Memorandum DATE: August 9, 2023 TO: Chief Art Miller #13224 Chief of Police FROM: Sgt. David Foulke #3061 Professional Standards Unit SUBJECT: Professional Standards Unit 2022 Calendar Year Summary Report (CALEA 26.2.5) This report is the Professional Standards Unit 2022 calendar year activity summary for the City of Peoria Police Department. The Professional Standards Unit (PSU) is responsible for the internal records regarding all Administrative Investigations and other specified administrative matters. PSU is responsible for the coordination and records storage of the following: • • • • • • • Discipline Review Panels Use of Force Committee Vehicle Operations and Safety Committee Early Intervention Program Department grievance and appeal processes Department Controlled Substance Screening Program Department audits and non-audit inspections In addition to assisting the City Attorney’s Office and the Human Resources Department with matters pertaining to police department personnel, PSU is also responsible for training of department personnel in matters relating to the functions of the Professional Standards Unit. The Peoria Police Department Professional Standards Unit is staffed with one lieutenant, two sergeants, and an Accreditation & Compliance Coordinator. 2022 Incidents/Entries Note: For the purposes of this report, each entry into the IAPro tracking system is considered an “incident.” Each item, whether it is generated internally or externally, is processed by the Professional Standards Unit and is given a tracking number. Typically, throughout the remainder of this report, the term “incident” will stand for an action documented in the IAPro system and processed by PSU. peoriaaz.gov An Internationally Accredited Law Enforcement Agency The Professional Standards Unit utilizes the tracking software system, IAPro. Additional software known as BlueTeam augments the IAPro software. The IAPro database helps maintain the accuracy and consistency by which complaints, commendations, and other performance issues are processed, tracked, and monitored. IAPro also tracks use of force incidents, vehicle related incidents, supervisor notes, firearm discharges, employee grievances, random drug screens, and inspections. The combination of IAPro and BlueTeam continues to be a valuable tool for the Professional Standards Unit and the members of the Peoria Police Department as we strive to meet our department goal of building partnerships and trust with the community we serve. During the 2022 calendar year, the Professional Standards Unit processed 702 BlueTeam entries, known as “incidents,” generated from citizens or from within the Peoria Police Department. Comparatively, this is 254 less entries processed than in 2021. In 2022, The Peoria Police Department implemented a new Annual Employee Evaluation system, which greatly reduced the number of “Supervisor Notes” that were submitted and processed throughout the department. This was the single biggest factor in the drastic reduction of total Incidents processed by the Professional Standards Unit. Commendations/Complaints (CALEA 26.2.4) Of the 702 entries processed in 2022, 103 (~14.7%) resulted in “Commendations” for department employees. This number is increased from last year by 12 incident/ entries. In years past, “Commendation” was utilized for any positive documentation for an officer. In 2019, a review found that “Commendation” was not being applied equally by supervisors in the agency. Guidance governing the use of “Commendation” was communicated to those who make supervisory entries in BlueTeam. The number for 2022 (103 entries) is generally consistent with the past three years. All other positive entries regarding work performance are entered under “Supervisor Notes.” In comparison, 49 (7%) of the 702 entries resulted in some type of documented complaint or Administrative Investigation. The remaining entries consisted of Supervisor Notes, Use of Force, Vehicle Accidents, Random Drug Screens, K-9 Kit Audits, Mobile Data Computer (MDC) Audits, BWC and Report Reviews and other incidents tracked by IAPro located in Figure 6 of this report. When looking at the 702 incidents received in PSU, 59 were from citizen-initiated contacts with the Professional Standards Unit. Seventeen (17) of the citizen contacts resulted in a service complaint against an employee. Eight (8) of those seventeen (17) service complaints were due to missed off-duty jobs. Eleven of the citizen contacts with PSU resulted in “Citizen Inquiries” which were handled within the unit or by first line supervisors throughout the department. There are multiple methods for citizens to file commendations and/or complaints with the Peoria Police Department:  Citizens can call the PSU hotline and speak directly with a member of the Professional Standards Unit or they may leave a detailed message. The goal of the unit is to return messages left by callers before the close of business. 2  Citizens can download the Commendation/Complaint Form from the City of Peoria website and mail it. This form may also be submitted on-line.  Citizens can enter the lobby of both precincts and fill out a Commendation/Complaint Form. This form is also available in Spanish at both locations.  Citizens may email commendations and complaints to PSU without completing the form.  Commendations and complaints can also be filed with any police supervisor. PSU takes action on all complaints, regardless if the citizen provides their identity or remains anonymous. (CALEA 26.2.1) Use of Force (CALEA 4.2.4) In 2022, the Peoria Police Department had 91 reportable use of force incidents involving 170 employees (166 sworn Police officers, 4 non-sworn Police Services Officers) using various types of force, to include deadly force. For comparison, in 2021, the department had 70 reportable use of force incidents involving 123 employees utilizing various types of force. The following is a report of the force used by Peoria police officers from January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2022. The information contained in this report was compiled by utilizing the information entered into BlueTeam and retained in IAPro. Use of Force Reporting Process (CALEA 4.2.1) An employee, typically a sergeant, is responsible for entering all qualifying use of force incidents into BlueTeam. Use of force is tracked by incident, not type of force used or number of involved officers. One incident can include more than one officer, more than one type of force action taken, and more than one citizen. Once the sergeant has completed (or reviewed) the initial entry, it is then forwarded to that sergeant’s lieutenant for review. Once approved, the lieutenant forwards the entry to the Professional Standards Unit for processing and dissemination to the Department’s Use of Force Committee. The Professional Standards Unit (PSU) ensures all related documents (i.e. case reports, photographs, body worn camera, and audio recordings) are made available to the Use of Force Committee when reviewing the incident. The committee may review the documents as a group or individually. The committee may also require the involved employee(s) to appear and answer any clarifying questions committee members may have. Committee members then cast their independent vote to the committee chair. The vote consists of “within policy” or “not within policy.” In the event the Use of Force Committee determines the force used was out of policy, a Service Complaint or an Administrative Investigation (as directed by the Chief of Police) will be conducted. 3 INCIDENT REVIEW (CALEA 4.2.2) Figure 1: Use of Force Chart (General) Description 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Difference 2021/2022 Use of Force Incidents 67 68 68 70 91 +21 122 122 103 123 Number of Employees Involved (Sworn Officers and Police Services Officers) Calls for Service 170 +47 89,932 91,570 75,720 82,538 86,184 +3646 Arrests 4348 4045 4879 5516 5801 +285 Sworn Full Time Employees 191 194 203 205+/- 217+/- +12 55 54 62 51 48 -3 20 26 18 15 18 +3 1 0 0 2 2 0 Description 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 O.C. Spray 0 0 0 2 0 Difference 2021/2022 -2 Hard Empty Hand 21 19 39 55 23 -32 Hard Impact Weapon 1 0 0 0 0 0 Soft Empty Hand* 80 88 61 42 91 +49 ----- Forced Take-Down 38 33 29 29 57 +28 ----- Control Hold 42 46 29 12 27 +15 ----- Impact Push 0 2 0 0 7 +7 ----- Pressure Points 0 7 3 1 1 0 Less Lethal Stun-bag/BIP 1 2 1 3 2 -1 Police Dog 11 7 6 5 5 0 Taser** 9 15 13 22 15 -13 Restraint Device*** 8 12 11 17 37 +20 Firearm-Officer Involved Shootings-Total Officers Involved 5 2 1 7 6 -1 Total Use of Force Actions**** 136 146 132 153 208 +55 Use of Force Resulted in InjuryCitizen Officer Injured in Conjunction with Use of Force Use of Force Resulted in Death *To gain more accurate data, the “Soft Empty Hand” category has been itemized out to the various types of actions taken in this category in the past. These four actions are now classified as “Forced Take-Down,” “Control Hold”, “Impact Push” and “Pressure Points.” The expansion of this category began in late 2017. 4 **Taser use category include pointing the sighting laser only (1), arc for compliance with no contact on suspect (1), drive stun with no probe deployment (3) and standard probe deployment (10). ***Restraint Device tracking is specifically including RIPP Restraint System to prevent an in-custody subject from kicking. Once a RIPP restraint is applied, Officers ensure care, custody and control by placing the subject in a seated positon. Other restraint devices tracked are “Batwing” straps utilized on a subject in custody who is attempting to slip their handcuffs to the front or who is attempting use their elbows to strike officers or do damage to property as a result of being placed in handcuffs. ****The total number is comprised of all reportable Use of Force actions taken by members of the Peoria Police Department. This total is higher than the “Use of Force Incidents” due to the accounting for all officers on scene of Use of Force incidents and the actions each individual Officer or PSO took. Example- Two (2) officers involved may count for one (1) forced take down and two (2) control holds applied in one incident. Figure 2: Arrests vs Use of Force over Five Years ARRESTS VS USE OF FORCE OVER FIVE YEARS 4879 5516 5801 Arrests 67 68 68 66 91 4045 4348 UOF 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022  The Use of Force Committee reviewed 89 of the 91 incidents. The remaining two (2) are Officer Involved Shootings that will be reviewed by a Deadly Force Review Board (DFRB)  In 2022, there were 5801 arrests. 5710 arrests were made without officers using any reportable force. 89 arrests required officers to use force. This amounts to officers using force in 1.53% of all arrests. There were also two (2) involuntary committal orders that were served that resulted in force being used to take the subject of the order into custody for transportation to a mental health facility. This rate of force being utilized is consistent with prior years.  Two (2) arrests were made following two separate Officer Involved Shootings. Two (2) other Use of Force incidents resulted in the death of the suspect during Officer Involved Shooting incidents. Due to the death of the suspects, these are not considered to be “arrests” for the purposes of this report. These two (2) OIS incidents are entered initially as a Use of Force incident in BlueTeam, then investigated via Administrative Investigation and reviewed by a Deadly Force Review Board, typically 12 to 16 months after the 5 incident occurs. Their status as a Use of Force is converted to “ClosedInvestigated as AI.”  During seventeen (17) incidents from 2022, officers assessed the condition of the citizen as being possibly mentally unstable.  In 22 of the 91 incidents, officers reported drugs and/or alcohol played a contributing factor to the citizen’s actions. INJURY/DEATH (CALEA 4.1.2) Figure 3: Five-Year Comparison of Injuries from Use of Force Incidents  There were two (2) use of force incidents in 2022 that resulted in the death of a human. These were both as a result on an Officer Involved Shooting where the officers encountered an armed subject or a subject who simulated being armed and was non-compliant with officers.  Of the 91 total use of force incidents, 48 incidents (52%) resulted in an injury or alleged injury to the suspect. This is a decrease of 5% from 2021.  Figure 3 is a five-year comparison of any level of injury or alleged injury. An injury is considered significant if the suspect or officer was transported to the hospital for treatment. Of the 91 incidents in 2022, 16 citizens and one (1) officer were transported to the hospital for treatment. It should be noted that with the exception of K-9 related Use of Force incidents and two (2) suspects who had been shot during an Officer Involved Shooting, the majority of injuries were reported or identified as being related to abrasions.  As shown in Figure 1, the most common type of force reported by officers in 2022 was “hard empty-hand.” These are generally due to hand striking, knees or kicks used to defend an officer or to gain compliance from a suspect who is actively fighting the officer(s). 6  “Soft empty hand” techniques increased in frequency of use in 2022. Soft empty hand techniques can be control-holds, pressure points, impact push or forced takedown. The soft empty hands category saw the highest volume of use in 2022. Officers reported using soft empty hand techniques 91 total times in 2022, which as increase of forty-nine (49) reported uses from 2021.  Further examination of the soft empty hands category showed a forced takedown was a specific technique reported to be used 57 times in 2022. This technique accounted for a majority of the reported injuries to citizens in the form of abrasions (31 of the 48 reported injuries were reported as abrasions.) Less-Lethal Force Options (CALEA 4.1.4) Figure 4 is a five-year comparison of less-lethal force used by employees. Included in this chart are also “soft empty hand” and “hard empty hand” response options for comparison. Figure 4: Five-Year Comparison-Less Lethal Force among all Response Options Less-Lethal force response options are defined and explained in Peoria Police Department policies 300 through 309. Less-lethal force is defined as a tactic that minimizes the risk of causing death or serious injury and is designed to stop aggression or aid in establishing control of a situation. Several different force options may be used during one incident by various officers to stop aggression and gain control. All reported individual tactics utilized are recorded in the total number. For 2022, there were 91 use of force incidents. In those 91 incidents, there were 208 total reportable use of force related actions. 7  In 2022, there were no uses of OC spray. This was down from two (2) uses in 2021.  In 2022, there were no uses of an impact weapon such as a collapsible baton. This was similar to 2021 and 2020, which also had no reported uses of impact weapons.  In 2022, there were two (2) successful stun-bag deployment. This was down by one from 2021 where there were also three (3) successful deployment of a stunbag.  Taser use was down in 2022. Tasers were utilized in 10 incidents. Of those 10 incidents, there were 15 uses of Tasers by individual officers. Eight (8) of the ten incidents involved probe deployment and one (1) was drive stun only. There was one (1) reported use of either activating the laser or an arc only, which caused the suspect to comply rather than to actually be Tased. Training (CALEA 4.3.3) In 2022, Peoria Police sworn personnel participated in Advanced Officer Training (AOT). Officers received mandatory in-service training on firearms, which included a low light and full-light qualifications, firearms skills updates, defensive tactics, Taser, and law and legal update. Uniformed members of the department, sworn and non-sworn, also attended comprehensive policing theory called Seven Foundational Principles for Policing. A portion of this training directly related to biases in relation to Emotional Control, De-Escalation and overall Professionalism. Use of Force Analysis (CALEA 4.2.4) Please refer to the attached Use of Force Analysis document generated by the Peoria Police Department’s Crime Analyst. FIREARMS Deadly Force Review Board (CALEA 4.1.2) The Deadly Force Review Board (DFRB) did convene during 2022. At the time of this report, one DFRB had been completed in 2022 reviewing an Officer Involved Shooting from September 2020. It should be noted that in 2023, four (4) Officer Involved Shootings, occurring in 2021and 2022 have been reviewed and cleared by the Maricopa County Attorney’s Officer Shooing Review Board and subsequently reviewed by the department’s Deadly Force Review Board. 8 Unintentional/Intentional/Accidental Discharge of a Firearm 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Difference 2021/2022 3 1 8* 13* +5 Unintentional 2 2 1 0 1 0 -1 Accidental 0 0 0 1 0 -1 Discharge of Firearm Intentional *See Intentional Firearms Discharge section below. Intentional Firearms Discharge (CALEA 4.2.1a) In 2022, there were five (5) reported intentional firearm discharges during two (2) separate Officer Involved Shootings. Each of these was reviewed by a Deadly Force Review Board once the Criminal Charging review was completed by the Maricopa County Attorney’s Officer Shooing Review Board. In addition, during 2022, eight (8) officers fired a weapon to dispatch injured animals that had been hit by a vehicle. Unintentional Discharge and Accidental Discharge of a firearm is defined in the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training (AZPOST) Firearms Manual under Section 2-"SAFETY".  An Unintentional Discharge can be voluntary or involuntary. o A Voluntary Unintentional Discharge is defined as consciously pressing the trigger but not really intending to fire. o An Involuntary Unintentional Discharge is defined as outside the realm of conscious intention. Some causes of Involuntary Unintentional Discharge of a firearm are sympathetic response, startle reaction or balance disruption.  An Accidental Discharge is a mechanical malfunction of the weapon allowing it to fire or outside forces cause the discharge, such as a holster strap getting inside the trigger guard while holstering. There were no unintentional discharges of a firearm in 2022. There were no accidental firearm discharges in 2022. Warning shots are prohibited by Peoria Police Department SOP 312, Firearms. There were no violations of this policy in 2022. (CALEA 4.1.3) 9 Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) and Mobile Field Force (MFF) Use of Force Figure 5 is a five-year comparison of SAU deployments and diversionary devices used. Figure 5: Five-Year Comparison of SWAT Five Year Comparison of SWAT Deployments Diversionary Device 128 106 108 102 6 2018 6 104 2019 11 4 2 2020 2021 2022 Figure 5a: Use of Force Chart (Special Assignments Unit/ Mobile Field Force) Use of Force by SAU and MFF 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Difference 2021/2022 Less Lethal Stun-bag Shotgun 0 0 0 0 0 No Change Less Lethal Kinetic Baton -40 MM Blunt Impact Projectile 0 2 2 2 2 No Change Smoke or Diversionary Device 6 6 2 4 11 +7 SAU (SWAT) Deployments 106 102 128 108 104 -4 SAU High Energy Breach 6 1 2 2 0 -2 Warrant Service Times 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Difference 2021/2022 Day (0600-1600) 32 40 53 56 59 +3 Evening (1600-2200) 5 7 13 9 9 No Change Night (2200-0600) 6 6 3 4 0 -4 10  There were no incidents in which the stun-bag shotgun (less lethal) was deployed in 2022 by the Special Assignments Unit or the Mobile Field Force. There was no increase or decrease when compared to 2021.  There were two (2) uses of less-lethal kinetic batons, also known as 40MM Blunt Impact Projectiles (BIP Rounds) in 2022. There was no increase or decrease when compared to 2021.  SWAT had 104 operational deployments in 2022, a decrease of deployments by four (4) deployments when compared to 2021.  SWAT deployed a diversionary device eleven (11) times in 2022. This was an increase by seven (7) in uses when compared to 2021. In 2014, the Department implemented a High Energy Breach (HEB) program. SWAT considers the use of HEB entries to be the exception and HEBs are used during some tactical situations when the speed of getting officers into a structure would be invaluable and increase the likelihood of a positive outcome and ensure the safety of officers, citizens, and suspects. Examples of these situations include hostage rescue operations and certain high-risk search warrant services. The HEB program is based on the premise that the minimum amount of explosives is used to guarantee a positive entry into the structure. In 2022, the Peoria Police Department Special Assignments Unit had no incidents utilizing a High Energy Breach based entry. There was a decrease when compared to 2021. THIS AREA INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 11 Professional Standards Unit (PSU) Figure 6: Total entries processed by PSU Description 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Difference 2021/2022 Total Incidents Processed* 1322 1308 1396 956 702 -254 Administrative Investigations 7 11 13 9 15 +6 Service Complaints 33 34 31 26 34 +8 Citizen Commendations 43 51 60 44 37 -7 Citizen Inquiry 25 31 23 15 22 +7 Commendations** 212 62 37 22 12 -10 Early Intervention Alerts*** 32 39 25 35 Not Available Not Available Employee Grievance 0 0 0 0 0 No Change Vehicle Accidents 30 26 15 24 29 +5 Vehicle Pursuits 1 3 9 8 7 -1 Photo Radar 0 0 0 0 0 No Change *In 2021, The Peoria Police Department implemented a new Annual Employee Evaluation system that greatly reduced the number of “Supervisor Notes” that were submitted and processed throughout the department. This was the signal biggest factor in the drastic reduction of Total Incidents Processed by the Professional Standards Unit. This downward trend of entries through the IAPro/ BlueTeam system continued in 2022. ** This number is greatly reduced from years past due to a re-evaluation and implementation of the category of “Commendation.” Traditionally, “Commendation” was utilized for any positive documentation for an officer. A review found this was not applied equally by supervisors based on their interpretations. In 2019, guidance was provided to create a consistent definition of “Commendation”. All other positive entries regarding work performance are entered under “Supervisor Notes” This held true again for 2022. ***Due to a system issue, an accurate number of Alerts forwarded to various managers within the organization in 2022 was not available at the time of this report. Service Complaint Findings 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Difference 2021/2022 Exonerated 5 3 0 4 10 +6 Unfounded 7 9 9 6 7 +1 Not Sustained 0 1 0 4 1 -3 Sustained 20 17 20 10 14 +4 Other**** 0 4 2 2 2 No Change **** In this instance, the category “Other” is comprised of Service Complaints that were converted to Administrative Investigations or closed with no formal finding in the status of the Service Complaint. 12 Service Complaint Discipline 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Difference 2021/2022 Letter of Reprimand* 2 1 3 3 10 +7 Written Counseling 8 6 7 2 1 -1 Verbal Counseling 14 9 10 4 4 No Change Training 0 1 0 1 0 -1 Suspension from Extra-Duty 0 0 0 0 0 No Change Administrative Investigation Disposition 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022** Difference 2021/2022 Exonerated 1 1 1 0 3 +3 Unfounded 0 0 0 0 0 No Change Not Sustained 0 0 0 1 0 No Change Sustained 4 9 9 4 11 +7 Investigation Ongoing/ Pending Resigned/ Retired Prior to completion 1 1 0 4 0 -4 1 0 1 0 0 No Change *Fourteen (14) Service Complaints were sustained in 2022. Fifteen (15) actions (Written Counseling, Verbal Counseling or Letter of Reprimand) were taken as a result of the sustained findings. **During 2022, The Professional Standards Unit was tasked by Human Resources to conduct an Administrative Investigation involving workplace conduct by a member of the Peoria Fire-Medical Department. The disposition of this investigation was handled by the Fire-Medical Department Fire Chief. Administrative Investigation Discipline* 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Difference 2021/2022 Termination ** 0 0 2 0 4 +4 Demotion 0 0 0 0 2 +2 Suspension 2 1 2 1 6 +5 Letter of Reprimand 1 0 2 1 3 +2 Written Counseling 1 1 2 1 0 -1 Verbal Counseling 0 0 0 0 0 No Change Retired/Resigned* 1 5 0 1 2 +1 No Action Taken 0 0 3 5 0 -5 *In 2022 there were fourteen (14) Administrative Investigations with twenty two (22) total involved employees. Due to this there were multiple individual disciplinary actions taken as a result of sustained findings. There are also instances where a single employee received multiple disciplinary actions (i.e. suspension and demotion) creating a total number of seventeen (17) disciplinary actions in 2022. **During 2022, two (2) employees resigned following a mitigation hearing for sustained findings for violation of Peoria Police Department policy. The resignations were accepted in lieu of termination by the Chief of Police. 13 Vehicle Accident Findings 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Difference 2021/2022 Preventable 20 13 10 11 11 No Change Non-Preventable 9 14 6 13 18 +5 Preventable/Justified/Pending* 0 0 0 0 0 No Change 2022 Difference 2021/2022 Vehicle Accident Discipline 2018 2019 2020 2021 Suspension 0 0 0 0 0 No Change Letter of Reprimand 4 2 1 1 0 -1 Written Counseling 0 0 0 0 0 No Change Verbal Counseling 16 11 8 10 10 No Change Training 0 0 0 0 0 No Change 2022 Difference 2021/2022 Vehicle Pursuits Findings 2018 2019 2020 2021 Out of Policy 0 0 1 1 0 -1 Within Policy 0 3 8 6 7 +1 2022 Difference 2021/2022 Vehicle Pursuit Discipline 2018 2019 2020 2021 Suspension 0 0 0 0 0 No Change Letter of Reprimand 0 0 0 0 0 No Change Written Counseling 0 0 0 0 0 No Change Verbal Counseling 0 0 1 0 0 No Change Training 0 0 0 1 0 No Change Complaint/Commendation Process (CALEA 26.2.4) The Professional Standards Unit utilizes a process, developed in 2003 and modified in 2011, to comply with Arizona Revised Statute (A.R.S. § 38-101) laws concerning the Officers Bill of Rights for administrative investigations. The Department has two forms of investigative formats: • Administrative Investigation – A non-criminal investigation, ordered by the Chief of Police, to determine the facts of what occurred in response to an alleged violation of an established rule, regulation, policy, or procedure. The involved employee’s chain of command reviews the investigation to determine if a violation has occurred and recommends corrective or disciplinary action to the Chief of Police. The allegation may result in discipline up to and including termination. 14 • Service Complaint – The investigative process conducted by the initiating supervisor to determine if a violation of policy has occurred and to administer the appropriate level of corrective action or procedural changes. The allegation, if true, would result in no more than a letter of reprimand. Administrative Investigations (AI) are typically investigated by the Professional Standards Unit (PSU) due to the severity of allegations and/or the potential level of discipline. On a rare occasion, an outside agency may be utilized to conduct the investigation. Service Complaints are typically investigated by the involved employee’s supervisor. Note- Both types of investigations, Administrative Investigation and Service Complaint processes are similar for both sworn and non-sworn employees. The possible findings for complaints investigated at any level are: Unfounded: The events or allegations reported by the complainant did not happen or were false. Exonerated: The allegation did occur but the employee’s actions were lawful, proper, and within department policy. Not Sustained: The allegation against the employee could not be proven or disproved during the investigation. Sustained: The allegation against the employee met the “standard of proof” and was determined to be true. Administrative Investigations: When an Administrative Investigation (AI) is completed, the report is forwarded to a Discipline Review Panel (DRP) for review. For each AI, a separate DRP is formed which is comprised of the involved employee’s chain of command up to a Deputy Chief or the Deputy Director. The DRP then makes a formal recommendation of findings and discipline to the Chief. A representative from Human Resources and the City Attorney’s Office attend the meeting and serve in an advisory role. In 2022, Chief Art Miller ordered fourteen (14) total Administrative Investigations. Of the fourteen Administrative Investigations, five (5) carried over into 2023. Two (2) of these were Officer Involved Shooting investigations. At the time of this report, all Administrative Investigations initiated in 2022 have been completed and reviewed. Note- During 2022, The Professional Standards Unit was tasked by Human Resources to conduct an Administrative Investigation involving workplace conduct by a member of the Peoria Fire-Medical Department. The review and disposition of this investigation was handled by the Fire-Medical Department Fire Chief. This accounts for the total number of Administrative Investigations of fifteen (15) in 2022. 15 No investigations required an officer to have medical or laboratory examinations. No investigations required an officer to participate in a photo line-up, disclose financial statements, or take a test that would detect deception. This criteria is outlined in Peoria Police Department Policy 1020. There were no recommendations for policy changes or training as the result of an Administrative Investigation in 2022. Dismissals/Terminations (CALEA 26.1.4) There were two (2) terminations or dismissals of employees during 2022. There were also two (2) resignations in lieu of termination in 2022. Service Complaints (CALEA 26.2.1) During 2022, a total of 34 service complaints were completed. Of these complaints, ten (10) were brought forth by a citizen. Twenty (20) were specific to employee conduct. Two (2) of the service complaints were specific to supervisors who failed to supervise employee activities and performance. The other nine (9) were due to missed off-duty jobs. Service Complaints are tallied by incident, not the involved officer or allegation. One service complaint can involve more than one officer and more than one allegation. These 34 complaints involved 45 different employees. There were no recommendations for policy changes or training as the result of a service complaint in 2022. The findings breakdown of these 34 service complaints are shown in Figure 6 (See previous pages). THIS SECTION INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 16 Employee discipline resulting from sustained Service Complaint investigations during 2022 is shown in figure 7: Figure 7: Discipline resulting from sustained investigations Range of Discipline for Service Complaints 4 10 Letter of Reprimand 1 Written Counseling Verbal Counseling Figure 8 is a five-year comparison of discipline in connection to sustained Administrative Investigations. (CALEA 26.1.4) Figure 8: Five-Year Comparison of Discipline for Administrative Investigations Five Year Comparison of Discipline for Sustained Administrative Investigations 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 17 Figure 9 is a five-year comparison of discipline in connection to sustained Service Complaints. (CALEA 26.2.1) Figure 9: Five-Year Comparison of Discipline for Service Complaints Five Year Comparison of Discipline for Service Complaints 16 14 12 2018 10 2019 8 6 2020 4 2021 2 2022 0 Letter of Reprimand Written Counseling Verbal Counseling Training Suspension from Extra-Duty Figure 10 is a five-year comparison of Citizen Commendations, Commendations, Service Complaints, and Administrative Investigations. (CALEA 26.2.4) Figure 10: Five-Year Comparison of Commendations, Service Complaints and Administrative Investigations 18 Biased Based Profiling Concerns (CALEA 1.2.9) In 2022, the department received minimal initial contacts from citizens expressing concerns of Biased Based Profiling or Discrimination. Two (2) citizens believed they received unfair treatment due to non-race based personal backgrounds; one (1) a woman with extensive medical needs and one (1) who is a registered sex offender on extended probation. Incident #1During an unwanted guest / trespassing call, a woman called and complained stated she received what she felt was unprofessional conduct because Officers arrived at this call for service “in a big group” and that the responding officers were dismissive of her self-reported medical issues, which required a large amount of medications. She also claimed that officers forced her from the residence where the call for service originated without socks or shoes. Finally, she alleged that Officers did not allow her to gather up her medical and personal belongings before she was escorted from the property. The Professional Standards Unit received the initial complaint and forwarded it to the Patrol Sergeant for the involved officers. The Patrol Sergeant reviewed the initial complaint. In this complaint, the supervisor attempted to contact the complainant, but she did not answer, nor return his call after he left her a message with instruction to do so. The Patrol Sergeant reviewed the Body Worn Camera Footage for this matter and did not find any sort of unprofessional conduct or bias toward the complainant. To the contrary, the officers were helpful throughout the incident and there is footage of the woman sitting on a bed while putting on shoes and socks while continuing to speak with Officers. This complaint was determined to be unfounded. Incident #2During an investigation by a detective, a man contacted the Professional Standards Unit stating the detective was biased against him from the beginning of her investigation. Even though it was unrelated to this investigation, the caller felt the detective was biased against him, as he is a Registered Sex Offender on extended probation. This complaint was investigated as a service complaint by the unit Sergeant who reviewed the investigative process and determined this complaint to be unfounded. Throughout the 2022 calendar year, there were a few calls and e-mails questioning the Peoria Police Department’s policies, directives and procedures regarding the actions we, as an agency are taking to deter, educate and monitor employees regarding race related law enforcement activity as well as use of force in general. The Professional Standards Unit addressed the citizens’ questions and concerns and the citizens did not file a formal complaint. Not all of these calls were documented at the time. For 2023, these types of calls and inquiries will be logged as a Citizen Inquiry for tracking purposes. 19 Vehicle Operations and Safety Committee (VOSC) The VOSC is comprised of ten (10) department employees from various ranks and positions within the department and is chaired by a Special Enforcement Section lieutenant. The VOSC is responsible for reviewing all employee-involved collisions, pursuits and injuries occurring to in-custody persons (not a result of use of force). Employee involved collisions are entered into BlueTeam in the same manner described for use of force entries. The VOSC reviews the actions made by employees, plus policy and training. The VOSC determines if the collision was “preventable” or “not preventable” with regard to the employee’s actions. If the VOSC determines the collision was preventable, the involved employee is subject to discipline. The VOSC will also make recommendations on policy changes or training needs. In 2022, Peoria Police employees were involved in 29 vehicle collisions. This was an increase by five (5) from 2021. Of those 29 vehicle collisions, the VOSC determined eighteen (18) were “not preventable” or the employee was not at fault for the collision and eleven (11) were “preventable” or the employee contributed to the cause of the collision. Figure 11 is a five-year comparison of preventable and non-preventable vehicle collisions. Figure 11: Five-Year Comparison of Vehicle Accidents Five Year Comparison of Vehicle Accidents 35 30 25 2018 20 2019 2020 15 2021 10 2022 5 0 Total Accidents Preventable Not Preventable 20 Preventable Justified or Pending Review Figure 12 is a five-year comparison of the primary collision factors. Backing, making turns and Lane changes were the top reasons noted for the 2022 collisions. Figure 12: Five-Year Comparison Primary Collision Factors Five Year Comparison Primary Collision Factors 12 10 8 6 4 2018 2 2019 0 2020 2021 2022 There was an increase in collisions from 2021. There were 29 total accidents in 2022 with eighteen (18) being non-preventable. By comparison, there were twenty four (24) total collisions in 2021. Through the past five (5) years, other than during the pandemic of 2020, the department has averaged 27.5 total crashes per year. Discipline for employees found “at fault” in vehicle collisions can range from verbal counseling to termination and is determined by Department SOP GEN-706. Of the eleven (11) preventable collisions in 2022, this was the first collision in over three years for eleven (11) employees. Each of these employees received a verbal counseling because of a preventable collision. Pursuits (CALEA 41.2.2) In 2022, the Peoria Police Department was involved in seven (7) vehicle pursuit incidents. The Vehicle Operations Safety Committee (VOSC) related that the current reporting and review procedures are functioning well and are recommending no changes to the process at this time. 21 Figure 13: Five-Year Comparison of Vehicle Pursuits Five Year Comparison of Vehicle Pursuits 9 8 7 6 5 Within Policy 4 Outside of Policy 3 2 1 0 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Road Blocks and Forcible Stopping of Vehicles (CALEA 41.2.3) There were no incidents of a forcible stop during a pursuit in 2022. An analysis of the policies and procedures of the department indicate that effective measures are in place and no adjustments to policy or training are needed at this time. Grievances (CALEA 22.4.1) A "grievance" is any dispute regarding the meaning, interpretation, or alleged violation of the Administrative Regulations or memorandum of understanding (MOU) with a collective bargaining unit. This includes any written allegation by an employee concerning the interpretation or application of rules and regulations governing personnel practices, Peoria Police Department work rules, working conditions, or alleged improper treatment of an employee, in which the complaint has not been resolved satisfactorily in an informal manner between the employee and their immediate supervisor. Employees are encouraged to resolve problems with their immediate supervisor or lowest level of supervision before initiating a formal grievance. The Police Chief routinely meets with members of the collective bargaining units to discuss potential problems and concerns in an effort to resolve them at the earliest moment. Additionally, the Police Chief carries an “open door” policy, where any member can have direct access to discuss concerns. He also practices a leadership style based in “servant-led leadership” and has instilled a general belief that “One Represents All” across the agency and all law enforcement career fields. There were no formal grievances filed by any employee in 2022. Since 2009, the department has had only five formal grievances filed. The Professional Standards Unit attributes this low grievance rate to the practices mentioned above. An analysis of the 22 procedures and practices in place indicate that effective measures are in place and the low occurrence of grievances supports this finding. No adjustments are considered necessary to policy at this time. Maintenance and control of grievance records are maintained in IAPro from 2009 until present day. Disciplinary Action Appeals (CALEA 26.1.6) There were three appeals filed in 2022, regarding employee discipline. These appeals are ongoing at the time of this report. Early Intervention Program (CALEA 35.1.9) The Early Intervention Program (EIP) is designed to provide assistance or training to employees experiencing work performance or personal difficulties. The intent of the program is to provide the employee with assistance or training in a non-punitive manner. The program also allows an employee an opportunity to overcome work performance problems without the stigma of discipline in a proactive manner. During 2022, one (1) Employee Improvement Program (EIP) plan was implemented. According to the supervisors of this employee, the EIP was initiated based on poor performance and decision- making. The EIP was successfully completed without need for further intervention at this time. In 2022, the Professional Standards Unit forwarded multiple alerts generated through the IAPro Early Warning Alerts function to various lieutenants for review and consideration of additional action. Alerts are generated when an employee reaches a pre-designated threshold for various type of incidents. Incident thresholds to generate alerts are set at the following levels: • (4) Use of Force incidents within a 12-month period • (3) Service Complaints within a 12-month period • (3) Photo Radar incidents within a 12-month period • (2) Pursuits within a 12-month period • (2) Firearm Discharges within a 12-month period • (2) Administrative Investigations within a 12-month period • (2) Vehicle Accidents within a 36-month period • (6) Overall Incidents listed within a 12-month period • (6) Traumatic Event Exposures in a 6-month period Employees who receive alerts are reminded that early warning alerts are nondisciplinary and are intended to create an opportunity for supervisors/managers to converse with employees reference the specified alert as a matter of general discussion to determine if there are any personal or professional concerns or influences that could be affecting the employee’s job performance. From the alerts generated in 2022, all employees involved were offered services through the City of Peoria Employee Assistance Program (EAP) as part of the supervisory discussions with the employee. Assistance offered to employees can come 23 from a variety of support services offered through the city’s Employee Assistance Program, such as counseling, financial services, legal services, and childcare or eldercare assistance. Peer counseling, mentoring or additional training may be considered as additional options to assist employees. Note- Due to a system issue, an accurate number of Alerts forwarded to various managers within the organization in 2022 was not available at the time of this report. Audits or Inspections: (CALEA 84.1.6) Controlled Substance Screening All Peoria Police Department sworn personnel are subject to quarterly random drug screenings. Banner Health supplies the City of Peoria’s Human Resources Department with a random selection each quarter. The Human Resources Department then provides the Professional Standards Unit with the names of the randomly selected employees for drug screening. The Professional Standards Unit ensures the randomly selected sworn employees (84 total throughout the year) are notified and the random drug screen is performed in a timely manner. During 2022, there were no positive returns from Banner Occupational Health. Document Purging (CALEA 26.1.8) In 2022, one (1) audit and review for internal PSU files was conducted. Per Arizona State Law and department policy, all Professional Standards files must be purged three years after the completion date of the investigation. Involved employee names are to be purged from IA Pro per policy and retention laws. In 2019, information was clarified regarding retention of documentation of discipline. The standard is now five (5) years for retention of Letters of Reprimand and all discipline actions to include suspensions, demotions and terminations. K-9 Drug Testing Kit/ Kennel and Equipment Inspections (CALEA 84.1.4) Throughout 2022, the K-9 supervisor periodically inspected all K-9 narcotic training kits and Explosive Ordinance Detection training kits and those inspections were processed through BlueTeam on a quarterly basis. All of the quarterly inspections returned with no discrepancies. The Professional Standards Unit conducted inspections of the K-9 unit as a whole with the assistance of the current K-9 Supervisor, Sgt. D. Stipp. Inspections of vehicles, conducted by K-9 Sgt. Stipp and Sgt. Foulke (PSU), checked all operational aspects of their vehicles to include air conditioners, heat alarms and emergency lighting. Also included in the inspections were the locked storage compartments within the vehicles used to secure and transport the training kits and detailed discussions about the functionality of each unit member’s home kennels. The home kennel inspection was completed virtually utilizing a process where K-9 Officers were given instruction to provide a minimum of two (2) photos showing their kennel from multiple angles within two (2) hours of receiving the message from Sgt. Stipp. The home kennels all remain within compliance of Department policy. An 24 unannounced spot check was also conducted for two (2) of the six (6) K-9 handlers within the department. Mobile Data Computer/Positron Messages Due to issues with New World and Tyler Technologies, the MDC message retrieval was been out of service for a majority of 2022. In a recent upgrade, the messaging issue was corrected, and random reviews of the MDC messaging resumed. Random audits are typically conducted quarterly on Mobile Data Computer messaging. The messages are read by the Professional Standards Unit to ensure employees are following policy. Note, in 2018 Positron, an inter-Communications messaging system, was discontinued. Internet Use In late September 2011, the Peoria Police Department released internet access to all Mobile Data Computers in the field. This Audit/Inspection is a result of this release. The Professional Standards Unit conducted quarterly Audit/Inspections of the entire police department’s internet usage. During 2022, the Professional Standards Unit did not find any incidents that caused concern regarding internet usage by department members. Additional Non-Audit Inspections During 2022, members of the Professional Standards Unit also completed non-audit inspections of the following processes: Peoria Police Department Property Section Vault and Property Room Department policy 804 provides for the proper collection, storage and security of evidence and other property. Additionally, this policy provides for the protection of the chain of evidence and those persons authorized to remove and/or destroy property. In April 2022, a complete no-notice inspection of the Property Section and the Property Room Vault were completed. Overall, the Property and Evidence Section Vault is clean, orderly and properly maintained. An itemized audit of the vault was completed in 2022. This was conducted in April 2022. Note- The vault is inventoried monthly by Property Supervisor Maureen Marquez and various members of the Property Section. Street Crimes Unit Funds Audit (CALEA 17.4.2) Department Policy 608, Confidential Informants, covers the procedures for the use, handling, security, and payment of confidential informants. Department SOP SES-608, Confidential Informants, establishes the procedure for the procurement, recording, and use of CI funds/money. The requirement that an audit/inspection will be conducted by Professional Standards Unit on a semi-annual basis and in conjunction with the City Finance Department during the rotation of the Street Crimes Unit sergeant or Special Enforcement Section lieutenant is located under SES-608.3. 25 The inspection revealed that all CI/UC funds/money were accounted for and in order. Computer automated records and tracking logs were also reviewed. All funds were hand counted in triplicate and verified to be accurate. Firearms Trade Program During the inspections, a total of 65 total firearms were determined to be qualified to enter the Department’s transfer/trade program for an upcoming trade in the near future. These firearms were associated with police cases that occurred between the years 2007 and 2022. Inspection Session August 2022 Handguns 52 Rifles 8 Shotguns 5 Each transfer program firearm was inspected to ensure it meets criteria established by Department legal counsel recommendations to remain in the Department’s trade/transfer program. The criteria includes the following:     The firearm is not currently identified as being stolen from another law enforcement jurisdiction. Note- Each transfer program firearm was checked again through NCIC by Property and Evidence Supervisor Marquez as part of the inspection of each firearm. The firearm is not determined to be illegal (“chopped” or defaced). The firearm does not create an exposure to an excessive amount of biohazard material. The firearm is able to be NIBIN tested. During the inspections, the following discrepancies/ concerns were discovered regarding four (4) total transfer program firearms:  One (1) firearm was found to have an unresolved “hold” status on the firearm. This was discovered by Property Supervisor Marquez during the inspection process.  Three (3) total firearms were found not to meet the above listed criteria due to the fact the firearms were damaged or altered and not recommended for sale. These firearms were designated for destruction through the contraband disposal program. It is evident the processes in which the members of the Property and Evidence Section teach, employ and monitor regarding the impounding and storage of firearms has greatly reduced and maintained a low number of discrepancies discovered during the Firearms Transfer/Trade Program audit. It is recommended the current process for the designation and processing of firearms for the Firearms Transfer/Trade Program is continued similar to past years (2022). 26 Contraband Destruction and Random Packaging Inspection In recent years, numerous impounded items were identified through standard Property and Evidence processes as contraband, primarily drug-related, designated for destruction to prevent the release back into society. For this specific set of items, there was a series of appointments where members of the Professional Standards Unit and the Property and Evidence section worked together to process bins of destruction items. In all, 2,599 individual items, some dating back to 2005, were accounted for. Traditionally included in the contraband destruction process are impounded firearms unsuitable for sale due to illegal modifications or excess biohazard, other miscellaneous weapons such as knives, brass knuckles, swords, and other items considered contraband and designated for destruction. This report does not include these items since they are only inventoried just before being destroyed. The non-audit inspections of the designated property items began in the fall of 20220 and occurred once a week until the end of December 2022. The items accounted for were secured in a Property and Evidence storage area with tamper-resistant seals until the inspection resumed in January 2023 in final preparation for the drug burn in Tucson, AZ. In all, roughly 25 employee hours were utilized to account for, inspect and process the items. Employees completed the initial inspection process in mid-December 2022. Sgt. Araceli Montes performed a number of inspections on behalf of the Professional Standards Unit while she was on light duty. During the process, various items were inspected randomly to ensure compliance with standard policies and procedures regarding packaging and proper evidence impound. Items were prepped and stored in a secure area until they were transported for destruction. About 258 items (~10%) were visually and physically inspected throughout the inspection process to ensure accuracy in labeling and packaging. Of the inspected items, none were found to have packaging that was insufficient for the item. These results are a testament to the attention to detail the members of the Property Unit had when impounding items for evidence, safekeeping, or items impounded for destruction. The members of the Property Unit visually inspect each impounded item and contact the employees if there is an issue or a discrepancy that needs to be addressed before the items are accepted by property personnel. During the inspection, roughly 250 items were selected for inspection of their packaging and labeling accuracy. All items were well marked with case numbers via the labeling system and were adequately sealed in accordance with acceptable standard processes. It is recommended to continue to utilize current practices and processes for designating and destroying items in accordance with department policies and standard operating procedures. 27 It is recommended to continue to utilize current practices and processes for designating and destroying items in accordance with department policies and standard operating procedures. 28 Memorandum DATE: July 31, 2023 TO: Chief Art Miller #13224 Chief of Police THRU: Sgt. David Foulke #3061, Professional Standards Unit Laura Oxford #10639, Accreditation and Compliance Coordinator FROM: Jennifer Loper #8153, Crime Analyst SUBJECT: Use of Force Analysis Report for 2022 (CALEA 4.2.4) Analysis was conducted on use of force (UOF) reports that involved one or more employees using force on a citizen between January 1, 2022 and December 31, 2022. There were a total of 91 reportable use of force incidents analyzed, which is 21 more than the previous year. These incidents involved 170 employees (166 sworn Police officers, 4 non-sworn Police Services Officers) using various types of force including deadly force. For comparison, in 2021, the department had 70 reportable use of force incidents involving 123 employees utilizing various types of force. Calls for Service Year 2022 Citizen Generated 54,898 Officer Initiated 31,286 Total Dispatched CFS 86,184 Incidents Using Force 91 A call for service (CFS) is generated each time a dispatcher enters information into the CAD system. The CFS is converted to an incident when an officer is dispatched to that call. An incident is also created when an officer self-initiates service. Of the 86,184 total dispatched calls for service in 2022, 64% were citizen generated and 36% officer initiated. In calendar year 2021, there were 82,538 dispatched calls for service with nearly the same distribution of citizen generated versus officer initiated. The top call types that resulted in a reportable use of force were Suspicious Circumstance (8 incidents), followed by Domestic Violence - Physical (7 incidents). peoriaaz.gov An Internationally Accredited Law Enforcement Agency Call Type Suspicious - Circumstance Domestic Violence - Physical Accident - No Injuries Disorderly Conduct Check Welfare Fight Welfare Assault - Aggravated Subject Attempt to Locate Domestic Violence Shooting Domestic Violence - Verbal Alarm - Commercial Assist - Agency Assault Drug Investigation Threat/Intimidate Interfering with Judicial Process EMS - Attempt Suicide Search Warrant Assist Other Agency Trespass/Loitering Mental Health Pickup PR Contact Attempt to Locate - DUI Follow Up Traffic Stop Juvenile Offenses OOP Assist - Motorist/Citizen Shoplift Check Hazard Suicide Attempt/Threat Warrant Arrest Incident Count 8 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Occurrence Of the 91 reportable use of force incidents in 2022, the most occurred in October (14) followed by August (13). The months with the least number of incidents were January and February (3 each). UOF Incidents by Month 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec The highest proportion of reportable use of force incidents occurred in the timeframe of 1400 to 2100 hours (39 incidents). This was followed by the range of 2200 hours to 0500 hours (35 incidents). The least occurrence was between 0600 hours to 1300 hours (17 incidents). UOF Incidents by Time of Day 17 35 0600-1300 1400-2100 39 2200-0500 The most frequent day of the week for reportable use of force incidents was Friday and Saturday (15 each). The least number of incidents occurred on Tuesday (11). UOF Incidents by Day of Week 15 10 5 0 Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Types of Force There were 91 reportable use of force incidents involving 208 uses of force. Traditional weaponless force was employed in 74% of total uses of force. Less lethal force was utilized in 23% of all reported incidents. There were two incidents (3%) of lethal force in 2022. Type of Force Types of Force 6 48 lethal 154 less lethal The most commonly used type of force was Forced Take Down (27%), followed by Restraint Device (18%). Officers predominately employ weaponless tactics (74%). There were 95 unique employees involved in reported use of force incidents. Of those, 24 employed force more than 3 times. Three employees used force 8 times or more, all of which were weaponless or less lethal uses of force. Two were SWAT operators designated to utilize chemical munitions. Only two reported use of force types were deemed out of policy. Count Forced Take Down 57 Restraint Device 37 Control Hold 27 Hard Empty Hand 23 SWAT MFF Chem Agent 21 Discharge of Probes 10 Impact Push 7 Firearm Intentional 6 K-9 5 SWAT MFF 40MM BIP 4 Drive Stun 3 No Force Used 2 Stun Bag Shotgun 2 Arc for Comply 1 Smoke 1 Laser Pointed 1 Pressure Point 1 Citizen Demographics White Non-Hispanic Black NonHispanic Hispanic Latino Other Unknown Total Weapon Female Male Male Female Male Female Male Unknown Firearm 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 ECW 0 4 2 0 3 0 1 0 10 Baton 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 Chemical/OC 3 1 0 0 3 0 0 1 8 Weaponless 8 32 4 5 19 1 2 0 71 K-9 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 Total 11 44 6 5 27 1 4 1 99 There were 99 unique citizens involved in reported use of force incidents, with 82% male and 17% female and one unknown gender. Of those, 72 were white (73%), 15 Hispanic (15%), 6 Black (6%) and 6 Other or Unknown (6%). The majority of reported use of force incidents involved a white, non-Hispanic male. The predominant age of citizens involved in reported use of force incidents was 18-29 years of age (44%), followed by 30-39 years of age (24%). In 2022, the youngest citizen involved was 15 years of age and the oldest was 74 years of age. OUF Incidents By Citizen Age 50 40 30 20 10 0 <18 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Citizen injury was reported in 48 incidents. Two incidents were fatal citizen injury. There were 18 incidents reporting employee injury. There were 5801 total arrests made in calendar year 2022. This was a 5% increase from arrests in 2021.