21st-quarterly-report.pdf

Twenty-First Quarterly Report of the Independent Monitor for the Oakland Police Department May 4, 2015 Page 18 on December 12, 2005, and March 13, 2007, incorporate the requirements of this Task. As the Department has trained at least 95% of relevant personnel on these policies, we find OPD in continued Phase 1 compliance with this Task. OPD was in Phase 2 compliance with Task 5 from the fourteenth through the eighteenth reporting periods. In each of the prior reporting periods, we found the Department in partial compliance with Task 5.7 During the nineteenth reporting period, we placed Task 5 in deferred compliance based on an Order issued by Judge Henderson in the wake of an officer’s reinstatement after he had been terminated for his actions during an Occupy Oakland protest. To verify Phase 2 compliance with Tasks 5.1 through 5.5, we reviewed 92 entries that appeared on the Daily Incident Logs (DILs) that were completed between October 1, and December 31, 2014. We identified these by randomly selecting 33 dates during this reporting period and reviewing the entries for each of those dates. Task 5.1 requires that when a citizen wishes to file a complaint, the citizen is brought to a supervisor or IAD, or a supervisor is summoned to the scene (compliance standard: 95%). During the last reporting period, we found OPD in compliance with this subtask. During the current reporting period, of the 92 DIL entries, 36 complaints were taken by supervisors in the field; two complaints were received by IAD directly; two complaints were called into the IAD Complaint Line; and in the remaining 52 cases, complainants called 911 to express their dissatisfaction. In these latter cases, IAD or field supervisors were notified, except when the complaints were against Communications personnel (these were handled by a Communications supervisor) or were clearly service complaints (e.g., slow response time with no specific officer complained of). We noted 29 such service complaints. Eighteen were for delayed response to calls for service. Two others involved perceived failure to address quality of life issues such as excessive noise. Another pertained to a change of procedures at the Animal Shelter. During this reporting period, OPD remains in compliance with Task 5.1. Task 5.2 requires that if there is a delay of greater than three hours in supervisory response, the reason for the delay be documented (compliance standard: 85%). OPD has added a checkbox to the DIL to record such delays. In addition to reviewing this section of the logs, we also checked the times of complaint receipt and supervisor contact with the complainant (or attempted contact where the complainant was unavailable – see Task 5.3). We identified one case during our review in which there appeared to be greater than a three-hour delay in contacting the complainant. The complainant called from a hospital on Travis Air Force Base, and alleged that officers failed to take a report. A sergeant and two officers responded to both take her complaint and complete a report if one was warranted. Because of the time required to free up a patrol unit and make the drive, the three-hour limit was exceeded. Since the reason for the delay was documented, OPD remains in compliance with Task 5.2. 7 Pursuant to an agreement among the Parties, Tasks 5.7- 5.11, and 5.13-5.14 are not subject to active monitoring.