Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
April 11, 2017
Workshop Shakopee City Council April 11,2017 HAKOPEE 7:00 PM City Hall 129 Holmes St. Shakopee Mission Statement The Mission of the City of Shakopee is to provide the opportunity to live, work and play in a community with a proud past,promising future, and small town atmosphere within a metropolitan setting. A.Keep Shakopee a safe and healthy community where residents can pursue active and quality lifestyles. B.Positively manage the challenges and opportunities presented by growth,development and change. C.Maintain the City's strong financial health. D.Maintain,improve and create strong partnerships with other public and private sector entities. E.Deliver effective and efficient public services by a staff of well-trained,caring and professional employees. E Housekeeping item. Mayor Bill Mars presiding 1. Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Approval of Agenda 4. RECOGNITION OF INVOLVED CITIZENS BY CITY COUNCIL- Provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items which are not on the agenda. Comments should not be more than five minutes in length. The Mayor may adjust that time limit based upon the number of persons seeking to comment. This comment period may not be used to make personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political endorsements or for political campaign purposes. Council Members will not enter into a dialogue with citizens, and questions from Council will be for clarification only. This period will not be used to problem solve issues or to react to the comments made, but rather for informational purposes only. 5. Workshop Discussion A. Police and Fire A.1. Body Worn Camera Grant Update 6. Adjournment to Tuesday, April 18, 2017 at 7 p.m. A.I. T-TAK PE Shakopee City Council April 11, 2017 FROM: Craig Robson, Captain TO: Mayor and Council Members Subject: Body Worn Camera Grant Update Policy/Action Requested: Review and discussion of policy Recommendation: Review and discussion of policy Discussion: As you are aware the Police Department is in the process of developing policy and selecting and testing a body worn camera as part of a 2016 Department of Justice Grant Award. Related to policy our draft policy was approved with a score of 98% from the DOJ on 04-06- 17. Attached for your review is the draft policy along with comments from the community. Budget Impact• None ATTACHMENTS: D Body Worn Camera Policy Draft D Body Worn Camera Comments oe3_ CITY OF re53 SHAKOPEE MEMO POLICE DEPARTMENT DATE: 04-07-17 TO: Mayor Mars and Members of the Shakopee City Council FROM: Craig Robson, Captain SUBJECT: Body Camera Grant Update Attached are documents for the Tuesday, April 11, 2017 Council work session. As you are aware the police department is in the process of developing policy and selecting and testing a body worn camera as part of a 2016 Department of Justice Grant award. Related to policy our draft policy was approved with a score of 98% from the DOJ on 04-06-17. i i I i i i i CITY OF SHAKOPEE USE OF BODY-WORN CAMERAS POLICY Purpose The primary purpose of using body-worn-cameras (BWCs) is to promote transparency and accountability and build public trust, enhance officer and public safety and capture evidence arising from police-citizen encounters. This policy sets forth guidelines governing the use of BWCs and administering the data that results. Compliance with these guidelines is mandatory, but it is recognized that officers must also attend to other primary duties and the safety of all concerned, sometimes in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving. Policy It is the policy of this department to authorize and require the use of department-issued BWCs as set forth below, and to administer BWC data as provided by law. Scope This policy governs the use of BWCs in the course of official duties. It does not apply to the use of squad-based (dash-cam) recording systems. The chief or chief's designee may supersede this policy by providing specific instructions for BWC use to individual officers, or providing specific instructions pertaining to particular events or classes of events, including but not limited to political rallies and demonstrations. The chief or designee may also provide specific instructions or standard operating procedures for BWC use to officers assigned to specialized details, such as carrying out duties in courts or,guarding prisoners or patients in hospitals and mental health facilities. Definitions The following phrases have special meanings as used in this policy: A. MGDPA or Data Practices Act refers to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. § 13.01, et seq. B. Records Retention Schedule refers to the General Records Retention Schedule for Minnesota Cities. I C. Law enforcement-related information means information captured or available for capture by use of a BWC that has evidentiary value because it documents events with respect to a stop, arrest, search, citation, or charging decision. i D. Evidentiary value means that the information may be useful as proof in a criminal prosecution, related civil or administrative proceeding, further investigation of an actual or suspected criminal act, or in considering an allegation against a law enforcement j agency or officer. 1 i E. General citizen contact means an informal encounter with a citizen that is not and does not become law enforcement-related or adversarial, and a recording of the event would not yield information relevant to an ongoing investigation. Examples include, but are not limited to, assisting a motorist with directions, summoning a wrecker, or receiving generalized concerns from a citizen about crime trends in his or her neighborhood. F. Adversarial means a law enforcement encounter with a person that becomes confrontational, during which at least one person expresses anger,resentment, or hostility toward the other, or at least one person directs toward the other verbal conduct consisting of arguing,threatening, challenging, swearing, yelling, shouting, or encounters in which a citizen demands to be recorded. I' G. Unintentionally recorded footage is a video recording that results from an officer's inadvertence or neglect in operating the officer's BWC, provided that no portion of the resulting recording has evidentiary value. Examples of unintentionally recorded footage include, but are not limited to,recordings made in station house locker rooms, restrooms, and recordings made while officers were engaged in conversations of a non-business, personal nature with the expectation that the conversation was not being recorded. H. Official duties, for purposes of this policy, means that the officer is on duty and performing authorized law enforcement services on behalf of this agency. Operational Objectives Operational objectives include: A. Promote transparency and accountability and build community trust B. Enhance officer and public safety C. Collect evidence for use in criminal investigation and prosecution D. Assist in resolving complaints against personnel E. Deter criminal activity and uncooperative behavior during police contacts F. Document statements and events during the course of an incident G. Enhance the officer's ability to document and review statements and actions for internal reporting requirements and courtroom preparation H. 'Promote additional information for training j I. Utilize best practices in the rapidly evolving field of law enforcement Issuance of Body-Worn Cameras (BWC) BWC's will be mandatory for officers involved in routine patrol positions for daily use. Cameras will be made available to all officers, such as investigators for instances when the officer reasonably believes he/she will be in contact with the public and the use of a BWC will enhance the officer's ability to achieve the operation objectives outlined above. Uniformed officers performing contracted overtime services will wear BWC's as part of their uniform. Due to the unique demands of some extra-duty jobs officers wearing i BWC's while engaged in extra-duty employment are not required to activate the BWC 2 for every citizen contact. However, such officers shall be expected to activate the BWC if a situation or incident occurs which would otherwise require activation, when safe to do so. r Training Users of the BWC system and supervisors shall successfully complete a Minnesota P.O.S.T. Board approved course of instruction prior to being deployed with a BWC in an operational setting. Use and Documentation A. Officers may use only department-issued BWCs in the performance of official duties for this agency or when otherwise performing authorized law enforcement services as an employee of this department. B. Officers who have been issued BWCs shall operate and use them consistent with this policy. Officers shall conduct a function test of their issued BWCs at the beginning of each shift to make sure the devices are operating properly. Officers noting,a malfunction during testing or at any other time shall promptly report the malfunction to the officer's supervisor and shall document the report in writing. Supervisors shall take prompt action to address malfunctions and document the steps taken in writing. C. Officers should wear their issued BWCs at the location on their body and in the manner specified in training. D. Officers must document BWC use and non-use as follows: 1. Whenever an officer makes a recording, the existence of the recording shall be documented in an incident report. j 2. Whenever an officer fails to record an activity that is required to be recorded under this policy or captures only a part of the activity, the officer must document the circumstances and reasons for not recording in an incident report. Supervisors shall review these reports and initiate any corrective action deemed necessary. E. The department'will maintain the following records and documents relating to BWC use, which are classified as public data: 1. The total number of BWCs owned or maintained by the agency; 2. A daily record of the total number of BWCs actually deployed and used by officers 3. The total amount of recorded BWC data collected and maintained 4. This policy,together with the Records Retention Schedule. 3 General Guidelines for Recording A. Officers shall activate their BWCs when anticipating that they will be involved in, become involved in, or witness other officers of this agency involved in • a pursuit, • Terry stop of a motorist or pedestrian, • search, • seizure, • arrest, • use of force, l • adversarial contact, • other activities likely to yield information having evidentiary value • officers need not activate their cameras when it would be unsafe, impossible, or impractical to do so, but such instances of not recording when otherwise required must be documented as specified in the Use and Documentation guidelines, part (D)(2) (above). B. Officers have discretion to record or not record general citizen contacts. C. Officers have no affirmative duty to inform people that a BWC is being operated or that the individuals are being recorded. i D. Once activated, the BWC should continue recording until the conclusion of the incident or encounter, or until it becomes apparent that additional recording is unlikely to capture information having evidentiary value. The officer having charge of a scene shall likewise direct the discontinuance of recording when further recording is unlikely to capture additional information having evidentiary value. If the recording is discontinued while an investigation,response, or incident is ongoing, officers shall state the reasons for ceasing j the recording on camera before deactivating their BWC. If circumstances change, officers shall reactivate their cameras as required by this policy to capture information having evidentiary value. E. Recordings may be temporarily ceased but officers shall not intentionally alter, block or b tamper with the BWC's audio or visual recording functionality to defeat the purposes of this policy. F. Notwithstanding any other provision in this policy, officers shall not use their BWCs to record other agency personnel during non-enforcement related activities, such as during pre- and post-shift time in locker rooms, during meal breaks, or during other private conversations, unless recording is authorized as part of an administrative or criminal investigation. Special Guidelines for Recording 4 i Officers should be mindful that BWC's are not intended to replace equipment issued to department personnel to take recorded statements of suspects, victims and/or witnesses. Likewise BWC's are not intended to replace equipment to photograph evidence, crime scenes, etc. Officers may, in the exercise of sound discretion, determine: A. To use their BWCs to record any police-citizen encounter if there is reason to believe the recording would potentially yield information having evidentiary value,unless such recording is otherwise expressly prohibited. B. In limited situations, BWCs may be used to take recorded statements from persons believed to be victims of and witnesses to crimes, and persons suspected of committing crimes, considering the needs of the investigation and the circumstances pertaining to the victim, witness, or suspect. In addition, C. Officers need not record persons being provided medical care unless there is reason to believe the recording would document information having evidentiary value. When responding to an apparent mental health crisis or event, BWCs shall be activated as necessary to document any use of force and the basis for it, and any other information having evidentiary value, but need not be activated when doing so would serve only to record symptoms or behaviors believed to be attributable to the mental health issue. D. Officers shall use their BWCs and/or squad-based audio/video systems to record their transportation and the physical transfer of persons in their custody to hospitals, detox and mental health care facilities,juvenile detention centers, and jails,but otherwise should not record in these facilities unless the officer anticipates witnessing a criminal event or being involved in or witnessing an,adversarial encounter or use-of-force incident. Downloading and Labeling Data A. Video files shall be maintained in an approved storage location, such as a server, storage device, cloud storage, website or other approved secure storage media, authorized by the Chief of Police. Each officer using a BWC is responsible for transferring or assuring the proper transfer of the data from his or her camera by the end of that officer's shift. However, if the officer is involved in a shooting, in-custody death, or other law enforcement activity resulting in death or great bodily harm, a supervisor or investigator shall take custody of the officer's BWC and assume responsibility for transferring the data from it. B. Officers shall label the BWC data files at the time of video capture or transfer to storage, and should consult with a supervisor if in doubt as to the appropriate labeling. Officers should assign as many of the following labels as are applicable to each file: 5 i 1. Evidence—criminal: The information has evidentiary value with respect to an actual or suspected criminal incident or charging decision. 2. Evidence—force: Whether or not enforcement action was taken or an arrest resulted, the event involved the application of force by a law enforcement officer of this or another agency. 3. Evidence—property: Whether or not enforcement action was taken or an arrest resulted, an officer seized property from an individual or directed an individual to dispossess property. 4. Evidence—administrative: The incident involved an adversarial encounter or resulted in a complaint against the officer. 5. Evidence other: The recording has potential evidentiary value for reasons identified by the officer at the time of labeling. 6. Training: The event was such that it may have value for training. 7. Not evidence: The recording does not contain any of the foregoing categories of information and has no apparent evidentiary value. Recordings of general citizen contacts and unintentionally recorded footage are not evidence. P C. In addition, officers shall flag each file as appropriate to indicate that it contains information about data subjects who may have rights under the MGDPA limiting disclosure of information about them. These individuals include: 1. Victims and alleged victims of criminal sexual conduct and sex trafficking. 2. Victims of child abuse or neglect. 3. Vulnerable adults who are victims of maltreatment. 4. Undercover officers. 5. Informants. 6. When the video is clearly offensive to common sensitivities. 7. Victims of and witnesses to crimes, if the victim or witness has requested not to be identified publicly. 8. Individuals who called 911, and services subscribers whose lines were used to place a call to the 911 system. 9. Mandated reporters. 6 10. Juvenile witnesses, if the nature of the event or activity justifies protecting the identity of the witness. 11. Juveniles who are or may be delinquent or engaged in criminal acts. 12. Individuals who make complaints about violations with respect to the use of real property. 13. Officers and employees who are the subject of a complaint related to the events captured on video. 14. Other individuals whose identities the officer believes may �be legallyprotected from public disclosure. D. Labeling and flagging designations may be corrected or amended based on additional information. Administering Access to BWC Data: A. Data subjects. Under Minnesota law, the following are considered data subjects for purposes of administering access to BWC data: 1. Any person or entity whose image or voice is documented in the data. 2. The officer who collected the data. 3. Any other officer whose voice or image is documented in the data, regardless of whether that officer is or can be identified by the recording. B. BWC data is presumptively private. BWC recordings are classified as private data about the data subjects unless there is a specific law that provides differently. As a result: 1. BWC data pertaining to people is presumed private, as is BWC data pertaining to businesses or other entities. 2. Some BWC data is classified as confidential (see C. below). 3. Some BWC data is classified as public (see D. below). C. Confidential data. BWC data that is collected or created as part of an active criminal investigation is confidential. This classification takes precedence over the "private" classification listed above and the"public" classifications listed below. � D. Public data. The following BWC data is public: it 7 1. Data documenting the discharge of a firearm by a peace officer in the course of duty, other than for training or the killing of an animal that is sick, injured, or dangerous. 2. Data that documents the use of force by a peace officer that results in substantial bodily harm. 3. Data that a data subject requests to be made accessible to the public, subject to redaction. Data on any data subject(other than a peace officer) who has not consented to the public release must be redacted [if practicable]. In addition, any data on undercover officers must be redacted. 4. Data that documents the final disposition of a disciplinary action against a public employee. However, if another provision of the Data Practices Act classifies data as private or otherwise not public,the data retains that other classification. For instance, data that reveals protected identities under Minn. Stat. § 13.82, subd. 17 (e.g., certain victims, witnesses, and others) should not be released even if it would otherwise fit into one of the public categories listed above. E. Access to BWC data by non-employees. Officers shall refer members of the media or public seeking access to BWC data to the Services Division Captain, who shall process the request in accordance with the MGDPA and other governing laws. In particular: 1. An individual shall be allowed to review recorded BWC data about him- or herself and other data subjects in the recording, but access shall not be granted: a. If the dataWas collected or created as part of an active investigation. b. To portions of the data that the agency would otherwise be prohibited by law from disclosing to the person seeking access, such as portions that would reveal identities protected by Minn. Stat. § 13.82, subd. 17. 2. Unless the data is part of an active investigation, an individual data subject shall be provided with a copy of the recording upon request,but subject to the following guidelines on redaction: a. Data on other individuals in the recording who do not consent to the release must be redacted. b. Data that would identify undercover officers must be redacted. c. Data on other officers who are not undercover, and who are on duty and engaged in the performance of official duties,may not be redacted. 8 F. Access by peace officers and law enforcement employees.No employee may have access to the department's BWC data except for legitimate law enforcement or data administration purposes: 1. Officers may access and view stored BWC video only when there is a business need for doing so, including the need to defend against an allegation of misconduct or substandard performance. Officers may review video footage of an incident in which they were involved prior to preparing a report, giving a statement, or providing testimony about the incident. 2. Agency personnel shall document their reasons for accessing stored BWC data at the time of each access. Agency personnel are prohibited from accessing BWC data for non-business reasons and from sharing the data for non-law enforcement related purposes, including but not limited to uploading BWC data recorded or maintained by this agency to public and social media websites. 3. Employees seeking access to BWC data for non-business reasons may make a request for it in the same manner as any member of the public. G. Other authorized disclosures of data. Officers may display portions of BWC footage to witnesses as necessary for purposes of investigation as allowed by Minn. Stat. § 13.82, subd. 15, as may be amended from time to time. Officers should generally limit these displays in order to protect against the incidental disclosure of individuals whose identities are not public.Protecting against incidental.disclosure could involve, for instance, showing only a portion of the video, showing only screen shots, muting the audio, or playing the audio but not displaying video. In addition, 1. BWC data may be shared with other law enforcement agencies only for legitimate law enforcement purposes that are documented in writing at the time of the disclosure. 2. BWC data shall be made available to prosecutors, courts, and other criminal justice entities as provided by law. Data Security Safeguards A. Personally owned devices, including but not limited to computers and mobile devices, shall not be programmed or used to access or view agency BWC data. B. Officers shall not intentionally edit, alter, erase, or copy any BWC recording unless otherwise expressly authorized by the Chief or the Chief s designee. C. As required by Minn. Stat. § 13.825, subd. 9, as may be amended from time to time, this agency shall obtain an independent biennial audit of its BWC program. Agency Use of Data 9 n f 0 A. In addition, supervisors and other assigned personnel may access BWC data for the purposes of reviewing or investigating a specific incident that has given rise to a complaint or concern about officer misconduct or performance. B. Nothing in this policy limits or prohibits the use of BWC data as evidence of misconduct or as a basis for discipline. C. Officers should contact their supervisors to discuss retaining and using BWC footage for training purposes. Officer objections to preserving or using certain footage for training will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Field training officers may utilize BWC data with trainees for the purpose of providing coaching and feedback on the trainees' performance. Data Retention A. All BWC data shall be retained for a minimum period of 90 days. There are no exceptions for erroneously recorded or non-evidentiary data. B. Data documenting the discharge of a firearm by a peace officer in the course of duty, other than for training or the killing of an animal that is sick, injured, or dangerous, must be maintained for a minimum period of one year. C. Certain kinds of BWC data must be retained for six years: 1. Data that documents the use of deadly force by a peace officer, or force of a sufficient type or degree to require a use of force report or supervisory review. 2. Data documenting circumstances that have given rise to a formal complaint against an officer. D. Other data having evidentiary value shall be retained for the period specified in the Records Retention Schedule. When a particular recording is subject to multiple retention periods, it shall be maintained for the longest applicable period. E. Subject to Part F (below), all other BWC footage that is classified as non-evidentiary, becomes classified as non-evidentiary, or is not maintained for training shall be destroyed after 90 days. F. Upon written request by a BWC data subject, the agency shall retain a recording pertaining to that subject for an additional time period requested by the subject of up to 180 days. The agency will notify the requestor at the time of the request that the data will then be destroyed unless a new written request is received. G. The department shall maintain an inventory of BWC recordings having evidentiary value. 10 i H. The department will post this policy and a link to the Records Retention Schedule on the city website. Compliance Supervisors shall monitor for compliance with this policy. The unauthorized access to or disclosure of BWC data may constitute misconduct and subject individuals to disciplinary action and criminal penalties pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 13.09. Policy g and Program Evaluation As required by Minn. Stat. § 13.825, subd. 9, as may be amended from time to time, this agency shall obtain an independent biennial audit of its BWC program. 11 BODY-WORN v CAMERA rw.rvrvc a TECHMCAL nsysrnna r Body Worn1Scorecard BWC PIP Site:Shakopee Police Department Date: 3-24-2017 Policy Issue Possible Score Agency Score PolicyDevelopment Did agency review National BWC Toolkit and PERF/COPS report? 1 1 Did agency review other agency policies on BWCs? 1 I Were internal units in the agency involved in police dc}clopmenlP Were external criminal justice/local stakeholders made aware of your decision to deploy BWCs? Were community and advocacy groups involved in policy development? I Does the policy have a date timestamp?(if so,indicate it) I 1 TOTAL-POLICY DEVELOPNIENT 6 6 General Issues Does policy specify who is assigned/permitted to wear BWC? 1 I Does policy specify requirements/conditions for required and voluntary BWC wearing? 1 I Does policy address wearing of private-owned BWCs? I I Does policy specify body/uniform location for BWC placement? I I j TOTAL-GENERAL ISSUES 4 4 Video Capture:Activation i Does policy specify when officers are to activate the BVVC? Does policy specify/require that officers document existence of BWC recording? Does policy specify if officers have discretion on when to activate BWC? 1 1 Does policy provide guidance on citizen notification of BNN'C? i Does policy provide guidance on BWC recording of crime victims and other sensitive I 1 populations? Does policy specify circumstances when recording is prohibited?(e.g.,locker room, I 1 supervisor/officer conversations,strip searches) TOTAL-VIDEO CAPTURE:ACTIVATION 6 6 Video Capture:Deactivation Does policy C provide guidance on appropriate B\N' deactivation(when and hoer to I I deactivate) Does policy provide guidance on requirements for discretionary deactivation/non- 1 0 activation of BWC?(citizen request for non-recording) TOTAL- VIDEO CAPTURE:DEACTIVATION 2 1 Data Transfer/Download Does policy assign responsibility for data download/transfer? 1 I Does policy provide guidance on process/requirements for data do%$nload(time I I requirements,by end of shift,etc.)? Does policy specify prohibitions for data tampering,copying,and deleting? I 1 Does policy specify process for tagging of videos by category? I 1 TOTAL-DATA TRANSFERIDOWNLOAD 4 4 BODY-WORN CAMERA 1n1.�I.e�P.iECNNtCAl A5A5LNCE I� Score Data Storage/Retention i) polis,, ication for proper video storage? I I Does policy specify data retention periods by incident category? 1 I TOTAL-DATA STORAGE/RETENTION 2 2 BWC Viewing Does policy specify authority of officer to review BWC footage he/she recorded? I I Does policy specify authority of other officers to review BWC footage? 1 1 Does policy address supervisory review of BWC footage? 1 I Does policy specify authority and conditions for review of BWC footage by training I I personnel? Does policy specify process for BWC review following a use of force,complaint,or I I critical incident(e.g.,officer-involved shooting,pursuit)? Does policy specify prohibitions for public sharing of BWC footage? 1 I Does policy specify process for auditing of BWC footage for performance review or policy 1 1 compliance? Does policy specify process for coordination with"downstream"criminal justice actors? (prosecutors,defense,courts) 1 1 I TOTAL-BWC VIEWING 8 8 BWC Training Does the policy specify mandatory training requirements in order to be authorized to I wear a RNC? TOTAL-BWC TRAINING 1 1 Public Release Are the state's public disclosure laws refleeted/referenced in the policy? 1 I Does the policy specify whether BWC footage is exempt/prohibited from public I I disclosure? Does the policy specify a process to receive and process public records requests for BWC I I footage? Does the policy specify who is authorized to approve release of BWC footage? I 1 Does the policy specify a process for BWC review and redaction prior to release? I I Is the BWC policy publicly available?(Ifyes,how?) 1 1 TOTAL-PUBLIC RELEASE 6 6 Policy and Program Evaluation Does policy specify a process for continuing review of BWC program(including I l policy review)? TOTAL-POLICY AND PROGRAM EVALUATION 1 1 BWCs and Use of Force BODY-WORN CAMERA TMNINGB iECHWCALA 95TANCE i Did agency review or revise its Use of Force policy and training during the BWC policy development?If so,how?Can the site provide a copy of their Use of Force 1 I policy? TOTAL-BWCs AND USE OF FORCE 1 1 Passing Grade:minimum 33/41(80%) All Required elements (in red) must be covered. Possible Score Agency Total Score Total Items 41 40 Total Mandatory Items 17 17 Total Items percentage score 41 98% Total Mandatory Items percentage score 17 100% OBODY-WORN CAMERA Body 1 Policy Review Scoi-ecai-d BWC PIP Site:Shakopee Police Department RECOMMENDATIONS 1.Does the reviewed policy represent a deliberate and well- considered policy development process? Yes,the policy does.The department reviewed policies from other agencies and involved internal and external stakeholders in the policy development process. 2.Identify any important issue areas in the agency's policy that may present concerns in the future,and that should be monitored by TTA Provider/BJA(i.e.,if an agency does not have a policy that requires officers to notify citizens that they are recording,please note that BJA and the agency may want to review future data for evidence of citizen's complaints of 'unauthorized recording').If no issue areas are identified,please note that the agency is a good target for general comparison The only issue is that the policy does not provide guidance on requirements with other national BWC programs. for discretionary deactivation/non-activation of BWC(citizen request for non recording). 3.Identify the work and persons(TTA lead and any members The TTA Lead for this review was Steve Rickman.BWC TTA Analyst Angie De from the site)involved in this policy review.Please note if and Groot also contributed to the review.Capt.Craig Robson represented the how many iterations of the policy have been completed and Shakopee Police Department.There were two iterations of the policy.The which areas have been modified as a result of this review only areas in the policy that were modified as a result of the review process process. pertained to data storage/retention. 4.Please note your approval/disapproval of this policy as well as I,Steve Rickman,recommend this scorecard or policy development process whether the site has made any related TTA requests. for approval.The site did not make any TTA requests. Shakopee Pulse: Body Worn Cameras https://www.shakopeemn.ciov/Home/Components/Topic/Topic/393/557 w � 1 Connect with Us > Participate Shakopee Pulse Font Sire: 0® 5r—&Bookmark Feedback I&P1,,11 Welcome to Shakopee Pulse!We invite you to share your feedback and input on current city initiatives,such as budget,development ift— and more.Weigh in through palls and online forums.Feedback will be shared with city leaders. at"wi: PULSE You must have a website account to participate in the discussion.Create or sign into your account. Body Worn Cameras In 2016,the Shakopee Police Department received a$60,000 body worn camera grantfrom the Departmentcfjustice's Bureau of Subscribe Today! justice Assistance.The grant will help the department fund 50 body cameras and accessories,as well as necessary server storage =' equipment. As part of the grant,the city must develop a body worn camera policy.The department is currently seeking community input on its Create an Account proposed policy(see below).We'd love to hear your thoughts, concerns or ideas.Feedback will be considered as we finalize our draft policy. City of Shakopee Body Worn Camera Policy-Draft[PD9 Timeline Minnesota General Records Retention Schedule[PDF] Upcoming currently Open Closed Pudic Comments The deadline to participate has passed. Larry Moody• 1 week ago To follow updates,he LM I believe the use of body-worn cameras is a good thing.I hope and believe it will minimize the sure to subscribe to the problems of"he said,she said"types of accusations,Minimizing these along with quickly and topic, accurately resolving them will be a significant return on investment,in addition to their evidentiary and training value. Page 1 of 7 Shakopee Pulse: Body Worn Cameras https://www.shakopeemn.ciov/Home/Components/Topic/Topic/393/557 Public Comments Larry Moody • 1 week ago I believe.he use of body-worn cameras is a good thing.I hope and believe it will minimize the problems of"he said,she said"types of accusations.Minimizing these along with quickly and accurately resolving them will be a significant return on investment,in addition to their evidentiary and training value. And now my comments and suggestions regarding the Policy: In the definitions section,F.Adversarial._.I STRONGLY object to assuming any and every time a citizen records an interaction that the encounter is automatically deemed adversarial.Why? Since more and more people have dashcarns that record continuously,is it to be assumed that every encounter is adversarial?It should not be thusly assumed.THIS PORTION OF SECTION "F" NEEDS TO BE REWRITTEN! General Guidelines for Recording section,C.Needs some additional language to the ef'ect of at least acknowledging that:"Citizens have no affirmative duty or obligation to inform an officer that he/she is being recorded."...If it's fair for one,it's fair for the other.Fairness for everyone, officer and citizen alike,should be a societal goal,a goal of the City,and a goal of the Department. • 1 reply Craig Robson m Larry Moody • 3 days ago Larry Sorry it took so long to get back to you on your comments.It has been my experience that the overwhelming majority of citizen contacts are/have been agreeable but on occasions we are involved in some heated situations.The court has recognized the rights of citizens to film police officers in public areas.As more technology enters our daily lives undoubtedly there will be more decisions,direction and guidance here.Our daily lives undoubtedly there will be more decisions,direction and guidance here.Our objectives implementing a BWC program are to promote accountability, build on our strong community relationships,enhance safety for our officers and produce an over- all better police productlservice. Thank you for your comments.I plan on sharing all the public comments during our BWC training. Page 2 of 7 Shakopee Pulse: Body Worn Cameras https://www.shakopeemn.ciov/Home/Components/Topic/Topic/393/557 Public Comments Michael Cycles • 1 week ago I support:ne use of BWC so long as the footage is properly stored&secured and non-essential footage is purged on a routine basis. Erin Raw • 3 weeks ago What would be interesting and perhaps valuable is to know what other similarly sized cities have for policies if they've already introduced BWCs,and what the costs of storage are.We also seem to be adding time to the admin duties of an officer during shift.they are now responsible for verifying the BWC works and then for transferring and labeling video capture at the end'. I assume the average"checking time"is less than 5 minutes,but how long to d©wndoad/transfer/label?Downloads can take forever,depending on bandwidth... Also-in checking a scorecard(https://www.bwcscorecard.org/)there seems to be some differences between this policy and the scorecard. For example-this policy doesn't say that vulnerable Individuals should have the right to not be recorded(our policyjust says to label it after the fact). Another glaring one is that the scorecard says that the officers should not be able to watch the video before previewing.There are more discrepancies including not explicitly limiting the use of biometric technologies. I don't know if the.org that i referenced should be the tried/true or not(they clearly have an agenda)but it seems like we should consider that.This one(http:l/www.aele.org/iacp-bwc- mp.pdf)which is from the IACP National Law Enforcement Policy center(funded by D0j)says that officers viewing video before or after should be left up to the administrators. It also says that people should be(when possible)told they are being recorded... Food for thought re lie �iVj ILLarry Moody Erin Raw • 1 week ago i Erin, On one of your paints I disagree with you: Page 3 of 7 Shakopee Pulse: Body Worn Cameras https://www.shakopeemn.ciov/Home/Components/Topic/Topic/393/557 Public Comments ditterences between this policy and the scorecard. For example-this policy doesn't say that vulnerable individuals should have the right to not be recorded(our pollcyjust says to label it after the fact). Another glaring one Is that the scorecard says that the officers should not be able to watch the video before previewing.There are more discrepancies including not explicitly limiting the use of biometric technologies. I don't know if the.org that i referenced should be the trieditrue or not(they clearly have an agenda)but it seems like we should consider that.This one(http://www.aele.org/iacp-bwc- mp.pdf)which is from the IACP National Law Enforcement Policy center(funded by D0J)says that officers viewing video before or after should be left up to the administrators. It also says that people should be(when possible)told they are being recorded... Food for thought 2 replies Larry Moody Erin Raw • 1 week ago Erin, On one of your points I disagree with you: 1,as an indlvidual that falls into two separate categories of"vulnerable adult", do not see any reason why I should have the right to insist that an officer in the performance of his/her duties that she/he may not record our interactions. Conversely, I certainly hope they will record such. Craig Robson m Erin Raw • 3 weeks ago Erin Thank you for your comments. If I was looking at the same thing thatyou were,the website was listing what different departments have in their policies.This is a little different than the scorecard that we received where we had to input our data. Some pollcy areas were mandatory and others were not.We covered all of the mandatory areas required by the DOJ and many of the non-mandatory areas too.Additionally we started writing our policy following the model policy from the League of Minnesota Page 4 of 7 Shakopee Pulse: Body Worn Cameras https://www.shakopeemn.ciov/Home/Components/Topic/Topic/393/557 Public Comments website was Misting what different departments have in their policies.This is a little different than the scorecard that we received where we had to input our data. Some policy areas were mandatory and others were not.We covered all of the mandatory areas required by the DOJ and many of the non-mandatary areas too.Additionally we started writing our policy following the model policy from the League of Minnesota Cities to make sure we were in compliance with state law. Before starting our policy draft,we brought the Burnsville PD in to share their experiences.As part of our grant,two our our staff will attend a national conference on body cameras as well as a regional conference.We've also gone to ma ny training sessions on the local level. Regarding uploads/downloads and labeling fifes,we hope to have a upload/download that is automatic,like the one that we currently use In our squad car cameras.When the squad is in range,their footage uploads automatically.You are correct,officers will have another administrative duty and we want to make as streamline and simple as possible. With regards to biometrics,our experience is that it is used in the redaction software. We've been told that it ensures that someone intended to be blurred from footage would not be lost if they left the frame and later returned. Biometrics would pick them up and continue to blur them out.We haven't finalized a vendor so we haven't finalized a redaction software.We've been told by a large department that they by- passed the biometrics in the redaction software because the manual version was easy to navigate and was much less expensive. Finally if by vulnerable your talking about people in a compromised or embarrassing situation I can assure you this area will be covered in our training lesson plans.We want the camera to add value and not alienate people. Again thank you for your comments Page 5 of 7 Shakopee Pulse: Body Worn Cameras https://www.shakopeemn.ciov/Home/Components/Topic/Topic/393/557 Public Comments Nate Rose • 3 weeks ago I'm all for BWC use by the Shakopee Police. It creates more accountability and transparency which builds trust with the public. The one question or feedback on the policy I have is that there is only the one small section about supervisory responsibility for the officers' use of the cameras. It would be great if there were additional details around how the expectations laid out for the officers on how and why they use the cameras will be monitored for compliance. For example,how will the supervisor know if the camera is used in each situation that is in the guidelines? Thank you.This Is a great thing for all Shakopee residents. • 2 replies Craig Robson m Nate Rose • 3 weeks ago Nate I wanted to make additional comments on your post.Officers using cameras will be required to tag or label their footage.Supervisors will review the footage to make sure that the footage is classified properly and that the cameras were operated in appropriate situations. In addition to policy directives, Minnesota law requires an independent audit of BWC footage. In developing our policy we were required to submit our policy to the Department of Justice for review and grading.The DOJ has a lot of mandatory language that we already had in our policy but there were some minor additions we had to make. Thank you for your comments, I hope the additional information was helpful. If you have more questions you can send them to police@shakopeemn.gov Craig Robson .is Jay Sutton m Nate Rose • 3 weeks ago Thank you for the feedback and support, Nate!Your suggestions regarding the supervisory responsibility for the officer's use of the body worn cameras will be given to the Doliev committee. Have a wonderful dav± Page 6 of 7 Shakopee Pulse: Body Worn Cameras https://www.shakopeemn.ciov/Home/Components/Topic/Topic/393/557 Public Comments Kevin Wetherille • 3 weeks ago I fully support the implementation of this program. I think the policy draft is excellent,though it may be prudent to dfined how long BWD data that has evidentiary value will be maintained. I see this policy references what appears to be a separate records retention policy,which may suffice,but it might help the public more to put that schedule into this policy explicitly,as opposed to by reference. Kudos to Chief Tate and the Shakopee PD for being on the front lines of this type of program. think most lawyers who have worked in criminal justice applaud the implementation of BWC's. Cities that have them have experienced far fewer court challenges to cases due to the clear nature of the evidence gathered by BWC's,just as we've seen for years with squad video. Nice work. 2 replies Gk Craig Robson m Kevin Wetherille • 3 weeks ago Thank you for your comments.We understand that the data retention schedule answers questions very broadly but because the retention rules are situational it is hard to avoid. In same cases the footage may have to be kept permanently(deaths& arsons)and in some situations the footage may be purged after a very short period of time(footage created when the camera is tested at the beginning of a shift). We are moving forward nicely with policy and product selection and will soon demo some of the systems.Again,thank you for your comments. Joy Sutton [M Kevin Wetherille • 3 weeks ago Your feedback regarding having more definition on the longevity of BWD data is greatly appreciated, Kevin! It will be passed on to the policy committee.Thank you, too,for the kudos which will be passed on to Chief Tate and the Shakopee PD. Have a wonderful day! Page 7 of 7