HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 01 Use of Force Policies AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 11/2/2020
Meeting Type: Work Session
Staff Contact/Dept.: Chief Lewis/Police
Staff Phone No: 541.726.3729
Estimated Time: 40 Minutes
S P R I N G F I E L D
C I T Y C O U N C I L
Council Goals: Strengthen Public Safety
by Leveraging
Partnerships and
Resources
ITEM TITLE: USE OF FORCE POLICY AND 8 CAN’T WAIT CAMPAIGN
ACTION
REQUESTED:
Provide Springfield City Council information and answer questions related to
Springfield Police Department’s use of force policy and alignment to 8 Can’t Wait
campaign.
ISSUE
STATEMENT:
The Springfield Police Department would like to share information regarding the
department’s use of force policy, processes and training and discuss how they align
with the “8 Can’t Wait” campaign.
ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: CBM 8 Can’t Wait Campaign and Exhibit A
Attachment 2: House Bill 4203
Attachment 3: House Bill 4205
Attachment 4: Oregon Revised Statutes 161.239
DISCUSSION/
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
The Springfield City Council requested information regarding Springfield Police
Department policies and their alignment with the national “I Can’t Wait” campaign.
Please refer to the Council Briefing Memorandum (CBM) for further information.
M E M O R A N D U M City of Springfield
Date: 10/26/2020
To: Nancy Newton, City Manager COUNCIL
From: Richard L. Lewis, Chief of Police BRIEFING
Subject: Use of Force 8 Can’t Wait Campaign MEMORANDUM
ISSUE:
The Springfield Police Department would like to share information regarding the department’s
use of force policy, processes and training and discuss how they align with the “8 Can’t Wait”
campaign.
COUNCIL GOALS/
MANDATE:
Strengthen Public Safety by Leveraging Partnerships and Resources
BACKGROUND:
Springfield City Council requested information regarding a comparison of the Police
Department policies to a national campaign titled “8 Can’t Wait”.
The Springfield Police Department recognizes and respects the value of human life and dignity
without prejudice to anyone. The use of force by police officers and detention officers is a
matter of concern to the public, as well as to law enforcement. Officers are constantly involved
in numerous and varied human encounters and when warranted may use force in carrying out
their duties. This Department recognizes that use of force is a serious responsibility that requires
constant evaluation and training. Officers receive use of force training their first week of
employment, at the police academy and during their field officer training program. They also
receive on-going training throughout their career. State of Oregon DPSST mandates that all
officers in Oregon will receive a minimum of eight (8) hours of some type of use of force
training on an annual basis.
To provide Council perspective regarding SPD officers use of force in arrest situations, the
attached graph (Exhibit A) shows the number of arrests for a year and the number of times some
level of force was required by an officer(s). The force required could be as simple as an escort
hold or the use of a Taser or the officer’s handgun. The graph demonstrates the relatively small
percentage of use of force when compared to the number of arrests made each year. Please note
that definitions for the various types of force depicted in the graph are included on page two of
Exhibit A.
The following information consists of the 8 recommendations from the “8 Can’t Wait”
campaign and a brief answer as to how Springfield Police Department policies and directives
either relate, match or differ from each particular strategy.
Ban chokeholds and strangleholds during arrests
Oregon House Bill 4203 was enacted and signed into law by Governor Kate Brown on June 30,
2020 and its effective date was immediate. This bill declares that a peace officer is not justified
or reasonable in any circumstance to use physical force that impedes the normal breathing or
circulation of blood of another person by applying pressure on the throat or neck of another
person unless it is a circumstance in which an officer may use deadly force as provided in ORS
161.239.
MEMORANDUM 10/29/2020 Page 2
SPD’s Use of Force policy is being updated to incorporate HB 4203 requirements. The final
version of the Use of Force Policy will state, “A department member is not justified, nor is it
reasonable, in any circumstances to knowingly use physical force that impedes the normal
breathing or circulation of the blood of another person by applying pressure on the throat
or neck of the other person, unless the circumstances is one in which the peace officer may
use deadly physical force as provided in ORS 161.239.”
An order/directive has been sent to all staff regarding HB 4203 therefore SPD’s practice meets
this standard.
Require de-escalation during incidents and detainment
The current Use of Force policy of the Springfield Police Department states that “Officers shall
use only the amount of force which is reasonably necessary to effectively bring an incident
under control.” De-escalation has always been part of the department’s culture and practices but
was not specifically labeled “de-escalation” and was never specifically called out in policy. Our
officers receive de-escalation training at the police academy and through our department training
on this specific topic. As a result of recent events and litigation de-escalation will be specifically
highlighted in our Use of Force policy.
The definition of “de-escalation is taking action or communicating verbally or non-verbally
during a potential force encounter in an attempt to stabilize the situation and reduce the
immediacy of the threat so that more time, options and resources can be called upon to resolve
the situation without the use of force or with a reduction in the force necessary.
Therefore Springfield Police Policy and practice is in alignment with this strategy.
Require warning before deputies (officers) shoot their firearms
Springfield Police officers are trained to give a verbal warnings before the use of deadly physical
force if practical under the particular circumstances they are facing. There is not a specific
mandate in policy that states that officers cannot fire their weapon until they provide a verbal
warning. Officers can be instantly thrust into situations where they may be fired upon or
attacked with a deadly or dangerous weapon which due to a time delay makes it unreasonable to
give a warning before using their firearm in order to protect themselves or a third person. An
example of this would be when an officer walks up to the driver on a routine traffic stop and the
person immediately opens fire on the officer.
SPD Policy is in alignment with this standard, but there are exceptions not delineated in the
standard.
Require officers to exhaust all alternatives before shooting
A prohibition from deploying deadly force until all other options have been tried would leave
the officers and public in an untenable position. An officer who observes someone in the
process of committing a serious assault with a deadly or dangerous weapon must immediately
respond to the threat level and it is impractical or impossible to attempt to use lower levels of
force. Our Use of Force policy states that officers shall use only the amount of force which is
reasonably necessary to effectively bring an incident under control and this guides our officers in
their response to use of force situations.
The policy and practice of the Department are aligned with the legal requirements of ORS
161.239 but do not match this particular strategy. As stated this strategy is unreasonable and
dangerous to the public and officers. Our de-escalation policy covers and guides our officers in
their response. Officers are trained to use the least amount of force necessary, but some
situations change rapidly within micro seconds which does not allow for an officer to “exhaust
all alternatives” before discharging their weapon.
MEMORANDUM 10/29/2020 Page 3
Require Officers to intervene, stop and or report excessive force used by other officers
HB 4205 was passed and signed into law by Governor Kate Brown effective June 30, 2020. The
bill requires officers and reserve officers to intervene to prevent or stop another officer from
engaging in an act they know or should reasonably know is unjustified or excessive force that is
objectively unreasonable under the circumstances or is in violation of the agency’s use of force
policy. The bill also requires other intervention for sexual harassment or sexual misconduct,
discrimination against a person based on protect class. Please see attached HB 4203 for further
details and requirements.
All SPD officers were immediately notified of HB 4203 and the policy will reflect the details
within this law. Therefore, SPD’s practice meets this particular standard.
Ban shooting at moving vehicles
SPD policy and training already prohibits shooting at moving vehicles, unless there is an
extremely unusual circumstance that exists and is in accordance with ORS 161.239. An
example of when it would be reasonable to shoot at a moving vehicle would be where a person
was purposely using a vehicle to drive through a crowd or deliberately run over other people.
We have experienced such a scenario here in Springfield and Eugene just a few years back. An
adult male attacked his parents in their home killing one of them and seriously injuring the other.
He departed the residence in a vehicle and purposely ran over and killed a pedestrian at the
Value Village on West Centennial in Springfield. He then proceeded to Eugene where he
intentionally ran over a couple who were simply crossing the street killing one and seriously
injuring the other.
SPD policy and practice does not in align with this standard due to the fact the standard does not
provide for exceptional circumstances.
Establish a force continuum that restricts and creates policy regarding the most severe type of
force to the most extreme situations
The use of force continuum is a dated standard. The current state and national standard is based
on the United States Supreme Court Case, Graham V Conner which requires an “objective
reasonableness” standard in evaluating police use of force. The idea of a “use of force
continuum” dates back to the 1980’s. This concept recommends a stair step approach to use of
force in which each step would have to be utilized before going to the next step. This approach
does not account for the dynamic nature of force events and we currently follow the curriculum
that the Oregon police academy (DPSST) uses as they went away from the using a force
continuum years ago.
SPD’s policy & practice do not meet this standard.
Require comprehensive reporting by officers for every instance of force or threats of force
utilized by law enforcement
This has been part of our policy and practice for a number of years. Officers are required to
notify a supervisor as soon as practical following the application of physical force that involves
the use of a Taser, chemical agents, impact weapons, focused blows, hobble, firearms or any
force resulting in injury or complaint of injury.
Officers are required to document in their reports the level or resistance of the suspect, type of
force applied, weapons possessed or used by the suspect, any injuries and medical treatment to
the officer and the suspect and any other relevant information that explains or justifies the
officer’s use of force. Other factors to consider are the age, size, and relative strength, skill level
of both the officer and the suspect along with seriousness of the suspected offense or reason for
the initial contact. Officers must also document times when they displayed their Taser or firearm
regardless of whether they used it or not.
Use of force statistics are compiled through the Professional Standards Office and a monthly
report is provided to the Chief of Police regarding the number and types of forced used by SPD
MEMORANDUM 10/29/2020 Page 4
personnel. We also participate in reporting police use of force cases to the FBI National Use-of
Force Data Collection Program which gathers information nation-wide. This reporting is a
voluntary program which gathers data on law enforcement use of force incidents resulting in
death or serious bodily injury of a person or involves the discharge of a firearm at or in the
direction of a person.
SPD’s training, policy and practice meet this standard.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Springfield Police Department invites Council input on the
Police Department’s use of force practice, policy & reporting in comparison to a national
campaign titled “8 Can’t Wait.”
Total Arrests, 4133
Physical Force, 229
Taser Displayed, 14
Taser Deployed, 8
Firearm Displayed, 62 K9, 19
Less Lethal, 2
Multiple Types, 2
VNR, 1
Exhibit A, Page 1 of 2
Use of Force Definitions
Physical Force = simple control or escort hold; grappling/wrestling; tackling a fleeing suspect,
focused blows
Taser Displayed = threat of Taser use which caused suspect to comply
Taser Deployed = actual use of Taser to gain compliance
Firearm Displayed = the officer pointed firearm at suspect. Example would be a felony car
stop, armed subject, etc.
Firearm Deployed = actual use of firearm
K9 = the deployment of a K9 to apprehend suspect
VNR = Vascular Neck Restraint (carotid hold)
Less Lethal = bean bag shotgun; diversionary device; C02 propelled gas rounds and impact
rounds
Multiple = officer had to use multiple types of force to gain compliance from suspect (i.e.
physical force & Taser displayed/deployed; K9 and physical force)
Exhibit A, Page 2 of 2
80th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2020 Special Session
Enrolled
House Bill 4203
Sponsored by Representatives KOTEK, ALONSO LEON, BYNUM, MEEK, SALINAS, SANCHEZ,
Senators FREDERICK, PROZANSKI; Representatives CLEM, DEXTER, FAHEY, HELT,
HERNANDEZ, HOLVEY, KENY-GUYER, LAWRENCE SPENCE, MITCHELL, NATHANSON,
NOBLE, NOSSE, PILUSO, PRUSAK, REARDON, SOLLMAN, WILDE, Senators FAGAN, HASS,
MONNES ANDERSON, WAGNER (at the request of Joint Committee on the First Special Ses-
sion of 2020)
CHAPTER .................................................
AN ACT
Relating to use of force by peace officers; creating new provisions; amending ORS 161.235; and de-
claring an emergency.
Whereas Black Lives Matter; and
Whereas the lives of Kendra James, Jason Washington, Andre Gladen, Patrick Kimmons, Chase
Arnae Peeples, Terrell Kyreem Johnson, Quanice Derrick Hayes, Denorris Laron McClendon and
Darris Eugene Johnson mattered; and
Whereas George Floyd’s last words were, “I can’t breathe”; and
Whereas Eric Garner’s last words were, “I can’t breathe”; and
Whereas choke holds have led to deaths in several high-profile cases, and presumably in more
cases than we will ever know; and
Whereas “I can’t breathe” chants are shouted in the streets throughout Oregon to draw atten-
tion to the incalculable consequences of police brutality and disproportionate policing; and
Whereas there have been at least 268 deadly force incidents in Oregon over the past 10 years;
and
Whereas 12 of the 55 Portland shootings or deaths were of Black people, or 22 percent of the
victims in a city that is six percent Black; and
Whereas the Oregon Justice Resource Center found that the Portland Police Bureau is more
likely to search and arrest Black people, with over 17 percent of the bureau’s traffic and pedestrian
stops involving Black people; and
Whereas choke holds or other restraint to the head, neck or back interferes with a person’s
blood flow or ability to breathe, which can cause asphyxiation and death; now, therefore,
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
SECTION 1.Section 2 of this 2020 special session Act is added to and made a part of ORS
161.195 to 161.275.
SECTION 2. (1) A peace officer is not justified in any circumstance in knowingly using
physical force that impedes the normal breathing or circulation of the blood of another per-
son by applying pressure on the throat or neck of the other person, unless the circumstance
is one in which the peace officer may use deadly physical force as provided in ORS 161.239.
(2) It is not reasonable under any circumstance for a peace officer to knowingly use
physical force that impedes the normal breathing or circulation of the blood of another per-
Enrolled House Bill 4203 (HB 4203-A)Page 1
Attachment 2, Page 1 of 2
son by applying pressure on the throat or neck of the other person, unless the circumstance
is one in which the peace officer may use deadly physical force as provided in ORS 161.239.
SECTION 3. ORS 161.235 is amended to read:
161.235. Except as provided in ORS 161.239 and section 2 of this 2020 special session Act, a
peace officer is justified in using physical force upon another person only when and to the extent
that the peace officer reasonably believes it necessary:
(1) To make an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of an arrested person unless the
peace officer knows that the arrest is unlawful; or
(2) For self-defense or to defend a third person from what the peace officer reasonably believes
to be the use or imminent use of physical force while making or attempting to make an arrest or
while preventing or attempting to prevent an escape.
SECTION 4.Section 5 of this 2020 special session Act is added to and made a part of ORS
181A.355 to 181A.670.
SECTION 5.The Board on Public Safety Standards and Training shall adopt rules pro-
hibiting the training of police officers and reserve officers to use physical force that impedes
the normal breathing or circulation of the blood of another person by applying pressure on
the throat or neck of the other person, except as a defensive maneuver.
SECTION 6.This 2020 special session Act being necessary for the immediate preservation
of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this 2020 special
session Act takes effect on its passage.
Passed by House June 26, 2020
..................................................................................
Timothy G. Sekerak, Chief Clerk of House
..................................................................................
Tina Kotek, Speaker of House
Passed by Senate June 26, 2020
..................................................................................
Peter Courtney, President of Senate
Received by Governor:
........................M.,........................................................., 2020
Approved:
........................M.,........................................................., 2020
..................................................................................
Kate Brown, Governor
Filed in Office of Secretary of State:
........................M.,........................................................., 2020
..................................................................................
Bev Clarno, Secretary of State
Enrolled House Bill 4203 (HB 4203-A)Page 2
Attachment 2, Page 2 of 2
80th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2020 Special Session
Enrolled
House Bill 4205
Sponsored by Representatives KOTEK, ALONSO LEON, BYNUM, LAWRENCE SPENCE, MEEK,
SALINAS, SANCHEZ, Senators FREDERICK, MANNING JR, PROZANSKI; Representatives
CLEM, DEXTER, FAHEY, HELT, HERNANDEZ, HOLVEY, KENY-GUYER, LEWIS, MARSH,
MCKEOWN, MITCHELL, NERON, NOBLE, NOSSE, PILUSO, POWER, PRUSAK, REARDON,
SOLLMAN, WILDE, WILLIAMS, Senators FAGAN, HASS, WAGNER (at the request of Joint
Committee on the First Special Session of 2020)
CHAPTER .................................................
AN ACT
Relating to duties of police officers regarding prohibited behavior; and declaring an emergency.
Whereas Black Lives Matter; and
Whereas the three other police officers present at George Floyd’s arrest had 8 minutes and 46
seconds to save his life; and
Whereas the history of racial violence in America, including public lynchings, deeply implicates
police officers that did not intervene to stop extrajudicial murders of Black Americans, creating a
culture of distrust between law enforcement and the Black community that persists to this day; and
Whereas police officers swear an oath to serve the public; and
Whereas police officers need to be trusted to step in when lives are endangered; and
Whereas two-thirds of Black Americans do not trust that they will be treated equally by the
police;and
Whereas Black youth experience hypervigilance, a symptom of post-traumatic stress disorder, in
the presence of police officers; and
Whereas Black children deserve to feel safe around the police; and
Whereas we all deserve to feel safe around the police; and
Whereas restoring trust in the police is not possible without real accountability measures; and
Whereas the United States Department of Justice’s October 2018 Special Report found that
Black people and Latinx people are twice as likely to experience the threat or use of force compared
to white people; and
Whereas intervening and reporting misconduct protects the reputation of police officers who are
acting in good faith and within the bounds of the law; now, therefore,
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
SECTION 1.Section 2 of this 2020 special session Act is added to and made a part of ORS
181A.355 to 181A.670.
SECTION 2.(1) As used in this section, “misconduct” means:
(a) Unjustified or excessive force that is objectively unreasonable under the circum-
stances or in violation of the use of force policy for the law enforcement unit employing the
offending officer;
(b) Sexual harassment or sexual misconduct;
Enrolled House Bill 4205 (HB 4205-A)Page 1
Attachment 3, Page 1 of 2
(c) Discrimination against a person based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation,
national origin, disability or age;
(d) A crime; or
(e) A violation of the minimum standards for physical, emotional, intellectual and moral
fitness for public safety personnel established under ORS 181A.410.
(2) Without regard to rank or assignment, a police officer or reserve officer shall inter-
vene to prevent or stop another police officer or reserve officer engaged in any act the in-
tervening officer knows or reasonably should know is misconduct, unless the intervening
officer cannot intervene safely.
(3) A police officer or reserve officer who witnesses another police officer or reserve of-
ficer engaging in misconduct shall report the misconduct to a supervisor as soon as practi-
cable, but no later than 72 hours after witnessing the misconduct.
(4) Failure to intervene or report as required by subsections (2) and (3) of this section is
grounds for disciplinary action against a police officer or reserve officer by the law enforce-
ment unit employing the officer or for the Department of Public Safety Standards and
Training to suspend or revoke the officer’s certification as provided in ORS 181A.630,
181A.640 and 181A.650.
(5) An employer may not discharge, demote, suspend or in any manner discriminate or
retaliate against a police officer or reserve officer with regard to promotion, compensation
or other terms, conditions or privileges of employment for the reason that the officer in-
tervened or reported as required by subsections (2) and (3) of this section. Violation of this
subsection is an unlawful employment practice as provided in ORS 659A.199.
(6) The Department of Public Safety Standards and Training shall report at least annually
to an appropriate committee of the Legislative Assembly on any rules adopted by the de-
partment implementing this section.
SECTION 3.This 2020 special session Act being necessary for the immediate preservation
of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this 2020 special
session Act takes effect on its passage.
Passed by House June 26, 2020
..................................................................................
Timothy G. Sekerak, Chief Clerk of House
..................................................................................
Tina Kotek, Speaker of House
Passed by Senate June 26, 2020
..................................................................................
Peter Courtney, President of Senate
Received by Governor:
........................M.,........................................................., 2020
Approved:
........................M.,........................................................., 2020
..................................................................................
Kate Brown, Governor
Filed in Office of Secretary of State:
........................M.,........................................................., 2020
..................................................................................
Bev Clarno, Secretary of State
Enrolled House Bill 4205 (HB 4205-A)Page 2
Attachment 3, Page 2 of 2
161.239 Use of deadly physical force in making an arrest or in preventing an escape. (1)
Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 161.235, a peace officer may use deadly physical force
only when the peace officer reasonably believes that:
(a) The crime committed by the person was a felony or an attempt to commit a felony
involving the use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person; or
(b) The crime committed by the person was kidnapping, arson, escape in the first degree,
burglary in the first degree or any attempt to commit such a crime; or
(c) Regardless of the particular offense which is the subject of the arrest or attempted escape,
the use of deadly physical force is necessary to defend the peace officer or another person from
the use or threatened imminent use of deadly physical force; or
(d) The crime committed by the person was a felony or an attempt to commit a felony and
under the totality of the circumstances existing at the time and place, the use of such force is
necessary; or
(e) The officer’s life or personal safety is endangered in the particular circumstances
involved.
(2) Nothing in subsection (1) of this section constitutes justification for reckless or criminally
negligent conduct by a peace officer amounting to an offense against or with respect to innocent
persons whom the peace officer is not seeking to arrest or retain in custody. [1971 c.743 §28]
Attachment 4, Page 1 of 1