately trained and equipped to safely provide the needed assistance? • What specifically are RPD personnel being asked to do? • Will there be adequate and appropriate supervision for RP'D personnel to do what is being asked of them? • Will the Department's personnel be appropriately taken care of? • How long is it reasonably expected that the Department's personnel or other resources will be needed? Depending on the type of request, the immediacy of the need, and the circumstances of the situation, mutual aid requests may be vetted with others outside the Police Department, including, the City Manager and the City Attorney. Many mutual aid requests involve situations or incidents where time is of the essence due to the nature of the emergency. No mutual aid request is granted without the specific approval of the Police Chief or his/her designee. As a general rule, when RPD personnel are requested for mutual aid, typically as part of the County's MFF, a Captain assigned by the Chief of Police accompanies RPD personnel to the incident and remains with them for the duration of the mutual aid assignment. Captain Mark Gagan is in charge of RPD's MFF team, so he is with the team when they deploy to another jurisdiction. Captain Gagan always has full discretion to pull RPD personnel from any situation where he believes the tactics being used by other agencies are unsafe, unwise, or unlawful. In addition, even in civil unrest mutual aid situations, the Richmond Police Department can specifically request that its personnel only be utilized for certain types of assignments, including things like helping another agency handle priority calls for service, providing security for Fire and EMS personnel, and assisting with perimeter security. Some thoughts about dealing; with civil unrest situations RPD has a Use of Force policy which addresses force options based on situational needs and legal considerations. Passive resistance, failure to obey verbal commands, and things like making a "human chain" by linking arms together typically necessitate a different use of force response than protestor actions that include assaultive behavior, utilizing weapons (including items used as weapons), and/or engaging in conduct that is physically harmful to others. In many larger -scale civil unrest situations, actions by the few (be they police officers or protestors) can easily—and wrongly—be perceived as representative of the larger group. When RPD officers deal with a crowd engaged in lawful acts of protest, the Department's goal is to protect everyone's rights, including protestors, bystanders, and property owners. When an assembly is declared unlawful, the Department is committed to using only that force which is necessary to move protestors out of the area or affect arrests. MFF officers are specifically trained to identify those individuals in a crowd who are engaging in, or encouraging others to commit, acts of violence—and then to remove those individuals as quickly and safely as possible. This protects the larger group and makes it less challenging to disperse individuals who are unlawfully assembled. A key role of the police is to protect the peace by maintaining order. This means the police protect the right of groups to gather in public and voice their message, while police agencies must remain neutral to the content of that message. Without exception, California peace officers are sworn to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. Often it's a police presence that allows more controversial messages to be expressed publicly and without major disruption or violence. Police are empowered to disperse public assemblies only when it becomes apparent that threats to human life and/or personal property exist. These types of determinations are typically made ONLY after physical assaults occur in a crowd, or individuals/groups in a crowd damage the property of others. When situations like these arise, the ranking police official at the scene must first declare "an unlawful assembly." These determinations rely on first-hand police observations, and cannot be based on reports from non -police personnel because California Penal Code 407, a misdemeanor, can apply. When these conditions are met, the ranking officer must declare "an unlawful assembly" in violation of P.C. 407 by (1) making a series of public address announcements to the crowd alerting them of this determination; (2) ordering immediate dispersal of the crowd according to specified egress routes; and (3) allowing adequate time for people to move on their own before employing dispersal tactics if orders are disregarded. Unlawful assembly declarations are always challenging. Such declarations often place police in a "no- win" situation when the "order" they are obligated to preserve gets lost and limited options for restoring it peacefully are available. This becomes especially true when subgroups within a crowd holding diverging views and agendas seek to bring more attention to themselves by provoking a confrontation with police. Such confrontations can be difficult for the police to guard against, but this topic has been front and center as part of the ongoing Administrative discussions within the PD related to the "Occupy" protests that have been taking place around the region. The Richmond Police Department seeks to respond to civil unrest situations in a manner that is thoughtful, yet legally and tactically sound, and that balances interests in a way that protects free speech while preserving public order. The Department is always at a disadvantage because it must often respond to situations based on incomplete and continually unfolding information. While RPD is not in a position to set strategy for our partners from other jurisdictions that request emergency mutual aid assistance, we retain the right to refuse to participate in actions that on their face are inconsistent with our values. When RPD does participate in mutual aid MFF events, we always place additional restrictions or qualifiers on our personnel who are sent to other jurisdictions. RPD does not condone the inappropriate use of force by individual officers from any police agency, including our own, who are assigned to crowd control duties. Each agency contributing to a mutual aid situation is responsible for insuring its officers utilize appropriate and lawful tactics and techniques. Officers failing to meet these expectations should be dealt with through each contributing jurisdiction's internal and community police oversight process, up to and including criminal prosecution, if deemed appropriate. Every situation and/or incident involving crowd control, civil unrest, civil disobedience, or rioting is different. In evaluating RPD participation when mutual aid is needed for such events, RPD's Administration continually monitors and evaluates changing circumstances that could cause the Department to assist with or pull-out of any incident. The subiect matter or political nature of an event is not what drives the Department's response; rather it is the risk to public safety and threat to life or Property that is of critical importance. 5 Resolution on Richmond Police Department and Mutual Aid Whereas the Richmond City Council supports the Constitutionally protected rights of all members of the public, including those involved in the "Occupy" movement, to free speech and peaceable assembly; and Whereas the Richmond City Council expresses strong concern about the treatment of some protestors by certain police officers during several recent "Occupy" protests in other jurisdictions, exemplified by the use of teargas munitions deployment and the harsh, repeated jabbing of batons against protestors who formed a "human chain" by linking their arms together as a form of nonviolent passive resistance; and Whereas the Richmond City Council believes that nonviolent resistance, failure to obey verbal commands, and things like making a "human chain" by linking arms together as a form of protest, typically necessitate a different form of police intervention than protestor actions that include property damage, assaultive behavior, utilizing weapons, and/or engaging in conduct that is physically harmful to others; and Whereas the Richmond City Council acknowledges and appreciates that its own police department has a team of officers who are utilized for civil unrest situations who Eire well trained, well supervised, and who demonstrate professionalism and good judgment under pressure; and Whereas the Richmond City Council is troubled by the prospect that Richmond Police Department personnel might be requested for certain "Mutual Aid" situations that would cause the City's police personnel to participate in operations involving other jurisdictions' law enforcement personnel who utilize force that is excessive, unwarranted, or ineffectual to deal with non-violent protests; and Whereas the Richmond City Council expects that members of its police department are always cognizant of how their individual and group conduct will be scrutinized and therefore must reflect the highest standards of professionalism whether they are deployed in Richmond or another jurisdiction; Therefore be it resolved that the Richmond City Council mandates its Chief of Police shall carefully evaluate all requests for Mutual Aid that involve responding to civil unrest situations, taking into consideration such factors as the potential role(s) Richmond Police personnel might be asked to play in dealing with protestors, the use of force being employed by police personnel from various departments in dealing with the incident, and any tactics being used that are inconsistent with RPD's assessment of "best practices" for deployment. In addition, the City Council empowers its Chief of Police to decline to respond to Mutual Aid requests where tactics being used, or likely to be used, are unsafe, unwise, or unlawful based on the best judgment of the Chief through information available at the time.