Report 2021-105 Recommendation 52 Responses

Report 2021-105: Law Enforcement Departments Have Not Adequately Guarded Against Biased Conduct (Release Date: April 2022)

Recommendation #52 To: San Jose Police Department

To ensure that it adequately investigates possible biased conduct and implements effective corrective actions, San José Police should ensure that by January 2023 it has formalized policies - such as through discipline matrices or broader discipline guidelines - specifying options for corrective actions beyond punitive discipline that are designed to change officer behaviors associated with biased conduct. The department should require that, when appropriate, these corrective actions—such as training and education—be part of the discipline that officers receive when they are found to have engaged in biased conduct.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From September 2023

The Department does not have a discipline matrix in which consequences are prescribed based on the actions or category of actions by a Department member. Rather, a recommendation of discipline is made by the Department member's command officer pursuant to Duty Manual section C 1724. In the event potential disciplinary action is likely to be greater than a letter of reprimand, the case is referred to the Disciplinary Review Panel.

The Disciplinary Review Panel is comprised of the commander of Internal Affairs and every level of the Department member's direct chain of command (e.g., their Sergeant, Lieutenant, Captain, Deputy Chief, Assistant Chief, and Chief of Police). The case is discussed, including all extenuating circumstances, the employee's performance history, length of employment and assignments, and any prior history of misconduct. A discussion of discipline is conducted by the Disciplinary Review Panel and a determination is made by the Chief of Police4 in consideration of all the disciplinary actions available in Duty Manual section C 1804:

· Training

· Informal Counseling

· Documented Oral Counseling

· Written Reprimanded

· Disciplinary Transfer

· Suspension

· Demotion

· Dismissal from City service

· Other appropriate disciplinary action that the Chief of Police deems appropriate

In the event of a sustained bias allegation, when appropriate, the Department will ensure training and education are a component of the outcome, in addition to or in lieu of punitive discipline. The Department reports to POST to review cases for possible de-certification as well.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

1-Year Agency Response

The Department does not have a discipline matrix in which consequences are prescribed based on the actions or category of actions by a Department member. Rather, a recommendation of discipline is made by the Department member's command officer pursuant to Duty Manual section C 1724. In the event potential disciplinary action is likely to be greater than a letter of reprimand, the case is referred to the Disciplinary Review Panel.

The Disciplinary Review Panel is comprised of the commander of Internal Affairs and every level of the Department member's direct chain of command (e.g., their Sergeant, Lieutenant, Captain, Deputy Chief, Assistant Chief, and Chief of Police). The case is discussed, including all extenuating circumstances, the employee's performance history, length of employment and assignments, and any prior history of misconduct. A discussion of discipline is conducted by the Disciplinary Review Panel and a determination is made by the Chief of Police4 in consideration of all the disciplinary actions available in Duty Manual section C 1804:

· Training

· Informal Counseling

· Documented Oral Counseling

· Written Reprimanded

· Disciplinary Transfer

· Suspension

· Demotion

· Dismissal from City service

· Other appropriate disciplinary action that the Chief of Police deems appropriate

In the event of a sustained bias allegation, when appropriate, the Department will ensure training and education are a component of the outcome, in addition to or in lieu of punitive discipline.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Pending

6-Month Agency Response

The Department does not have a discipline matrix in which consequences are prescribed based on the actions or category of actions by a Department member. Rather, a recommendation of discipline is made by the Department member's command officer pursuant to Duty Manual section C 1724. In the event potential disciplinary action is likely to be greater than a letter of reprimand, the case is referred to the Disciplinary Review Panel.

The Disciplinary Review Panel is comprised of the commander of Internal Affairs and every level of the Department member's direct chain of command (e.g., their Sergeant, Lieutenant, Captain, Deputy Chief, Assistant Chief, and Chief of Police). The case is discussed, including all extenuating circumstances, the employee's performance history, length of employment and assignments, and any prior history of misconduct. A discussion of discipline is conducted by the Disciplinary Review Panel and a determination is made by the Chief of Police4 in consideration of all the disciplinary actions available in Duty Manual section C 1804:

· Training

· Informal Counseling

· Documented Oral Counseling

· Written Reprimanded

· Disciplinary Transfer

· Suspension

· Demotion

· Dismissal from City service

· Other appropriate disciplinary action that the Chief of Police deems appropriate

In the event of a sustained bias allegation, when appropriate, the Department will ensure training and education are a component of the outcome, in addition to or in lieu of punitive discipline.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

The Department does not have a discipline matrix in which consequences are prescribed based on the actions or category of actions by a Department member. Rather, a recommendation of discipline is made by the Department member's command officer pursuant to Duty Manual section C 1724. In the event potential disciplinary action is likely to be greater than a letter of reprimand, the case is referred to the Disciplinary Review Panel.

The Disciplinary Review Panel is comprised of the commander of Internal Affairs and every level of the Department member's direct chain of command (e.g., their Sergeant, Lieutenant, Captain, Deputy Chief, Assistant Chief, and Chief of Police). The case is discussed, including all extenuating circumstances, the employee's performance history, length of employment and assignments, and any prior history of misconduct. A discussion of discipline is conducted by the Disciplinary Review Panel and a determination is made by the Chief of Police4 in consideration of all the disciplinary actions available in Duty Manual section C 1804:

· Training

· Informal Counseling

· Documented Oral Counseling

· Written Reprimanded

· Disciplinary Transfer

· Suspension

· Demotion

· Dismissal from City service

· Other appropriate disciplinary action that the Chief of Police deems appropriate

In the event of a sustained bias allegation, when appropriate, the Department will ensure training and education are a component of the outcome, in addition to or in lieu of punitive discipline.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

All Recommendations in 2021-105

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.