EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Community Crisis Response Services (Bridge Services) .................................................................................................. 53 Youth Peers Mental Health, Behavioral, and Crisis Response ...................................................................................... 55 Respite from Gender Violence ............................................................................................................................................... 56 Language Equity ......................................................................................................................................................................... 57 APPENDIX ........................................................................................................................................................................ 58
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
4 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This section provides an overview of Berkeley’s work towards Reimagining Public Safety, highlighting key milestones and the city’s commitment to creating an equitable and effective model for all residents.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
5 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Introduction
The dialogue surrounding public safety in the United States shifted in 2020. National events starkly highlighted that trust in law enforcement and public safety mechanisms had been deeply eroded for many, especially within marginalized communities. The tragic and unjust deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and many others underscored the pressing need to address systemic inequities and to deeply reconsider the tenets of public safety. On June 6, 2020, over 7,000 Berkeley residents marched in the streets to call for transformative change in law enforcement. The City of Berkeley, aware of its role and responsibilities in this national context, promptly heeded this call for introspection and reform.
This report delineates the systematic and strategic steps -- grounded in equity, transparency, and community engagement -- taken by the City of Berkeley since 2020 to reimagine and recalibrate its approach to public safety.
As Berkeley progresses in its mission, the City remains committed to fashioning a public safety paradigm that is both reflective of community aspiration and is robustly equipped to address emergent challenges through holistic measures. With a blend of strategic financial investments, stakeholder collaboration, and a dedication to innovation, Berkeley is diligently working to set a standard for community-focused public safety.
This report and status update on Reimagining Public Safety underscores the City of Berkeley’s dedication to serving its residents. It provides a comprehensive review of the City’s progress and efforts thus far towards the Reimagining Public Safety initiative. The City remains determined to develop a comprehensive, fair, and inclusive approach to public safety that benefits every member of the community. The City remains committed to these efforts and will continue to collaborate with the community and engage with experts in the field towards designing and implementing a new public safety model that aligns with an expansive approach towards public safety, encompassing areas from traditional policing to mental health and crisis intervention, and disaster preparedness (e.g., managing climate change).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
6 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Timeline of Phase 1 Actions and Commitments
The table presented on the following page provides a chronology of the City of Berkeley’s systemic actions in its initiative to Reimagine Public Safety. This timeline highlights significant milestones, serving as a testament to the work, due diligence, and unwavering commitment of both city officials and vibrant community. It sheds light on process, emphasi zing the importance of community engagement, fostering cross departmental collaboration, liaising with pivotal stakeholders and subject matter experts, a ll converging towards a judicious allocation of resources. Such planning and execution ensure that strategies are not only envisioned, but also effectively operationalized with the community’s best interests in mind.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
7 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Phase 1: Community Process and Research
Date Milestone Description References
June 16, 2020
A rapid response to the evolving national dialogue was
evidenced with the introduction of the “Urgency Item: Safety for All,” a directive that set the stage for the Omnibus motion, and comprehensive deliberations on public safety. • Annotated Agenda
July 14, 2020
With the approval of the Omnibus motion, Berkeley signaled its intention to undertake substantive and meaningful
reforms.
• See Action Calendar:
Items 18a-18e
• Annotated Agenda
December 15, 2020
Recognizing the need for expert input, a partnership and contract with the National Institute of Criminal Justice Reform (NICJR) was established.
• See Consent Calendar:
Item 7
• Annotated Agenda
January 19, 2021
Institutionalizing community and stakeholder engagement, the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force was instituted, ensuring that diverse voices were actively included in the reimagining process.
• See Consent Calendar:
Item 18
• Annotated Agenda
March 10, 2022
The culmination of research analysis, and community
dialogue was manifested in the comprehensive reports from NICJR, the Task Force, and Specialized Care Unit (SCU). • See Action Calendar:
Item 1-2
• Annotated Agenda
April 21, 2022
A presentation by the City Manager’s Office served as a synthesis of the work done, offering an in-depth view of Berkeley’s roadmap and strategic vision.
• See Action Calendar:
Item 1
• Annotated Agenda
May 5, 2022
The Mayor presented a plan to the City Council from which a final framework was adopted:
1. Allocating up to $5.3 million for FY 2023-2024, aimed at reinforcing staff/consultant resources, and critical
community investments to complete the Reimagining Public Safety Initiatives.
2. Prioritization of Phase 1 programmatic recommendations for the next two years (2022-2024).
3. A mandate for designing an innovative and comprehensive public safety agency or Department of Community Safety
within the City of Berkeley administration, and return with recommendations to the City Council by May 2024 to align with the FY 2025-2026 Biennial Budget process.
4. Forward-looking plans for further reforms, designated for inclusion in the FY 2025-2026 Biennial Budget.
• See Action Calendar:
Item 1a-1c
• Annotated Agenda
June 28, 2022
The Biennial Budget adoption was emblematic of Berkeley’s strategic foresight, weaving in financial judiciousness with transformative public safety objectives.
• See Action Calendar:
Item 44
• Annotated Agenda
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
8 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Progress Overview
Phase 1
Community Process and Research
On July 14, 2020, in Resolution No. 69,501-
N.S., City Council passed a package of items
providing direction for the development of a
new paradigm of public safety in Berkeley. As
part of the items that were adopted, City
Council adopted Item 18c
(“Referral to City
Manager to Re-imagine Policing Approaches to
Public Safety Using a Process of Robust
Community Engagement, to Develop a Path
Forward to Transforming Public Safety and
Policing in Berkeley”) and Item
18d (“Transform
Community Safety and Initiate a Robust
Community Engagement”), which directs the
City Manager to engage a qualified firm(s) or
individual(s) to lead a robust, inclusive, and
transparent community engagement process
with the goal of achieving a new and
transformative model of positive, equitable and
community centered safety for Berkeley.
Partnerships & Collaborations
As outlined in the City Manager’s April 2022
report, the City has embraced a holistic and
integrated community engagement process. This
initiative aims to lead the community toward a
transformative model of equity and community-
centered safety (See Companion Appendix A,
pp. 2-17 of City Manager’s Report).
National Institute for Criminal Justice
Reform (NICJR) Partnership and
Community Engagement
On December 15th 2020, the City Council
authorized a contract with NICJR to enhance
community safety and police reform strategies.
NICJR, selected due to their recognized
expertise and alignment with Berkeley’s ethos,
worked hand-in-hand with City teams,
stakeholders, and community to ensure
comprehensive strategies for Reimagining
efforts.
Reimagining Public Safety Task Force
and Departmental Presentations
On January 19, 2021, the City Council
adopted revisions to the enabling legislation for
the Reimagining Public Safety (RPS) Task Force.
The RPS Task Force’s work centered on
providing input and making recommendations
to NICJR and City Staff on a set of
recommended programs, structures and
initiatives incorporated into a final report and
implementation plan developed by NICJR to
guide future decision making in upcoming
budget processes for FY 2022-23 and, as a
second phase advanced, in the FY 2024-2026
budget process. The Public Safety / Police Re-
Imagining and community engagement process
was led initially by Deputy City Manager David
White and then Deputy City Manager LaTanya
Bellow who provided overall project
management support to the team.
City departments responsible for executing
Reimagining Public Safety directives engaged
with the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force
to shed light on the comprehensive nature of
their operations. Through these informative
interactions, the Task Force was better
positioned to form recommendations. Working
in tandem with the Mayor’s Office and City
Council, the RPS Task Force served as a central
pillar of Berkeley’s community engagement
strategy, ensuring that diverse perspectives are
considered as we continue to shape the future
of public safety in Berkeley.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
9 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Culmination of Efforts and Adopted
Framework
On March 10, 2022, the culmination of
research, analysis, and community dialogue was
manifested in the comprehensive reports from
NICJR, the Reimagining Public Safety Task
Force, and Resource Development Associates
work on the Specialized Care Unit (SCU)
design. During a City Council work session,
these reports were shared, providing a detailed
overview of suggested programs, structural
changes, and new initiatives aimed to establish a
community-centric safety paradigm. NICJR’s
approach and recommendations were rooted in
the principles of Reduce, Improve, and Reinvest.
The report from the Reimagining Public Safety
Task force offered a response to NICJR’s
recommendations, including a historical context
on public safety issues and steps to address
community-centric approaches in Berkeley (See
Companion Appendix A, pp. 861-1005 for
Reimagining Public Safety Task Force Report).
Additionally, the session included three reports
specifically related to the design and
implementation of the Specialized Care Unit
(SCU) (See Companion Appendix E, pp. 2497-
2701 for RDA SCU Reports).
On April 21, 2022, the City Manager provided
the City Council with a report and presentation
on the work accomplished in Phase 1 of the
Reimagining Public Safety initiative. The report
submitted included recommendations for
advancing various critical initiatives within the
Reimagining Public Safety Framework of
Reimagine, Improve, and Reinvest:
• Reimagine: Redesign public safety
from a traditional Police enforcement
model to one that is focused on the
diverse needs of the community it
serves.
• Improve: Improve the City of
Berkeley’s public safety system for
residents and communities that have
experienced the greatest harm from
the existing public safety model.
• Reinvest: Increase equitable
investment in vulnerable communities
and for those who have been
historically marginalized.
This encompassed proposals for transforming
Berkeley’s police force, enhancing priority
dispatch, developing a Berkeley Department of
Transportation (BerkDOT), and establishing a
Specialized Care Unit (SCU). The report also
included budget recommendations for these
initiatives and highlighted important factors for
the City Council to consider in the City’s
efforts to move forward with implementation
(See Companion Appendix A, pp. 2-17 of City
Manager’s Report).
On May 5, 2022, a special City Council
meeting was convened, wherein the Mayor’s
final framework for the next steps of the
Reimagining Public Safety initiative was formally
adopted (See Companion Appendix C, pp.
2287-2307). This framework was the
culmination of years of diligent work from
community members, officials and staff. The key
decisions made were as follows:
1. Refer up to $5.3 Million to the FY
2023-2024 Budget Process for staff
and/or consulting services and
community investments to complete
the Priority Reimagining Public Safety
Initiatives.
2. Direct the City Manager to prioritize
over the next two years the
programmatic recommendations for
Phase 1 of Reimagining Implementation.
3. Direct the City Manager to initiate a
design process for an innovative and
comprehensive public safety agency or
Department of Community Safety
within the City of Berkeley
administration, and return with
recommendations to the City Council
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
10 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
by May 2024 to align with the FY 25-26
Biennial Budget process.
4. Except where resources may allow for
exp
edited implementation, refer
additional reforms to the FY 2025-2026
B
iennial Budget.
On June 28, 2022, the City Council adopted
the FY 2023-2024 city budget which included
key Reimagining Public Safety Tier 1 items.
Ongoing Engagement
While in 2020, a collaborative strategy was set
in motion, drawing on the expertise of multiple
city departments, as well as the City Auditor, to
ensure alignment with the City Council
directives, this collaborative approach has
remained. In ongoing efforts to maintain
transparency and foster trust, the City’s team
has held public forums, presented City Manager
comments, and issued progress memos to the
City Council and the community (See
Companion Appendix B, pp. 1899-2285 for City
Manager’s Reimagining Public Safety Off-Agenda
Memos).
Deliverables & Status Update
Based on the recommendations listed in the
omnibus package, Phase 1 of the Reimagining
Public Safety Initiative, directed by City
Leadership, consisted of numerous elements.
The following pages provide a high-level
overview of the Phase 1 recommendations and
status updates. Additionally, the following
legend offers an overview of the key
Reimagining Public Safety departments leading
the implementation of these priority initiatives.
It is crucial to emphasize that this initiative is a
city-wide effort, reliant on the active
involvement of a variety of city staff and
community-based subject matter experts
throughout its phased implementation. This
1 https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/boards-
commissions/reimagining-public-safety-task-force
team is uniquely situated to continue
accomplishing this work. Their dedication,
passion and leadership around this work is truly
exceptional.
Lastly, please refer to the Companion
Appendix
1 online for a full scope of archival
documentation related our efforts; the
Abbreviated Appendix includes new items
introduced.
Reimagining Public Safety Deliverable Leads
Color Code Lead Department
Grey City Manager’s Office (CMO)
Yellow Health Housing and
Community Services (HHCS)
Blue Police
Red Fire
Green Public Works
Orange City Auditor’s Office
Purple City Attorney’s Office (CAO)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
11 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Health, Housing, and Community Services-led Deliverables Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Specialized Care Unit (SCU)
Development
Adopt the report, “City of Berkeley Specialized Care Unit Crisis Response Recommendations by Resource Development
Associates” and implement the pilot Specialized Care Unit (SCU).
Complete. HHCS worked extensively with RDA, the Reimagining Public Safety Taskforce, the SCU Steering Committee, and other key community stakeholders in the Specialized Care Unit development process. The Specialized Care Unit Response Recommendations were shared with the City Council on March, 10, 2022 (See Companion Appendix E).
(Phase 1) Community Crisis
Response (CCR) Bridge
Services
Implement the Community Crisis Response (CCR) services while the Specialized Care Unit is piloted and reaches full operations.
In Progress. Contracts with Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients (Berkeley Drop-in Center), Options Recovery, and Women’s Daytime Drop-in Center renewed/amended.
Gender Violence
Recommendations
Implement recommendations from the Reimagining Task Force relating to Gender Violence, LGBTQIA and PEERS as feasible.
In Progress. HHCS has hired a Community Services Specialist II to support with implementing these recommendations and preliminary steps of research are underway.
Fire-led Deliverable
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Priority Dispatch
Development
Continue development and implementation of prioritized
dispatch, request staff return with a recommended plan.
In Progress. Federal Engineering, Inc. was contracted for the Dispatch Needs Assessment, a second opinion with another industry expert is underway.
City Manager’s Office-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Community/Consultant
Engagement Process
Engaging a qualified firm(s) or individual(s) to lead a robust, inclusive, and transparent community engagement process with the goal of achieving a new and transformative model of positive, equitable and community-centered safety for Berkeley.
Complete. The City of Berkeley engaged with several key community stakeholders and field experts in the Reimagining Public Safety process.
Recommendations shared include: the SCU Response Recommendation, Reimagining Public Safety Taskforce Recommendations (shared March 10, 2022), and City Manager’s Report and Recommendations (shared April 21, 2022) (See Companion Appendix A).
Alternative Response
Implementation Plan
Develop an implementation plan to expand alternative response from civilian responders beyond the proposed pilot for SCU for other low-level calls that includes, but is not limited to:
Community Service Officers for only those calls that necessitate police, code enforcement, environmental health, fire inspectors or city-hired community mediators.
To Be Initiated. Preliminary steps of research are underway.
Violence Intervention
Program (GVP/Ceasefire) Fully implement the Ceasefire Violence Intervention Program. In Progress. Gun Violence Prevention analysis has been completed, the Assistant to the City Manager is outlining preliminary next steps for implementation.
PHASE 1 DELIVERABLES REIMAGINE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
12 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
City Auditor-led Deliverable
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
City Auditor Analysis
Have the City Auditor perform an analysis of City’s emergency 9- 1-1 calls-for service and responses, as well as analysis of the Berkeley Police Department’s (BPD) budget.
Complete. The City Auditor Completed their report, Data Analysis of the City of Berkeley’s Police Response, July 2, 2021 (See Companion Appendix A, pp. 521- 600).
Public Works-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Berkeley Department of
Transportation (BerkDOT)
Development
Pursuing the creation of a Berkeley Department of
Transportation (“BerkDoT”) to ensure a racial justice lens in traffic enforcement and the development of transportation policy, programs and infrastructure, and identify and implement approaches to reduce and/or eliminate the practice of pretextual stops based on minor traffic violations.
In Progress. While the City Manager’s Office Public Works Department continues to work with stakeholders and constituents in the BerkDOT development process, progress has been slow, especially concerning legislative matters. For instance, the California Senate Bill 50 supporting civilian traffic enforcement was declined on September 14, 2023. Additionally, since Berkeley is not included in the Assembly Bill 645, introducing a Speed Safety System Pilot Program locally would require separate legislation.
Crossing Guards Transition Transition crossing guards from BPD to Public Works until a Department of Transportation is developed.
Complete. Transition of crossing guards from BPD to Public Works until a Department of Transportation is developed is completed. Additionally, Public Works planning capacity has been expanded to include collision analysis.
Transportation Functions
Consolidation
Continue consolidating transportation functions as recommended by staff. In Progress. Continued efforts are underway.
Police-led Deliverable(s)
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Fair and Impartial Policing
Recommendations
Complete the implementation of Fair and Impartial Policing (FIP) Recommendations.
In Progress. Following the approval of the 14 Fair and Impartial Policing recommendations, the Berkeley Police Department has fully implemented 13 of them and has hired a consultant to fulfill the remaining recommendation.
Auditor Recommendations Complete Auditor Recommendations on overtime and calls for service.
Complete. The Berkeley Police Department initiated efforts to implement recommendations. Progress updates have been communicated to council and the community via memos and information reports (See Companion Appendix S, pp. 3246-3257 for latest update).
City Attorney-led Deliverable
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Litigation Analysis
Analyzing litigation outcomes and exposure for city departments in order to guide the creation of City policy to reduce the impact of settlements on the General Fund.
In Progress. The City Attorney’s Offices continues to partner with departments on all Reimagining Public Safety-related efforts.
IMPROVE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
13 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Progress Overview
Phase 2
Continued Analysis and
Implementation
The Reimagining Public Safety initiative stands as
a pivotal project, dedicated to transforming
public safety in an equitable and community-
centered way; this initiative involves a
comprehensive and inclusive process that
unfolds in three main phases:
1. Phase 1 (2020-2022) Community
Process and Research
2. Phase 2 (2022-2024) Continued
Analysis and Implementation
3. Phase 3 (2024-2026) Continued
Implementation and Expansion
Following a community-driven process in Phase
1, based on input from community members,
the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force, and
recommendations from the National Institute
for Criminal Justice Reform and other field
experts, the City Council developed a
framework and direction on Reimagining Public
Safety that would lead the city to carry forward
it’s work into the next phase.
Employing the guiding principles of Reimagine,
Improve, and Reinvest, as a framework for the
city’s efforts, Phase 2 comprises a series of
pivotal initiatives and deliverables, including:
• Staffing Investments in the
Department of Health, Housing and
Community Services (HHCS), Police,
Public Works, and the City Manager’s
Office, to support with implementing
the priority recommendations of this
initiative;
• Identifying Consultant Costs related
to assessments, covering areas such as
dispatch needs, crisis response, staffing
and beat structure, as well as the
development of BerkDOT; and
• Community Investments dedicated to
strengthening community resilience
through: violence prevention initiatives,
engagement programs and mental
health services, and providing support
for individuals affected by gender-based
violence, among other programmatic
elements.
Partnerships & Collaborations
As the City of Berkeley progresses through
Phase 2 of the Reimagining Public Safety
initiative, the City staff leading this work have
diligently carried forward the groundwork
established in Phase 1. During this phase, an
integrated and interdepartmental approach has
remained a cornerstone of the City’s efforts.
This approach ensures that departments leading
the execution of the Reimagining Public Safety
deliverables work cohesively and in alignment
with the directives set by the City Council. In
addition, the City’s community-centric process
continues to encompass engagement with
commissions, boards, committees, ad-hoc
groups, and various working groups to
strategically inform and guide the work.
Preparations are underway to provide a
detailed account of the evolving nature of these
partnerships as Phase 2 nears conclusion.
Deliverables and Status Update
The following pages contain tables that offer a
summarized overview of the key deliverables
associated with the Reimagining Public Safety
initiative. These deliverables, as outlined, derive
from the phased approach adopted during the
City Council meeting on May 5, 2022 (See
Companion Appendix C, pp. 2290-2298 for
outline of phased approach and deliverables).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
14 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Subsequently, beginning on page 23, the
“Priority Reimagining Public Safety Initiatives”
section offers a detailed account of each
department’s specific actions and their current
status. Through this structure, the City team
leading this work aims to clearly communicate
both the individual steps taken by departments
and the broader progress made in Berkeley’s
efforts to reimagine public safety.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
15 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
City Manager’s Office-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Assistant to the City Manager
Reimagining Project
Coordinator
The responsibilities of project management have fallen under Deputy City Manager, with part-time support from a Management Analyst. To effectively coordinate the ongoing work, a full-time senior level staff person is required.
In Progress. This position was successfully filled on August 21, 2023. The Assistant to the City Manager will continue to support and report out on the city’s Reimagining efforts.
Office of Equity
(DEI Officer and Assistant)
The development of the Office of Equity should reflect the recommendations from the Task Force. Particular attention from the Office of Equity should be paid to language access.
In Progress. The individual appointed to the DEI Officer role is anticipated to commence their duties on November 27, 2023.
Grant Assistance Recommended by City Manager to access grant funds to support reimagining efforts and other programs.
In Progress. The city is currently engaged with California Consulting LLC. for grant writing support and coordinated efforts; FY 23 funding carryover request for AA0#1.
Health Housing and Community Services-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
(Phase 1) SCU Implementation
Adopt the report, “City of Berkeley Specialized Care Unit Crisis Response Recommendations by Resource Development Associates” and implement the pilot Specialized Care Unit (SCU)
In Progress. Contract with Bonita House initiated; SCU
continues to hire and train staff to build to 24/7 operations.
Police-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
(Phase 1) Fair and Impartial
Policing Implementation
Recommendation to implement and prioritize FIP and continue to support employee training and professional development.
In Progress. 13 of the 14 Task force recommendations have been implemented; BPD will continue to support and fulfill officer training needs through Fiscal Year 2025.
Wellness Funding Continue to support employee health and wellness. In Progress. Continued partnerships and efforts towards BPD Wellness Practices for officers are underway.
Staffing (CSO & Dispatcher)
Launch a pilot Community Services Officer unit using Police salary savings.
Positions would be project based for two-years. Evaluate pilot after two-year period to align with the FY 25-26 Budget Process and determine the appropriate location of the CSO unit within a new Public Safety Department and the role for other non-sworn responders.
In Progress. Recruitment is underway, current applicants are being assessed for candidacy.
PHASE 2 DELIVERABLES REIMAGINE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
16 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Health Housing and Community Services-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Crisis Needs Assessment Behavioral Health, Crisis Response, and Crisis-related Services Needs and Capacity Assessments
In Progress. Existing contract for SCU program evaluation is amended to add a scope of work for RDA to conduct the
crisis needs assessment; work is underway.
Public Works-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Vision Zero Coordinator
(Collision Analysis)
Approve a new Vision Zero staff position in Public Works’ Division of Transportation to conduct collision analysis. This will promote the City’s Vision Zero approach by boosting the City’s capacity to analyze collision data collected by the Police Department.
In Progress. This position was successfully filled October 2023. The Associate Planner will continue to support and report out on Vision Zero as it relates to Reimagining efforts.
Public Works-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
(Phase 1) BerkDOT
Development
Continue BerkDOT process to plan for a civilian traffic enforcement unit, both by informing the content of state law changes to enable such a unit, and by developing two implementation plans: 1) if state law changes to accommodate, and 2) if state law does not change.
In Progress. Efforts related to BerkDOT design are in
preliminary stages; funding deferred for AA0#1 review.
Police-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Staffing Assessment Analysis of BPD Staffing and Beat Structure. In Progress. Contract with Citygate for Staffing Assessment; preliminary stages of data collection underway.
CONSULTANT COSTS
PHASE 2 DELIVERABLES IMPROVE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
17 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
City Manager’s Office-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Transportation Fines/Fees
Review Municipal Code for proposed changes to increase equity and racial justice in City’s transportation fines and fees, and explore the civilianization of the municipal code.
To Be Initiated. This deliverable has yet to be
implemented; funding deferred for AA0#1 review.
Department of Community
Safety
Support an organizational design process to create an umbrella Department of Community Safety.
To Be Initiated. Efforts related to Department of
Community Safety design are in preliminary stages; funding deferred for AA0#1 review.
Fire-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
(Phase 1) Dispatch Needs
Assessment (DNA) &
Implementation
Consulting costs requested by City Manager to support
continued analysis of prioritized dispatch and development of an implementation plan.
In Progress. Stage 1 of DNA is well underway, a second
opinion will be initiated with an additional vendor.
Health Housing and Community Services-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Violence Prevention and Youth
Services
Community investments for violence prevention/services programs (McGee Ave.
Baptist Church and Berkeley Youth Alternatives). In Progress. Funds have been allocated to CBOs.
City Manager’s Office-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
(Phase1) Gun Violence
Prevention (Ceasefire)
Development
Fully implement the Ceasefire violence intervention program.
In Progress. Preliminary analysis of Gun Violence
Prevention Programs complete; FY 23 funding carryover
request for AA0#1.
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
VIOLENCE PREVENTION
CONSULTANT COSTS
PHASE 2 DELIVERABLES REINVEST
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
18 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Health Housing and Community Services-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
(Phase 1) Community Crisis
Response (CCR) Bridge Services
Implement the Community Crisis Response (CCR) services while Specialized Care Unit ramps up.
In Progress. Contracts with Alameda County Network of
Mental Health Clients (Berkeley Drop-in Center), Options Recovery, and Women’s Daytime Drop-in Center
renewed/amended.
Youth Peers Mental Health
Response
Youth Peers Mental Health Response is retained as proposed by the Berkeley High School student-led plan for mental health services.
In Progress. Contract with BUSD initiated; wellness center work is underway with a soft launch of the new center in winter 2024.
Public Works-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Expand Downtown Streets
Teams (DST)
Expand Downtown Streets Team (DST) as placement for low-level violations (e.g. vehicular camping/parking and sidewalk ordinance infractions).
In Progress. A contract with DST has been renewed and it has been expanded to cover additional areas; however, for the specific work to place low-level violators; funding deferred for AA0#1 review.
Alternatives to Sanctions/Fines
Hearing Officer
Expand hearing officer resources in the City Manager’s Office to provide alternative referrals to community service and social services for parking and other infractions.
In Progress. Resources in Public Works have been
expanded to support these efforts; alternatives to sanctions and fines to be initiated; funding deferred for AA0#1
review.
ALTERNATIVES TO SANCTIONS/FINES
COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH, BEHAVIORAL AND CRISIS RESPONSE
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
PHASE 2 DELIVERABLES REIMAGINE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
19 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Health Housing and Community Services-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Respite from Gender Violence
Provide services and housing leads for victims of gender violence. Request staff to work with county partners and CBOs to map the system, identify gaps, recommend how to fill them.
In Progress. Community Services Specialist II hired with preliminary steps of system mapping underway.
City Manager’s Office-led Deliverables
Deliverable Recommendation Status Update
Language Equity Publish victim resources in plain language and in multiple languages.
To Be Initiated. Efforts related to Language Equity are in preliminary stages, the Assistant to the City Manager will partner with HHCS on implementation; FY 23 funding
carryover request for AA0#1.
RESPITE FROM GENDER VIOLENCE
LANGUAGE EQUITY
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
PHASE 2 DELIVERABLES IMPROVE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
20 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Considerations
In the process of Reimagining Public Safety,
Berkeley is faced with a series of
interconnected challenges that could shape the
trajectory, efficacy, and timeline of
implementation. Understanding and addressing
these considerations is imperative to ensure
that efforts are not only transformative but also
compliant, sustainable, and resilient to potential
challenges.
Staffing Vacancies and
Attrition
From 2018 to 2022, the City of Berkeley
observed a concerning trend in attrition, with
departures surpassing hires. According to the
City Auditors report, by October 2022, the city
of Berkeley’s vacancy rate was 19%, ranking it
as the second highest in the Bay Area (See
Companion Appendix U, pp. 3271-3275 for
report). This staffing challenge has had tangible
impacts on service delivery, and poses
significant challenges, especially as the City staff
strive to successfully implement the Reimagining
Public Safety initiative.
Reduced staffing has had a pronounced impact
on various city services. Confronting these
challenges, several departments have had to
adjust operations and manage costs.
Furthermore, attrition has led to substantial
loss of institutional knowledge. With that said,
in the city’s continued progression toward the
Reimagining Public Safety initiative, it is crucial
to have a stable and committed workforce to
drive these transformative changes. This
approach is essential to align with the City
Council’s established timeframe, scope, and
budgetary parameters. Ultimately, the staffing
challenges in key departments may have ripple
effects on the City of Berkeley’s broader public
safety objectives, emphasizing the
interconnectedness of city services and the
urgency to address these staffing concerns
holistically, such as through the Employer of
Choice (EOC) initiative (See Companion
Appendix V, pp. 3328-3361 for EOC supporting
documentation).
Regulatory Compliance
As the City of Berkeley moves forward with its
initiatives, particularly in developing the
Berkeley Department of Transportation
(BerkDOT), the City must adhere to regulatory
frameworks.
• Local Adherence: Compliance with
City of Berkeley’s specific ordinances
and by-laws is crucial. These local
guidelines dictate the foundation and
operation of city departments, ensuring
that efforts remain consistent with
established standards.
• State-Level Conformity: Navigating
the intricacies of California’s regulatory
landscape is essential. For example
while the California SB-50 Bill, which
supported civilian traffic enforcement,
was not approved as of September 14,
2023, it serves as a significant legislative
consideration. It is imperative that the
City stay updated on these legislative
developments and align, or adjust, our
strategies accordingly to ensure legal
compliance.
• Federal Standards: The City’s
initiatives must meet the expectations
set by federal entities, including the
United States Department of
Transportation and related federal
mandates in the realms of public safety
and transportation. This ensures
eligibility for federal grants and
maintains the integrity of potential
national partnerships.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
21 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
We will rely on the City Attorney’s Office
to ensure that the initiatives associated with
these efforts comply with federal, state, and
local laws, regulations, and statutes.
Ongoing Funding
In the context of Reimagining Public Safety, it is
important to underscore the fiscal parameters
under which this effort is operating. The City of
Berkeley has allocated budgetary support
specifically for Fiscal Years 2023 and 2024, with
the anticipation of supplying recommendations
for the next budgetary cycle by May 2024 (See
Companion Appendix C, pp. 2290-2298 and
Appendix T, pp. 3259-3264).
• Implementation Delays: Due to
delays in rolling out select deliverables,
there is a potential challenge ahead. By
the time budgetary recommendations
are presented to the City Council in
May 2024, some Reimagining-related
initiatives may still be in the early stages
of implementation. This early phase
could complicate accurate evaluations
of their financial implications and long-
term feasibility.
• Grant Funding: While external grant
funding is being pursued to execute
some of the deliverables, the nature of
such funding is inherently uncertain.
Grants, whether from foundations or
government sources, are highly
competitive, often involving lengthy
decision-making processes. As a result,
and there is no guarantee of securing
them for intended purposes.
Implementation Timeline
While the Reimagining Public Safety initiative
has set ambitious goals, the full realization of
these objectives and deliverables may span an
extended timeframe. Estimations project a
timeline of 3-5 years for the complete roll-out
of all items. However, it is paramount to
consider that legislative progress and other
unforeseen factors could extend this period.
Furthermore, regular analysis is vital to
understand and ascertain the effectiveness of
these implemented initiatives. To ensure
accurate assessment, it is crucial to allow
enough time for initiatives and measures to take
effect. The timeline and phased approach
presented, while informed and deliberate,
should be viewed as a dynamic structure.
Next Steps
As the City advances efforts towards the R eimagining Public Safety initiative, continuing to strategically navigate evolving challenges such as staffing vacancies, legislative considerations, and budgetary constraints will remain a priority, with a proactive and solution-oriented approach. City leaders, in conjunction with Human Resources, are diligently working to address staffing concerns . Concurrently, the City Manager’s Office and Public Works Department is engaged with relevant legislative entities to further the BerkDOT agenda. And lastly, the City staff and Council will make budgetary decisio ns during the AAO#1 (First Amendment Annual Appropriations Ordinance) process scheduled for mid -December. In this process, the City Council will consider re -appropriation of unspent Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 funds and deferred items into FY 24, informing the development of FY 25-26 Biennial Budget.
The City Manager’s Office, alongside the departments spearheading this work, will plan to deliver the next progress update on Reimagining Public Safety by Spring 2024, which will provide further insights into both a ccomplishments and challenges. In line with these efforts, the City expects to continue to cultivate a community- centered approach as initiatives are designed, implemented, and assessed with principles of compassion, equity, and democracy at the forefront.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
22 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Priority Reimagining Public Safety Initiatives
This section offers a concise overview of Berkeley’s work towards Reimagining Public Safety, highlighting key milestones and the city’s commitment to creating an equitable and effective model for all residents.
23 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Overview
Building upon the summaries outlined in the earlier sections for Phases I and II, this part of the report delves deeper, offering an expanded view of the City’s ongoing endeavors. It will detail the unique challenges and considerations associated with each deliverable, laying out forthcoming steps and associated timelines. Further corroborative details can be found in the report’s companion appendix.
As mentioned in the Executive Summary, while the City presses forward in efforts to reimagine public safety, it is pivotal to acknowledge certain roadblocks. Some initiatives have faced delays, primarily attributed to staffing constraints and temporary deferral of resources. It is the City’s duty and responsibility to ensure transparency and clear communication regarding all facets of this initiative, including both achievements and challenges encountered.
It is vital to recognize that, while there are further milestones to attain, real change is a continuous process. The City of Berkeley remains deeply invested in this essential work and its impactful journey ahead. This work, grounded in community, is not just an obligation but a privilege, and it remains central to Berkeley’s shared vision of a safer, more inclusive city.
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
24 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
REIMAGINING PUBLIC SAFETY PROJECT COORDINATOR
Department Lead: City Manager’s Office
Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
The City recognized the need for dedicated leadership to support the multi-departmental responsibilities of the Reimagining Public Safety initiative. This requirement led to the creation of the role of Assistant to the City Manager as a Reimagining Public Safety Project Coordinator. Previously, such responsibilities were managed by the Deputy City Manager with support from a Management Analyst. Given the extensive scope of the initiative, this appointment became an essential need and priority. This position was successfully filled on August 21, 2023.
Since assuming the position, the Assistant to the City Manager has engaged with pivotal departments including Police, Fire, Health Housing and Community Services, and Public Works. To streamline the reporting and documentation process, the Assistant to the City Manager has worked collaboratively with these departments to craft the Reimagining Public Safety Coordination Plan (See Abbreviated Appendix D, pp. 2477-2485 for RPS Coordination Plan). This plan serves as an essential roadmap, aiming to efficiently manage resources, bolster communication, and ensure methodical progress towards a new public safety paradigm.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Considerations:
• Departmental Coordination and Alignment: Given the multi-departmental involvement, there’s a necessity to ensure seamless coordination among various departments such as Police, Fire, Health Housing and Community Services, and Public Works. With city-wide staffing shortages and competing priorities, proper resource management becomes critical to maintain RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
August 2023 Assistant to the City Manager hired.
September –
November 2023
Reimagining Public Safety Coordination plan created and a Reimagining Public Safety status report is underway.
Anticipated
December 2023
Reimagining Public Safety presentation to the City Council (December 5, 2023).
Anticipated
Fall 2023 –
ongoing
The Assistant to the City Manager, will continue to coordinate and offer support in project management facets of the initiative.
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
25 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
momentum and efficiency. With this in mind, achieving consistent alignment and understanding among the core departmental team leading this work is essential.
Ongoing Timelines:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing: The Assistant to the City Manager, in their capacity as the Reimagining Public Safety Project Coordinator, will continue to project manage and offer support in various facets of the initiative. Their role will be pivotal ensuring seamless progression and implementation of all endeavors associated with Reimagining Public Safety. They will continue to collaborate cross-departmentally to report back to the City Council with updates on the initiative's progress in Spring 2024.
DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION (DEI) OFFICER
Department Lead: City Manager’s Office
Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
Endorsed by the City Council, Reimagining Public Safety Task Force, the City Manager’s Office championed the establishment of a DEI Officer position, as part of Phase 2 implementation. Situated within the City Manager’s Office, the DEI Officer will helm the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Division.
The primary vision guiding the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Division is to centralize and embed equity and justice practices within the City’s infrastructure. By adopting this approach, the City aspires to not only address present disparities but also to cultivate strong alliances with community organizations. The overarching goal is for City Departments to continue to evolve into entities that are both responsive and truly accountable to the diverse communities they serve.
The DEI Officer’s responsibilities will encompass overseeing the division’s multifaceted actives and operations, including but not limited to:
• Strategic Development and Policy Administration: Under the direction of the City Manager, the DEI Officer will lead the creation, planning, and deployment of the DEI Division’s strategic objectives. Their responsibility will extend to crafting and endorsing policies and procedures, ensuring they resonate with the City’s DEI vision and lay the groundwork for enduring, meaningful change. Central to this role will be the Officer’s capability to harmonize divisional activities cross-departmentally, fostering a unified approach to city-wide training and professional advancement.
• Inclusive Visionary Leadership: The DEI Officer will be an integral part of promoting inclusivity within the City. Tasked with the responsibility to collaborate with City and community leadership, the Officer will help align diversity and inclusion initiatives with the City’s broader objectives. They are expected to facilitate strategic planning in areas of diversity and inclusion and periodically engage in evaluations through surveys. The aim is to collaboratively develop and implement strategies that reflect the City’s mission, vision, and goals, ensuring that Berkeley continues its commitment to being an inclusive and equitable community.
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
26 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Considerations:
• Definition and Scope, and Sustainability: Navigating the evolving landscape of DEI requires the city of Berkeley to maintain a clear, shared understanding of its significance. Ensuring the that City’s DEI vision remains aligned with evolving norms and values while planning for long- term sustainable impact. This overarching consideration encompasses understanding DEI, implementing initiatives, and working towards continuity. • Inter-departmental Collaboration and Resource Allocation: Effective DEI integration hinges on seamless collaboration between various city departments. It is essential to strike a balance between promoting DEI principles and other citywide priorities, which can pose challenges in terms of communication, coordination, and the optimal allocation of resources. • Community Trust, Engagement, and Evaluation Metrics: Building and retaining community trust is vital for the success of DEI efforts. This involves effective communication and the establishment of clear metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of DEI efforts and implementation.
Ongoing Timelines:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing: The individual appointed to the DEI Officer role is anticipated to commence their duties on November 27, 2023. The City Manager’s Office anticipates next steps would likely include onboarding and familiarization with the city’s current DEI landscape and getting acquainted with the City’s structure and key personnel in order to begin building a strategic DEI plan and hiring the DEI Administrative Assistant to support this implementation.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
Anticipated
November 2023
DEI Officer Hired. The individual appointed to the DEI Officer role is anticipated to commence their duties on November 27, 2023.
Anticipated
Fall 2023 –
ongoing
Onboarding of DEI Officer and preliminary planning of DEI strategic plan. Hiring of DEI Administrative Assistant. Next steps would likely include onboarding and familiarization with the city’s current DEI landscape and getting acquainted with the City’s structure and key personnel in order to begin building a strategic DEI plan.
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
27 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
GRANT ASSISTANCE
Department Lead: City Manager’s Office
Status Update: In Progress (FY 23 carryover request to AAO#1) Overview:
In Phase 2 of the Reimagining Public Safety initiative, the City Council approved an allocation of $100,000 for fiscal years 2023 and 2024. This funding aims to bolster the longevity and sustainability of the City’s commitment to Reimagining Public Safety. In 2024, the City of Berkeley has engaged California Consulting, LLC to enhance grant application capabilities (See Companion Appendix R, pp. 3241-3244 for California Consulting Contract and Scope of Services). In the pursuit of a more comprehensive Reimagining Public Safety initiative, the City of Berkeley has turned its attention to opportunities that not only address immediate safety concerns but also contribute to the overall wellbeing and enhancement of community spaces.
Among the state and federal grants pursued, notable prospective state funders include the Community
Resilience Centers Program2 (CRC) and the CalTrans Clean California Local Grant Program3. The CRC aims to fund facilities that serve as community safe havens during climate adversities, offering shelter and vital resources during challenges such as extreme heat or poor air quality events. The Clean California program is devised to channel funds into local communities, aiming to beautify and uplift local streets, tribal lands, parks, pathways and transit centers. Equally important, the Clean California program is committed to advancing equity, promoting public health, strengthening cultural connections, and enhancing community place making.
Significant Federal grant applications include the PROTECT Discretionary Grant Program4 and Reconnecting Communities and Neighborhoods (RCN) Program5. The PROTECT program’s vision revolves around bolstering the resilience of transportation infrastructure against the impending climate crisis. The primary objective of the PROTECT program is not only to ensure resilient transportation infrastructure but also to promote equity by safeguarding disadvantaged communities, who often bear the brunt of natural hazards. The RCN program holds significant alignment with the Reimagining Public Safety objectives as one of its priorities. It emphasizes the advancement of disadvantaged communities, broadens access to essential services such as jobs, education, healthcare, food, and recreation, and underscores the importance of equitable development and community restoration. Additionally, a key focus is on bridging community divides by tackling transportation facilities that impede connectivity, ensuring that mobility, access, and economic development are unobstructed.
Unspent funds ($100,000) from Fiscal Year 2023 have been requested for carryover to FY 2024 as part of AA0#1. The Assistant to the City Manager will collaborate cross-departmentally to pinpoint grant opportunities that align with objectives of the Reimagining Public Safety initiative.
2 https://sgc.ca.gov/programs/community-resilience-centers/ 3 https://cleancalifornia.dot.ca.gov/local-grant-program 4 grants.gov/search-results-detail/347585
5 https://www.transportation.gov/grants/rcnprogram
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
28 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Considerations:
• Grant Alignment and Coordination: Grants from state, federal, and local sources come with varied criteria. Balancing Berkeley’s Reimagining Public Safety goals with these diverse requirements demands precise tailoring of applications, ensuring both alignment with grant specifics and adherence to overarching Reimagining Public Safety objectives. In addition to this, inter-departmental collaboration introduces considerations for streamlined processes.
Ongoing Timelines:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing: Unspent funds ($100,000) from Fiscal Year 2023 have been requested for carryover to FY 2024 as part of AA0#1. The Assistant to the City Manager will collaborate cross-departmentally to pinpoint grant opportunities that align with objectives of the Reimagining Public Safety initiative.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
Summer –
Fall 2023
Contract with California Consulting, LLC has been initiated. Seven grant applications were submitted under the direction of Parks, Recreation and Waterfront Department.
Anticipated
Winter 2023 –
ongoing
The Reimagining Public Safety Project Coordinator will manage continued efforts in grant identification, application, and management.
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
29 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
SPECIALIZED CARE UNIT IMPLEMENTATION
Department Lead: Health, Housing and Community Services Department Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
In part of the Mayor’s phased approach to Reimagining Public Safety, Phase 1 work primarily focused on extensive community engagement and research to create recommendations for a Berkeley-specific crisis response model. To ensure that the design of the Specialized Care Unit (SCU) model was aligned with community expectations, Health, Housing, and Community Services created a Steering Committee that includes representatives from the Mental Health Commission, Berkeley Community Safety Coalition, and community service providers, as well as staff from the City’s HHCS and the Fire Departments, to provide guidance on SCU design and implementation. In addition, the City contracted with Resource Development Associates (RDA), to conduct research on non-police crisis response models, lead the community engagement process with guidance from the Steering Committee, and make recommendations for a SCU model for Berkeley (See Companion Appendix E, pp. 2487-2496 for RDA Contract). RDA’s final report includes 25 recommendations for implementing a successful Specialized Care Unit in Berkeley (See Companion Appendix E, page pp. 2497-2701 for RDA reports). The Steering Committee analyzed and further refined these recommendations, laying the groundwork to move forward with a SCU pilot program.
At the beginning of 2022, to bolster these initiatives, HHCS brought on board several key staff, including a Senior Management Analyst, dedicated to aiding the implementation of the SCU as well as the Community Crisis Response (“Bridge Services”) programs. To support these Bridge Services, the City contracted with Options Recovery Services, Peer Wellness Collective (formerly Alameda County Network for Mental Health Clients), and Women’s Daytime Drop-In Center to provide a variety of services for vulnerable community members who experience mental health and substance use crises.
These programs helped to support the continued need for community crisis support while the City worked toward implementation of the Specialized Care Unit.
In December, 2022, after a competitive Request for Proposal process, Bonita House, Inc. was selected to be the Specialized Care Unit provider. (See Companion Appendix F, pp. 2703-2785 for Bonita House/SCU Contract). In 2023, Bonita House hired and trained initial SCU staff and worked collaboratively with the City and the SCU Steering Committee to ensure the program is implemented in alignment with the recommendations from RDA and Steering Committee. On September 5, 2023, the SCU began providing services to the Berkeley community and currently operates daily from 6 am to 4 pm. Bonita House continues to hire and train staff to ramp-up to full 24/7 operations.
The SCU pilot program is supported by grant funding from the American Rescue Plan Act, California Department of Health Care Services (Crisis Care Mobile Units program), and Mental Health Services Act funding. The full budget breakdown of the SCU contract can be found in Companion Appendix F, pp. 2714-2717.
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
30 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Considerations:
• Scaling Up: The SCU continues to operate in a ramp-up state as Bonita House continues to hire and train staff for the program. As staff are hired and trained, they can start providing services in the field. The SCU will continue to expand their hours, as staffing allows, to operate a 24/7 non-police response to mental health and substance use crises. The City of Berkeley continues to work on receiving City-purchased vehicles for SCU operations, which are currently being customized for SCU operations.
• Grants and Long-term Funding: As grant funding is of a limited-term nature, HHCS is actively pursuing additional funding opportunities to sustain and improve the SCU over time.
Ongoing Timeline:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing: The SCU will continue to hire and train staff to build toward 24/7 operations. Additionally, HHCS and Bonita House have started initial conversations about using a MediCal billing model to contribute to longer term program costs.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 1
(2020-2022)
December 2020 SCU Steering Committee Formed.
January 2021 Contract with RDA for research, community-engagement, and SCU design.
March 2022 RDA Completes Report & Presents to Council.
May 2022 City Council informed of Reimagining Public Safety Framework for SCU design.
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
December 2022 Contract with Bonita House for SCU Implementation.
January 2023 –
ongoing
SCU staff are hired and trained; Systems for implementation are developed.
February 2023 –
Ongoing
HHCS hosts Community Dialogues to provide updates on SCU development and implementation. Community listserv begins to provide program-specific updates.
September 2023
SCU soft launch begins; SCU team begins providing daily services from 6am to 4pm in mid-September. Outreach materials are distributed throughout the community.
Anticipated
October 2023 -
ongoing
The SCU will continue to hire and train staff to build toward 24/7 operations. Additionally, HHCS and Bonita House have initiated conversations about using a MediCal billing model to contribute to longer term program costs.
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
31 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
STAFFING POSITIONS (PILOT RPS COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS & DISPATCHERS) Department Lead: Police
Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
In part of the Phase 2 implementation, funding was allocated for Fiscal Years 2023 and 2024 by City Council to introduce a temporary two-year pilot program of additional Community Service Officers and Public Safety Dispatchers. City Council directives included an evaluation of the pilot after the two-year period to align with the FY 25-26 Budget Process and determine the appropriate location of the CSO unit within a new Public Safety Department and the role for other non-sworn responders.
The Mayor and City Council approved the Recruiting and Retention Incentive Program (RRIP) for the Berkeley Police Department (BPD). The City has intensified recruitment efforts across the department to address staffing vacancies. These efforts include the approved RPS-designated positions: 8 Public Safety Dispatcher II, 1 Public Safety Dispatch Supervisor, 6 Community Service Officers (CSO), and 1 Community Service Officer Supervisor. The CSO positions are temporary and were budgeted for 3 years starting July 1, 2022. We are currently in the 3rd month of year 2, and any new hires must be told the position ends June 30, 2025. Previous candidates have declined the job offer because of the temporary status.
The Berkeley Police Department’s recent Community Service Officer recruitment drive concluded on September 18, 2023 and saw a marked increase in interest attracting 138 CSO applicants – nearly double the previous year’s count. The subsequent evaluation, involving written and physical tests, is scheduled for October 21, 2023. It is important to acknowledge that in previous evaluations, several candidates faced challenges in clearing one or both tests. Given the increased applicant pool this year, Berkeley PD remains optimistic about securing a larger number of qualified candidates.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Ongoing Timeline:
• October 2023 – ongoing: The Berkeley Police Department is on track to assess approximately 138 applicants in the month of October and continue efforts to fill these vacancies in 2024, further enhancing BPD’s capacity to serve the community.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
Summer –
Fall 2022
RPS funding allocation of approximated ~$2.5 million for pilot program.
BPD Recruitment Cycle commenced.
July 2023 Contract with Citygate for BPD Staffing Assessment.
August 2023 Recruiting and Retention Incentive Program.
Anticipated
Summer –
Fall 2023
BPD Recruitment Cycle.
Anticipated
October 2023 –
ongoing
The Berkeley Police Department is on track to assess approximately 138 CSO applicants in the month of October.
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
32 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
FAIR AND IMPARTIAL POLICING
Department Lead: Police
Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
On February 23, 2021, during a City Council Special Meeting, the recommendations put forth by the Mayor’s Fair and Impartial Policing (FIP) Taskforce were directed to the Berkeley Police Department for implementation. Berkeley PD provides quarterly updates to City Council, and has completed 13 of the 14 recommendations to date. These FIP recommendations were introduced during Phase 1 of the Mayor’s strategy for Reimagining Public Safety. The Berkeley Police Department has subsequently facilitated a series of FIP-dedicated training sessions, emphasizing key fair and impartial policing tenets.
As Berkeley PD continues to advance the recommendations of the Fair and Impartial Policing Task Force, additional Tier 1 funding of $100,000 was approved for Fiscal Years 2023 and 2024 for specialized FIP training for Berkeley police officers. This enactment is a part of Phase 2 in the Mayor’s phased
approach.
Berkeley PD FIP training also includes Crisis Intervention Team (CIT), LGBTQ, Racial Profiling and Bias6 training offered through the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST)7.
Furthermore, BPD has mandated the KIND Policing Education Incentive in the newest 2023 – 2025 Berkeley Police Association MOU with the city (See Companion Appendix H, pp. 2799-2801). The KIND Policing Educational Incentive is a first-of-its-kind initiative that promotes the City’s policing values while ensuring the availability of robust training for sworn members of BPD in effective policing that is rooted in procedural justice and impartiality, community-oriented, and culturally competent.
Berkeley PD believe these efforts will enable the Department to better serve the community and ensure public safety for all. The Berkeley Police Department will continue to work closely with the City Council and other stakeholders to develop and implement strategies that are effective, equitable, and just.
Berkeley PD remains committed to promoting fair and impartial policing practices and fostering trust and mutual respect between the police and the community we serve.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
6 https://catalog.post.ca.gov/SearchResult.aspx?category=Mandates&MAC=9jfKTy12dmPZ5m6b632T9DV8U5Q 7 https://post.ca.gov/
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 1
(2020-2022)
June 2020 –
March 2021
Community Process for FIP Recommendations Development
convened.
February 2021 Mayor and the City Council pass FIP Recommendations August 2021 –
ongoing
Berkeley Police has implemented ongoing fair and impartial trainings for its officers.
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
33 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Ongoing Timeline:
• October 2023 – ongoing. The Berkeley Police Department will continue to fulfill officer training needs through Fiscal Year 2025. Berkeley PD will have various related CIT, LGBTQ, Bias/Profiling, and FIP-styled training planned for 2024.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
July 2022 –
ongoing Continued training inclusive of FIP tenets.
August 2023
The KIND Policing Educational Incentive is a first-of-its-kind initiative that promotes the City’s policing values while ensuring the availability of robust training for sworn members of the Berkeley Police Department in effective policing that is rooted in procedural justice and impartiality, community-oriented, and culturally competent.
October 2023 –
ongoing
The Chief of Police submitted an “Update on the Implementation of Fair and Impartial Policing Task Force Recommendations” October 3 2023. Thirteen of the fourteen Task Force recommendations have been implemented and we remain committed to upholding and sustaining these measures (See Companion Appendix G, pp. 2787- 2797).
Anticipated
October 2023 –
ongoing
BPD will continue to support and fulfill officer training needs through Fiscal Year 2025. We will have various related CIT, LGBTQ, Bias/Profiling, and FIP-styled training planned for 2024.
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
34 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
WELLNESS PRACTICES (CRITICAL INCIDENT STRESS, PEER SUPPORT
TEAM, AND EMERGING WELLNESS NEEDS)
Department Lead: Police
Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
The Berkeley Police Department has built out a suite of wellness and mental health services for staff as outlined in the key accomplishments section. In part of the Reimagining Public Safety Phase 2 directives, the department has utilized the allocated $50,000 Reimagining Public Safety funds for Crisis Intervention and Critical Incident Stress Management Services. Acknowledging that physical health is intertwined with mental well-being, improvements have been made to BPD’s gym facilities, both at the Public Safety Building and the substation. For those officers in need of specialized support, Berkeley PD provided access to an immersive group therapy program designed to provide employees with the ability to recover from traumatic incidents with resilience. In addition to these wellness efforts, we’re on the brink of launching a mobile application designed to provide anonymous access to a vast array of health and wellness resources.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Ongoing Timeline:
• October 2023 – ongoing. The Berkeley Police Department will continue to work with PSFCG to utilize Crisis Intervention and Critical Incident Stress Management Services for the officers through Fiscal Year 2026, in addition to continued wellness offerings. Berkeley PD will have various related CIT, LGBTQ, Bias/Profiling, and FIP styled training planned for 2024.
8 https://icisf.org/individual-crisis-intervention-and-peer-support-group-crisis-intervention/ 9 https://www.o2x.com/
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
July 2022 –
June 2023
FY 2023 Wellness Efforts Include:
• Contracted with a local first responder-specific counseling group, Public Safety Family Counseling Group (PSFCG).
• International Critical Incident Stress Foundation training in Assisting Individuals in Crisis and Group Crisis Intervention 8. • Gym Updates
• Access to immersive group therapy
July 2023 –
ongoing
FY 2024 Wellness Efforts Include:
• O2X Partnership9
• First Responder Wellness Apps & Resources
Anticipated
October 2023
– ongoing
Continued partnerships and efforts towards BPD Wellness Practices for officers.
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
35 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
VISION ZERO PROGRAM COORDINATOR
Department Lead: Publ ic Works Department
Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
The Public Works department have successfully hired a Vision Zero Program Coordinator (Associate Planner) in October 2023. This position supports the work of the Vision Zero Program Manager (Senior Planner) which is currently vacant. In line with the eleven high priority action items identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan, the Associate Planner will be supporting with the implementation of the programmatic and capital project delivery elements of Vision Zero. Three of the eleven high priority action items include collision analysis as described in the Reimagining Public Safety initiative. Note the latest Vision Zero Annual Report (2021-2022) (See Companion Appendix I, pp. 2803-2886 for Vision Zero Action Plan and Vision Zero Annual Report). Some of the current program priorities include:
supporting the delivery of grant-funded capital traffic safety capital projects on Vision Zero High Injury Streets; reconvening the Vision Zero Coordinating Committee; restarting development and implementation of a Rapid Response program, including: supporting the City’s interdepartmental Rapid Response team in understanding the reasons for traffic crashes and restarting development and implementation of a Quick Build program to be able to respond through appropriate traffic safety countermeasures; conducting the three-year update of the Vision Zero Action Plan; and resuming Vision Zero Annual Reports.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Considerations:
• Staffing Vacancies. The City Manager issued three Off-Agenda memos, November 2022, December 2022, and October 2023, respectively, to update the City Council on the Public Work’s Transportation Division’s staffing and work priorities (See Companion Appendix J, pp. 2888-2900 for Staffing Memos).
o While the Vision Zero Program Coordinator (Associate Planner) has been hired, the Vision Zero Program Manager (Senior Planner) position is currently vacant following the promotion of the former Senior Planner to Principal Planner in August 2023. Public Works is preparing to kick off the recruitment for this position.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
October 2023 Vision Zero Program Coordinator (Associate Planner) Hired.
Anticipated
January 2024 –
ongoing
In line with the 11 high priority action items identified in key priorities of the Vision Zero Action Plan, the Associate Planner will be supporting the implementation of the programmatic and capital project delivery elements of Vision Zero. Three of the eleven high priority action items include collision analysis as described in the Reimagining Public Safety initiative.
STAFFING INVESTMENTS
36 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Next Steps & Timelines:
• January 2024 – ongoing: In 2024, the Vision Zero program anticipates restarting the Vision Zero Coordinating Committee meetings; initiating the three-year update to the Vision Zero Action Plan; restarting the development of the Rapid Response and Quick Build Programs; continuing to support major grant-funded capital projects on Vision Zero High Injury Streets, such as Southside Complete Streets, Sacramento St Pedestrian Crossing Safety Improvements, and the Alameda County Transportation Commission San Pablo Avenue Corridor Projects.
Progress on Vision Zero high priority projects and programs in 2024 will depend on hiring a new Vision Zero Program Manager (Senior Planner).
CONSULTANT COSTS
37 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
CONSTULTANT COSTS
BERKEKELY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (BERKDOT)
DEVELOPMENT
Department Lead: Public Works Department
Status Update: In Progress (funding deferred to AAO#1)
Overview:
In the structured approach to the Reimagining Public Safety initiative, Phase 1 played an instrumental role in laying the groundwork for BerkDOT. This phase focused on preliminary design and development, underpinned by robust stakeholder engagement (See Companion Appendix B, pp. 1899-2285 for Off- Agenda Memos). Central to the vision of BerkDOT is the consolidation of all transportation-related functions in the city into a single entity. This department would be responsible for diverse areas, from traffic management and road maintenance to school crossing guards. Additionally, an embedded racial justice lens in BerkDOT’s mandate ensures that transportation policies, programs, and infrastructure actively address racial disparities. By doing so, the City aims to create transportation environments that reduce burdens historically placed on communities of color, ensuring streets where all residents feel secure and included.
The City approved a Tier 1: Reimagining Public Safety budget allocation of $300,000 for Fiscal Year 2023 with the objective of propelling BerkDOT’s implementation forward. This budget allocation, which is central to Phase 2, will also support research for a forthcoming “white paper” and potential advocacy for state legislation.
Below outlines five core deliverables related to early implementation of BerkDOT:
1. Continue legislative advocacy for changes in state law to grant cities the authority for non-sworn civilian traffic enforcement, and automated enforcement for speeding/red lights.
2. Transition crossing guards from the Police Department to Public Works’ Division of Transportation.
3. Strategize for a Civilian Traffic Enforcement Unit, pending legislative changes.
4. Review Berkeley Municipal Code for proposed changes to increase equity and racial justice in the City’s existing transportation fines and fees.
5. Develop a roadmap for establishing a standalone Berkeley Department of Transportation.
While the Public Works Department successfully transitioned crossing guards, progress in other sectors have been slow, especially concerning legislative matters. For instance, the California SB-50 Bill10 supporting civilian traffic enforcement was declined on September 14, 2023. Additionally, since Berkeley
10 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB50
CONSULTANT COSTS
38 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
is not included in the Assembly Bill 645 (AB-64511), introducing a Speed Safety System Pilot Program locally would require separate legislation.
Other challenges include the Public Works Department’s significant staffing issues. The Berkeley Public Works Department, central in BerkDOT’s, faced significant staffing challenges. The City Manager issued Off-Agenda memos in November and December of 2022, and again in October 2023 (See Companion Appendix J, pp. 2888-2900 for Staffing Memos). These memos informed the City Council on the department’s staffing challenges and their implications for ongoing projects, highlighting that several initiatives led by Public Works, including BerkDOT’s evolution, had been temporarily halted. This pause was later addressed at the Berkeley Budget & Finance Committee on June 22, 2023 and at the June 27, 2023 City Council session. Notably, several Reimagining Tier 1 requests have been referred to the December 2023 Annual Appropriations Ordinance #1 process (See Companion Appendix K, pp. 2902- 2997 for
Budget & Finance Committee Annotated Agenda and June 2023 Item 53 Council Supplemental Item).
As of this report’s submission, movement related to this deliverable has yet to be initiated. The Public Works Department anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable, once a decision around funding has been finalized at the AAO #1 meeting. Should the allocation be returned, Public Works’ proactive response plan will be to launch a comprehensive Request for Proposal (RFP) process to bring aboard a third party with a proven track record in urban transportation to assess preliminary research, bridge any existing gaps, and devise an actionable BerkDOT implementation plan.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Considerations:
• Regulatory Compliance: BerkDOT must strictly adhere to local, state and federal transportation regulations. This includes not just road and transit roles, but also any pertaining to pedestrian zones, bike lanes, and other urban transportation forms. Ensuring compliance will prevent potential legal complications and foster smoother collaboration and state federal agencies.
11 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB645 RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 1
(2020-2022)
June 2020 –
ongoing Community Process for BerkDOT Development
Fall 2022
Crossing guards transitioned from the Police to Public Works’ Division of Transportation.
November 2022 –
ongoing
Public Works staffing vacancies memos issued to City Council and community.
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
June 2023 City Council referred several Reimagining Tier 1 requests to the December 2023 Annual Appropriations Ordinance #1 process.
Anticipated
November 2023 –
ongoing
Public Works anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable, once a decision around funding has been made at the AAO#1 meeting. Next Steps would include a possible RFP process for BerkDOT implementation planning.
CONSULTANT COSTS
39 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
• Budgetary Limitations: The BerkDOT’s budget is currently deferred. This situation necessitates providing essential project and operations within existing resources. The City must explore innovative solutions and consider alternative funding avenues, such as grants or strategic partnerships.
• Staffing: The Public Works Depar
tment is currently facing a staffing shortage, which affects its capacity to meet all operational demands. The Department is actively recruiting to fill vacancies.
It is important to note that with limited personnel, there are competing priorities to manage.
Ongoing Timeline:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing: As of this report’s submission, movement related to this deliverable has yet to be initiated. The Public Works Department anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable, once a decision around funding has been finalized at the AAO #1 meeting. Should the allocation be returned, Public Works’ proactive response plan will be to launch a comprehensive Request for Proposal (RFP) process to bring aboard a third party with a proven track record in urban transportation to assess preliminary research, bridge any existing gaps, and devise an actionable BerkDOT implementation plan.
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, CRISIS RESPONSE, AND CRISIS-RELATED
SERVICES NEEDS AND CAPACITY ASSESSMENTS
Department Lead: Health, Housing and Community Services Department Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
In Phase 2, the City of Berkeley allocated $100,000 in Fiscal Year 2023 for a service needs assessment based on 911 and non-911 calls for service, dispatch, and response to address the needs of Berkeley people with behavioral health issues and/or who are unhoused. This needs assessment should be conducted using computer-aided dispatch (CAD) or other data from the Berkeley Communications Center, other dispatch agencies, BPD, BFD, and any other relevant data during the COVID-19 pandemic from at least March 2020 through the present. In addition to this service assessment, the recommendation also includes a capacity assessment of crisis response and crisis-related services available to Berkeley.
In May 2023, the City Council authorized the City Manager to add a portion of this funding to an existing contract with Resource Development Associates (RDA) to support a CAD data analysis to better inform the implementation and evaluation of the Specialized Care Unit (SCU) (See Companion Appendix E, pp. 2487-2496 for RDA Contract).
Analyzing the CAD data will help inform future SCU and crisis system operations by gaining a better understanding of the types of calls that could apply to behavioral health crises. Components of this CAD data analysis and follow-up recommendations, as it applies to current program operations will be incorporated into the broader SCU evaluation, and provided to the City throughout the SCU pilot.
CONSULTANT COSTS
40 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
In addition to the RDA contract to analyze 911 call data, HHCS recently hired a Community Services Specialist II (CSSII) who is focused on analyzing care support systems in the City of Berkeley and Alameda County, including crisis response and crisis-related services. This CSSII will focus on conducting the capacity assessment to determine what exists and system gaps with respect to the SCU, respite, and sobering centers. This work will continue throughout the calendar year and into early 2024.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Considerations:
• Expanding Data Analysis & Dynamic Needs: As the project progresses, there might be a recognition of new data sets essential for comprehensive analysis. • Partner Coordination & Feedback: With multiple partners involved, there will be extensive coordination to ensure that all information is gathered to inform these analyses. • Policy Awareness: Staying updated with relevant behavioral health policies and regulations will be key to ensure project success and compliance.
Ongoing Timeline:
• Fal
l 2023 – ong
oing: These projects continue to be ongoing through the rest of 2023. HHCS expects to receive initial results of the analysis of the 911 call data and crisis systems by the beginning of next year.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
June 2023 Existing contract for SCU program evaluation is amended to add a scope of work for RDA to conduct the crisis needs assessment.
June 2023 –
August 2023 Crisis needs assessment for 911 call planning begins with initial data scoping.
August 2023 –
ongoing
Data analysis of Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) calls begins with City of Berkeley stakeholders.
August 2023 HHCS hired a Community Services Specialist II to analyze crisis response and related systems, specifically including crisis stabilization.
Anticipated
Ongoing –
December 2023
Data collection and systems planning.
Anticipated
December 2023 –
ongoing
Reporting. These projects continue to be ongoing through the rest of 2023.
HHCS expects to receive initial results of the analysis of the 911 call data and crisis systems by the beginning of next year
CONSULTANT COSTS
41 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
STAFFING ASSESSMENT
Department Lead: Police
Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
As part of ongoing efforts in the Reimagining Public Safety Phase 2 recommendations, the Berkeley Police Department has contracted with Citygate Associates to undertake a thorough study of the Berkeley Police Department (See Companion Appendix L, pp. 2999-3006 for Contract and Scope of Services). This comprehensive study aims to evaluate the Department’s organizational structure, resource allocation, and geographical patrol boundaries. Citygate will also recommend organizational improvements to enhance overall service to the community with consideration given to the morale and well-being of police staff.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Ongoing Timeline:
• October 2023 –
ongoing. Citygate’s
workload study will
take approximately
nine months and
consists of 6 key tasks
outlined in the
contract. The
Berkeley Police
Department
anticipates providing
updates during the
next Reimagining
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
July 2023
The Berkeley Police Department has successfully engaged with Citygate Associates for a comprehensive staffing assessment and workload study.
Citygate’s workload study will take approximately nine months and consists of 6 key tasks outlined in the contract. RPS funding allocation of $125,000 for FY 2024.
August 2023 –
ongoing Citygate Staffing Assessment Tasks 1 & 2.
Anticipated
October 2023 –
November 2023
Stakeholder Interviews and Community Survey.
Anticipated
November 2023 –
December 2023
Review of Organizational Functions and Workload.
CONSULTANT COSTS
42 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Public Safety status report out.
TRANSPORTATION FINES & FEES ANALYSIS
Department Lead: City Manager’s Office
Status Update: To Be Initiated (funding deferred to AAO#1) Overview:
As a Phase 2 item in the Reimagining Public Safety initiative, $150,000 was allocated by the City Council for Fiscal Year 2023 to review the City of Berkeley’s Municipal Code for proposed changes to increase equity and racial justice in City’s transportation fines and fees, and explore the civilianization of enforcement of various Municipal Code violations (See Companion Appendix T, pp. 3259-3264).
As previously mentioned, several Reimagining Public Safety deliverables, have yet to be initiated.
Additionally, at the City Council’s Budget & Finance Committee meeting on June 22, 2023 and June 27, 2023 City Council session, several Reimagining Tier 1 requests were deferred to the December 2023 Annual Appropriations Ordinance #1 process (See Companion Appendix K, pp. 2902-2997 for Budget & Finance Committee Annotated Agenda and June 2023 Item 53 Council Supplemental Item). The City Manager’s Office anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable once a decision around funding has been finalized at the AAO #1 meeting.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Ongoing Timeline:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing: As of this report’s submission, this deliverable has yet to be initiated. The City Manager’s Office anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable, once a decision around funding has been finalized at the AAO #1 meeting.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
June 2023 City Council referred several Reimagining Tier 1 requests to the December 2023 Annual Appropriations Ordinance #1 process.
Anticipated
October 2023 –
ongoing
The City Manager’s Office anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable, once a decision around funding has been made at the AAO#1 meeting.
CONSULTANT COSTS
43 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SAFETY DESIGN AND
IMPLEMENTATION
Department Lead: City Manager’s Office
Status Update: To Be Initiated (funding deferred to AAO#1) Overview:
As a Phase 2 item in the Reimagining Public Safety initiative, $250,000 was allocated for Fiscal Year 2024 to support a design process for the creation of a Department of Community Safety (See Companion Appendix T, pp. 3259-3264).
As previously mentioned, several Reimagining Public Safety deliverables, have yet to be initiated.
Additionally, at the City Council’s Budget & Finance Committee meeting on June 22, 2023 and June 27, 2023 City Council session, several Reimagining Tier 1 requests were deferred to the December 2023 Annual Appropriations Ordinance #1 process (See Companion Appendix K, pp. 2902-2997 for Budget & Finance Committee Annotated Agenda and June 2023 Item 53 Council Supplemental Item). The City Manager’s Office anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable once a decision around funding has been finalized at the AAO #1 meeting.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Ongoing Timeline:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing: As of this report’s submission, this deliverable has yet to be initiated. The City Manager’s Office anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable, once a decision around funding has been finalized at the AAO #1 meeting.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
June 2023 Council referred several Reimagining Tier 1 requests to the December 2023 Annual Appropriations Ordinance #1 process.
Anticipated
October 2023 –
ongoing
The City Manager’s Office anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable, once a decision around funding has been made at the AAO#1 meeting.
CONSULTANT COSTS
44 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
DISPATCH ASSESSMENT & IMPLEMENTATION
Department Lead: Fire Department
Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
The City’s Dispatch center is the hub of both police, fire and emergency medical services (EMS) for the community. When a resident call 911 for help, there is a simple expectation that person has: that the right responders arrive on scene to provide help quickly. What happens behind the scenes is a complex process that is similar to that of an air traffic control center. Dispatchers receive calls for help via 911 or a ten-digit phone number, they ask questions to clarify the need, collect critical information and enter information into a Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system, alert the right resource(s), coordinate the response to the call, all the while maintaining awareness of the system status.
With this project, the Berkeley Fire Department’s goal is to enhance the City’s Dispatch center to allow for the systematic triage of emergency calls, to provide pre-arrival emergency medical instructions to callers, and to create the opportunity to send alternate resources like an alternative mobile health unit (similar to the Fire Departments Mobile Integrated Paramedic unit deployed early in the Pandemic) or the Specialized Care Unit (SCU). To meet these modern fire and EMS capabilities, as seen in most other centers in the region including the Contra Costa Regional Fire Communications Center, the Alameda County Regional Emergency Communications Center, and the San Francisco Emergency Communications Department, a substantial initial and on-going investment may be required.
In part of the Mayor’s phased approach
to Reimagining Public Safety, Phase 1 work primarily focused on preliminary development and stakeholder engagement of the Dispatch Needs Assessment (DNA) design prior to soliciting a formal (See Companion Appendix B, pp. 1899-2285 for City Manager’s Reimagining Public Safety Off-Agenda Memos). As we advanced efforts towards Dispatch Needs Assessment and Redesign, additional funding was approved for Fiscal Year 2023 for DNA efforts, this enactment is a part of Phase 2 in the Mayor’s three-tiered approach.
Leading into Phase 2 of the Reimagining Public Safety initiative, the Berkeley Fire Department contracted with Federal Engineering, Inc. (FE) to conduct a Dispatch Needs Assessment (DNA). The results of the completed scope of work is detailed in the high-level implementation plan (See Companion Appendix M, pp. 3009-3014 for FE Contract and High Level Implementation Plan). The recommendations included a staffing model, facility improvements, advanced training and protocols required to support call triaging for alternative response models, and the implementation of emergency medical dispatch.
Due to the significance of the recommendations from FE and following extensive discussions with stakeholders from dispatch, the City Manager’s Office, the fire department, and the police department, staff is seeking a second opinion from other industry experts in the field before bringing the full report to City Council and advancing to the next phase of the DNA (implementation of the plan). The scope and lasting impacts of implementation of the DNA recommendations is so significant, it is imperative
CONSULTANT COSTS
45 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
that the team exercises due diligence. By soliciting a second opinion, staff aim to ensure that the report and subsequent recommendations to the City Council are anchored in best practices, are pragmatic, fiscally responsible, and represent a comprehensive understanding of the challenges and requirements of this industry. This careful approach underscores the Berkeley Fire Department’s commitment to the highest standards of professional and strategic implementation.
The cost of the second opinion is not expected to exceed $20,000 and will be paid by Measure FF funds.
Contract initiation and reassessment will conclude in Spring 2024. Within this timeframe, the core objective is to undertake a comprehensive reassessment of the current and proposed staffing model.
The reassessment will utilize the most recent call data, as the FE report is now a year old. It is important to contextualize that the data, influenced by the unprecedented challenges of the COVID-19 Pandemic, may not represent typical patterns. The final output will encompass a plan for strategic implementation of the derived recommendations. Upon the completion of the second opinion, Fire Department staff anticipates engaging with City leadership to shape and inform next steps. The findings from this review will be presented to the appropriate stakeholder groups and the Council in 2024. The total contract for the Dispatch Needs Assessment and Implementation Plan is $300,000. In addition to City allocation ($200,000) the initial assessment was funded by HHCS grants (approximately $100,000).
CONSULTANT COSTS
46 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Considerations:
• Staffing. Through FY23 the Fire Department experienced significant and ongoing recruitment and hiring challenges resulting from the global pandemic, the Office of the Fire Chief (the Department) has struggled to fulfill community needs through day-to-day operations, strategic planning efforts, and project and program management. The most significant challenges surround overseeing operational and programmatic priorities due to short staffing. The Department is working diligently to reorganize its operations to support current and future staff and staffing needs.
• Facilities Space. One of the primary challenges and considerations that may inhibit implementation of Stage II of the Dispatch Needs Assessment is securing an appropriate facility space for the center. There is not enough space in the Public Safety Building before the Fire Department moves to an independent headquarters facility. Identifying and obtaining the appropriate amount of space to house dispatcher workstations is vital for the successful rollout and operation of the project. Ensuring the space meets the specific requirements and standards, both in terms of functionality and accessibility, is paramount and current configuration of the Public Safety Building will need to be adjusted to accommodate a modern and expended dispatch center.
• Budget. Stage I of this project was paid for with HHCS grant funds and the second opinion and planning for implementation is funded by Measure FF. Additional funding for implementation of any/all recommendations will need to be approved and appropriated by the City Council.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 1
(2020-2022)
February 2021 –
December 2021 RFP Process Executed.
January 2021 –
October 2022
Federal Engineering Conducts Assessment. The scope of work for this project examined existing dispatch capabilities and the City's goals to develop a gap analysis and path forward on how to triage calls, divert non-emergency calls—including mental health calls —to appropriate resources, and implement the delivery of emergency medical instructions to callers.
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
November 2022 –
May 2023
The Federal Engineering Report on Priority Dispatch was presented to key stakeholders and discussed internally.
July 2023 –
October 2023 Development of Second Opinion Scope and Vendor Selection Anticipated
Fall 2023
A budget of $20,000 from Measure FF funds is allocated for a second opinion, set to begin in November for a three-month duration. This review will re-evaluate our staffing model using the latest call data, considering the anomalies from the COVID-19 impacted years. The outcome will provide strategic recommendations for implementation.
Anticipated
Winter/Spring 2024 Second opinion report complete.
Anticipated
Winter/Spring 2024
Discussion with City project stakeholders of FE’s report and the second opinion to determine next steps for the DNA.
CONSULTANT COSTS
47 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
Ongoing Timeline:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing: A budget of $20,000 from Measure FF funds is allocated for a second opinion, set to begin in late Fall 2023. This review will re-evaluate Fire’s staffing model using the latest call data, considering the anomalies from the COVID-19 impacted years. The outcome will provide strategic recommendations for implementation.
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
48 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
VIOLENCE PREVENTION
VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND YOUTH SERVICES
Department Lead: Health, Housing and Community Services Department Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
In Phase 2 of the initiative to Reimagine Public Safety, emphasis was placed on community investments.
Two prominent Community-Based Organizations (CBOs), namely McGee Avenue12 Baptist Church Center for Food, Faith, and Justice and Berkeley Youth Alternatives13 were identified and selected to receive funds. These allocations are instrumental in bolstering collective efforts to reshape and enhance the dynamics of Berkeley’s community. For Fiscal Years 2023 and 2024, $50,000 has been designated to support the “Voices Against Violence” series by the McGee Avenue Baptist Church. Additionally, Berkeley Youth Alternatives has been allocated $160,000, of which, $125,000 is dedicated to their Counseling Center14 and the remaining $35,000 is designated for the Summer Jam Day Camp.
Center for Food, Faith. In the City’s ongoing efforts to enhance community safety and enrichment, the McGee Avenue Baptist Church was granted funding of $50,000 to support with their “Voices Against Violence” youth campaign.
Berkeley Youth Alternatives. BYA, another pillar in the community, has been awarded $160,000. A substantial portion, $125,000 is dedicated to fortifying their counseling center, which plays a crucial role in providing support to many. The remaining $35,000 is allocated to ensure successful continuation of their Summer Jam Day Camp.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Ongoing Timeline:
• Fall 2023 – June 2024: The City will continue to allocate funds to McGee Avenue Baptist Church and Berkeley Youth Alternatives corresponding to their programmatic expenditures through the end of Fiscal Year 2024, which ends on June 30, 2024.
12 https://www.cffj.org/programs-services
13 https://www.byaonline.org/
14 https://www.byaonline.org/programs/counseling-center/counseling-center RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
July 2022- June 2023 Funds allocated to CBOs
Anticipated
Fall 2023 – June 2024 Funds continued allocation to CBOs through FY 24.
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
49 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION (BERKELEY CEASEFIRE)
Department Lead: City Manager’s Office
Status Update: In Progress (FY 23 carryover request to AAO#1) Overview:
As part of the Mayor’s phased approach to Reimagining Public Safety, Phase 1 work primarily focused on community-centric processes and comprehensive engagement with key stakeholders and field experts. In this engagement, analysis, and design process, the National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform15 (NICJR), was commissioned to conduct an assessment of programs and models that increase safety, properly respond to emergencies, reduce crime and violence, and improve policing. Included in their final report was a dedicated assessment of Community Driven Violence Reduction Strategies16, also known as Gun Violence Prevention or “Ceasefire,” This report was presented to the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force, and thereafter to the City Council in Spring 2022 (See Companion Appendix A, pp. 1107-1111, for NICJR Report).
Councilmember Terry Taplin recommended a series of budget referrals (November 2021, May 2022) for a Gun Violence Intervention (Operation Ceasefire) program to be designed and implemented within the city of Berkeley (See Abbreviated Appendix N, pp. 3088-3095). To support this initiative, the Berkeley Police Department (BPD) has established a comprehensive Transparency Hub17 with data and analysis designed to support the Ceasefire process and inform the community of BPD’s efforts in this space.
As the Reimagining Public Safety work transitioned to Phase 2 of analysis and implementation, on June 28, 2022, the City of Berkeley ratified a budget for FY 2023 & FY 2024 with an allocation of $1,000,000 dedicated to addressing the increase in gun violence that the city of Berkeley has experienced in recent years. The budget item, titled “Ceasefire,” is predicated on said prior discussions on potential community-based violence prevention strategies. The City Manager has since issued an Off Agenda Memo in
October 2022 providing updates on progress thus far, highlighting BPD’s preliminary steps, including engagement with Ceasefire programs in surrounding cities and other violence prevention programs when there are Berkeley connections to crime in other jurisdictions as well as their expanded partnership with UC Berkeley to include a collaboration with the Goldman School of Public Policy to design a Gun Violence Prevention program evaluation plan including the definition of success metrics and independent analysis thereof. (See Abbreviated Appendix N, pp. 3014-3087, for Report). In addition to the Police Department’s efforts, Councilmember Taplin has coordinated several advisory group meetings inviting a number of community stakeholders and experts in violence reduction programs.
These meetings included faith leaders and community-based organizations in Berkeley. The meetings involved identifying current systems and other stakeholders who should be engaged in the process as
15 https://nicjr.org/
16 https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/BerkeleyReport_030722.pdf#page=100 17 https://bpd-transparency-initiative-berkeleypd.hub.arcgis.com/
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
50 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
well as discussions as to what strategies would work best in Berkeley. A memo was published April 2023 (See Abbreviated Appendix N, page p. 3088, for April 2023 memo).
The Gun Violence Prevention (GVP) report was completed in summer 2023 and preliminary analyses and findings have been presented to the Chief of Police and City Manager’s Office, and are expected to be presented to the City Council December 5, 2023 (See Appendix N, pp. 3014-3087, for Gun Violence Prevention Report). Unspent funds ($1,000,000) from Fiscal Year 2023 have been requested for carryover to FY 2024 as part of AA0#1. The Assistant to the City Manager, now onboarded in their role as the Reimagining Public Safety Project Coordinator, will collaborate with essential stakeholders to design the forthcoming steps and processes tailored to meet the specific requirements of Berkeley’s GVP program. The team will also explore the potential need for a Request for Proposal (RFP) during this phase.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Considerations:
• CBO/Staffing Recruitment: The current recruitment landscape presents its own set of challenges. Staffing up qualified organizations/individuals for this program may face prolonged lead times in recruitment. Beyond initial recruitment, the essential training required to ensure the efficacy of the GVP launch may further extend lead times.
Ongoing Timeline:
• December 2023 – ongoing: Unspent funds from FY 2023 have been requested for carryover as part of AA0#1. GVP findings are scheduled to be presented to the City Council December 5, 2023. The Assistant to the City Manager will collaborate with essential stakeholders. This collaboration aims to design the forthcoming steps and processes tailored to meet the specific requirements of the GVP program.
RPS Phase Timeline Status
Phase 1
(2020-2022)
Spring 2022
Preliminary Steps. NICJR Presents report to Task Force and Council. Councilmember Terry Taplin presents budget
recommendations. BPD launches transparency hub.
June 2022 $1M allocation adopted for Gun Violence Prevention Program.
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
November 2022 Gun Violence Prevention (GVP) Preliminary Analysis Initiated May 2023 GVP Report complete.
August 2023 Assistant to the City Manager – Reimagining Public Safety Project Coordinator hired.
Anticipated
December 2023 Comprehensive update on Reimagining and Project update for GVP.
Anticipated
Winter 2024 –
ongoing
Preliminary research and stakeholder engagement for next steps and possible process.
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
51 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
ALTERNATIVES TO SANCTIONS/FINES
HEARING OFFICER-ALTER NATIVES TO SANCTIO
NS/FINES
Department Lead: Public Works Department
Status Update: In Progress (funding deferred to AAO#1)
Overview:
As a Phase 2 item in the Reimagining Public Safety initiative, $150,000 was allocated for Fiscal Year 2024 to enhance hearing officer resources. The remit of this allocation includes referring individuals to community service and social services for various infractions, such as low-level violations related to parking.
As previously mentioned, several Reimagining Public Safety deliverables, have yet to be initiated.
Additionally, at the City Council’s Budget & Finance Committee meeting on June 22, 2023 and June 27, 2023 City Council session, several Reimagining Tier 1 requests were deferred to the December 2023 Annual Appropriations Ordinance #1 process (See Companion Appendix K, pp. 2902-2997 for Budget & Finance Committee Annotated Agenda and June 2023 Item 53 Council Supplemental Item). The City Manager’s Office anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable once a decision around funding has been finalized at the AAO #1 meeting. In light of the need to address the backlog of the administrative review queue, the Public Works Department has expanded resources to bring on an assistant to support with this process.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Ongoing Timeline:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing: As of this report’s submission, this deliverable has yet to be initiated. The Public Works Department anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable, once a decision around funding has been finalized at the AAO #1 meeting.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
June 2023 City Council referred several Reimagining Tier 1 requests to the November 2023 Annual Appropriations Ordinance #1 process.
Anticipated
October 2023 –
ongoing
The Public Works Department anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable, once a decision around funding has been made at the AAO#1 meeting.
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
52 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
EXPAND DOWNTOWN STREETS TEAMS
Department Lead: Public Works Dep artment
Status Update: In Progress (funding deferred to AAO#1)
Overview:
In Phase 2, a budgetary provision of $50,000 was allocated for Fiscal Years 2023 and 2024 to expand the scope of the City’s contract with Downtown Streets Team18. On May 31, 2022, City Council approved Resolution No. 70, 394-N.S to allow for City staff to enter into sole source negotiations with DST for new pricing, contract terms, and scope of services in support of the Clean Cities Program for the continuation of hand sweeping, leaf and litter removal, graffiti abatement, and poster removal services for various commercial districts (See Companion Appendix O, pp. 3097-3100 for 2022 Contract with Downtown Streets Team).
As mentioned, several Reimagining Public Safety deliverables have yet to be initiated. Additionally, at the Berkeley Budget & Finance Committee meeting on June 22, 2023 and June 27, 2023 City Council session, several Reimagining Tier 1 requests have been referred to the December 2023 Annual Appropriations Ordinance #1 process (See Companion Appendix K, pp. 2902-2997 for Budget & Finance Committee Annotated Agenda and June 2023 Item 53 Council Supplemental Item).
Public Works has since then entered into a new contract with Downtown Streets Team, June 27, 2023 wherein which DST supports the city with services related to hand sweeping, graffiti and litter abatement, poster removal, and low barrier volunteer work experience programming (See Companion Appendix O, pp. 3101-3103 for 2023 Contract with Downtown Streets Team). The Public Works department anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable, once a decision around funding has been finalized at the AAO #1 meeting.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Ongoing Timeline:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing: As of this report’s submission, this deliverable has yet to be initiated. The Public Works Department anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable, once a decision around funding has been finalized at the AAO #1 meeting.
18 https://www.streetsteam.org/berkeley
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
June 2023
City Council referred several Reimagining Tier 1 requests to the December 2023 Annual Appropriations Ordinance #1 process. Public Works enters contract with Downtown Streets Team.
Anticipated
October 2023 –
ongoing
The Public Works Department anticipates exploring next steps towards fulfilling this deliverable, once a decision around funding has been made at the AAO#1 meeting.
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
53 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH, BEHAVIORAL, AND
CRISIS RESPONSE
COMMUNITY CRISIS RESPONSE SERVICES (BRIDGE SERVICES)
Department Lead: Health, Housing and Community Services Department Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
Within the framework of Phase 1 of the Reimagining Public Safety initiative, the city was actively engaged in the planning stages of the Specialized Care Unit (SCU). The SCU, envisioned as a 24/7 mobile unit, will provide support to individuals experiencing a mental health or substance abuse crisis, without necessitating direct police involvement. During the design period, with HHCS actively engaged in the development process, the city recognized the pressing need to enhance non-police relationships and support for individuals at risk of entering a crisis state. In response to this need, the City Council, on June 29, 2021, allocated up to $1,200,000 from the FY 2022 budget, sourced from the American Rescue Plan, to fund the Community Crisis Response (CCR) services. These services, intended to bridge the gap until the SCU became operational, were also referred to as “Bridge Services.”
In pursuit of these goals, the City issues a Request for Proposals, seeking community-based organizations (CBOs) and groups with expertise to provide these supportive services. The City of Berkeley received proposals from three local organizations, Alameda County Network of Mental Health
Clients19 (Berkeley Drop-in Center), Options Recovery20, and Women’s Daytime Drop-in Center21, each with intent to expand their current service offerings. The review committee, consisting of representatives from the Health, Housing and Community Services Department, the Fire Department, the Mental Health Commission, and the Berkeley Community Safety Coalition, recommended funding all three contracts (See Companion Appendix P, pp. 3105-3110 for City Manager’s consent item).
These contracts will provide financial support to:
1. Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients (Berkeley Drop-in Center) to expand their peer support programming for crisis prevention, crisis intervention and post-crisis support (See Companion Appendix P, pp. 3111-3150 for Peer Wellness Berkeley Drop-In Center Contract)
2. Options Recovery for hiring Substance Use Disorder (SUD) Navigators for culturally competent stage-matched interventions (See Companion Appendix P, pp. 3151-3244 for Options Recovery Contract)
3. Women’s Daytime Drop-in Center for enhanced mental health care services to the community including assessment, linkages, workshops, and goal-setting (See Companion Appendix P, pp. 3180-3215 for Women’s Daytime Drop-in Center Contract)
19 https://alameda.networkofcare.org/mh/services/agency.aspx?pid=BerkeleyDropInCenter_344_2 _0 20 https://optionsrecoveryservices.com/
21 https://www.womensdropin.org/
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
54 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
As Reimagining efforts have transitioned into Phase 2 of the implementation process, these contracts were initiated in Spring 2022, and amended to be extended the following year, while the Specialized Care Unit, having launched September 2023, continues to build and ramp up.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Ongoing Timeline:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing:
HHCS will continue
partnership Alameda County
Network of Mental Health
Clients (Berkeley Drop-in
Center), Options Recovery,
and Women’s Daytime
Drop-in Center for
Community Crisis Response
Services, while the SCU will
continue to hire and train
staff to build toward 24/7
operations.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 1
(2020-2022)
June 2021
City Council approves to allocate $1,200,000 from the FY 2022 budget, sourced from the American Rescue Plan, to fund the Community Crisis Response (CCR) services.
Summer 2021 RFP Process initiated.
November 2021
Consent item issued to adopt three Resolutions authorizing the City Manager to execute contracts and any amendments or extensions with Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients (Berkeley Drop-in Center), Options Recovery, and Women’s Daytime Drop-in Center for Community Crisis Response Services, in an amount not to exceed $1,200,000.
Spring 2022 –
Winter 2022
Contracts with Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients (Berkeley Drop-in Center), Options Recovery, and Women’s Daytime Drop-in Center initiated.
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
Spring 2023 –
ongoing
Contracts with Alameda County Network of Mental Health Clients (Berkeley Drop-in Center), Options Recovery, and Women’s Daytime Drop-in Center renewed/amended, while the SCU will continue to hire and train staff to build toward 24/7 operations.
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
55 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
YOUTH PEERS MENTAL HEALTH, BEHAVIORAL, AND CRISIS RESPONSE Department Lead: Health, Housing and Community Services Department Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
The City’s Health, Housing, and Community Services (HHCS) Department has initiated a collaborative effort with the Berkeley Unified School District (BUSD). Central to this partnership is the establishment of a Wellness Center at Berkeley High School22. This center is envisioned as a new space for students, providing an environment conducive to rejuvenation, connectivity, and well-being. This initiative falls under of Phase 2 of the Reimagining Public Safety’s Community Investments, with “Community Mental Health, Behavioral and Crisis Response” identified as a focal sub-category. In alignment with this vision, the City of Berkeley has allocated $175,000 for Fiscal Year 2023 and 2024 (totaling $350,000) to contract and cover the salary and benefits for a BHS Mental Health and Wellbeing Coordinator to oversee the Wellness Center. In addition, the City partially funds the MEET and Wellness Counselor at the Center (See Companion Appendix Q, pp. 3215-3239 for BUSD Contract and Scope of Services).
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Considerations:
• Coordination with the Berkeley High School Health Center: The BHS Health Center, operated by the mental health and public health divisions of HHCS, continues to provide first aid, mental health, youth development, and reproductive and sexual health services to students on campus. As Wellness Center services are largely preventive in nature, and Wellness Center and Health Center staff will coordinate as needed to support the unique needs of students.
Ongoing Timeline:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing: BUSD will submit a project evaluation plan to HHCS. Evaluation #1 will be delivered to HHCS July 2024.
22 https://sites.google.com/berkeley.net/bhswellness/bhs-mental-health-resources RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
July 2023 Mental Health Wellness Coordinator Hired.
August 2023 Wellness Center Refurbishing and Soft Opening.
August 2023 –
ongoing
BUSD - HHCS Collaboration Meeting.
Outreach activities to introduce MHW Coordinator to BUSD staff, students, and parents (as appropriate).
Preliminary Wellness Center activity and services offered Anticipated
November 2023 BUSD submits project evaluation plan to HHCS.
Anticipated
July 2024
Evaluation #1 due to HHCS (for the period of June 26, July 15, 2024 2023 - June 30, 2024).
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
56 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
RESPITE FROM GENDER VIOLENCE
RESPITE FROM GENDER VIOLENCE
Department Lead: Health, Housing and Community Services Department Status Update: In Progress
Overview:
The Health, Housing, and Community Services (HHCS) Department has initiated a strategic effort to conduct a systems analysis concerning respite from gender violence and its intersections with other pertinent crisis response systems. The purpose is to increase the community’s knowledge about respite resources, understand their strengths and challenges, and to identify gaps that can be addressed. To facilitate this, a temporary Community Services Specialist II was hired in August 2023 to lead the process. Additional resources will be identified to fill service gaps.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Considerations:
• Community Collaboration: Prioritizing insights from community partners ensure that the policy evolution remains responsive to the lived experience, policy needs, and priorities of survivor communities.
Ongoing Timeline:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing: The Health, Housing, and Community Services Department anticipates continuing research and evaluation to identify resources available based on the needs of the community.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
August 2023 Temporary Community Services Specialist II hired.
October –
November 2023
Preliminary steps of research to identify resources available at the local, state, and federal level.
Anticipated
Fall 2023 –
ongoing
Continued research and evaluation to identify resources available based on the needs of the community.
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS
57 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
LANGUAGE EQUITY
LANGUAGE EQUITY
Department Lead: City Manager’s Office
Status Update: To Be Initiated (FY 23 carryover request to AAO#1) Overview:
In Phase 2 of the Reimagining Public Safety initiative, the City Council allocated a budget of $15,000 for Fiscal Year 2023 to support the publication of victim resources in plain language and multiple languages.
This strategic investment is aimed at expanding accessibility and ensuring that vital information and support services are readily available to all members of the community, including those with limited English proficiency, non-English speakers, and individuals with low-literacy levels. This initiative directly aligns with the recommendations outlined in the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force Report (See Companion Appendix A, pp. 938-941 for Reimagining Public Safety Task Force Report).
Unspent funds ($15,000) from Fiscal Year 2023 have been requested for carryover to FY 2024 as part of AA0#1. The Assistant to the City Manager, serving as the Reimagining Public Safety project manager will coordinate with the Health Housing and Community Services Department, specifically, their newly appointed Community Services Specialist II who is focusing on respite from gender violence work.
Key Accomplishments and Next Steps:
Ongoing Timeline:
• Fall 2023 – ongoing: The team anticipates continuing research and evaluation to identify resources available based on the needs of the community. As the City progresses in this phase, the team will coordinate to identify usage for language equity funds.
RPS Phase Timeline Milestone
Phase 2
(2022-2024)
August 2023 Assistant to the City Manager and temporary Community Services Specialist II hired.
October –
November 2023
Preliminary steps of research to identify resources available at the local, state, and federal level.
Anticipated
Fall 2023 –
ongoing
Continued research and evaluation to identify resources available based on the needs of the community; coordination to identify usage for language equity funds.
58 Page | Reimagining Public Safety Status Report
APPENDICES
Please refer to the Companion Appendix online for a comprehensive archive.
To access the full Companion Appendix referenced in the Status Report, please visit the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force landing page to find the full Companion Appendix under Additional Information: https://berkeleyca.gov/your- government/boards-commissions/reimagining-public-safety-task-force
For quick reference of new materials introduced, please refer to the Abbreviated Appendix.
ABBREVIATED APPENDIX
REIMAGINING PUBLIC SAFETY
Status Update and Report Out
City Manager’s Office
Fall 2023
Introduction
The abbreviated appendix for the Reimagining Public Safety Status Report highlights the new materials related to the City of Berkeley's Phase 2 efforts, that are not already accessible via Records Online.
Extracted from the full "Companion Appendix," these key items include a Reimagining Public Safety Coordination Plan (Appendix D) and a Gun Violence Prevention Report (Appendix N).
To access the full Companion Appendix referenced in the Status Report, please visit the Reimagining Public Safety Task Force landing page to find the full Companion Appendix under Additional Information https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/boards-commissions/reimagining-public-safety-task-force
APPENDIX D
Reimagining Public Safety Coordination Plan
PAGE 2476
APPENDIX D
City Manager’s Office
Reimagining Public Safety Coordination Plan
PAGE 2477
APPENDIX D
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Executive Summary............................................................................................................. 3 2 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Objective of the Reimagining Public Safety Initiative Coordination Plan ................................ .... 4
2.2 Drivers, Problems to be Solved, and Communities Impacted ................................ ..................... 4
2.3 Purpose and Value to Organization ................................ ................................ .......................... 5 3 Reimagining Public Safety Team .......................................................................................... 6 4 Deliverables and Tasks ........................................................................................................ 7 5 Assumptions and Constraints .............................................................................................. 8 6 Project Budget .................................................................................................................... 9
6.1 Reporting Process, Frequency, and Deadlines ................................ ................................ ........... 9
PAGE 2478
APPENDIX D
1 Executive Summary
Introduction: The Reimagining Public Safety (RPS) initiative is a groundbreaking effort by the City of Berkeley to transform its approach to public safety. The initiative aims to build a safe, equitable, and thriving community through a redefined, multidisciplinary approach to public safety.
Justification: The RPS initiative aims to achieve a transformative approach to public safety, improving community well-being and potentially reducing long-term costs. The expected outcome includes not just policy adjustments but also broad, systemic change.
Objectives: To fulfill1 the task activities and deliverables outlined within the Mayor and Councils recommendations and phased approach regarding Reimagining Public Safety:
1. Refer up to $5.3 Million to the FY 2023-2024 Budget Process for staff and/or consulting services and community investments to complete the Priority Reimagining Public Safety Initiatives listed in Attachment 1, Section A to the report
2. Direct the City Manager to prioritize over the next two years the programmatic recommendations for Phase 1 of Reimagining Implementation listed in Attachment 1, Section B to the report.
3. Direct the City Manager to initiate a design process for an innovative and comprehensive public safety agency or Department of Community Safety within the City of Berkeley administration, as outlined in Attachment 1, Section C to the report, and return with recommendations to the City Council by May 2024 to align with the FY 25-26 Biennial Budget process.
4. Except where resources may allow for expedited implementation, refer additional reforms to the FY 2025- 2026 Biennial Budget as outlined in Attachment 1, Section D to the report.
Scope: The initiative encompasses a breadth of fields including, but not limited to, law enforcement, health, housing and community services, dispatch analysis and coordination with our fire teams, and public works.
It will focus on collaborative, proactive, and problem-solving approaches that align with the mission and values of our City and Reimagining Public Safety efforts.
Purpose of the Coordination Plan: This coordination plan is aims to integrate the Assistant to the City Manager, serving as the Reimagining Public Safety Project Coordinator, into the RPS Team and establish a framework for collaborating. Designated City Departments (CMO, HHCS, Police, Fire, Public Works), who have been spearheading this initiative forward, will continue to serve as leads for respective Reimagining Public Safety deliverables. The Assistant to the City Manager will serve as the RPS project coordinator and work collaboratively alongside Departments to catalog and report-out RPS project progress.
Timeline: This timeline will follow the 2020-2026 phased approach outlined here.
Budget and Resources: A budget of up to $5.3 million has been referred for the FY 2023-2024 Budget Process. Staff and/or consulting services will be engaged for implementing deliverables.
Next Steps: This coordination plan is a dynamic document and may be updated as needed. Upon formal approval of this plan, we will make every effort to execute the plans and activities outlined herein. 1 Unless otherwise amended.
PAGE 2479
APPENDIX D
2 Introduction
2.1 Objective of the Reimagining Public Safety Initiative Coordination Plan The primary objective of this Coordination Plan is to articulate the integration of project coordinator responsibilities within the broader context of leaders and teams committed to propelling the Reimagining Public Safety (RPS) initiative forward. Given the dynamic nature of the RPS initiative, the coordination plan is inherently a living document, adaptable to the evolving needs of the team. It establishes a framework for reporting on the progress of various deliverables and sub-deliverables associated with the Reimagining Public Safety initiative (RPS) being implemented across the City of Berkeley. The Assistant to the City Manager – RPS Project Coordinator’s role will primarily involve cataloging ongoing work, managing information flow, and ensuring that the key stakeholders are informed of RPS developments and progress.
2.2 Drivers, Problems to be Solved, and Communities Impacted In striving to reimagine public safety, Berkeley’s efforts encompass a balanced distribution of resources, reassessment of policing responsibilities, strategic community investments, and the design of a holistic approach to safety. This approach seeks to offer a balanced model for addressing public safety while also attending to various community needs.
Drivers & Motivators Problems to be Solved Communities Impacted • Community Well-
being
• Public Trust
• Equity and Inclusion
• Legislative
Momentum
• Resource
Optimization
• Fiscal Responsibility
• Compliance and
Accountability
• Resilience and
Preparedness
• Technological
Advances
• Addressing Historical
Inequities
• Scope and Range of Police
Responsibilities
• Community Investment Gap
• Resource Allocation
• Public Perception and Trust
• Data and Reporting
• Diverse Population
Dynamics
• Community Call Responses
• Holistic Safety and Well-
being Approach
• Sustainability
• City of Berkeley Residents
o Communities of Color
o Low Income Communities
o LGBTQIA+ Communities
o Justice-Impacted Communities
o Mental Health & Substance Use Communities
o Youth & Students
o Immigrant Communities
o Justice-Impacted Communities
• Community Based Organizations
• Government Officials
o City Departments: CMO, Fire, Police, HHCS,
Public Works, HR, IT, Finance
o Council Committees: Public Safety Policy
Committee, FITES Committee, Health, Life
Enrichment, Equity & Community Committee,
Budget & Finance Policy Committee
o Boards & Commissions: Mental Health
Commission, Public Safety Policy Committee,
Police Accountability Board, RPS Taskforce
PAGE 2480
APPENDIX D
2.3 Purpose and Value to Organization
The purpose of the Reimagining Public Safety Initiative in the City of Berkeley is to develop a more equitable, holistic, and community-centered approach to public safety. By reassessing and restructuring traditional models, we aim to address systemic inequities, increase community trust, and efficiently allocate resources for the well-being of all residents. This initiative not only seeks to enhance the city’s public safety and community engagement, but also positions Berkeley as a potential model for innovative, comprehensive, and inclusive public safety strategies nationwide. Reimagining Public Safety Principles, Commitments, and Objectives
Guiding Principle Commitment
REIMAGINE
Redesign public safety
from a traditional Police
Department to one that
is focused on the diverse
needs of the community
it serves.
A transformative approach to community-centered safety and reducing the scope of policing, by re-defining our understanding of safety to be holistic and focus not just on crime prevention but health, wellness, and economic security for all of our residents. While the focus has been on reducing the footprint of policing, we recognize that police play a critical role in our society, and we must determine the right size, focus and function of our Police Department to prevent and respond to crime, while exploring alternative response models and upstream investments in social services to create a healthy, safe and equitable community.
Reimagining health and safety, considering allocating resources towards a more holistic approach - one that shifts resources away from policing towards health, education and social services, and is able to meet crises with a variety of appropriate responses.
Identifying alternatives to policing and enforcement to re duce conflict, harm, and institutionalization , introduce alternative and restorative justice models, and reduce or eliminate use of fines and incarceration.
IMPROVE
Improve the City of
Berkeley’s public safety
system for residents and
communities that have
experienced the greatest
harm from the existing
public safety model.
A broad, inclusive community process that will result in deep and lasting change to support safety and wellbeing for all Berkeley residents.
Determining the appropriate response to community calls for help including size, scope of operation and powers and duties of a well-trained police department.
Supporting police by freeing them to focus on what they do best: respond to and investigate crimes.
REINVEST
Increase equitable
investment in vulnerable
communities and for
those who have been
historically marginalized.
Equitable investment in the essential conditions of a safe and healthy community , especially for those who have been historically marginalized and have experienced disinvestment.
Providing meaningful safety, continuing critical health and social services, and committing to, and investing in, a new, positive, equitable and community-centered approach to health and safety that is affordable and sustainable.
Ensuring an appropriately staffed and deployed Police Department while reducing the impact of Police expenditures to the General Fund; Investing in a suite of alternative response services and a sophisticated dispatch system to deploy the most appropriate emergency response in a cost-effective manner.
PAGE 2481
APPENDIX D
3 Reimagining Public Safety Team
The Reimagining Public Safety Team has undertaken the substantial task of reshaping the city’s approach to public safety, following the City Council’s adoption of the July 2020 omnibus motion. This initiative, as noted in the City Manager’s report, represents a collective effort, drawing together city departments, community stakeholders, field experts, and the dedicated Reimagining Public Safety Task Force to collaboratively design a new public safety paradigm.
In Phase 1 (2020-2022), the City Manager, leadership team, and city staff actively engaged in comprehensive consultations and strategic planning sessions; their efforts, focused on ensuring that the initiatives underway are well-aligned with both the community’s needs and the city council’s directives, set the stage leading into Phase 2 (2022-2024).
The table below offers an overview of the Reimagining Public Safety Team’s structure for Phase 2, acknowledging the individuals and their collaborative work2. It is crucial to emphasize that this initiative is a city-wide effort, reliant on the active involvement of a variety of city staff and community-based subject matter experts throughout its phased implementation. This team is uniquely situated to continue accomplishing this work. Their dedication, passion and leadership around this work is truly exceptional.
Department RPS Team
City Manager’s Office (CMO)
Dee Williams Ridley City Manager
LaTanya Bellow Deputy City Manager
Anne Cardwell Deputy City Manager
Carianna Arredondo Assistant to the City Manager
Reimagining Public Safety Project Coordinator
Health Housing and
Community Services (HHCS)
Dr. Lisa Warhuus Director, Health Housing and Community Services Katherine Hawn Senior Management Analyst, HHCS
RPS Team Lead Representative (HHCS)
Police
Chief Jennifer Louis Chief of Police
Lt. Matthew McGee Lieutenant, Police
RPS Team Lead Representative (Police)
Fire
Chief David Sprague Chief of Fire
Shanalee Gallagher Program Manager, Fire
RPS Team Lead Representative ( Fire)
Public Works Liam Garland Director, Public Works
RPS Team Lead Representative (Public Works)
City Attorney’s Office (CAO) Brendan Darrow Assistant City Attorney City Attorney’s Office (CAO) Emile Durette Assistant to the City Attorney RPS Team Lead Representative (City Attorney ’s Office)
2 As noted in the Executive Summary, this coordination plan is aims to integrate the Assistant to the City Manager, serving as the Reimagining Public Safety Project Coordinator, into the RPS Team and establish a framework for collaborating. Designated City Departments (CMO, HHCS, Police, Fire, Public Works), who have been spearheading this initiative forward, will continue to serve as leads for respective Reimagining Public Safety deliverables. The Assistant to the City Manager will serve as the RPS project coordinator and work collaboratively alongside Departments to catalog and report-out RPS project progress.
PAGE 2482
APPENDIX DPage 183 of 261
4 Deliverables and Tasks
At the time of this coordination plan’s creation, the Reimagining Public Safety initiative has already been set into motion. City departments, each taking steps in line with their specific mandates and responsibility, are continuing to move forward in their efforts to support this initiative. Department Heads and the designated RPS Team leads will collaborate with the Assistant to the City Manager serving as the RPS project coordinator in identifying and cataloging work that has already been completed, work that is in progress, and future tasks that still require action. This consolidated view will enable effective resource allocation, risk management, and strategic planning, thus ensuring the deliverables are executed in a timely and effective manner.
Department Deliverable
City Manager’s Office (CMO)
Phase 1 • Community Engagement Process
Phase 2
• Asst. To City Manager – RPS Project Coordinator
• DEI Officer & Asst to DEI Officer
• Grant Assistance
• Department of Community/Public Safety Design
• Fines/Fees Analysis
• Ceasefire Analysis, Design & (early) Implementation
Phase 3 • Ceasefire Implementation
• Launch Universal Basic Income Pilot
Health Housing and
Community Services (HHCS)
Phase 1 • Specialized Care Unit Design
• Bridge Services
Phase 2
• Specialized Care Unit Implementation
• Respite from Gender Violence
• Needs and Capacity Assessment
• Violence Prevention and Youth Services
• Youth Peers Mental Health Response
Phase 3 • Specialized Care Unit Expansion
Police
Phase 1 • Fair and Impartial Policing
Phase 2
• Fair & Impartial Policing
• Beat Study & Staffing Assessment
• Wellness Funding -- CIS Contract & PST
• Staffing – Community Service Officers & Dispatchers
Phase 3 • BPD Budget & Staffing Update
Fire
Phase 1 • Dispatch Analysis Study Design
Phase 2 • Dispatch Analysis Study Implementation
Phase 3 • Dispatch Redesign Application
Public Works
Phase 1 • BerkDOT Design
Phase 2
• BerkDOT Analysis & Implementation
• Associate Planner for Vision Zero Collision Analysis
• Expand Downtown Streets Teams
• Hearing Officers Alternatives to Sanctions/Fines
Phase 3 • BerkDOT Implementation
• Implementation of Public Safety Department
PAGE 2483
APPENDIX D
5 Assumptions and Constraints
In planning and executing the Reimagining Public Safety initiative, it’s crucial to identify the underlying assumptions that guide our strategies, as well as the constraints that may limit our options. This section outlines these assumptions and constraints to provide a structured framework for decision-making, risk management, and effective project implementation on an inter-departmental level.
Assumption/Constraint Description Example Detail
Funding
Adequate financial resources will be available for
implementing various aspects of the project. Budget allocation, grants, etc.
Limited funds may restrict the extent of changes or
pace implementation.
Budget caps, competing
priorities.
Community Support
There is strong community support and engagement in
the reimagining process.
Community meetings,
surveys, etc.
Resistance or opposition from certain community
groups may slow down the project’s pace.
Public protests, negative
media attention.
Legislative Framework
Necessary changes in local and state laws will be made
to facilitate project goals.
Policy adjustments for
unarmed enforcement.
Existing laws may limit the types of changes that can
be implemented immediately.
State laws on unarmed
enforcement.
Staff Recruitment/Retention
Required staff positions will be filled timely and will remain stable throughout the project.
Assistant City Managers,
Vision Zero Coordinator, etc.
Constraints on hiring or retaining the specialized staff required for the project.
Recruitment challenges,
staffing shortages, causing
delay.
High attrition rates.
Hiring and training can take
up to a year due to added
measures in this specialty.
Technology
Technology platforms will effectively support new
dispatch and response models.
Software for prioritized
dispatch.
Technological limitations may constrain the speed or
effectiveness of new systems or models. Outdated systems, interoperability issues,
extended timelines.
Request for Proposals is often a 6-month process.
Actual implementation of new systems could take up to
two years.
PAGE 2484
APPENDIX D
6 Project Budget
A budget allocation of up to $5.3 million3 has been designated for Fiscal Year 2023-2024. Together with additional grants, the total funding for the Reimagining Public Safety Initiative exceeds approximately $9 million. Developed based on recommendations from the City Manager, Mayor, and City Council the budget serves as a financial blueprint for responsibly allocating resources and achieving the initiative’s objectives. For optimized tracking and reporting, we’ve established a simple process that involves multiple stakeholders.
6.1 Reporting Process, Frequency, and Deadlines
The given the dynamic nature of the Reimagining Public Safety work, the team will continue to collaborate on identifying and improving best practices for budget process. RPS Project Leads will be responsible for sharing the following information for respective RPS-related deliverables:
Type of Expense Tracking Information
For Contracted Items • Vendor Name
• Contract # (if applicable)
• Budget COA
For Staffing Positions • Position Filled (Y/N)
• Job Description/Posting Link
Considering the RPS work is funded by the city across FY 2023 and FY 2024, a quarterly reporting cadence is most effective.
By adhering to these guidelines and protocols, we aim to maintain rigorous control and agility while effectively making meaningful progress on the Reimagining Public Safety Initiative.
3 Subject to change based on bi-annual budget review process and recommendations.
PAGE 2485
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX N
Gun Violence Prevention (Ceasefire) Related Supporting Documentation PAGE 3013
APPENDIX N
The author conducted this study as part of the program of professional education at the Goldman School of Public Policy, Univ ersity of California at Berkeley. This paper is submitted in partial fulfillment of the course requirements for the Master of Public Policy degree. The judgments and conclus ions are solely those of the author, and are not necessarily endorsed by the Goldman School of Public Polic y, by the University of California or by any other agency.
GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
Berkeley, California
Michelle A. Verger MPP ‘23
[email protected]
Abstract
This research extensively reviews the relevant literature on gun crime, crime concentration, gun violence prevention approaches, and small city gun violence prevention taken from other programs. Various interventions are evaluated using specific criteria in the context of Berkeley’s “brand” of gun violence. The recommended program is a combination of police and non-police interventions that hopefully brings a holistic sense to the program. This research also makes recommendations as to implementation and program evaluation.
PAGE 3014
APPENDIX N
2 Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Statement of Positionality ................................................................................................................................ 7 Introduction and Problem Analysis ................................................................................................................... 7 Gun Crimes and Regulations Legal Landscape in Berkeley ............................................................................. 11 Data Analysis Results ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Hot Spot Analysis ....................................................................................................................................................... 12 Social Network Analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 13 Key Criteria ..................................................................................................................................................... 15 Program components ..................................................................................................................................... 16 Component #1: Hot Spots Policing/Place-based Policing ........................................................................................... 16 Component #2: Hot Spots Policing Version of Problem-Oriented Policing (POP) ....................................................... 17 Social Network Analysis, Focused Deterrence, and Social Services............................................................................ 18 Component #3: SNA and Focused Deterrence/Custom Notifications ........................................................................................ 18 Component #4: SNA and Social Services .................................................................................................................................. 19 Component #5 Warrants to Remove Firearms from Domestic Abusers (DVROs) and Individuals Posing a Danger to Themselves or Others (GVROs), Court-Issued Protective Orders, and Criminal Protective Orders (CPOs) ................. 20 Component #6 Street Outreach Workers/Violence Interrupters ............................................................................... 20 Component #7 Hospital-Based Violence Intervention ............................................................................................... 21 Component #8 Gun Buyback Programs ..................................................................................................................... 21 Longer Term Solutions Addressing the Root Causes of Gun Violence ........................................................................ 21 Evaluating Components Using Criteria ........................................................................................................... 21 Hot Spots Policing ...................................................................................................................................................... 21 Hot Spots Version of Problem-Oriented Policing (POP) ............................................................................................. 25 SNA and Focused Deterrence .................................................................................................................................... 26 SNA and Social Services ............................................................................................................................................. 27 Warrants to Remove Firearms from Domestic Abusers (DVROs), Individuals Posing a Danger to Themselves or Others (GVROs), Court-Issued Protective Orders, and Criminal Protective Orders (CPOs) ......................................... 28 Street Outreach Workers/Violence Interrupters ....................................................................................................... 29 Hospital Based Violence Intervention ........................................................................................................................ 30 Gun Buyback Programs .............................................................................................................................................. 31 PAGE 3015
APPENDIX N
3 Packaged components into programs ............................................................................................................ 31 Alternative #1: Problem Oriented Policing (POP) at Hot Spots + Street Outreach Workers ....................................... 31 Alternative #2: Problem Oriented Policing (POP) at Hot Spots + Street Outreach Workers + SNA Focused Deterrence .................................................................................................................................................................................. 31 Alternative #3: Problem Oriented Policing (POP) at Hot Spots + Street Outreach Workers + SNA Focused Deterrence + Social Services ......................................................................................................................................................... 32 Program recommendation .............................................................................................................................. 32 Implementation .............................................................................................................................................. 32 POP at Hot Spots ....................................................................................................................................................... 33 Focused Deterrence/Custom Notifications ................................................................................................................ 34 Street Outreach Workers ........................................................................................................................................... 35 Social Services ........................................................................................................................................................... 35 Program Evaluation ........................................................................................................................................ 36 Program Evaluation Recommendation ...................................................................................................................... 36 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................................... 37 Appendices ...................................................................................................................................................... 39 Appendix A: Research Approach and Methodology .................................................................................................. 39 Overview of Research Sources ................................................................................................................................................. 39 Interview Protocol ................................................................................................................................................................... 39 Interview Practices Employed .................................................................................................................................................. 39 Interview Subjects ................................................................................................................................................................... 39 Appendix B Literature Review ................................................................................................................................... 41 Crime Concentration/Place-Based Policing .............................................................................................................................. 41 Gun Buyback Programs ........................................................................................................................................................... 44 Hot Spots Policing ................................................................................................................................................................... 46 Problem Oriented Policing ....................................................................................................................................................... 50 Social Network Analysis as it Relates to Gun Violence .............................................................................................................. 52 Gangs and Gang Membership .................................................................................................................................................. 54 Domestic Violence and Firearm Accessibility............................................................................................................................ 55 Hospital Based Violence Intervention Programs (HVIPs) ........................................................................................................... 56 Focused Deterrence (Custom Notifications) ............................................................................................................................. 57 Street Outreach Teams/Violence Interrupters ......................................................................................................................... 58 Root Causes of Gun Violence ................................................................................................................................................... 61 Appendix C Visualizations .......................................................................................................................................... 62 Hot Spot Visualizations ............................................................................................................................................................ 62 Social Network Analysis Visualizations ..................................................................................................................................... 64 PAGE 3016
APPENDIX N
4 Appendix D Criteria Matrix ........................................................................................................................................ 66 References ...................................................................................................................................................... 68
PAGE 3017
APPENDIX N
5 Executive Summary
Gun violence in Berkeley is rising rapidly and becoming a city-wide concern. As such, the City Council has affirmed a $1 million budget for “Berkeley Ceasefire” that will fund non-police interventions. Within the police department, the Gun Violence Intervention Working Group of the Berkeley Police Department is partnering with a UC Berkeley researcher to develop a program that incorporates both police and non-police interventions.
Causes of this steep rise in gun violence – from seven to over 50 annually in the last five years – are several. 4% have been fatal, 21% have resulted in injury, and 75% were simply “shots fired”. First, Berkeley’s problem is in the context of skyrocketing gun violence nationwide and regionally. Second, the proliferation of ghost guns makes it even more difficult to suppress supply-side dynamics. Third, street-crew shootings and domestic violence make up some portion of shootings. However, much of the gun violence is not categorized and cannot be attributed to any one cause.
This research employs mixed methods. Qualitatively, an extensive literature review was done on major topics around gun violence and prevention, and interviews with experts and practitioners were conducted. Quantitatively, I calculated geospatial point density using ArcGIS to locate “hot spots” and I performed social network analysis (SNA) to identify networks relevant to gun violence. Geospatially, I identified seven key locations for the department and community to focus interventions on. SNA revealed key ideal recipients of both social service outreach and focused deterrence measures.
PAGE 3018
APPENDIX N
6 Hot Spots Identified
Berkeley Shootings Social Network of Offenders and Victims
PAGE 3019
APPENDIX N
7 I considered a basic version of hot spots policing, a problem-solving version of hot spots policing, SNA-based focused deterrence, SNA-based social services, warrants to remove firearms from domestic abusers, street outreach workers, and hospital-based violence intervention programs as components to form a comprehensive gun violence prevention program. Ultimately, I concluded that four of these components will form the basis of the recommendation – problem solving at hot spots, focused deterrence, social services, and street outreach workers. This program option is advantageous because it is holistic and erodes gun violence from multiple angles. Additionally, if one approach is clearly not working or is running up too high of a cost, it can be cut and other portions of the program can remain ongoing instead of rebuilding a new program from scratch. This program should be monitored as closely as possible during its first year followed by an annual pre-test post-test evaluation to determine how close the program is to meeting the benchmark of 10% fewer shootings per year.
Intervention Description
POP at Shooting Hot Spots Random patrol idles at and checks on hot spots for 15-20 minutes. Officer notes events, people, or problems that facilitate crime at hot spot.
SNA Focused Deterrence Social Network Analysis is used to identify who is most likely to be involved in future gun violence and a CBO and police deliver a “hard” deterrence message and the community delivers a “soft” extension of help or social services.
SNA Social Services Outreach Connected to above but can be done without deterrence. SNA is used to identify people who are at risk and to extend wraparound social services to them, tailored to their specific needs. Case management ideal.
Street Outreach Workers These individuals have connections to the community and carry legitimacy in their work to diffuse conflict, stop retaliation, and urge non-violence. They also help people exit a violent lifestyle.
Statement of Positionality
I am a white skinned, queer, Latinx woman. I am Venezuelan American. I have never been shot or involved in any violent crime. This research and its findings are part of my Master’s thesis, for the Advanced Policy Analysis course at the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley.
Introduction and Problem Analysis
I recommend that Berkeley implement a multi-pronged, holistic gun violence prevention program that incorporates problem-solving at hot spots, street outreach, targeted focused deterrence and social services.
The number of incidents involving firearms is sharply rising in Berkeley, California, a small city in the San Francisco East Bay. Berkeley is not alone. The nation has seen a dramatic rise in gun violence in all cities, spurring policymakers and public safety practitioners to find solutions. The Berkeley Police Department’s Gun Violence Intervention Working Group, city councilmembers, and community leaders are searching for near-term strategies to reduce gun violence.
PAGE 3020
APPENDIX N
8 Many gun violence intervention programs have been developed throughout the country, focusing on everything from place-based or “hot spots” policing to public health epidemiological modeling to a combination of several approaches.
There have also been many programs that integrate other city services and departments, as well as Community-Based Organizations (CBOs). All of these programs have all had varying effects and results, not to mention costs and personnel.
The challenge Berkeley has is to design a multi-pronged program that is uniquely suited to its mode of gun violence and to also develop a monitoring and evaluation process that the department will implement after some time has passed.
Existing models typically have a multi-pronged approach, and often include both police activities and activities taken on by other city departments or CBOs.
Let it be noted that for the purposes of this research problem and design, “gun violence” will be defined as firearm violence between two or more people, and classified as either “shots fired”, shooting-related injury, or shooting-related death. This provides clarity that suicides, although a majority (roughly two-thirds) of firearm violence incidents in the United States
1, are not within the scope or aim of this particular project.
In 2020, Berkeley’s $1 million Ceasefire Program2 was proposed by the City Council3 in response to an alarming rise in shootings – 39 that year. In 2021 there were 50 incidents of gun violence and in 2022 even more, resulting in three dead and 15 injured.4 Over the past five years, shootings have risen from 15 in 2017 to 53 in 2022 – an increase of over 353%.5 The population of Alameda County has fallen since the 2020 census, primarily attributed to the pandemic.6, 7 Berkeley’s population likewise has dropped to 117,145 in 2021.8 So, there are approximately 45 shootings per 100,000. But, calculating only for injuries and deaths due to firearm violence, that figure drops to approximately 13 per 100,000. For injuries alone the rate is 10 per 100,000. The rate of gun deaths, however, is just 2.6 – far smaller than the state rate of 9 per 100,000. I was unable to find shots fired or firearm injury data for the state as a whole.
This is a policy problem because the police department is in charge of public safety for the City of Berkeley. This charge is represented through city budgeting, city regulations, and internal police policies. Gun violence is a clear threat to public safety and public health, one that represents injuries and loss of life. “Effective violence prevention is
1 Wintemute, Garen J. “The Epidemiology of Firearm Violence in the Twenty-First Century United States.” Annual Review of Public Health, vol. 36, no. 1, Mar. 2015, pp. 5–19. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031914-122535. 2 The goal of the Ceasefire Program, formally the “Violence Intervention Initiative”, is to identify community members most likely to engage in violence and surround them in “circles of care” like drug rehabilitation, job training, and available social workers. This is what the fiscal year 2023- 2024 budgets for the Ceasefire Program: one full time director, one program manager, five life coaches, three outreach workers, a fringe estimate, and gun violence problem analysis.
3 “Ceasefire Off Agenda Memo- Update Violence Intervention Initiative Berkeley Ceasefire.Pdf.” Google Docs, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ESpeLFADzRbLVNRBR6Ujdi1Uu4PwyFE1/view?usp=embed_facebook. Accessed 18 Jan. 2023. 4Current Trends. Berkeley Police Department, Transparency Hub https://bpd-transparency-initiative-berkeleypd.hub.arcgis.com/pages/current-trends.
Accessed 25 Jan. 2023.
5Id.
6 Base population of 2020 census for entire county is 39,538,245. Census estimate for 2022 is 39,029,342. 7 Bureau, U. C. (n.d.). County population totals and components of change: 2020-2022. Census.Gov. Retrieved May 5, 2023, from https://www.census.gov/data/datasets/time-series/demo/popest/2020s-counties-total.html 8 U. S. Census bureau quickfacts: Berkeley city, California. (n.d.). Retrieved May 4, 2023, from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/berkeleycitycalifornia PAGE 3021
APPENDIX N
9 fundamental to community and economic development, mental health, and a decent quality of life”.9 Gun violence is also a problem that can be addressed through policy formation and change. This policy formation and change has occurred in cities throughout the country, so there are many blueprints for Berkeley to follow. “Public safety is foundational to human development, economic development, and a civilized life – and communities beset by violence in all those respects…Gun violence is a multifaceted problem requiring a multifaceted response. But an essential component of any comprehensive effort is more effective policing. Most instances in which one person shoots another are crimes. The police offer a unique capacity for violence prevention that has no good substitute from other institutions, and effective policing could prevent much of the shooting.” – Braga and Cook, 2022 10 This project is best defined as “programmatic”, “prescriptive”, and “evaluative”. The goal of this project is to design a program for Berkeley to adopt – some policy prescription is needed to do that. And on the back end the program needs a way to be evaluated so that future versions integrate past successes or failures into better addressing the causes of gun violence.
It became clear to the Berkeley City Council that this rise was steep and unusual, prompting action. They are prominent stakeholders in the perseverance of said action, whatever it may be – Berkeley Ceasefire and additional measures taken.
But more importantly, so are Berkeley’s inhabitants, workers, and passersby. Over the last several years in Berkeley, families of victims and concerned citizens have held rallies for change as well as vigils in memory of those killed.
However, “shots fired” and “shooting-related injuries” affect even more people – not just those directly involved but also their greater neighborhood and even the whole city. Promoting a Berkeley that feels and is safe to all people, however lofty, is a theme of this project.
Geographic specificity here matters. Northeast Berkeley neighborhoods Northside etc.) and the Berkeley hills area (Cragmont etc.), simply put, experience less gun violence of all varieties as defined in this project. Clearly from the map on Berkeley Police Department’s “Transparency Hub”, South (of UC Berkeley) and West Berkeley are where a majority of gun violence incidents occur and where we should be focused.
9 Braga, A. A., & Cook, P. J. (2023). Policing gun violence: Strategic reforms for controlling our most pressing crime problem. Oxford University Press.
10 Id.
PAGE 3022
APPENDIX N
10 11
Who is involved in these incidents matters too. South and West Berkeley are home to more people of color, people that are lower income, and who live in more of a “city-scape” proximate to Oakland and the water. In Berkeley, most perpetrators of gun violence in Berkeley are African American and victims are predominantly African American.12 Nationwide, “Homicide risk is concentrated to a remarkable degree among Black males through much of the life span. At ages 20-29 in 2012, the firearm homicide rate for Black males was at least five times higher than that for Hispanic males and at least 20 times that for White males.”13 This is true for Berkeley as well. Arrested subjects, suspects, and detainees were 81% male and 19% female. They were 67% Black, 19% Hispanic, 9% white, 4% Asian, and 2% other. For firearm victims, they were 58% male, 42% female, 40% white, 25% Black, 13% other, 12% Hispanic, and 10% Asian. Notably, this includes victims of property crime, who are more likely to be white, and which distorts the racial percentages of victims.
Excluding “shots fired” entirely for victims in order to exclude property damage, the race breakdown does change: 37% Black, 30% white, 15% Hispanic, and 13% other.14 These figures are for all shootings.
This report does seek to know the “why”. We are interested in who is involved in gun violence, where the incident took place, what happened, and how individuals were affected (injury, loss of life, fear). But crucially, “why” gun violence is occurring, and occurring the ways that it currently does in Berkeley, will illuminate our pursuit of the right gun violence
11 Current trends. (n.d.). Retrieved March 7, 2023, from https://bpd-transparency-initiative-berkeleypd.hub.arcgis.com/pages/current-trends 12 Berkeley Police Department, 2023
13 Wintemute, Garen J. “The Epidemiology of Firearm Violence in the Twenty-First Century United States.” Annual Review of Public Health, vol. 36, no. 1, Mar. 2015, pp. 5–19. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031914-122535. 14 Berkeley Police Department, 2023
PAGE 3023
APPENDIX N
11 prevention program and program evaluation. Generally, gun violence is rising in Berkeley because nationwide, cities are seeing spikes in gun violence, locally ghost guns are proliferating, there is some gang- and street-crew gun violence, and there is some firearm-related domestic violence. However, the majority of gun violence cases are not specific to any category and is “random”. This is especially true of when police arrive on scene, possibly have witnesses, but only identify shell casings and do not apprehend a suspect. This happens more often than not.
The client in this case should seek to sustain a continued decrease in gun violence incidents, year after year. The Center for Criminal Justice Violent Crime Working Group states that city leaders and criminal justice advocates should aim for an annual homicide and violent crime reduction of 10% because that goal is both tangible and realistic for cities.15 At Berkeley’s volume, that’s about six shootings per year. Such a benchmark is helpful but not strict. Any reduction is a good sign and obviously exceeding it is welcome.
Long term, Berkeley should hope to get back to the 2017 rate of less than ten annual gun violence incidents. Over the course of less than ten years, we should expect to return to 2017 levels. If we are to expect the pandemic to continue subsiding, addressing gun violence with a holistic program should decrease gun violence now faster than it rose over the past five years due with that anomaly.16 This is what happened in Champaign, Illinois after they implemented their multi- pronged, holistic Blueprint program.17 The program should be monitored closely in its first year, following a very thorough annual evaluation. Then, each year there should be an analysis of shootings that occurred, what form gun violence is taking over time, and how close the city is to that 10% reduction.
Gun Crimes and Regulations Legal Landscape in Berkeley
In California, a background check is done at the point of sale for every firearm sold. It requires that everyone with a concealed carry permit complete a training that includes shooting a gun. Open carry requires a permit or is barred altogether, and the state can bar concealed carry permits to be issued to anyone they deem dangerous. The state has so far refused to enact a “Shoot First” law, also known as a “Stand Your Ground” law. Assault weapons are prohibited, except where they have been grandfathered in or modified to be “California compliant”. New handguns are required to have childproofing features and microstamping technology – which marks bullets and cartridge cases with a unique fingerprint each time the firearm is discharged. To abide by state law, firearms must be stored locked, unloaded, and separate from ammunition when a child under 18 can or will access the firearm. Ghost guns are regulated (this is not particularly enforceable), high capacity magazines are prohibited, and there is no legal immunity for the gun industry.
Officials are required to trace all guns recovered at crime scenes.
People with violent misdemeanors, felonies, hate crime convictions, a short-term emergency order in place (for domestic abusers), or a history of stalking are prohibited from possessing a firearm. Domestic abusers with misdemeanor convictions or restraining orders in place, and stalkers must relinquish their weapons. Fugitives and those who have been involuntarily committed or deemed a danger to themselves or others are barred from possessing a
15 “Saving Lives: Ten Essential Actions Can Take to Reduce Violence Now.” Council on Criminal Justice, 12 Jan. 2022, https://counciloncj.org/10- essential-actions/.
16 Gun violence prevention and response. (n.d.). City of Champaign. Retrieved May 4, 2023, from https://champaignil.gov/police/resources/gun- violence-prevention-and-response/
17 Id.
PAGE 3024
APPENDIX N
12 weapon. Law enforcement, immediate family members, employers, coworkers, teachers, roommates, people with a child in common or who have a dating relationship in California can petition the court to temporarily take away gun access for those in crisis. There are no guns allowed in K-12 schools, on college campuses, at the state capitol, or in political demonstrations. Dealers are required to be licensed, are barred from completing sales while background checks are ongoing, must release their sales records to law enforcement and notify law enforcement when someone barred from doing so attempts to purchase a weapon. Finally, there are waiting periods to buy a gun. These are the foundational laws related to firearms in California.18
California also allows localities to enact their own gun safety laws. In Berkeley, discharging a firearm is illegal in all cases except where law enforcement is concerned or a citizen is acting in assisting an officer. Violation of this law is a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars, or by imprisonment not to exceed six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment.19 Right now in Berkeley, there is “a rise in detection and seizure of firearms lacking serial numbers or other identifying markings, commonly known as “ghost guns””.20 They are prohibited by city ordinance but have been linked to many shootings over the last several years. Each possession and use of a ghost gun (or part or frame of a ghost gun) is a Class 1 misdemeanor. In 2022, BPD seized 47 ghost guns and 72 other guns. It is a rising problem, complicating tracing guns to crimes and to people.
Data Analysis Results
Hot Spot Analysis
Hot spot analysis of shootings in Berkeley shows that they are concentrated at about seven specific sites. ArcGIS was used to do geospatial analysis on five years of shooting data in Berkeley. Because there were fewer than 2,000 data points, we were unable to run Cluster, Hot Spot, or Optimized Hot Spot analysis. Instead, Point Density analysis was used as it can run for smaller datasets.21
We knew broadly already that the south (of UC Berkeley) and west parts of Berkeley are where most shootings occur.
Although at first shootings appeared to be clustered along long corridors, our Point Density analysis allowed us to further demonstrate what intersections and city blocks are statistically significant points of convergence that deserve attention. Seven locations were foremost identified by the software: 63rd Street & King Street, Acton Street & Russell Street, Channing Street & 8th Street, Channing Street & San Pablo Avenue, Durant Street & Sather Street, Harmon Street & Sacramento Street, and Oregon Street & Park Street (San Pablo Park). Identifiable to BPD from experience is the site just south of UC Berkeley, San Pablo Park, and two sites on Channing that relate to public housing where chronic
18 California. (n.d.). Everytown Research & Policy. Retrieved April 8, 2023, from https://research.www.everytown.org/rankings/state/california/ 19 Ch. 13.72 Discharge of Firearms. (n.d.). Berkeley Municipal Code. Retrieved April 8, 2023, from https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/13. 20 Ch. 13.73.010 Non-Serialized Firearms. (n.d.). Berkeley Municipal Code: PROHIBITION OF POSSESSION OR SALE OF NON-SERIALIZED, UNFINISHED FIREARM FRAMES OR RECEIVERS AND NON-SERIALIZED FIREARMS. Retrieved April 17, 2023, from https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/13.73.010
21 The Point Density Tool calculates a magnitude-per-unit area from point features that fall within an area around each cell. The sum value of points within a search area (neighborhood) is divided by the search area size to get each cell's density value. Conceptually, a neighborhood is defined around each raster cell center, and the number of points that fall within the neighborhood is totaled and divided by the area of the neighborhood. calculates the magnitude per unit area from point features within a neighborhood.
PAGE 3025
APPENDIX N
13 offenders are known to reside. Below we have shown the full picture of the city with the Point Density layered on top. A zoomed in portrait of each of one can be found in Appendix C.
Temporal analysis of shootings in Berkeley reveals very little. There are not clear patterns about how shooting locations have changed over the last five years. There does not seem to be an identifiable pattern when viewing the shootings by quarter year.
Social Network Analysis
“By identifying high-risk individuals and transmission pathways that might not be detected by other means, a contagion- based approach could detect strategic points of intervention that would enable measures to proactively reduce the trauma associated with gun violence rather than just react to past incidents…such a contagion-based approach is centered on the PAGE 3026
APPENDIX N
14 subjects of gun violence and…has the potential to move the larger public dialogue on gun violence away from efforts that rest largely on geographic or group-based policing efforts that tend to disproportionately affect disadvantaged minority communities.” – Green, Horel, and Papachristos (2017)22 Social Network Analysis allowed us to see clearly that what Berkeley has is akin to other cities. We have a large network of incidents, suspects/detained parties/arrested, and victims. Within that network is a denser, more interconnected network at the center compared to the larger network. See below:
It is important that the distal effects of exposure are considered. With any SNA intervention, we should include not just immediate ties to victims and perpetrators but also their indirect 2nd degree and higher order ties.23 Likelihood of victimization is two to three times greater if one has a social tie to a victim than if they have no exposure to victims.24 This accounts for how transmissible victimization within networks.25 In Boston’s Cape Verdean network, researchers found 85% of victims in the large component.26 In Newark, 33% of all shootings occurred in network components compromising approximately less than 4% of the entire population.27 Clustering also occurs within a network – you can
22 Green, B., Horel, T., & Papachristos, A. V. (2017). Modeling contagion through social networks to explain and predict gunshot violence in Chicago, 2006 to 2014. JAMA Internal Medicine, 177(3), 326. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.8245 23 Papachristos, A. V., Wildeman, C., & Roberto, E. (2015). Tragic, but not random: The social contagion of nonfatal gunshot injuries. Social Science & Medicine, 125, 139–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.01.056 24 Id.
25 Green, B., Horel, T., & Papachristos, A. V. (2017). Modeling contagion through social networks to explain and predict gunshot violence in Chicago, 2006 to 2014. JAMA Internal Medicine, 177(3), 326. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.8245 26 Papachristos, A. V., Braga, A. A., & Hureau, D. M. (2012). Social networks and the risk of gunshot injury. Journal of Urban Health, 89(6), 992– 1003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-012-9703-9
27 Papachristos, A. V., Braga, A. A., Piza, E., & Grossman, L. S. (2015). The company you keep? The spillover effects of gang membership on individual gunshot victimization in a co-offending network: gang membership, networks, & victimization. Criminology, 53(4), 624–649. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12091
PAGE 3027
APPENDIX N
15 see dense pockets of individuals connected to each other by a small number of ties. While perhaps not as extreme, Berkeley’s network follows a similar dynamic, as is visually apparent.
Key Criteria
Do not allow non-police interventions in a program to amount to more than the allotted $1 million. Berkeley Police explained to me that that budget was for non-police interventions. The annual Ceasefire budget that was passed by the City Council is for non-police interventions of one million dollars in sum. Anything of that nature under the umbrella of the program cannot exceed this amount annually. This is the most difficult criterion to fulfill, as we will see that most non-police program elements likely surpass this budget. It is probable more funds will need to be procured, and demonstrated project success will help the city to prioritize and justify more funding.
Reduction of shootings by 10% per year.28 For Berkeley this amounts to about 5 shootings per year. This is the basic measure of effectiveness for the project, supported by literature – specifically it is the recommendation to law enforcement by the Council on Criminal Justice. This criterion is essential, although it may take time to achieve. Any reduction should be seen as a success. But, the program should be flexible enough to allow for alterations to be made continually to enable the program to get to a 10% reduction in shootings annually.
The program needs to be workable to the City Manager’s Office that will authorize the program. This report will be read and implemented by the Office of the City Manager. It is necessary that the report is understandable from their point of view and also acceptable from a political standpoint. The city is still hiring for the specific position of Assistant to the City Manager so it is impossible to know the constraints they will bring to the project.
This program needs to avoid delegitimizing the Berkeley police, instilling fear of crime in Berkeley residents, and decreasing the community’s collective efficacy.29, 30 These metrics are signs that the community-police relationship is breaking down. Police legitimacy means that the public consents to police authority and sees their part of the contract as obeying city laws. Crime spikes or hostility toward police are signs that police legitimacy is decreasing. Fear of crime can occur when a portion of the city is visually seeing more police in their immediate vicinity and interpreting this as a sign that crime has increased. When fear of crime increases in a city, fewer people interact with their neighbors or report incidents that they feel are happening all the time. Collective efficacy is the social cohesion of a group, which allows for residents to enforce mutually agreed upon norms and rules for their neighborhood. Ensuring community- police relationship success is critical to the mission of reducing gun violence. Even if short-term goals are achieved, a breakdown could offset any gains in long-term crime control. 31 A community survey or way for residents to report how they are feeling and behaving in their neighborhood after the treatment begins would be a good start to evaluating this
28 Saving lives: Ten essential actions cities can take to reduce violence now. (2022, January 12). Council on Criminal Justice. https://counciloncj.org/10-essential-actions/
29 Weisburd, D., Bushway, S., Lum, C., & Yang, S.-M. (2004). Trajectories of crime at places: A longitudinal study of street segments in the city of Seattle*. Criminology, 42(2), 283–322. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2004.tb00521.x 30 Weisburd, D., & Telep, C. W. (2014). Hot spots policing: What we know and what we need to know. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 30(2), 200–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986214525083 31 Id.
PAGE 3028
APPENDIX N
16 metric. If funds allow, having a polling agency do this work formally would go a long way to ensuring the health of the community-police relationship.
Continually monitor the program and analyze progress to ensure success. Ensure that there are personnel to monitor and evaluate the program in its infancy and on the annual. Both budget and effectiveness need to be monitored. The budget constraints are above, and it needs to be reviewed not only annually but as the program goes along to make sure that non-police interventions will not exceed the one million dollar figure at year’s end. In terms of effectiveness we know that our aim is about 5 fewer shootings per year. But, we want to stay in touch with different safety practitioners to make sure that what is being seen and heard on the ground lines up with this goal – even before the year is over.
Use of police and non-police resources. It is well known that the police are not a multitool for all public safety issues.
Many issues can be addressed or improved using city services or community-based organizations (CBOs). The gun violence intervention program needs to utilize both the capabilities of law enforcement and the different services available through the city or CBOs.
Program components
Component #1: Hot Spots Policing/Place-based Policing
Based on a long history of experimental and quasi-experimental studies and evidence, it is now known that hot spots policing – focusing on places not people – is an effective crime prevention strategy.32, 33, 34 Hot spots are identified by creating a crime map, usually with a GIS mapping system, plotting incidents, and using one of the various mathematical hot spot tools to highlight where crime convergence is unusually high compared to other micro-units of a city. Police randomly idle at hot spots every several hours and remain there for 15-20 minutes.35 An absolute minimum of 10 minutes must be spent there to have a crime control effect and some “survival time”.36 Survival time is the amount of time after police leave that an area remains disorder- and crime-free.37 Koper (1995) studied the residual deterrent effects of police patrols in hot spots and whether longer “dosages” (time spent at a hot spot) created stronger effects.
He found that each additional minute of police presence increased survival time by 23%.38 Two theories underpin this strategy. First, deterrence: police can maximize crime and disorder reduction at hot spots simply by being visible randomly and intermittently, thus maximizing deterrence and minimizing the amount of
32 Weisburd, D., & Telep, C. W. (2014). Hot spots policing: What we know and what we need to know. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 30(2), 200–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986214525083 33 Braga, A. A., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2010). The concentration and stability of gun violence at micro places in Boston, 1980–2008.
Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26(1), 33–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-009-9082-x 34 Skogan, W. G., & Frydl, K. (2004). Fairness and effectiveness in policing: The evidence. National Academies Press. 35 Koper, C. S. (1995). Just enough police presence: Reducing crime and disorderly behavior by optimizing patrol time in crime hot spots. Justice Quarterly, 12(4), 649–672. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418829500096231 36 Id.
37 Id.
38 Id.
PAGE 3029
APPENDIX N
17 unnecessary time spent at hot spots. Second, crime opportunity reduction: police presence modifies the opportunity structure to cause crime and disorder at hot spots.39
The concern has often been, if you are patrolling certain micro-locations more often, you might encounter negative crime spillover effects to neighboring areas as the hot spot is recognized to encounter police more often.40 However, several studies have shown that what is more likely is the diffusion of crime control benefits into the surrounding areas, not crime displacement.41, 42, 43, 44
In one small city in the Midwest, continual adjustment of hot spots, and active management and tracking of patrols helped keep officers diligent as a trend has been that effectiveness of this intervention decreases over time. This study showed that without deep problem solving efforts, a sustained visible presence approach can also serve to impact crime over the long run.45 This strategy can easily be operationalized for Berkeley gun violence. For this report, hot spot analysis was run and seven locations were identified [12].
Component #2: Hot Spots Policing Version of Problem-Oriented Policing (POP)
The same theories of deterrence and opportunity reduction underlie POP at hot spots. Braga (2012) found that POP programs that incorporate hot spots policing produced effect sizes more than double those produced by hot spots studies only on police presence.46 POP is associated with statistically significant impacts on crime reduction and shows no evidence of crime displacement.47
The first step to POP at each hot spot is identifying the spots, bumping up police presence for the near future, and spending that same 15 minutes every few hours of patrol at the spot, patrolling and scanning for potential problems
39 Braga, A. A., Turchan, B. S., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2019). Hot spots policing and crime reduction: An update of an ongoing systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15(3), 289–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-019-09372-3 40 Weisburd, D., & Telep, C. W. (2014). Hot spots policing: What we know and what we need to know. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 30(2), 200–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986214525083 41 Braga, A. A., Turchan, B. S., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2019). Hot spots policing and crime reduction: An update of an ongoing systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15(3), 289–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-019-09372-3 42 Sherman, L. W., & Weisburd, D. (1995). General deterrent effects of police patrol in crime “hot spots”: A randomized, controlled trial. Justice Quarterly, 12(4), 625–648. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418829500096221 43 Weisburd, D., Wyckoff, L. A., Ready, J., Eck, J. E., Hinkle, J. C., & Gajewski, F. (2006). Does crime just move around the corner? A controlled study of spatial displacement and diffusion of crime control benefits. Criminology, 44(3), 549–592. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745- 9125.2006.00057.x
44 Bowers, K. J. (2004). Prospective hot-spotting: The future of crime mapping? British Journal of Criminology, 44(5), 641–658. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azh036
45 Koper, C. S., Lum, C., Wu, X., & Hegarty, T. (2021). The long-term and system-level impacts of institutionalizing hot spot policing in a small city.
Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 15(2), 1110–1128. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paaa096 46 Braga, A. A. (2008). Problem-oriented policing and crime prevention (2nd ed). Willow Tree Press. 47 Hinkle, J. C., Weisburd, D., Telep, C. W., & Petersen, K. (2021). Problem-oriented policing for reducing crime and disorder: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. CrimRxiv. https://doi.org/10.21428/cb6ab371.5277ad69 PAGE 3030
APPENDIX N
18 using the SARA method (see Literature Review [50]). Regarding what to do at each spot, most traditionally the S.A.R.A. method (Scanning-Analysis-Response-Assessment) is used when applying POP. 48 Police presence is theorized to deter would-be criminal acts from occurring, and this bears out in the research.49 This deterrence is key, but in practice it cannot go on forever. While there, police document problems that could facilitate crime, whether they be social or environmental. That is where other entities, and the police department staff that liaises with them, come into play. Depending on the unique environment of each hot spot, the department would come together and determine what non-police interventions would transform the location. This could involve street teams to diffuse possibly violent situations, street lighting, the addition of green space, among many other interventions. If these transformations cause the area to be perceived differently by would-be criminals (again, this bears out in the research), the program’s impact has the staying power to continue to deter gun violence longer than simply patrolling hot spots.
Social Network Analysis, Focused Deterrence, and Social Services
Some social network analysis (SNA) was done for this report. Further SNA may have to be done as time passes or as other alternatives are identified. “Gunshot violence follows an epidemic-like process of social contagion that is transmitted through networks of people by social interactions.”50 Social network analysis allows police to see clearly which people are most connected to incidents of gun violence and either victims or perpetrators of gun violence.51, 52, 53 Studies show that it is these individuals who are most at risk of becoming involved in gun violence for the first time or again. The theories of change here are deterrence and social supports.
Component #3: SNA and Focused Deterrence/Custom Notifications
From SNA the police can identify those most at-risk of gun violence perpetration or victimization. The task then is to deliver a message that violence will no longer be tolerated in the community and that any violence will be met with swift consequences. Champaign, Illinois has a program where these “custom notifications” are not done by law enforcement
48 Eck, J. E., & Spelman, W. (1987). Problem-solving: Problem-oriented policing in Newport News. U.S. Dept. of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
49 Koper, C. S. (1995). Just enough police presence: Reducing crime and disorderly behavior by optimizing patrol time in crime hot spots. Justice Quarterly, 12(4), 649–672. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418829500096231 50 Green, B., Horel, T., & Papachristos, A. V. (2017). Modeling contagion through social networks to explain and predict gunshot violence in Chicago, 2006 to 2014. JAMA Internal Medicine, 177(3), 326. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.8245 51Zeoli, A. M., Pizarro, J. M., Grady, S. C., & Melde, C. (2014). Homicide as infectious disease: Using public health methods to investigate the diffusion of homicide. Justice Quarterly, 31(3), 609–632. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2012.732100 52 Papachristos, A. V., Braga, A. A., & Hureau, D. M. (2012). Social networks and the risk of gunshot injury. Journal of Urban Health, 89(6), 992– 1003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-012-9703-9
53 Papachristos, A. V., Wildeman, C., & Roberto, E. (2015). Tragic, but not random: The social contagion of nonfatal gunshot injuries. Social Science & Medicine, 125, 139–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.01.056 PAGE 3031
APPENDIX N
19 but by a community-based organization.54 This is because when police do notifications, receptivity of that “hard” message by individuals can be very low.55
At the least, in Berkeley, street outreach or social workers would need to accompany the police for the delivery of the custom notification and/or provide a written notice of zero tolerance signed by the police chief. The notice would detail that individual’s legal vulnerabilities for their specific criminal history. Avoidance of punishment, theoretically and empirically, is what drives gun violence down. So, for focused deterrence to work, the desire to avoid punishment needs to be there.
After the individual is given the “hard” message, the CBO can deliver the helping or “soft” message. The “soft” message is that neither the CBO nor the police nor the individual’s family want to see them dead from gun violence, and essentially, they all want to help lift this person out of a violent future. They offer the individual various services to help them navigate a new way forward. The downside to this intervention is that the individual can reject both messages, stay involved in violence, and refuse social services. Focused deterrence has credibility in the literature but is by no means the only way the police can utilize SNA.
Component #4: SNA and Social Services
Through identification using SNA, the police can connect at-risk people with community-based organization case managers and thus to social services. This can include case management broadly, mental health services, housing assistance, reentry services for the formerly incarcerated, economic opportunity (employment, training), restorative justice, among other services.
The vast majority of these types of interventions would require the city to partner with CBOs or other city departments56 and, as with environmental improvements in Problem Solving Policing, require some sort of go-between for the Berkeley Police Department to monitor the course of the program. The theory of change here is that with additional social supports, the impetus to turn to delinquency and gun violence decreases.57 For example, for the young man who is occasionally dealing drugs with a gun and has many connections to gunshot victims, perhaps job training and employment may provide him financial incentive to refrain from carrying a handgun and dealing drugs. For the older gang member, perhaps stable housing opportunities for their family would remove them from the geographic area the gang operates in and provide a way out of life on the street. These are just examples, but very targeted social services can and do change people’s motivations for engaging in violence.58 There is not much of a role for law enforcement to play in this intervention, it is more a city-CBO partnership that precludes the “hard” message described above.
54Elvir, J. (2023, March 22). Champagne, Illinois Blueprint Program [Zoom]. 55 Id.
56 Pivot. (n.d.). Retrieved February 15, 2023, from https://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/police/community-involvement/pivot/ 57 Braga, A. A., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2010). The concentration and stability of gun violence at micro places in Boston, 1980–2008.
Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26(1), 33–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-009-9082-x 58 Id.
PAGE 3032
APPENDIX N
20 Component #5 Warrants to Remove Firearms from Domestic Abusers (DVROs) and Individuals Posing a Danger to Themselves or Others (GVROs), Court-Issued Protective Orders, and Criminal Protective Orders (CPOs)
Combining the use of DVROs with GVROs, Court-Issued Protective Orders, and CPOs might be impactful. Each of these are aimed at preventing people deemed to be a danger to themselves or others from possessing a firearm.59 GVROs – also referred to as “red flag laws” – are court-issued orders that temporarily suspend a person’s access to firearms when they are found to pose a significant risk to themselves or others by having legal access to firearms or ammunition. Court- Issued Protective Orders are certain orders from a court prohibiting specified persons (also called the “restrained party” or “respondent”) from possessing firearms or ammunition. CPOs are like DVROs, but are issued by a court during a criminal case, or after a finding of guilt. Like GVROs and DVROs, CPOs prohibit the subject of the order from possessing firearms or ammunitions.60 Using each of these more and in addition to DVROs would augment the strategy of using DVROs more often in the community.
Component #6 Street Outreach Workers/Violence Interrupters
Out of the public health science of behavioral epidemiology emerged the idea that violence is a social contagion capable of spreading from individual to individual based on exposure.61 Street Outreach Workers or “Violence Interrupters” address this cause by being a presence on the street, stopping the spread of the contagion of violence. Street Outreach Workers help identify violence and interrupt or mediate it in real time. They are credible messengers, often formerly incarcerated or have been involved in or affected by violence in the past. They bolster any law enforcement intervention they aid due to that credibility.62 They often have connections to or knowledge of the street life, culture, and “code”, and can be a quality “go-between” for those living a life of violence and the larger gun violence intervention program.63 Operating beneath this strategy is the aim to increasing informal social controls – or fortifying a community’s collective norms and standards of conduct, and encouraging community members to uphold them. When done well it “marries the goal of strengthening a community’s moral voice against violence with the imperative to offer help to its highest risk population.64 It also lends itself to concrete violence interventions, such as controlling rumors during moments of
59 Domestic violence restraining orders and gun violence restraining orders. (2022, September 20). State of California - Department of Justice - Office of the Attorney General. https://oag.ca.gov/ogvp/gvro-dvro 60 Id.
61 Butts, J. A., Roman, C. G., Bostwick, L., & Porter, J. R. (2015). Cure violence: A public health model to reduce gun violence. Annual Review of Public Health, 36(1), 39–53. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031914-122509 62 Considering the place of streetwork in violence interventions. (n.d.). National Network for Safe Communities (NNSC). Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://nnscommunities.org/guides/considering-the-place-of-streetwork-in-violence-interventions/ 63 Id.
64 Op-ed: What we know (And don’t know) about street outreach and gun violence prevention. (2021, October 25). Chicago Tribune. https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-opinion-chicago-gun-violence-street-outreach-20211025-6pylamxs5jazhhyya3x3nb3eya- story.html
PAGE 3033
APPENDIX N
21 conflict, calming people down to defuse potential retaliation, and mentoring people at high risk of hurting someone or being hurt”.65
Component #7 Hospital-Based Violence Intervention
Hospital-Based Violence Intervention Programs identify violently injured patients and intervene at their hospital bedside immediately following a violent victimization. Patients are assigned a case manager or social worker who evaluates patients based on the patient’s perception of their own psychosocial, emotional, or financial needs and connects them with providers in the community that are capable of addressing those needs. Various models tend to emphasize that case workers need to be culturally competent and it is beneficial if they come from similar environments as patients. In the San Francisco Bay Area, there are two such programs. The Wraparound Program is run by Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, and they utilize hospital social worker staff to work with patients if they opt in.66 The other is run through Highland Hospital in Oakland by YouthAlive! – a CBO.67 I was unable to reach these programs to better understand their similarities and differences. That said, gunshot victims in Berkeley go to Highland Hospital as it is the local Trauma 1 hospital.
Component #8 Gun Buyback Programs
Gun buyback programs are a supply-side oriented tactic to reduce gun violence. Gun buyback programs are “no- questions-asked”, anonymous forums for community members to relinquish weapons in exchange for monetary value – usually cash or a gift card. The theory of change here is financial – money incentivizes those willing to part with their weapon to do so, thereby the community becomes safer for each gun collected in the buyback program.
Longer Term Solutions Addressing the Root Causes of Gun Violence
It is indisputable that addressing the root causes of negative social phenomena improves well-being and has a decreasing effect on violence overall. Berkeley should either start or continue to improve public schools, lessen income inequality and poverty, invest in quality public housing and public services, and build social bridges so under-resourced community members can thrive. They should continue to minimize easy access to firearms by high-risk people – legislatively or via the warrant described above. However, the urgency of this issue makes these longer term solutions drive change over the course of years not months, and are thus outside the particular scope of this project. These solutions should, however, absolutely be part of the normal operations of the city of Berkeley.
Evaluating Components Using Criteria
Hot Spots Policing
65 Considering the place of streetwork in violence interventions. (n.d.). National Network for Safe Communities (NNSC). Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://nnscommunities.org/guides/considering-the-place-of-streetwork-in-violence-interventions/ 66 Wraparound project. (n.d.). Retrieved May 5, 2023, from https://wraparound.ucsf.edu/ 67 O’Brien, J. (2019, June 20). Dinner honors clients, highland social workers. Youth ALIVE! https://www.youthalive.org/dinner-honors-clients- highland-social-workers/
PAGE 3034
APPENDIX N
22 The majority of the U.S. public believes policing is more cost-effective than incarceration and supports focus on sentinel patrols (patrolling and prevention rather than solving crimes already committed) and crime Hot Spots Policing (HSP).68 This is relevant because it is common knowledge that Berkeley is to the political left of the U.S. average and therefore is less punitive.
There is very robust evidence not only that hot spots policing is an effective crime prevention strategy but that it has significant diffusion of crime control benefits rather than crime displacement.69 It is well established that mere presence of law enforcement at hot spots is sufficient to deter crime.70, 71, 72, 73 “Crime prevention is maximized when police focus resources on these micro-units of geography.” While this may seem controversial at the outset, understanding that the micro-units examined here are street segments or intersections. No neighborhood or city area is targeted broadly. Hot spots here are hyper-local locations where there has been a convergence of shootings surrounding that spot. 20 out of 25 experimental or quasi-experimental evaluations report crime reductions, so the vast majority, suggest that when police focus in on this micro-unit they can positively impact public safety in that area.74 The Berkeley Police Department says that HSP could be accomplished without increasing costs, with officers spending more time at hot spots along their regular beats. During the day shift there are 14 beats (down from 16 due to staffing shortages). During the night shift they collapse into seven. Each hot spot would require officer presence for 15 minutes every few hours at random.75 The main cost of this alternative is a department-wide training where all officers would be taught the efficacy and responsibilities of performing Hot Spots Policing.
68 Metcalfe, C., & Pickett, J. T. (2018). The extent and correlates of public support for deterrence reforms and hot spots policing: Deterrence reforms and hot spots policing. Law & Society Review, 52(2), 471–502. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12327 69 Braga, A. A., Turchan, B. S., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2019). Hot spots policing and crime reduction: An update of an ongoing systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15(3), 289–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-019-09372-3 70 Weisburd, D., & Telep, C. W. (2014). Hot spots policing: What we know and what we need to know. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 30(2), 200–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986214525083 71 Braga, A. A., Turchan, B. S., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2019). Hot spots policing and crime reduction: An update of an ongoing systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15(3), 289–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-019-09372-3 72 Braga, A. A., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2010). The concentration and stability of gun violence at micro places in Boston, 1980–2008.
Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26(1), 33–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-009-9082-x 73 Skogan, W. G., & Frydl, K. (2004). Fairness and effectiveness in policing: The evidence. National Academies Press. 74 Weisburd, D., & Telep, C. W. (2014). Hot spots policing: What we know and what we need to know. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 30(2), 200–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986214525083 75 Koper, C. S. (1995). Just enough police presence: Reducing crime and disorderly behavior by optimizing patrol time in crime hot spots. Justice Quarterly, 12(4), 649–672. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418829500096231 PAGE 3035
APPENDIX N
23 Berkeley Daytime Beats (collapse into eight at night) 76 Crime concentration has been studied in small cities some, and those studies have concluded that crime concentrates more not less in small cities. Generally, “reducing crime by 20% at hot spots that generate 50% of a jurisdiction’s crime should reduce the locality’s overall crime level by roughly 10%.77 “City leaders should commit to tangible reductions in these measures. Annual 10% reductions in homicides and non-fatal shootings are realistic goals.”78 It is likely that this intervention will reduce shootings by 10% annually for as long as the program can be maintained. I am confident in this
76 Berkeley Police Department, 2023
77 Nagin, D. S., & Sampson, R. J. (2019). The real gold standard: Measuring counterfactual worlds that matter most to social science and policy.
Annual Review of Criminology, 2(1), 123–145. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-011518-024838 78 Saving lives: Ten essential actions can take to reduce violence now. (2022, January 12). Council on Criminal Justice. https://counciloncj.org/10- essential-actions/
PAGE 3036
APPENDIX N
24 with one strong caveat: the gun violence concentration in hot spots does not reach 50% of overall levels, so it is harder to project just how much gun violence will drop.
I am also confident that the issue of gun violence is poignant enough to make this intervention politically feasible. It is BPD’s experience that the city council has an appetite for law enforcement action to address gun violence. While the Assistant to the City Manager has not been hired yet, we can have moderate confidence in interpreting this appetite as consistent in city government.
“It is not entirely clear whether police can achieve and maintain such ‘system-level’ impacts through HSP.”79 There is strong evidence of eventual of deterrence decay – due to either police loss of focus or fatigue.80 Another weakness of this alternative is that it is truly short-term and difficult to maintain. Decay can also be caused by non-geographical crime displacement such as offense type, target, or temporal displacement.81 Displacement by type is when offenders switch crime; displacement by target is when they change who they are victimizing; and displacement temporally is when time or date is altered to avoid detection.82
“Prior studies of HSP, which have often focused on pilot or other temporary programs, have mostly used follow-up periods ranging from a few months or less (in most studies) to 1–2 years; very rarely have they gone beyond 2 or 3 years to assess the long-term institutionalization and impacts of these strategies. Notably, the studies of HSP’s aggregate-level effects highlighted above spanned several months at most.”83 In one exception, a study of the HSP program in Manhattan, Kansas over the course of 8 years, violent crime dropped by 39.8% over 8 years. But, strength of the effect did weaken over time.84
The perception of aggressive policing may drive a wedge between the community and police. Studies have conflicted on whether HSP produces a negative impact on police legitimacy but most study data do not support that concern. 85 Resident fear of crime at hot spots is relatively unaffected by increased police intervention. There is little empirical evidence to date on the impact of HSP approaches on citizens in targeted areas in terms of fear, collective efficacy, or
79 Nagin, D. S., & Sampson, R. J. (2019). The real gold standard: Measuring counterfactual worlds that matter most to social science and policy.
Annual Review of Criminology, 2(1), 123–145. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-011518-024838 80 Koper, C. S., Lum, C., Wu, X., & Hegarty, T. (2021). The long-term and system-level impacts of institutionalizing hot spot policing in a small city.
Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 15(2), 1110–1128. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paaa096
81 Id.
82Weisburd, D., & Telep, C. W. (2014). Hot spots policing: What we know and what we need to know. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 30(2), 200–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986214525083 83 Eck, J. (1993). Criminal Justice Abstracts. Problem Solving Quarterly: A Police Executive Research Forum Publication Reporting on Innovative Approaches to Policing, 6(3), 1–2.
84 Koper, C. S., Lum, C., Wu, X., & Hegarty, T. (2021). The long-term and system-level impacts of institutionalizing hot spot policing in a small city.
Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 15(2), 1110–1128. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paaa096 85 Weisburd, D., & Telep, C. W. (2014). Hot spots policing: What we know and what we need to know. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 30(2), 200–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986214525083 PAGE 3037
APPENDIX N
25 attitudes toward the police more generally.86 Based on these overall findings, I am very confident that HSP has low or no negative impact on fear, collective efficacy, or police legitimacy.
Hot Spots Version of Problem-Oriented Policing (POP)
Implementing POP at hot spots would use normal staff hours and beats, not increasing costs. It would require training, redirecting patrols, or rearranging staff activities (including researcher/analyst capacity) which would likely cost less than $1 million, but this intervention is not beholden to that criterion. It would require heavy use of the Violence Prevention Working Group and the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) strategies – a multi-disciplinary approach to reduce opportunities for crime that are inherent in structure design, architectural planning and design, and the management of natural environments.87 According to John Eck, Ph.D., this approach needs to recognize who has power over places, and that is primarily property owners – landlords, homeowners, public housing authorities, and businesses that own their buildings. These people need to buy in to whatever changes Berkeley wants to make to specific environments that are relevant to them.
Few studies have done cost-benefit analysis on this intervention but in all cases where cost-benefit was measured, POP projects were associated with a substantial cost savings.88 A meta-analysis of POP programs shows statistically significant reduction in crime by 34%. But, specifically, violent crime studies did not yield a significant effect but the reduction was still positive, 9.5%. There are some violent crime studies in the meta-analysis but they don’t have the same large drops that property crime studies show. Still, studies show evidence of some impact of POP programs.89 It shows no evidence of crime displacement and possibly diffusion of crime benefits.90 It is proven that things that are aggressive do not work as well as things that are problem-solving.91 I am somewhat confident that it is likely to reduce shootings by about 10%.
Because this strategy does not direct patrols only, but focuses on problem-solving and may leverage non-police resources like city services, it is less controversial as there is less of a chance of increased enforcement on low-income neighborhoods of color. This will make it more palatable to Berkeley residents and politicians. These changes, unlike altered patrolling alone, are far more sustainable over time. POP (and CPTED) is more capable of maintaining its negative impact on crime over time. You may have multiple iterations of solving the problem (e.g. maintaining green space) but this is doable.
In the meta-analysis of P.O.P. Six, eight, and three studies collectively show limited impact on police legitimacy, fear of crime, and collective efficacy respectively. The most rigorous study designs show little to no decrease on police legitimacy but, the studies are not consistent with one another. Often, they show that people who live near target
86 Weisburd, D., & Telep, C. W. (2014). Hot spots policing: What we know and what we need to know. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 30(2), 200–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986214525083 87 Current trends. (n.d.). Retrieved March 7, 2023, from https://bpd-transparency-initiative-berkeleypd.hub.arcgis.com/pages/current-trends 88 Braga, A. A., Turchan, B. S., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2019). Hot spots policing and crime reduction: An update of an ongoing systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15(3), 289–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-019-09372-3 89 Hinkle, Joshua C., et al. “Problem-Oriented Policing for Reducing Crime and Disorder: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” CrimRxiv, July 2021. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.21428/cb6ab371.5277ad69. 90 Id.
91 Eck, J. (2023, March 24). Professor of Criminal Justice at the University of Cincinnati [Zoom].
PAGE 3038
APPENDIX N
26 problem sites are more susceptible to fear of crime.92 Collectively, they show mixed and inconsistent effects on collective efficacy.
According to John Eck, Ph.D., the main downside to this is that it is most likely to reduce shootings over a period of months or years, not necessarily right away. There will need to be interim solutions while that success is being developed. Hot spots patrol can certainly fill that gap, or other interventions.93 Depending on urgency and how easily the “problems” can be addressed, this may or may not be preferable in Berkeley.
SNA and Focused Deterrence
SNA and focused deterrence require normal data analyst personnel hours which use existing staff time and adds $0. It requires officer training, which is exempt from the cost criterion but would likely meet it. However, this also requires contracting with a CBO and monitoring their participation, which likely costs around $1 million. Social network analysis models gun violence in a way that helps identify who could be victimized in the future and to target individuals with law enforcement messages.94 The literature shows that these individuals would have to adopt permanent lifestyle changes in order to sustain lower tendency toward gun violence. Also, new high-risk individuals would need to be prevented from entering the pool of violence, so SNA would need to be iterative for the program to be successful. Gun violence reduction strategies are best served by directing intervention and prevention toward high-risk social networks.95 A “hard” message with a “soft” message can beneficially leverage both law enforcement and social services. Focused deterrence studies conclude that they statistically significantly reduce gun violence, making me somewhat confident that reductions could meet 10% annually.
According to Cody Telep Ph.D., “focused deterrence can be effective in a smaller city if violence is concentrated among a small group of individuals. There is some good evidence from places like Lowell, MA that are similar in size to Berkeley.96 The challenging part for a small city can just be coordinating all the criminal justice organizations and resources needed to create [credible deterrence] to make the program successful in a small environment.”97 The Berkeley Ceasefire D2 Ad Hoc Advisory Group Brief reflects a sole focus on social services and a lack of political will to engage law enforcement directly with at-risk individuals. This intervention has moderate political feasibility, as the Brief does mention that BPD is already playing a role in SNA. While there is no literature evidence, logic says that because this affects a very small group of people rather than a neighborhood or hot spot, it is not voluminous enough to cause fear of crime to rise, or police legitimacy or collective efficacy to fall. I am very confident in this low risk.
92 Hinkle, Joshua C., et al. “Problem-Oriented Policing for Reducing Crime and Disorder: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” CrimRxiv, July 2021. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.21428/cb6ab371.5277ad69. 93 Eck, J. (2023, March 24). Professor of Criminal Justice at the University of Cincinnati [Zoom]. 94 Green, B., Horel, T., & Papachristos, A. V. (2017). Modeling contagion through social networks to explain and predict gunshot violence in Chicago, 2006 to 2014. JAMA Internal Medicine, 177(3), 326. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.8245 95 Papachristos, A. V., Braga, A. A., & Hureau, D. M. (2012). Social networks and the risk of gunshot injury. Journal of Urban Health, 89(6), 992– 1003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-012-9703-9
96 Project safe neighborhoods (Lowell, Massachusetts). (n.d.). National Gang Center. Retrieved May 5, 2023, from https://nationalgangcenter.ojp.gov/spt/Programs/3588
97 Telep, C. (2023, April 11). Associate Professor & Associate Director of the School of Criminology & Criminal Justice at Arizona State University [Email].
PAGE 3039
APPENDIX N
27 SNA and Social Services
SNA and requires normal data analyst and office personnel hours (to identify individuals and liaise with the CBO respectively) which uses existing staff time and adds $0. This does require contracting with a CBO and monitoring their participation, which adds costs likely around $1 million. Finding out just how much it will cost is based on first estimating, how many individuals you want to serve, and second, what size case load is manageable and appropriate for a case manager. Once again, modeling gun violence helps identify who could be victimized by or perpetrate gun violence in the future, and target social services to those individuals.98 Gun violence reduction strategies are best served by directing intervention and prevention toward high-risk social networks.99 However, this intervention is unlikely to reduce shootings without additional “hard message”. If it reduces shootings, I am somewhat confident that it is unlikely to reach the 10% annual goal.
The Berkeley Ceasefire D2 Ad Hoc Advisory Group Brief makes clear that a targeted social services approach is incredibly politically palatable in Berkeley. Again, individuals would have to adopt permanent lifestyle changes in order to sustain lower tendency toward gun violence. Also, new high-risk individuals would need to be prevented from entering the pool of violence, so SNA would need to be iterative for the program to be successful. While there is no literature evidence, logic confidently illustrates that because this does not involve police it cannot cause police legitimacy or collective efficacy to fall, or fear of crime to rise.
Papachristos, Ph.D., recognizes the relatively high average age of those involved in violence in his study – 29 – and says that this high age actually means the services needed by the population are many and vary widely. Health and housing, he says, are the big two, but jobs, job training, education, psychological help, and childcare are also important for many individuals. Street Outreach is there to build trust and relationships, and stop violence, but it cannot be a replacement for the dire need of clinicians – both mental and physical health clinicians – for this population.100 The literature is not as supportive of these programs and they are understudied and do not have as much empirical success. Since they are opt-in, a program’s success could also simply reflect the less vulnerable nature of those who are likely to take up the program. This component very much reflects the vision for Berkeley to “surround individuals in circles of care”. It is certainly possible to extend social services proactively but there is no guarantee they will be taken up.
98 Green, B., Horel, T., & Papachristos, A. V. (2017). Modeling contagion through social networks to explain and predict gunshot violence in Chicago, 2006 to 2014. JAMA Internal Medicine, 177(3), 326. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.8245 99 Papachristos, A. V., Braga, A. A., & Hureau, D. M. (2012). Social networks and the risk of gunshot injury. Journal of Urban Health, 89(6), 992– 1003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-012-9703-9
100 Papachristos, A. (2023, March 9). Professor of Sociology and Faculty Fellow at Northwestern’s Institute for Policy Research [Zoom].
PAGE 3040
APPENDIX N
28 Warrants to Remove Firearms from Domestic Abusers (DVROs), Individuals Posing a Danger to Themselves or Others (GVROs), Court-Issued Protective Orders, and Criminal Protective Orders (CPOs)
When there is a gun in the home, domestic violence is more likely to escalate to murder.101 Removing firearms from homes of abusers is rated one of the most effective and most frequently used interventions according to a national survey of local police departments.102 Domestic violence restraining order firearm-prohibition laws are associated with 10% reductions in Intimate Partner Homicide, but those results are only statistically significant when the law covers dating partners and ex-parte orders.103104 California law does both of these things. Upon being served with a domestic violence protective order in California, the respondent must relinquish his or her firearm by surrendering it immediately upon request of any law enforcement officer, or within 24 hours if no request is made.105 This requires staff time and liaising with the courts to get warrants for these interventions. Expert opinion within the police department states that routine staff hours are used up until liaising with the courts, which requires more.
Sometimes the Community Services Bureau will look at calls or cases and proactively seek a GVRO. In some cases it is based on the continued behavior of a subject. If BPD gets a seizure order/warrant, based on the nature of the situation, it will likely cost overtime in the form of BPD’s SRT (SWAT) serving the search warrant. This only applies if someone is not in custody when BPD is granted the seizure order. Most cases will likely be the former, in which BPD takes someone into custody responding to a call and contemporaneously seizes the guns by consent or warrant. I can confidently say that this intervention has minimal costs, with the exception of the overtime.106 The downside of this component is that domestic violence-related firearm incidents are just not that common in Berkeley, and even very successful interventions of this nature would not reduce overall gun violence much. There are only a handful of Domestic Violence cases annually that include firearms. I can confidently say that this would not amount to a 10% reduction in shootings – the cases are not frequent enough. Also, it is known that acquiring a firearm illegally is easy locally, especially with the proliferation of ghost guns.107 As California is one of the friendliest states to gun regulations and Berkeley is an epicenter of progressive gun reforms, this intervention should not be politically problematic. Restraining orders and protective orders are, by their very definition, temporary. So, logically, I am confident that this would not have long-lasting effects, although it may reduce
101 Domestic violence & firearms in California. (n.d.). Giffords. Retrieved April 9, 2023, from https://giffords.org/lawcenter/state-laws/domestic- violence-and-firearms-in-california/
102 Koper, C. S., Woods, D. J., & Kubu, B. E. (2013). Gun violence prevention practices among local police in the United States. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 36(3), 577–603. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-06-2012-0052 103 An “ex parte order” is when one is able to get a restraining order without the other person present 104 Zeoli, A. M., McCourt, A., Buggs, S., Frattaroli, S., Lilley, D., & Webster, D. W. (2018). Retracted: Analysis of the strength of legal firearms restrictions for perpetrators of domestic violence and their associations with intimate partner homicide. American Journal of Epidemiology, 187(7), 1449–1455. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwx362
105 Domestic violence & firearms in California. (n.d.). Giffords. Retrieved April 9, 2023, from https://giffords.org/lawcenter/state-laws/domestic- violence-and-firearms-in-california/
106 Berkeley Police Department (2023)
107 Smith, E. (2023, January 25). California has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. Here’s what we know about the guns used in this week’s deadly attacks. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/25/us/california-shootings-guns-wwk/index.html PAGE 3041
APPENDIX N
29 the number of shootings by a few. This intervention occurs siloed away in individual homes. Neighbors would see the police on scene but overall there logically should be no impact on police legitimacy, fear of crime, or collective efficacy.
Street Outreach Workers/Violence Interrupters
Acquiring street outreach workers involves contracting with a CBO and monitoring their participation, which adds costs likely around $1 million. If they are already operating in Oakland or Richmond it would be worth exploring if they could expand operations to include Berkeley as well. I reached out to several CBOs for input and did not manage to connect with any of them.
Street teams can be very effective. But that assessment is based on high-risk community members opting in and having contact with a street team member. Of people that participated in Chicago’s CRED program, victimization rates were 50% lower than non-participants.108 I am unsure of what percentage reduction in shootings would occur because it is based on opting-in, and we don’t know the likelihood of any one person opting in to the program. Andrew Papachristos, Ph.D. claims that there will also be reports coming out soon that show a positive programmatic effect at an individual and a community level.109 What is unrealistic, he says, is “level setting” – claiming a specific amount of impact for any program. While sometimes it has been effective, sometimes it also hasn’t.
The National Network for Safe Communities (NNSC) highlights the imperative of strong working relationships between street outreach workers and police departments for street work to be successful as part of a larger gun violence initiative.110 This is the case in Stockton, California, Los Angeles, California, Chicago, Illinois, and New York City, New York.111 Unfortunately, there is not such affirming research on street teams in small cities. However, there could be much added value to custom notifications (focused deterrence) if street outreach workers accompanied Berkeley police to deliver messages to high-risk individuals. It would increase credibility of the police and the message, and the optics would be more genuine.112
Again, referencing the Berkeley Ceasefire D2 Ad Hoc Advisory Group Brief, there is strong evidence that social services and community interventions that do not involve law enforcement are extremely palatable to politicians. Participants chose CRED and remained enrolled in CRED to avoid pervasive community violence and attempt to improve their own situations. Those individuals were receptive to CRED recruitment efforts, citing the program’s immediate, tangible
108 Op-ed: What we know (And don’t know) about street outreach and gun violence prevention. (2021, October 25). Chicago Tribune. https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-opinion-chicago-gun-violence-street-outreach-20211025-6pylamxs5jazhhyya3x3nb3eya- story.html
109 Papachristos, A. (2023, March 9). Professor of Sociology and Faculty Fellow at Northwestern’s Institute for Policy Research [Zoom]. 110 Considering the place of streetwork in violence interventions. (n.d.). National Network for Safe Communities (NNSC). Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://nnscommunities.org/guides/considering-the-place-of-streetwork-in-violence-interventions/ 111 Project safe neighborhoods (Lowell, Massachusetts). (n.d.). National Gang Center. Retrieved May 5, 2023, from https://nationalgangcenter.ojp.gov/spt/Programs/3588
112 Elvir, J. (2023, March 22). Community Relations Manager Champaign, Illinois Blueprint Program [Zoom].
PAGE 3042
APPENDIX N
30 benefits and fulfilling relationships with staff as key reasons for remaining engaged.113 There is some evidence of long- lasting effects but only for those that take up the program.
This intervention tangentially involves police but mostly uses community members as credible messengers for peace, so it maintains trust between street teams and community members. Papachristos states that, “in the 90s in Boston, you actually saw people recognize that there are different lanes, and people stayed in their lanes and shared relevant information and it actually went without much drama…outreach organizations and police for their part, they don’t want to be seen crossing the line. I do not think street outreach should be informants nor do I think that cops should be using intelligence to do so.”.114 If those boundaries can be maintained, street outreach will likely have no impact on police legitimacy. If done well, it would diffuse street tensions and likelihood of shootings/crime, leading to a decrease in fear of crime. Street workers ostensibly create more accountability by leveraging existing relationships in the community, thereby increasing collective efficacy.
Reviewing shootings that have just occurred and having information flow unidirectionally from police to streetworkers would identify high risk individuals and also likely prevent future violence. Protocols and boundaries need to be established prior to their work. Information should not flow from streetworkers to police, but rather only from police to streetworkers in terms of intelligence. This preserves the credibility of street outreach among community members. The only times they should be together are during intelligence meetings (shooting reviews, violence reviews) and custom notifications. If this working agreement can be designed, a mutually beneficial relationship can be formed, sustained, and trusted, street outreach can be effective in Berkeley.
Hospital Based Violence Intervention
YouthAlive! is a CBO currently doing bedside interventions at Highland Hospital in Oakland, which is the local Trauma 1 hospital for Berkeley.115 Shooting victims are nearly always sent to the local Trauma 1 hospital according to DHHS. While attempts to contact YouthAlive! to understand the logistics and determine the efficacy of their ongoing program have not been successful, this intervention is already being done.
Youth Alive! is doing bedside intervention when there is an act of violence to stop retaliation and connect victims with services. It stands to reason that, as it is already happening, hospital-based violence intervention is already being paid for and we do not need to consider it as a program component. More research is necessary to understand their approach and its efficacy, but since it is ongoing and shootings are still rising, it has little to no chance of reaching a 10% annual reduction in shootings. By the same token, this is already happening and not causing any political friction. In terms of how long its effects endure, this is a one-on-one interaction that hopefully has a positive effect on others in the victim’s social network. But, shootings are still increasing so it is unlikely to have long term or notable spillover effects.
113 Op-ed: What we know (And don’t know) about street outreach and gun violence prevention. (2021, October 25). Chicago Tribune. https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-opinion-chicago-gun-violence-street-outreach-20211025-6pylamxs5jazhhyya3x3nb3eya- story.html
114 Papachristos, A. (2023, March 9). Professor of Sociology and Faculty Fellow at Northwestern’s Institute for Policy Research [Zoom]. 115 Berkeley Police Department, 2023
PAGE 3043
APPENDIX N
31 Because this does not involve police and does not occur in a neighborhood, I can confidently conclude that it has little to no effect on police legitimacy, fear of crime, or collective efficacy.
Gun Buyback Programs
While the low cost is very attractive – a simple multiple of however many guns are turned in – the efficacy of gun buyback programs to curb firearm violence is seriously limited.116 Many studies have shown gun violence is a serious public emergency.117 Studies also show that buybacks do indeed have the ability to collect many weapons from the community.118 However, studies fail to show how buybacks are causal drivers in any reduction of violence or attract participants that are also involved in community violence. In this last respect programs have deeply failed, with participants lacking most characteristics of violent offenders, other than being mostly male. The typical buyback participant is over 55, white, and either inherited a gun they did not want or have no use for a gun.119 For more on these shortcomings, see Gun Buyback Programs [44] in the Literature Review. That said, buyback programs have no chance of increasing fear of crime, or decreasing police legitimacy or collective efficacy. Law enforcement plays a passive role, simply facilitating the collection of weapons.
Packaged components into programs
Alternative #1: Problem Oriented Policing (POP) at Hot Spots + Street Outreach Workers A POP approach would allow for longer-term systemic impacts to be made at hot spots than hot spots policing on its own. While law enforcement would be analyzing and spending time at hot spots, street outreach workers would be building rapport with offenders and possible victims as well as diffusing tensions among individuals.
Alternative #2: Problem Oriented Policing (POP) at Hot Spots + Street Outreach Workers + SNA Focused Deterrence
A POP approach would allow for longer-term systemic impacts to be made at hot spots than hot spots policing on its own. While law enforcement would be analyzing and spending time at hot spots, street outreach workers would be building rapport with offenders and possible victims as well as diffusing tensions among individuals. Street outreach workers would also help in the custom notification process, to balance the deterrent message by offering support and social services.
116 Kasper, R. E., Green, J., Damle, R. N., Aidlen, J., Nazarey, P., Manno, M., Borer, E., & Hirsh, M. P. (2017). And the survey said.... Evaluating rationale for participation in gun buybacks as a tool to encourage higher yields. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 52(2), 354–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2016.08.009
117 Wintemute, G. J. (2015). The epidemiology of firearm violence in the twenty-first century united states. Annual Review of Public Health, 36(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031914-122535 118 Kasper, R. E., Green, J., Damle, R. N., Aidlen, J., Nazarey, P., Manno, M., Borer, E., & Hirsh, M. P. (2017). And the survey said.... Evaluating rationale for participation in gun buybacks as a tool to encourage higher yields. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 52(2), 354–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2016.08.009
119 Violano, P., Driscoll, C., Chaudhary, N. K., Schuster, K. M., Davis, K. A., Borer, E., Winters, J. K., & Hirsh, M. P. (2014). Gun buyback programs: A venue to eliminate unwanted guns in the community. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 77(3), S46–S50. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000000319
PAGE 3044
APPENDIX N
32 Alternative #3: Problem Oriented Policing (POP) at Hot Spots + Street Outreach Workers + SNA Focused Deterrence + Social Services
A POP approach would allow for longer-term systemic impacts to be made at hot spots than hot spots policing on its own. While law enforcement would be analyzing and spending time at hot spots, street outreach workers would be building rapport with offenders and possible victims as well as diffusing tensions among individuals. Street outreach workers would also help in the custom notification process, to balance the deterrent message by offering support and social services. In this package, the city would invest additional money in case management for at-risk individuals, making both focused deterrence and social services key applications of the social network analysis.
Program recommendation
I recommend that the City of Berkeley and Berkeley Police Department implement Alternative #3: Problem Oriented Policing (POP) at Hot Spots + Street Outreach Workers + SNA Focused Deterrence + Social Services. As long as the budget can make it work, I highly recommend doing the most programmatically that can be done as gun violence takes human lives.
These programs are complementary but not interdependent. So, it is additionally advantageous, if any part of the program fails to produce results or runs up too high of a cost it can be cut while other measures are already active. The remaining measures would not be harmed. This is more convenient than having to start from scratch with new program ideas. If the same CBO is being funded for multiple programs, it is critical that it is clear how much of their funding goes to each program. In the slight way that focused deterrence is related to social services and street outreach, it is most likely helpful not harmful if community members recognize the same workers in different roles. More frequent, positive encounters promote trust and mutual respect.
In the analysis of outcomes, POP at hot spots has the potential for negative community-level effects, which could be counteracted by street workers that develop trust and cohesion in a neighborhood. The “hard” message of focused deterrence is similarly counteracted through the offering of social services. Bundling, in this sense, ensures that Berkeley achieves its goals without creating significant deleterious side effects due to one component or another. Having such a multipronged program is aspirational and as such may not be feasible – that is really up to the city.
Eroding violence from multiple angles is a goal of this recommendation. It recognizes that the roots of gun violence are complex, many, and intertwined. If we can simultaneously activate this multi-pronged program, we will be joining other small cities (Champaign, IL, Lowell, MA) in attempting to curb gun violence from a law enforcement perspective and a human perspective.
Implementation
The program as a whole would benefit from one additional administrative staff member assigned to the Community Services Bureau and one additional patrol officer. The administrative staff member will ensure that officers know to whom they should make their reports related to the program and would be available to communicate with CBOs or other municipal services regarding ongoing programmatic matters. The additional patrol officer would be able to fill any PAGE 3045
APPENDIX N
33 gaps created by POP at hot spots in overall patrol. I realize this may be difficult, with patrol downsizing and the hiring crisis being what it is.
It is ideal if the City of Berkeley can find a CBO willing and able to manage focused deterrence, street outreach, and the extension of social services. Even if it costs more budgetarily, this makes sense from an efficiency standpoint and from an information standpoint. It is much easier if one CBO houses all the information necessary to do all three jobs and it can be reasoned that each one would be enhanced by the others.
POP at Hot Spots
Ideally, the department would select a few (2-5) crime concentrations in specific places identified (7) in this research on which to focus.120 The police would need to incorporate the mapped gun violence incident data from this report but also possibly do their own crime mapping if it would be more up-to-date by the time this report is read.
Police should use the S.A.R.A. method when operationalizing problem-solving. “Scanning” involves the identification and prioritization of potential problems that may be causing crime within a jurisdiction. “Analysis” involves and in-depth evaluation of problems using a variety of data sources so the most appropriate response can be developed. This is not just about problem outcomes like traditional policing but concerned with the underlying processes that lead to problems. “Response” is the development and implementation of an intervention tailored to the nature of the problem distilled in the analysis phase. Response searches should be broad, involving law enforcement and non-law enforcement methods, other agencies, community groups and members. “Assessment” is the ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the response effect on targeted problem(s). This process is intended lead to continual improvements and refinement in further iterations of the response.121
When not answering calls for service, officers should visit the locations on their beat, on a random basis, and patrol (including foot patrol) for 15-20 minutes. A minimum of 10 minutes must be spent in each hot spot to have any deterrent effect.122 This should be repeated periodically and unpredictably. This will likely require a reorganization or reorientation of patrol, to enable them to spend 15 minutes every several hours (but randomly – for example not every three hours on the dot just several times a shift) in each hot spot. If problems are inside a store or business, walk inside of that location in addition to outside patrol.123 While patrolling hot spots, officers should record anything notable that facilitates crime, from the same individuals to substantial debris to a deserted lot used as a loitering area. These notes should be used in the future to alter these spaces in ways where crime control is long lasting.
120 How many hot spots are addressed at one time depends on the capabilities of the police force. If they can treat multiple locations with enough dosage that may make sense from a public safety perspective. But if they are experimenting to see which approach works best they might want to begin with a small number of places.
121 Chief Eliot Isaac, Lt. Matthew Hammer M.S., Blake Christenson M.A., & Dr. Tamara D. Madensen. (2017). P.I.V.O.T. Place Based Investigations of Violent Offender Territories (Herman Goldstein Award Submission). Cincinnati Police Department. 122 Koper, C. S. (1995). Just enough police presence: Reducing crime and disorderly behavior by optimizing patrol time in crime hot spots. Justice Quarterly, 12(4), 649–672. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418829500096231 123 High-Crime Areas (“Hot spots”). (n.d.). https://www.evidence-basedpolicing.org/hot-spot- patrols/#:~:text=The%20Koper%20Principle%20states%20that,in%20conjunction%20with%20other%20strategies.
PAGE 3046
APPENDIX N
34 It is well within the capacity of the Berkeley Police Department to undertake POP, especially because they have some degree of a head start. Some police officers already use a POP approach to their beats. To do POP at hot spots, they would need evolving data analysis, personnel to devote to, at minimum, two hot spots for a limited amount of time, and administrative personnel to liaise with other departments and CBOs regarding non-police interventions. BPD says that both POP and hot spots policing could both be accomplished with “staff time,” with officers incorporating POP approaches along their regular beats. Additionally, there already are some staff that could liaise with other city departments without increasing costs. POP at hot spots will require a training for all patrol officers and office staff who would be coordinating city or community services regarding problems cited by patrol.
Focused Deterrence/Custom Notifications
Focused deterrence will require a training for all officers that will be utilized for this specialized program as well as any CBO actors partnered with for this purpose. Other criminal justice agencies (e.g. parole, probation) need to be identified early on, and if they can also participate in the trainings that is ideal. The earlier who does what can be determined all the better. The CBO needs to be amenable to delivering the “soft” message while working in tandem with the police and others as they deliver the “hard” message. The officers involved in this intervention need to be selected extremely carefully. Not only do they need to believe in deterrence but they need to be able to deliver the message with great care. The Community Services Bureau (CSB) in tandem with the Personnel and Training Department’s Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) on focused deterrence should coordinate internal training for these officers. CSB is dedicated to liaising with the public and should be responsible for all communications regarding training for this highly specialized team. Not only do they have experts on doing so but they have powerful data analysis personnel and tools (coding, GIS mapping, network analysis), allowing them to zero in on key people.
A best practices process to custom notifications is encouraged by COPS – Community Oriented Policing Services at the U.S. Department of Justice124. First, impact players are identified, using SNA if possible. Next, custom legal assessments are done for each impact player that law enforcement plans on notifying. Third, positive influentials in impact players’ lives are identified and community, social services, and street outreach workers are mobilized. Lastly, written documents and support materials are created to aid with the notification.
Identifying impact players is straightforward. The first thing is to talk to frontline personnel – beat officers, special units, probation, parole, corrections staff, and/or confidential informants. They have the greatest knowledge of who is at the center of ongoing violence. If violence has just occurred, convene right away to determine the groups involved, key players, and instigating factors. Debrief all the same parties, review incident data, crosscheck lists of groups and their members, conduct criminal history reviews of active group members, perform social network analysis, and create a final list of impact players. Get input from street outreach workers and community members, and use social network analysis to focus resources strategically on those at highest risk of violence. Identify as many impact players as possible to notify.125
124 Kennedy, D. M., & Friedrich, M. A. (2014). Custom Notifications: Individualized Communication in the Group Violence Intervention. U.S.
Department of Justice COPS Community Oriented Policing Services. https://nnscommunities.org/wp- content/uploads/2017/10/GVI_Custom_Notifications_Guide.pdf 125 At this stage, it unnecessary for evidence to meet legal standards for arrest because arrests are not goal of custom notifications. Their purpose is to communicate to impact players that violence is unacceptable, let them know their custom legal exposure, and to offer them opportunities for help. As such, evidence can be based on broad range of information that officers and community members provide about impact players.
PAGE 3047
APPENDIX N
35 An influential is a person close to an impact player who has their respect and can help them make positive choices. This may be someone within their family or a person with moral standing and credibility within the community. Asking the impact player is the best way to identify an influential, followed by examining personal connections – family, friends, partners, coaches, barbers, school resource officers, or street outreach workers. A last resort is looking at people who have posted their bail or attended hearings. An influential is only relevant in this context if they are a positive influence on the individual and not committed to the street code – the set of norms that mandates violence as a response to disrespect, indifference to prison, and antagonism to the police. If an impact player cannot be directly reached, delivering the message both orally and in writing to the influential seems to be an effective substitute. 126
It is important that custom legal assessments are made for each person to whom a notification is given. A meeting should be held with prosecutors to determine the individual’s personal legal exposure from past violent crimes, especially those with a firearm, and compile the potential state and federal sanctions for further violent crimes. “Compiling custom legal assessments of this sort requires a close working partnership between police and prosecutors at local, state, and federal levels. After police perform an incident review to identify the impact players they want to notify, they pass their names to the [prosecutor]. The state prosecutor reviews the criminal records and determines potential sanctions for a range of violent offenses [sometimes] consulting with the federal prosecutor to establish whether grounds exist for a federal case.”
127 The custom legal assessment should be finalized in writing that is plain and easily understood.
Street Outreach Workers
The first step required is identifying a CBO that is ready and willing to take on street outreach. It is smart to check with neighboring cities (Oakland, Richmond) that are already overseeing similar work. This will require approximately bimonthly meetings between the CBO and the Berkeley Police. This is so that the police can provide any intelligence that may help the CBO on the street and so that the police can monitor and get an idea of the effectiveness of the street outreach. While these meetings may not cost any money per se, it will take dedicated staff time and record keeping within the Community Services Bureau. During these meetings it is important to go over cost effectiveness and budget items of the CBO’s program to create an accountability structure for the funding they are getting from the city. It is also important that the city apply for grants to fund this program, so it makes sense for there to be dedicated personnel specializing in grant research and applications at least at the city level. Champaign, IL found such positions essential for its CBO programs within their gun violence initiative.
128
Social Services
This has the same steps as above – it first requires identifying a CBO that is ready and willing to take on social services case management and checking with neighboring cities is the logical first step. It is my understanding that many community members in Berkeley have case managers through many different CBOs. It is important that, once SNA identifies who should be targeted for social services based on risk, those people should all be managed through one CBO.
126 Ruderman, W. (2013, March 3). To Stem Juvenile Robbers, Police Trail Youth Before the Crime. New York Times. 127 Kennedy, D. M., & Friedrich, M. A. (2014). Custom Notifications: Individualized Communication in the Group Violence Intervention. U.S.
Department of Justice COPS Community Oriented Policing Services. https://nnscommunities.org/wp- content/uploads/2017/10/GVI_Custom_Notifications_Guide.pdf 128 Elvir, J. (2023, March 22). Community Relations Manager Champaign, Illinois Blueprint Program [Zoom].
PAGE 3048
APPENDIX N
36 This will also require a bimonthly meeting between the CBO and police. This is so that the police can monitor and get an idea of the effectiveness of the case management by the CBO. It may also help police to know what services people are taking up or which seem to be most needed. While these meetings may not cost any money per se, it will take dedicated staff time and record keeping, within the Community Services Bureau. During these meetings it is important to go over cost effectiveness and budget items of the CBO’s program to create an accountability structure for the funding they are getting from the city. It is also important that the city apply for grants to fund this program, so it makes sense for there to be dedicated personnel specializing in grant research and applications at least at the city level. Champaign, IL found such positions essential for its CBO programs within their gun violence initiative.129 Program Evaluation
Program Evaluation Recommendation
According to David Weisburd, Ph.D., “It is important to begin assessment when a program begins so that you can see how the intervention affected the street over time. As a rule, if the purpose is to assess the impacts of the program it is better to select sites and then randomize them to receive the intervention. If you have control conditions that have not been treated, that will provide the best comparison for assessing whether the intervention is having an impact. Those "control" sites can then receive the treatment later if it turns out that the intervention is effective. Sometimes such rigor is not possible in the everyday realities of policing, but it is still important to try to identify comparison places that are similar to those receiving the intervention if you want a valid assessment of the program's utility. It is a good idea of police agencies to team up with researchers if they are trying to assess outcomes.”130 As previously stated, the client in this case should seek to sustain a continued decrease in gun violence incidents, year after year. The Center for Criminal Justice Violent Crime Working Group states that city leaders and criminal justice advocates should aim for an annual homicide and violent crime reduction of 10%.131 The program should be monitored closely in its first year, following a very thorough annual evaluation. No randomized control trial is possible, due to this program operating in the real world. Not just because of legal and ethical constraints, but you could not leave a part of Berkeley without police services just to test a hypothesis. But, what would be possible is applying alternatives 2 and 3 differentially – applying social services in one part of the city and not in a different part. If the department really wants to know if an intervention is effective this is a good choice. The question then becomes, which parts of the city are comparable enough to give different treatments? Only police intelligence and data analysis of violence can answer this question.
Berkeley’s trend should be regularly compared to the rest of Alameda County and the state to see where it sits contextually. In a one-group pretest-posttest design, the dependent variable is measured once before the treatment is implemented and once after it is implemented. This is a stronger evaluative measure than simply a posttest evaluation.
This would mean comparing the number of shootings prior to the intervention to the number after the intervention begins. It might also make sense to compare shots fired pre-test to shots fired post-test, and likewise with firearm
129 Elvir, J. (2023, March 22). Community Relations Manager Champaign, Illinois Blueprint Program [Zoom]. 130 Weisburd, D. (2023, April 11). Distinguished Professor at George Mason University [Email]. 131 “Saving Lives: Ten Essential Actions Can Take to Reduce Violence Now.” Council on Criminal Justice, 12 Jan. 2022, https://counciloncj.org/10- essential-actions/.
PAGE 3049
APPENDIX N
37 injuries and firearm fatalities. This would be informative by allowing practitioners and researchers to see from which category the most change is coming from.
Conclusion
The value of law enforcement partnerships with academic researchers is a cornerstone of data-driven, smart policing.
Especially in this turbulent time, where policing is under strict scrutiny by the public, it is imperative that the foundations of policing be navigated and calculated with scientific precision. I selected this Advanced Policy Analysis with an optimistic eye toward these foundations as we move forward in our search for stronger policies around policing. “Police chiefs benefit immensely from having a respected academic representative standing next to them affirming that the choices and decisions made by the police follow best practices developed by research, study, and assessment.”132 Gun violence takes human lives, and we should pilot as many prongs of a program as can be sustained budgetarily and practically. It is my hope that these recommendations are undertaken with as much aspiration as they are intended, and that the consistency of the science underpinning policing remains in place. “Promising partnerships are developing between American police agencies and universities as well as abroad. If carefully cultivated and nurtured, these relationships may well be the third police research tradition that is essential for enhancing police practices.” 133
The past lack of “real-world” value of academic police research mainly was reflected in the absence of implementation recommendations. “It would be naïve to suggest that the working relationship is always smooth.”134 “Academics are very good at detecting, describing, and documenting the problems in police practices. Academics are also very good at theorizing and providing innovative ways to enhance policing practices…however, academics have not traditionally been good at providing the necessary guidance regarding implementation.”135 This is why I have included a relatively detailed implementation process for each prong of the program that I am recommending. However, much of implementation changes as programs go along, incorporating real-time data and experience.
Ultimately, we cannot solve the crime problems of today, including the rise in gun violence, without smart and evidence- based solutions. It is well documented “why police administrators should strongly consider the work generated by the academic community…and why academics need to better listen to and understand police”.136, 137 This research has carefully considered the policies, procedures, and politics underlying professional policing and sought to overcome past
132 Engel, R. S., & Whalen, J. L. (2010). Police–academic partnerships: Ending the dialogue of the deaf, the Cincinnati experience. Police Practice and Research, 11(2), 105–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614261003590803 133 Id.
134 Fleming, J. (2010). Learning to work together: Police and academics. Policing, 4(2), 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paq002 135 Engel, R. S., & Whalen, J. L. (2010). Police–academic partnerships: Ending the dialogue of the deaf, the Cincinnati experience. Police Practice and Research, 11(2), 105–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614261003590803 136 Id.
137 There are four primary reasons for police administrators to strongly consider the research and viewpoints of the academic world when making important decisions about the leadership of a police department: (1) operational effectiveness and efficiency, (2) external validity, (3) cooperative transparency, and (4) the information technology revolution. (Engel & Whalen, 2010) PAGE 3050
APPENDIX N
38 barriers of “the ivory tower versus the real world”.138 I hope that this research and any that follows can continue the new trend in police-academic partnerships that is grounded in practical, applicable methods that practitioners can use.
138 Original quotation
PAGE 3051
APPENDIX N
39 Appendices
Appendix A: Research Approach and Methodology
I employ a mixed methods approach in this report, focusing on a review of the scholarly literature, an examination of interventions that could or could not apply to the City of Berkeley’s gun violence, qualitative interviews, and Berkeley Police Department shooting data. Quantitatively, I performed point density analysis to identify geospatial points of convergence or gun violence “hot spots”, and Social Network Analysis to identify individuals at risk of gun violence perpetration and victimization.
Overview of Research Sources
Source Category Source
Legal California Penal Code
Berkeley Municipal Code
Scholarly UC Berkeley Library
Departmental – Police 2018-2022 Shooting Data on Location, Type, Date and Time 2017-2022 Data on All Persons Involved in Shootings and Their Race, Gender, and Age
Public Berkeley Police Department Transparency Hub
Interview Protocol
I developed a step-by-step approach to guide requests for interviews, the interview process, and the follow-up. After initially developing this approach, I integrated feedback from a GSPP Faculty Advisor, and refined the final approach:
Step 1: Send email to request interview using email template Step 2: Set up time to schedule interview
Interviews completed by the end of March / early April
Step 3: Find category of interview and look at question bank Log all interviews and notes in Interview Running Notes document Step 4: Send thank you and any other follow-up message(s) to interviewee Step 5: Consolidate takeaways
Interview Practices Employed
I am experienced with policy work related to public safety more generally, but much research was done in order to target the right subjects. I contacted the subjects and scheduled the interviews. In all but one case I recorded the sessions with permission so that notes could be taken later. This made space for follow-up questions and comments.
Interview Subjects
David Weisburd Ph.D., Distinguished Professor at George Mason University PAGE 3052
APPENDIX N
40 Andrew Papachristos Ph.D., Professor of Sociology and Faculty Fellow at Northwestern's Institute for Policy Research, and the Faculty Director of Corners: The Center for Neighborhood Engaged Research & Science.
Cody Telep Ph.D., Associate Professor & Associate Director of the School of Criminology & Criminal Justice at Arizona State University
John Eck Ph.D., Professor of Criminal Justice at University of Cincinnati Rebecca Plevin, M.D., FACS, Co-Director of the San Francisco Wraparound Project Jorge Elvir, Champagne, IL Blueprint Community Relations Manager, Equity and Engagement Department
PAGE 3053
APPENDIX N
41 Appendix B Literature Review
Crime Concentration/Place-Based Policing
It is a well-known in criminology that crime in general is concentrated in a very small amount of micro-geographic units.
Or, more scientifically the “Law of Crime Concentration” says that “for a defined measure of crime at a specific micro- geographic unit, the concentration of crime will fall within a narrow bandwidth of percentages for a defined cumulative proportion of crime.”139 Specifically, gun violence is concentrated in small portions of the country and within even smaller geographic portions of cities, particularly in under resourced and disadvantaged neighborhoods. This results in an “uneven distribution of race and place,” further complicating how police address it and what issues fall out of those interventions.140
Weisburd’s “law of crime concentration” says that crime at a specific micro-geographic unit, the concentration of crime will fall within a narrow bandwidth of percentages (eg. 25% or 50%) for a defined proportion of crime, even when there is extreme volatility in the total number of crime incidents.141 Weisburd (2004, 2015) and Braga (2010), among others, find strong support for the law of crime concentration.142 For example, in Seattle it was found that 50% of crime incidents occurred at only 4.5% of street segments.143
For example, over the course of 30 years in Boston, 89% of street segments and intersections had zero ABDW (Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon) firearm incidents and another 6% experienced just one. The remainder was responsible for the overwhelming majority of ABDW firearm incidents.144 This trend was stable over the course of the 30-year period. Due to this crime concentration, it has been productive and impactful for police to focus on the small proportion of cities that generates the most crime. In his study of crime concentration in different sized cities, Weisburd looks at small cities: Brooklyn Park, MN, Redlands, CA, and Ventura, CA. He finds that 50% of crime is concentrated in between 2.1 and 3.5% of the cities. This is remarkable because he finds that it is even more concentrated than his sample of large cities (New York, NY, Cincinnati, OH etc.).145 Braga (2013) finds that 89% of Boston’s street segments and intersections had zero firearm assaults with a deadly weapon. 6% experienced 1. The remaining 5% was responsible for virtually all of Boston’s gun violence. The epidemic
139 Weisburd, D. (2015). The law of crime concentration and the criminology of place*: The law of crime concentration. Criminology, 53(2), 133– 157. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12070
140 Papachristos, A. V., Wildeman, C., & Roberto, E. (2015). Tragic, but not random: The social contagion of nonfatal gunshot injuries. Social Science & Medicine, 125, 139–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.01.056 141 Weisburd, D. (2015). The law of crime concentration and the criminology of place*: The law of crime concentration. Criminology, 53(2), 133– 157. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12070
142 Braga, A. A., & Weisburd, D. (2010). Policing problem places: Crime hot spots and effective prevention. Oxford University Press. 143 Weisburd, D., Bushway, S., Lum, C., & Yang, S.-M. (2004). Trajectories of crime at places: A longitudinal study of street segments in the city of Seattle*. Criminology, 42(2), 283–322. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2004.tb00521.x 144 Braga, A. A., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2010). The concentration and stability of gun violence at micro places in Boston, 1980–2008.
Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26(1), 33–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-009-9082-x 145 Weisburd, D. (2015). The law of crime concentration and the criminology of place*: The law of crime concentration. Criminology, 53(2), 133– 157. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12070
PAGE 3054
APPENDIX N
42 and later downturn of gun violence is credited to trends at 3% of micro-places that experienced volatility in gun violence through that time.146
So far as it has been studied, smaller cities have higher levels of crime concentration. Scholars caution applying big city trends and solutions to less dense cities, suburbs, and rural areas. Weisburd (2015) looked at three small cities, including Ventura, CA which is comparable to Berkeley’s size. The data suggest that crime concentration can be different in smaller cities, like simply being on a few specific high-density streets. They have fewer overall crime incidents and their street segments are generally much longer. Small city phenomena are just beginning to be studied. 147
146 Braga, A. A., & Schnell, C. (2013). Evaluating place-based policing strategies: Lessons learned from the smart policing initiative in Boston.
Police Quarterly, 16(3), 339–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611113497046 147 Weisburd, D. (2015). The law of crime concentration and the criminology of place*: The law of crime concentration. Criminology, 53(2), 133– 157. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12070
PAGE 3055
APPENDIX N
43 148
The street segment has been identified as a useful division of a city because it is a sort of “micro-community,” in that a block has certain culture, closeness, norms, activities, boundaries, and historical evolution. These qualities make it “an important theoretical unit in the studying of crime at place”.149 The “street segment” is two block faces on both sides of a street between two intersections.150 It is a better micro-unit choice than smaller units, such as addresses, and makes for less complicated data gathering and analysis. Intersections have, on occasion, been used in addition to street segments. “City level gun violence trends are understood best by the analyses of trends at a very small number of micro places, such as street segments and intersections, rather than analyses of trends at larger areal units such as neighborhoods, arbitrarily-defined policing districts, or Census tracts.” 151 Knowing this has positively impacted gun
violence policing and public policy. The more we learn about the concentration of gun violence, the more we are able to concentrate treatments for gun violence (policing, social services etc.) in those specific areas.152 What are now referred to generally as “Place-Based Policing” and “Hot Spots Policing” originate from these studies and conclusions.
The natural conclusion from this, with the caveat of having only few small city studies, is that if crime is indeed so concentrated, policing and prevention resources should be similarly geospatially concentrated.153 Interventions should
148 Weisburd, D. (2015). The law of crime concentration and the criminology of place*: The law of crime concentration. Criminology, 53(2), 133– 157. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12070
149 Id.
150 Weisburd, D., Bushway, S., Lum, C., & Yang, S.-M. (2004). Trajectories of crime at places: A longitudinal study of street segments in the city of Seattle*. Criminology, 42(2), 283–322. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2004.tb00521.x 151 Braga, A. A., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2010). The concentration and stability of gun violence at micro places in Boston, 1980–2008.
Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26(1), 33–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-009-9082-x 152 Weisburd, D., Groff, E. R., & Yang, S.-M. (2014). The importance of both opportunity and social disorganization theory in a future research agenda to advance criminological theory and crime prevention at places. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 51(4), 499–508. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427814530404
153 Weisburd, D. (2015). The law of crime concentration and the criminology of place*: The law of crime concentration. Criminology, 53(2), 133– 157. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12070
PAGE 3056
APPENDIX N
44 focus on very specific location and not larger neighborhoods or “beats”.154 This conclusion extends beyond criminal justice intervention and applies as well to social interventions that may ameliorate gun violence. The concept of treating city “hot spots” in prevention efforts grows out of the now established fact of crime concentration.
Gun Buyback Programs
Gun buyback programs theoretically decrease the supply of guns in a community. Buyback programs encourage participation by offering cash or gift cards in exchange for weapons voluntarily surrendered and by using a “no questions asked” policy. Several studies have been done on who participates in a gun buyback program once it exists, but less studies have illuminated their effect on overall gun violence. “Additional research is needed to determine effective methods to target individuals who would have the greatest impact on gun violence if they relinquished their weapons.”155 Less ambiguously, these individuals are not relinquishing their guns during gun buybacks, which is why research is needed on how to get high-risk individuals to participate.
For example, some characteristics of participants in a Worcester, Massachusetts buyback program from 2009 to 2015 are that 68% had gun safety training and a majority were white males over 55 years old who did not themselves buy the gun. Most commonly, those surveyed inherited the gun they turned in, and there was a strong positive relationship between inheriting a gun and turning it in.156 This is significantly different than the population of individuals involved in gun violence. In fact, 98% of gun buyback participants were white when just 65% of Worcester’s population is white.157,158 This study illustrates that guns are a public health risk and that buybacks take in guns, but it fails to illustrate how buybacks increase public safety by removing guns accessible to individuals at risk of violence. Even they state, “Our program has so far failed to attract significant numbers of young minority community members. Improving upon this is particularly important, given the higher burden of gun violence experienced among minority communities. A recent New York Times review article explored 358 national armed encounters occurring in 2015 where four or more people were killed or wounded. They found that 73% of the victims were black, 72% were males, and the average age was 27.” 159
A study that looks at three cities’ programs (Worcester, MA included) found that more than half of participants (55%) did not purchase the firearm, but acquired it through inheritance, gift, or random find.160 “The primary goal of gun
154 Braga, A. A., & Schnell, C. (2013). Evaluating place-based policing strategies: Lessons learned from the smart policing initiative in Boston.
Police Quarterly, 16(3), 339–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611113497046 155 Violano, P., Driscoll, C., Chaudhary, N. K., Schuster, K. M., Davis, K. A., Borer, E., Winters, J. K., & Hirsh, M. P. (2014). Gun buyback programs: A venue to eliminate unwanted guns in the community. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 77(3), S46–S50. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000000319
156 Kasper, R. E., Green, J., Damle, R. N., Aidlen, J., Nazarey, P., Manno, M., Borer, E., & Hirsh, M. P. (2017). And the survey said.... Evaluating rationale for participation in gun buybacks as a tool to encourage higher yields. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 52(2), 354–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2016.08.009
157 Id.
158 U. S. Census bureau quickfacts: Worcester city, Massachusetts. (n.d.). Retrieved April 19, 2023, from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/worcestercitymassachusetts 159 Kasper, R. E., Green, J., Damle, R. N., Aidlen, J., Nazarey, P., Manno, M., Borer, E., & Hirsh, M. P. (2017). And the survey said.... Evaluating rationale for participation in gun buybacks as a tool to encourage higher yields. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 52(2), 354–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2016.08.009
160 Violano, P., Driscoll, C., Chaudhary, N. K., Schuster, K. M., Davis, K. A., Borer, E., Winters, J. K., & Hirsh, M. P. (2014). Gun buyback programs: A venue to eliminate unwanted guns in the community. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 77(3), S46–S50. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000000319
PAGE 3057
APPENDIX N