Fiscal Year 2013-2015 Special Budget Meeting

Case3:00-cv-04599-TEH Document930 Filed05/01/13 Page28of59 agreed to with the IMT and the OPD that thresholds should be based on percentages when measured within a Department member's peer group, e.g. patrol teams, undercover personnel, investigative personnel. A beta test of the new methodology using percentages is in-progress. As Risk Management meetings commence in the month of April, much discussion about establishing and utilizing valid threshold measurements will be discussed. The OPD has expressed the need for funding as IPAS2, CRIMS, and RMS continue to mature in the Department. The Monitor has questions about the hard numbers versus standard deviations on reported misconduct. The statistical variances are in dispute at this time, and will require future discussion, analysis, and agreement. Of particular concern are Sergeant's recommendations of "no action" that are overturned by Command. COMPLIANCE DIRECTOR'S FINDINGS AND ACTION ITEMS: In the near future the Compliance Director will host a meeting involving the Monitor, OPD and the OPOA to discuss this issue of appropriate threshold methodology. The result will hopefully be consensus on this issue. TOPICAL AREA #2 Supervisors fail to enforce Departmental policy by not intervening in or reporting unacceptable behavior that they are either informed of or witness. REMEDIAL ACTIONS: GOAL: • Executive leadership in the Department must clearly demonstrate to first line supervisors and middle management that their responsibilities to lead and supervise their subordinates is their first and most important responsibility, that they will be held strictly accountable for intervening in prohibited behaviors they observe, and for timely reporting all such infractions whether observed or reported to them. 28