Recommendation 8: The Advisory Committee urges the police division to adopt the model rules published by the International Association of Chiefs of Police relative to the escalation of force.

Finding 9: The Advisory Committee finds that over the years the community relations bureau has not had a stable existence, at one time being without a coordinator for several years. The position of coordinator now has been eliminated and the duties assigned to a deputy chief. Further, the Advisory Committee finds that the community is largely unaware of the purpose and functions of the community services bureau.

Recommendation 9: The Advisory Committee urges the police division to review the current status of the community services bureau, evaluate its activities and develop a coordinated program to improve police-community relations. Community and minority organizations should be a part of the planning process. Recommendation 9a: The Advisory Committee recommends that the police division initiate a public information campaign for at least twelve months. The purpose would be to inform the public not only about the community services bureau but also about other aspects of policing, such as the complaint process and 911 system. If the program succeeds in improving police-community

relations, it should become permanent.

Recommendation 9b: The mayor and chief of police should issue a joint

statement emphasizing their support of community relations programs and making it clear that discourteous, disrespectful or unfair treatment of citizens by police officers will not be tolerated.

Finding 10: The Advisory Committee finds that there has been too little contact between police officers and the community, despite limited outreach programs in the past and despite the current desires of the mayor and police division officials to increase use of the 10-10 status (whereby officers may leave their cars while staying available for calls).

Recommendation 10: The Advisory Committee recommends that the chief of police make clear that division policy encourages the use of 10-10 status. The chief If it proves

of police should monitor its use and evaluate its effectiveness. effective, the chief periodically should emphasize its use through inservice

and recruit training.

Finding 11: The Advisory Committee finds that the minority community has very little confidence in the existing citizen complaint process. The mechanics of the complaint process and the right to appeal to the mayor's administrative review board are relatively unknown to the minority community. While there is widespread dissatisfaction with police processing of citizen complaints, few appeals have been presented to the mayor's administrative review board. Recommendation 11: The Advisory Committee recommends that the city establish a citizen complaint process that balances the rights of the police officers and the citizens. Consideration should be given to using an outside agency to take the complaints and allowing complaints to be filed at locations other than the police division headquarters.

Recommendation 11a: The Advisory Committee urges the police division in

cooperation with the city's human relations department to initiate a public information campaign informing citizens of their right to file complaints and the steps needed to do so.

APPENDIX A

Model Rules for Law Enforcement Officers: A Manual on Police Discretion Copyright 1974, I.A.C.P.

Sec. 3.03. Under normal circumstances, only the methods or instrumentalities listed below may be used to apply force. These methods are listed in ascending order from the least severe to the most drastic. It is the officer's responsibility to first exhaust every reasonable means of employing the minimum amount of force before escalating to a more severe application of force.

(a) Physical strength and skill.

(b) Approved mace, gas or noxious substance.

(c) Approved baton, sap or blackjack.

(d) Approved service revolver or other approved firearm and approved ammunition.

Sec. 4.01. Non-deadly force may be used in instances where a police officer must take aggressive physical action to achieve a lawful objective, as enumerated in Section 1.01.

Sec. 4.02. Whenever a police officer finds it necessary to use non-deadly force to achieve a lawful police objective, it shall be incumbent upon that officer to exhaust every reasonable means of employing the least amount of force to effect the purpose before escalating to the next, more forceful method. However, nothing in this rule shall be interpreted to mean that an officer is required to engage in prolonged hand-to-hand combat or struggle rather than resort to that method which will most quickly and safely bring the arrestee under control.

Sec. 4.03. Chemical mace may be used when the officer, while performing his official duties, is required to use physical force, either to protect himself from assault or to subdue a person engaged in unlawful activities. Chemical mace shall not be used if the resistance is minor, not hazardous to the officer (or a third party), or if the resistance can be overcome by the officer's physical prowess, or by several officers acting together.

Sec. 4.04. The baton (short or long) may be used by an officer to subdue a violently resisting subject or in self defense or defense of a third party if lesser methods have failed or if circumstances warrant the immediate use of the baton.

(a) Blows from the baton capable of inflicting permanent injury must be avoided.

(b) The baton should not be used as a club or bludgeon and it shall not be raised above the head to strike a blow to any person.

(c) Blows delivered with a baton shall be short and snappy and shall be delivered only to the vulnerable areas of the body which will render the opponent temporarily incapacitated but will not cause serious bodily harm.

Sec. 4.05. The baton may also be used as a barricade or repelling device in crowd control situations, or to ward off blows from an assailant.

Fortunately, while an officer may have to resort to use of non-lethal force fairly frequently, situations requiring the use of deadly weapons are relatively infrequent.

The definition of non-deadly force, Section 2.02, includes the specific instruments normally available to an officer. Physical strength or skill, mace or the baton is neither "likely" nor "intended" to cause great bodily harm if properly used. No one, however, will dispute the fact that the improper and unreasonable use of any of the above methods or instruments could cause severe injury and even death.

Section 4.01 calls attention to the fact that law and sound police practice recognize the need to apply reasonable non-deadly force where necessary and practical. However, if the circumstances are such that non-deadly force would be ineffective, or its use would not prevent great bodily harm to the officer or a third party, it would be justifiable to use deadly force.

In an effort to minimize the possibility of unnecessary force, these rules establish an escalating scale of force. The lowest, least drastic method of a police officer using force would be physical strength and skill (holding, throwing, restraining, pushing, pulling, singly or with help from other officers). Physical prowess is a reasonable method of overcoming the resistance of a person who is unarmed or simply failing to abide by the officers lawful command to submit.

There are few situations where an officer should resort to any force greater than physical prowess. Escalating this type of force may mean simply bringing in more officers. It should be remembered that good police procedure dictates that, on potentially hazardous calls for service, more than one officer should be automatically assigned and reinforcements should be called upon, if necessary. The key to restraint and diminishing resistance is superiority of manpower, and no officer should ever be faulted for requesting assistance. The officer who enters a bar room brawl or domestic disturbance alone, unless absolutely necessary or when a cover unit is not available, is in need of retraining. The theory behind superiority of manpower involves not only the protection of the officer, but also the protection of the person to be taken into custody. One man may not have the ability to effectively control a subject and must therefore resort to a degree of force greater than if two officers simply restrained the individual. Although both forms of force may constitute lawful violence in that they were reasonable under the circumstances, the latter is by far a more effective and superior police tactic.

Section 4.03 refers to the use of chemical mace in rendering the resistor incapable of further resistance. Chemical mace should be used only if physical strength and skill are ineffective or impractical. Although mace can be used effectively in most cases, there have been instances where mace has simply not been successful or has further angered the subject, resulting in increased aggression.

In instances where physical strength and skill or mace are ineffective or their use might constitute a danger to the officer or a third party, the officer is justified in using the baton or sap to overcome resistance and to end the conflict.