Berkeley City Council
May 7, 2024

49 AGE - FRIENDLY BERKELEY
Appendix B
Year 1Year  2-3

ACTION PLAN
Inter-generational programming is
continuing to be fostered in schools
and in the community, such as
student interns and volunteers .

Working with the Berkeley
Continuum and  established
student groups, home visits are
being offered to socially isolated
seniors.

Older adults are included in public
imagery of local media campaigns,
positively and without stereotypes;
community members are consulted
as to how best to portray older
people.

Media
CampaignPrevent
Isolation
In Process
Public
Schools
When "family" events or activities
are organized by the City or other
organizations, include older adults as
part of the target audience, not only
children and families.

Part of the
Family
Organize an annual inter-generational
event that celebrates the value of
people of different ages and fosters
understanding across generations
Inter-
generational
Event

TAKE AWAYS
Information: The people who filled out our survey are involved in activities in the community and most are socially connected. However, we know this is not representative of the larger community because our survey relied on community organizations and social networks for distribution.  Some of the reasons people don't participate in the  community is because they are isolated and/or  don't know about the activities or resources that  could help them participate. The City and organizations need to communicate information clearly and reach out to people who may be more isolated.

Equity and  Inclusion: Seniors in Berkeley are a diverse group, some with many intersecting identities. Language, race, immigration status, sexual orientation, gender, income level, housing status, and other factors all play a role in the way seniors experience life in Berkeley and it is important for volunteers and service providers to keep this in mind.

Communication devices are
available to ensure that seniors
with hearing difficulty are able to
participate in public meetings.

Public
meetings
Year 1Year  2-3

ACTION PLAN
Inter-generational programming is
continuing to be fostered in schools
and in the community, such as
student interns and volunteers .

Working with the Berkeley
Continuum and  established
student groups, home visits are
being offered to socially isolated
seniors.

Older adults are included in public
imagery of local media campaigns,
positively and without stereotypes;
community members are consulted
as to how best to portray older
people.

Media
CampaignPrevent
Isolation
In Process
Public
Schools
When "family" events or activities
are organized by the City or other
organizations, include older adults as
part of the target audience, not only
children and families.

Part of the
Family
Organize an annual inter-generational
event that celebrates the value of
people of different ages and fosters
understanding across generations
Inter-
generational
Event

TAKE AWAYS
Information: The people who filled out our survey are involved in activities in the community and most are socially connected. However, we know this is not representative of the larger community because our survey relied on community organizations and social networks for distribution.  Some of the reasons people don't participate in the  community is because they are isolated and/or  don't know about the activities or resources that  could help them participate. The City and organizations need to communicate information clearly and reach out to people who may be more isolated.

Equity and  Inclusion: Seniors in Berkeley are a diverse group, some with many intersecting identities. Language, race, immigration status, sexual orientation, gender, income level, housing status, and other factors all play a role in the way seniors experience life in Berkeley and it is important for volunteers and service providers to keep this in mind.

Communication devices are
available to ensure that seniors
with hearing difficulty are able to
participate in public meetings.

Public
meetings
Attachment 1

50 AGE - FRIENDLY BERKELEY
Appendix B
Public
Communication &
Information
3-1-1 is a non-emergency single
point of contact for the City that
helps direct people to the
appropriate department for
information or services.

This App is available  in senior
centers for information about
daily activities and for internal
tracking.

While there are a myriad of programs, events, and activities throughout Berkeley, it is often difficult for older adults to find what they want or need. Many older adults have internet access either through their mobile phone or at home, but websites are not intuitive or easy to navigate. Input from older adults about their needs and how they are currently getting information will help tailor existing communication to better meet their needs.

Large text and alternate formats
of public records are available.

Alameda County residents have
access to a 2-1-1 phone line,
managed by the nonprofit Eden
I&R, for information and referral
services.

The Center for T echnology &
Aging (CTA) at UC Berkeley is
designed specifically to
encourage and enhance the
development of new
technologies for the aging
population.

The Center for Independent
Living's  (CIL)  Information and
Referral (I&R) is a program that
provides information on free
disability-relevant community
resources.

AGE FRIENDL Y RESOURCES
Accessible
Documents

CTACIL I&R
The monthly newsletter for
Berkeley's senior centers is
distributed to 200 seniors via
email and is available in hard
copy at the centers.  It
announces class schedules and
events.

Berkeleyside is a local
independent news site for
Berkeley residents reporting on
local events and issues that has
an average of 270,000 unique
users each month.

Berkeleyside
The Nugget
My Senior
Center App
The NextDoor website helps
neighbors communicate.

Individuals need to verify their
address through the mail to use
it.  Many older people in
Berkeley accessed our survey
through announcements on this
site.

Nextdoor
3-1-1
Eden I&R
2-1-1
Nonprofit &
UniversityPrivate
There are 5 public libraries in
Berkeley. They host the Berkeley
Information Network,  an online
database of local resources that
can be accessed on their website
and that has a specific section for
seniors.

Public
Libraries
Richard Bermack
Attachment 1

51 AGE - FRIENDLY BERKELEY
46%
of survey respondents would be at
least somewhat likely to use
Internet/T echnology training if it was
free or low-cost
Internet Access
Home (27%) Phone (3%) None (5%)
Both (65%)
Comfort Using Internet
Very Comfortable Somewhat Comfortable
Not Very Comfortable Not at All Comfortable
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 Internet comfort
DATA
Some information regarding internet use among seniors emerged from the community survey.  Many residents who submitted the survey did so online, making the sample slightly skewed towards more internet savvy people. Even though the majority of respondents said that they were comfortable using the internet, almost half indicated they would be interested in internet/technology classes if they were available. 270,000
people on average read Berkeleyside
each month
3,492
2-1-1 calls were made by Berkeley
residents between January and
August 2018
5,211
2-1-1 referrals were made between
January and August 2018
An independent needs assessment contracted by the city as part of their Digital Divide project found that some of the barriers for older adults in  using technology include:

Basic
Training
Quality
Devices
Reliable
Internet
According to focus groups done by
the Berkeley Continuum and the
Age-Friendly Berkeley Initiative
Many older people are concerned about how to navigate
different systems in the city, including resources for
transportation, housing, and healthcare

Most people want to be able to call someone or go
somewhere to find information about services, but they
don't know of any "one stop shop" for  different kinds of information.

While people who are members of an organization like
Ashby Village or who live in affordable housing with a
service coordinator know where to go for help, this
situation does not exist for most people.

Most people said they prefer getting information from a person, either over the phone or face-to-face,  rather
than online. However, the number of people who can
find information online if they need it is increasing.

Appendix B
Attachment 1

52 AGE - FRIENDLY BERKELEY
Appendix B
Consider developing a City of
Berkeley Mobile app, to facilitate
how people in the field triage
incidents involving older adults.

Look at the frequency of 311 calls
for different services from older
residents in order to better
understand and support  the
resources they are seeking.

As part of the City's IT strategic plan,
gather input from older adults about
how content can be best presented to
them .

IT StrategyMonitor
3-1-1
Mobile
App
Year 1Year  2-3

ACTION PLAN
The City website is being
redesigned to reduce the number of
pages (now 18,000 pages), make it
more searchable, and address ADA
compliance throughout.

A Master Plan is being created that
includes improvement to
infrastructure for high
speed broadband internet
access and technology for seniors;
and that  includes a collaboration
with non-profit groups.

In Process
The 311 line is being redevloped with a
new online solution; expected to roll
out in 18 months.

Improving
3-1-1
City
Website
Digital
Divide
Create an Age Friendly website that
provides updates on services, news,
projects, and activities.

Age Friendly
Website
Piggyback on the popularity of local
newspapers with a Senior Newsletter,
similar to the one in Fremont, California,
or an Age-Friendly page or link in local
newspapers.

City
Newsletter

TAKE AWAYS
Equity and  Inclusion: While most survey respondents said they use the internet, this may be a skewed sample because of the many surveys completed online. Focus groups indicated that older people also get information from schools, their children,  or their neighbors.  Multiple modes of communication, including paper and online formats , should be used to ensure that older adults are able to stay informed, particularly those who are isolated.

Information: While 2-1-1 receives hundreds of calls each month from Berkeley residents and makes referrals to services, it is not clear how many older people use this service and follow through on referrals (the system does not collect this data).  This site is also difficult to navigate and does not contain information regarding activities and opportunities for social engagement.

Infrastructure and  Policy: The city website is difficult to navigate and needs to be updated more regularly in order to be a useful source of information for residents with varying degrees of comfort using the internet.

Attachment 1

53 AGE - FRIENDLY BERKELEY
A. Survey: The AARP Age-Friendly Community Survey was used with a few minor adjustments

1. Circulation: The survey was available between March 1st and April 10 • A link to the online version of the survey was posted on NextDoor and sent as an email blast through the following organizations:
o The Mayor and City Council Member’s websites
o A City website news announcement
o Ashby Village
o University of California Retirement Center Newsletter o AARP mailing to local members
o Member organizations of the Senior Services Coalition of Alameda County • A press release announcing the survey was sent out by the local paper, Berkeleyside, • Hard copies were made available at organizations:
o All 5 Berkeley Public Library Locations
o 2 Resources for Community Development senior housing locations o 6 Satellite Affordable Housing Associate senior housing locations o Both Senior Centers
o J-Sei
o Ashby Village
o Meals on Wheels
o LifeLong Medical Care Over 60 Health Center
o Jewish Community Center of the East Bay

2. 1402 residents responded. Analysis provided by Nancy Frank & Associates, Piedmont, CA B. Supplemental local reports:
• See www.berkeleycontinuum.org 2017 needs assessment and focus group information used in this report
• See Alameda County Plan for older adults, May 2016 https://alamedasocialservices.org/public/ services/elders_and_disabled_adults/docs/planning_committee/5.2016_County_Area_Plan.pdf C Interviews with 18 city staff in 9 City of Berkeley departments: April-May 2018 D Additional Focus Groups, Public Forum, City Council Presentation and meetings with the Commission on Aging
• City Council Presentation and Workshop: July 17, 2018 • Additional Focus Groups: September 22, 2018, October 24, 2018 • Public Forum co-hosted with the Commission on Aging: October 27, 2018 • Several meetings with the Commission on Aging throughout project Appendix C: Data Collection
Attachment 1

54 AGE - FRIENDLY BERKELEY
Appendix C

FOCUS GROUPS SUMMARY
Latinx Focus Group
Location: Bahia , inc.

Group size: 10
Average age: 59.4
All lived in Berkeley >20 years
Income
<$17K
$17K-$35K
$35K-$60K
>$60K

1. Affordable housing

2. Cost of living

3. Affordable health insurance

4. Accessible places to get services
T op Concerns
What is working well?
Good Schools
Living close to work
Latinx community
Cultural diversity
Advocacy for rights  &  equality
Neighborhood is safe
What is NOT working well?
Not informed about resources
Feel like we're being pushed out
Growing homelessness issue
Cost of living; children can't afford to live
nearby
"Low-income" program cut-off doesn't match
cost of living
Neighborhood permit parking
Homeowner sidewalk responsibility
High taxes
Disruption in church community;
congregation spread out

Some  Recommendations
Linguistically/Culturally
appropriate assisted living options
Affordable dental care resources
African American (faith-based
Focus Group
Location: St, Paul's AME Church
Group size: 9
Average age: 59.4
What is working well?
Feel safe, not threatened: Berkeley is like a
“Garden of Eden”
Diversity
Church as support system
T axi scrip resource through Senior Centers
What is NOT working well?
Vandalism
Not enough senior housing
Lack of community cohesion, support
Maintaining diversity;  many are leaving for
more affordable communities
Cost of living, pressure to sell home
Family/children live far away

1.  Cost of living

2.  Affordable housing

3. Pressure to move out
T op Concerns
Some Recommendations
Centralized information in a senior
resource guide
Fill gaps in public transportation
(more bus lines and stops) Berkeley Continuum Focus Groups Group size: 57 across 3 groups
Age range:  48-93
53% lived in Berkeley >10 years

See Berkeley Continuum Needs Assessment for details
www.berkeleycontinuum.org
Income
<$17K
$17K-$35K
$35K-$60K
>$60K
Berkeley Commission on Aging Forum (2)
Location: St, Paul's AME Church
Group size: 36
Age range:  48-93
53% lived in Berkeley >10 years
Concerns were similar to those heard elsewhere and
focused on:
how older adults can learn about what goes on in the
community[housing health care and transportation were
mentioned] and needing online and in‐person ways to
learn that);
need for affordable housing
need for sidewalk safety
Main concerns:

Housing cost is too high, fear
of having to leave Berkeley,
affordable housing waitlists
too long
People want in-home
supports, but are worried
about where to find them,
who to trust, and
affordability
Need more access to  face-to-
face or personalized over the
phone systems for
navigation support
Need more frequent and
flexible public transport
Concerns about sidewalk
safety
Location: North Berkeley Senior Center
Group size: 18
Concerns and needs were similar to those heard
elsewhere and focused on:
more employment opportunities
affordable meals
community navigators/advocates
transportation in the hills
more housing for seniors with different levels of care
more help for those just above "low-income" level
access to and knowledge of community events (not just
for parents and children)
Attachment 1

55 AGE - FRIENDLY BERKELEY
Appendix C
Focus Group Question Guide
Question 1: Imagine that you are describing to people the experience you are having in Berkeley as you grow older. What do you like best about it? What is working well for you? What has been most challenging for you? What are the “age friendly” characteristics that are most important to you? Question 2: Which of the characteristics we just mentioned are strongest or currently lacking in Berkeley? Question 3: Of all the things we’ve listed here, what do think are the priorities? Where should we start if we are going to develop new services, supports or conditions? As time allows and depending on focus of discussion:

Question 5: Do you have concerns about whether you will be able to live out your years in Berkeley? If so, why? Where would you go?
Question 6: How many of you have access to a computer and the internet in your home or building? Do you ever skype? Other uses?
Question 7: How do you want to be able to learn about resources that are available to you as your health and/or everyday needs change? A place (like a center?), a person (like a navigator?) the internet ? Question 8: If someone offered to come to your home to check it out for fall hazards, talk to you about what is available in the community, needs you might have, help you plan and provide you with referrals and linkages, would that be attractive to you?
Question 9: If you had to move out of your home because you need more help day-to-day than you can get at home, where would you go? What would be your fears about living in assisted living or nursing situation? Focus Group Survey

1. How old are you? _______________

2. What is your zip code? _______________

3. Did you participate in any recent survey about aging either from Berkeley or Alameda County?

4. Are you on Medicare or MediCal?

5. Where do you get your medical care?

6. Income: What would you estimate was your income last year from ALL sources (social security, retirement, pension, savings, employment, tenants, other)
Does that income support: Only you, Yourself and a partner/spouse with no other income, Yourself and a partner/spouse with additional income from them, Includes another dependent

8. What are the biggest challenges you are facing (or anticipating) as you age in Berkeley:

Is there anything else you would like to tell us?
Attachment 1

56 AGE - FRIENDLY BERKELEY
Appendix C

ALAMEDA COUNTY PLAN FOR OLDER ADULTS
2016-2017
Berkeley Results from the
Survey T op 10 Concerns

1.  Income for Basic Needs

2.  Inclusion in Decisions

3.  Housing Affordable

4.  Income for Future

5.  Stay in Home

6.  Maintain Home

7.  Falling

8.  Prepare Healthy Food

9.  Anxiety of Stress

10.   Confusion or Memory
Rating

3.4 3.3

3.3 3.3

3.3 3.2

3.0 2.9

2.7 2.6
Survey T op 10 Resources Lacking

1.  Job Opportunities

2.  Clean & Well-kept Sidewalks

3. Affordable Housing

4.  Safe & Well-lit Streets

5.  A Computer You FeelComfortable Using

6.  Housing Suited to Your Needs

7.  Resources to Feel Safe

8.  Fresh Vegetables & Fruit I Can Afford

9.  A Trusted Source to Go for Needs

10. Health Services Culturally/Language Appropriate
% Without

31.9%

21.3%

19.9%

16.9%

16.1%

15.3%

14.9%

12.2%

11.8%

11.2%
Notes: Older Adults=60+; Survey Results from AC Older Adults Survey 2015; Concerns rated from high (5) to low (1) with the average of all ratings shown; Bar graphs from the US Census, ACS 2010-2014 T able S0102 and ESRI 2015

This page was copied from the Alameda County Plan for Older Adults 2016-2017 Appendix D Medi-Cal Enrolled IHHS EnrolledVeterans
1980 1990 2000 2010 2015
14,661 14,320 13,879
19,516
22,031
White
2+ Races
American Indian
Pacific Islander
Hispanic
Asian
Black 13.5%
12%

4.7%

1.8%

0.1%
0%
Other 0.3%

67.5%
Earnings Soc. Security SSI Pub. Assis.

Cash
Retirement
$92,694
$18,219 $9,832 $7,009
$44,960
Earnings Soc. Security SSI Pub. Assis.

Cash
Retirement
57%
66%
8%
1%
40%
Living
Alone
Married
Couple
48%

36.5%
3,458
2,733
1,188
Foreign born Non-citizen Non-English at
Home
Not English
Proficient

17.3%

3.8%

17.9%

6.9%
Growth of 60+ population % Race/Ethnicity
Household avg. income by source % Households with income source Living Arrangements >30% Income on Housing
27%
55%
Own RentOwn Rent
69%
31%
Own vs Rent
English Proficiency & Citizenship
Attachment 1

57 AGE - FRIENDLY BERKELEY
Appendix D: Useful References
AARP Livable Communities
http://www.aarp.org/livable-communities/network-age-friendly-communities/ AARP Livable Communities: Great Places to Age
https://states.aarp.org/aarp-livable-communities-great-places-for-all-ages/ Age-Friendly BusinessCertification Programs
http://www.programsforelderly.com/awareness-elders-in-action-age-friendly-business-certification. php
Age-Friendly Communities,
Grantmakers in Aging https://www.giaging.org/issues/community-development/ Scharlach, Andrew E.; Amanda Lehning, “Creating aging-friendly communities,” Generations, vol. 33, no. 2
Aging Survey-The United States of Aging; American Association of Retired Persons [AARP] (2012). https://www.aarp.org/livable-communities/learn/research-trends/info-12-2012/the-united-states-of- aging-2012.html
Alameda County Plan for Older Adults
https://alamedasocialservices.org/public/services/elders_and_disabled_adults/docs/planning_ committee/5.2016_County_Area_Plan.pdf
American Community Survey
https://www
.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/
Berkeley Reports
Age-Friendly Berkeley Continuum Executive Summary and Needs Assessment, 2016 www.berkeleycontinuum.org
Health Status Report (2018)
https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Health_Human_Services/Level_3_-_Public_Health/2018- health-status-report-berkeley
.pdf
Berkeley on AARP list of Top Ten “Livable Cities,” Streetsblog Cal, June 21, 2018 https://cal.streetsblog.org/2018/06/21/san-francisco-berkeley-on-aarp-list-of-top-ten-livable-cities/ Broadband Equity Research Report, May 1, 2018, Nutter Consulting https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Manager/Economic_Development/2018-06-19%20 WS%20Item%2002%20Referral%20Response%20Addressing.pdf
Community Need Assessment
Alta Bates Summit Medical Center Community Health Needs Assessment 2016 https://www.sutterhealth.
or
g/pdf/for-patients/chna/absmc-2016-chna.pdf
Fall Prevention
http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/falls/adultfalls.html https://www.ncoa.org/healthy-aging/falls-prevention/preventing-falls-tips-for-older-adults-and- caregivers/
Attachment 1

58 AGE - FRIENDLY BERKELEY
Food Assistance
http://www.alamedasocialservices.org/public/services/food_assistance/index.cfm Global Age-Friendly Cities: A Guide
http://www.who.int/ageing/publications/Global_age_friendly_cities_Guide_English.pdf Poverty
Kushel, MD, Margot. “Growing Older, Getting Poor.” New American Media, April, 2015, San Francisco Senior Center Transformation
https://www.aarp.org/livable-communities/act/civic-community/info-12-2012/transforming-senior-center- into-21st-century-wellness-centers.html
Senior Center without Walls
http://www.seniorcenterwithoutwalls.org/about/
Social Determinants of Health
https://www.kff.org/disparities-policy/issue-brief/beyond-health-care-the-role-of-social-determinants-in- promoting-health-and-health-equity/
https://www
.healthypeople.gov/2020/topics-objectives/topic/social-determinants-of-health Technology, David Lindeman, MPH
https://citris-uc.org/technology-older-adults-new-era-connected-aging/ Transportation Needs in an Aging Friendly Community
https://www.aarp.org/livable-communities/learn/transportation-mobility/info-12-2012/meeting- transportation-needs-in-an-aging-friendly-community.html

Appendix D
Attachment 1

Attachment 2
City Departmental Budgets

Attachment 3
HHCS Departmental Summary

Attachment 4
HHCS Division Summary

Attachment 5
Berkeley’s Unique Structure for Aging Services
Aging Division Activities Summary

Aging in Alameda County:

A Changing Landscape
July 2022
1 The Senior Services Coalition represents 45 nonprofit and public community-based organizations that provide health and supportive services to over 85,000 older adults in Alameda County.

Our Mission is to strengthen and improve the network of support for older people in Alameda County, especially those disproportionately impacted or at risk because of fragile health, cognitive impairment, disability, language, culture, race, financial status, sexual orientation or gender identity.

We do that by advancing county and state policy change and facilitating collaborative solutions that bridge silos and sectors.
2 Attachmment 6

The Shifting Landscape of Needs and the
Ecosystem of Supports…
● We are aging
● Increasing economic insecurity
● Medical and LTC increasingly out of reach
● High preventable use of ER and hospital
● Social isolation
● The pandemic toll
● From housing insecurity to homelessness
3 We are Aging
● Older adults are the fastest growing segment in Alameda County ● By 2030, older adults will make up 20% of the population ● Number of people with Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD) is expected to triple among Alameda County residents over the age of 65, from 26,480 in 2020 to 89,792 in 2060
https://agefriendly.acgov.org/aging-in-ac/aging-in-ac-overview.page 4 Attachmment 6

https://www.healthyalamedacounty.org/ 5
6 Attachmment 6

Increasing Economic Insecurity
● Cost of Living & Inflation are outpacing income
● Half of single older adults in Alameda County can’t cover basic living expenses
● One in six older adults in California lacks reliable access to enough affordable, nutritious food
● Income, wealth & savings at retirement all characterized by disparities “There is a disproportionate burden on people of color, women and LGBTQ individuals. These groups have less retirement savings and face a greater likelihood of aging into poverty.”
- Report on Employment & Older Adults in Alameda County; Kakama, Chaudhuri; Alameda County Age-Friendly Council, July 27, 2020 7 8
Attachmment 6

Medical & Long-Term Care Increasingly out of Reach
● For those of modest income who have Medicare coverage:
○ Out-of-pocket costs (copays & deductible) are unaffordable for many ○ Nursing Home covered first 90 days but a qualifying hospital stay is the entry point and copays apply after day 20
○ Assisted Living, Board & Care, and Adult Day Care are not covered ○ In-home support and care are not covered by Medicare
○ Those who are immigrants or who didn’t work enough quarters may have to pay for Part A as well as Part B and D
● Medi-Cal Share of Cost
○ Older adults might be $1 over the threshold to qualify for full-scope (free) Medi-Cal, and if so they must pay more than half their income towards health care in order to access Medi-Cal coverage in any given month
● Long-term care is unaffordable for the 83,000 seniors in the county with incomes below the Elder Index (Insight Center, 2017 HCBS LTC Costs).
9 Preventable is the Theme in ER & Hospital use
Of the total 34,819 people age 65
visiting ERs in 2018:
● 25.9% (9,017) had two or more
ADL deficits;
● 34.2% (11,897 people) had both
two or more ADL deficits and
cognitive impairment.
● A very small percentage (1.87%
had cognitive impairment but no
ADL deficits
https://eldercare.shinyapps.io/eldercaredata_shinyapps/ 10 Attachmment 6

Living Alone at Risk of Social Isolation
Individuals 65 and older have the highest rate of suicide deaths: 1 in 4 older adults who attempt suicide die, versus 1 in 200 younger persons 11 The Pandemic Toll
● Social and Health Impacts
○ Social Isolation
○ Deconditioning
○ Deferred health care
○ Family support networks destabilized
● Stark disproportionate impacts reflect historic disparities and structures of racism
○ Infection and death rates
○ Vaccination rates
○ Economic impacts
○ Need for and access to government aid
○ Use of virtual/telemedicine opportunities 12
Attachmment 6

From Housing Insecurity to Homelessness
● In 2019, 47.6% of senior renters in Alameda County are “housing cost burdened” (over 30% of their income goes to housing); 30% spend over half their income on housing.
● Of the 4,209 complete applications for COVID Rent Relief (2021/22 ERAP) from Oaklanders, 9.64% were from people between age 61 and 80; 71.2% were from people of color
● Financial, medical or other emergencies later in life can push those who were already struggling to make ends meet into homelessness. ● People over 50 now account for over half of the unhoused population in Oakland; People 65+ were over 10% of homeless Point In Time count. ● 2022 Point In Time count - Oakland’s unhoused population increased by 25% from 2019 (data re older adult component not yet available) 13 14https://agefriendly.acgov.org/aging-in-ac/housing.page? Attachmment 6

The shifting ecosystem of supports:
● Capacity is not adequate across the continuum
● Workforce needs to grow
● Caregivers need support
18 State and Local Funding for Older Adults and
Aging Services:
● State funding opportunities
● Potential state funding opportunities
● Local funding
21 Attachmment 6

Questions?
Wendy Peterson
[email protected]
(510) 332-4669
32 Attachmment 6

Breakdown of Alameda Area on Aging Funds for Berkeley
Amounts below indicate FY2024 amounts; the percentages indicate the general brea kdown overall, every year:
● Congregate Nutrition (dine-in lunch service): $73,381 (15%) ● Home-Delivered Meals: $140,192 (25%)
● Fa
mily Caregiver Support: $99,528 (20%)
● Information Assistance: $156,803 (30%)
● Senior Center Activities: $47,363 (10%)
Attachment 7

Attachment 8
Highlights of Census Data on Aging in Berkeley
Changes in >60 Population 2010 and 2020
Red-orange high; blue low.

First two figures show absolute numbers. Second two are percentages of population.

Some narratives about the figures:
• About 8% of residents > 65 years either without a computer at home or internet access, ~1500 people
• About 2000 people > 60 below the poverty line in the last 12 months • About 4000 people 65 years and older below 200% of the poverty line, ~20% of Berkeley's seniors
• About 700 kids living with "a grandparent householder" which I take to mean being raised by their grandparent
• About 5500 people over 65 who live alone
• About 4500 people > 65 work. Only 1900ish drive alone. 400 take transit, 200 carpool, 350 walk, 1500 work from home. Only 150 take a taxicab, motorcycle, bicycle, or other means
• Median household income in $93,000
• About 2000 are on medicaid or other means tested public health insurance • About 3000 > 65 with an ambulatory difficulty
• About 1200 with a cognitive difficulty
Margins of error on all these estimates are around 10-20%

Understanding California's Middle-
Income Older Adult Population
NORC | The SCAN Foundation | West Health Institute
October 3, 2022
Attachment 9

3PROJECT OVERVIEW : BACKGROUND
The first Forgotten Middle studies brought national attention to the unmet needs of future middle-income seniors
The original Forgotten
Middle study
Forgotten Middle
2022 “refresh”
• Released in 2019 • Released in 2022
Purpose: To forecast
the size, demographics,
health needs, and
financial resources of
middle-income seniors
aged 75 and older
• Forecasted the senior
population through 2029
• Forecasted the senior
population through 2033
• Relied on 2014 Health and
Retirement Study (HRS) data
• Updated the original analysis
using 2018 HRS data
• Fifth most read Health Affairs
article of 2019
Attachment 9

21CA NEAR DUALS : HEALTH AND FUNCTIONAL STATUS
Within California’s near duals group, 57% will have mobility limitations and nearly half will have 3+ chronic conditions in 2033 Over two-thirds of near duals
over the age of 85 will have
mobility limitations in 2033
Health or Functional Limitations All Seniors 75+ 75-84 85+ 3+ Chronic Conditions 48% 49% 47%
3+ Limits in Activities of Daily Living 11% 7% 16%
High Needs* 16% 12% 22%
Cognitive Impairment 31% 20% 46%
Mobility Limitations 57% 50% 67%
*High-needs is defined as those with three or more chronic conditions and one or more limitations in ADLs. Not mutually exclusive with other categories.
4PROJECT OVERVIEW : NATIONAL MODEL DESIGN
The 2022 Forgotten Middle model uses the 2018 HRS to
forecast characteristics of seniors in 2033
2018 2033
Age Cohort 60-69; 70+ 75-84; 85+
Life Expectancy Entire Cohort Those predicted to still
be alive
Health
Chronic conditions, mobility
limitations, and cognitive
impairments
Projected rates of
underlying conditions
Financial
Resources
Actual income and annuitized
assets for each individual
Projected financial
resources
Mortality model based on
sociodemographics, health, and mobility
Assume consistent prevalence by
sociodemographic group
Grow based on recent rate of change
by resource category
Increase age by 15 years
Attachment 9

5PROJECT OVERVIEW : NATIONAL FINDINGS
Summary of findings from the 2022 Forgotten Middle update Over the next decade, the number of middle-income seniors will almost double by 2033—reaching 16M adults ages 75+ by 2033 Many older adults will have health needs, like mobility limitations and cognitive impairments, that make it hard to live independently Without selling their homes, three-quarters (11.5M) of middle-income seniors have insufficient resources to pay for private assisted living 20CA NEAR DUALS : RACE & ETHNICITY
Nearly 46% of California’s near duals cohort will consist of people of color in 2033

45.4% 54.1%

65.6%

45.8% 26.1%

17.9%

4.0% 4.4% 4.4%

4.8% 15.3% 12.1%
< 139% FPL 139 - 400% FPL > 400% FPL
California Lower-Middle Income Seniors by Race & Ethnicity and FPL, 2033
White Hispanic Black Other
The lower-middle income
cohort in California will
have the highest
percentage of “Other”
races and ethnicities,
compared to the <139%
FPL and >400% FPL
groups
Likely Medicaid Eligible “Near Duals”
Attachment 9

19CA NEAR DUALS : POPULATION SIZE
By 2033, over 1M seniors in California are projected to have incomes within 139% to 400% of FPL
127K
171K
190K
249K
271K

12.6% 17.0% 18.9% 24.7% 26.9%
-
50K
100K
150K
200K
250K
300K
139-200%
FPL
201-250%
FPL
251-300%
FPL
301-350%
FPL
351-400%
FPL
Projected Distribution of Low-Middle Income Seniors in
California by FPL Range, 2033
693K
574K
278K 434K
971K 1008K
2018 2033
California's Lower-Middle Income
Population by Age Group, 2018 & 2033
75-84 85+
+56%
-17%
+4%
6PROJECT OVERVIEW : CALIFORNIA -SPECIFIC ESTIMATES
Why create a California-specific model?
* Utilizes the 2021 Genworth Cost of Care Survey data converted to 2018 dollars † Based on 44 hours of care per week
The sociodemographics and senior housing costs in California are meaningfully different from national averages
Average assisted living cost is 17% more
expensive in California
More likely to not have children living
within 10 miles
Significantly more racially and ethnically
diverse than the U.S. overall
Higher percentage of individuals with less
than a high school education and those
with a college degree
Senior housing and care costs are higher in California. 23%
19%
9%
17%
24%
35%
Personal Care Services†
Home Health Aide†
Adult Day Health Care
Assisted Living Facility
Nursing Home Semi-Private
Nursing Home Private Room
Percent Difference in California Housing and Care Costs Compared to the U.S. Average, 2018*
Attachment 9

Key Findings from California
18CA NEAR DUALS : OVERVIEW
NORC also examined California’s “near duals” cohort, which includes seniors with income-only resources close to Medicaid eligibility • NORC’s national “Forgotten Middle” was designed to focus on individuals who are unlikely to qualify for Medicaid
• To understand the population at risk of spending down to Medicaid eligibility, NORC took an additional step to analyze the size California’s “near dual eligible” seniors in 2033
• Income thresholds for California’s near duals:

To align with Medi-Cal rules, this analysis only considers sources of income, not other assets or housing equity.

Lower: 139% FPL – Ineligible for Medi-Cal
Aged & Disabled Program (138% FPL)
Upper: 400% FPL – Eligibility cutoff for
federal marketplace exchange subsidies
Attachment 9

California Near Dual Eligibles
10KEY FINDINGS : POPULATION SIZE
California is estimated to have 1.6M middle-income seniors age 75 and above in 2033
The size of California’s middle-
income senior population will
increase by 60% (601K) by 2033
The number of California’s middle-
income seniors aged 85+ is
expected to more than double
(increasing by 233K)
773K
1,141K
230K
463K
2018 2033
Number of California's Middle-Income Seniors by Age
Group, 2018 and 2033
75-84 85+
1,003K
1,604K +60%
+102%
+48%
Attachment 9

11KEY FINDINGS : INCOME AND RACE
California’s middle-income seniors will be more diverse in 2033, with people of color making up 47% of the population
California remains significantly
more racially and ethnically diverse
than the U.S. overall
Policymaking will require high levels
of cultural sensitivity to meet the
needs of all older adults
66%
89%
53%
78%
20%
4%
29%
10%
10% 2%
13% 4%
4% 6% 5% 8%
California National California National
2018 2033
Middle-Income Seniors 75+ by Race and Ethnicity, California vs. National, 2018 and 2033
White Hispanic Other Black
34%
47%
• California:
• National:
16KEY FINDINGS : AL AFFORDABILITY WITH HOUSING EQUITY Even if they sold their homes, half of California’s middle-income seniors still will not have sufficient resources to pay for private assisted living 34K
114K
210K 216K 209K 197K
147K
478K
K
50K
100K
150K
200K
250K
300K
350K
400K
450K
500K
$25,984 - $35,000 $35,001 - $45,000 $45,001 - $55,000 $55,001 - $65,000 $65,001 - $75,000 $75,001 - $85,000 $85,001 - $95,000 > $95,000 Projected Financial Resources of California Middle-Income Seniors Including Housing Equity Compared to Assisted Living Costs, 75+ 2033
Average Assisted Living Rent
+ Medical Costs = $75,000
783K (49%) Middle-income seniors in CA will have annual financial resources <$75,000 including housing equity
Average private-pay assisted living rent for California generated by applying the percent difference between national and California costs of assisted living in the 2021 Genworth Cost of Care Survey (17%) to the 2018 average cost of assisted living provided by the National Investment Center for Seniors Housing & Care. Average out-of-pocket medical costs and premiums from Kaiser Family Foundation.

Attachment 9

15KEY FINDINGS : AL AFFORDABILITY WITHOUT HOUSING EQUITY Excluding home equity, 89% of California’s middle-income seniors will have insufficient resources for private-pay assisted living Average private-pay assisted living rent for California generated by applying the percent difference between national and California costs of assisted living in the 2021 Genworth Cost of Care Survey (17%) to the 2018 average cost of assisted living provided by the National Investment Center for Seniors Housing & Care. Average out-of-pocket medical costs and premiums from Kaiser Family Foundation. 213K
303K
277K
311K
328K
118K
39K
14K
K
50K
100K
150K
200K
250K
300K
350K
$25,984 - $35,000 $35,001 - $45,000 $45,001 - $55,000 $55,001 - $65,000 $65,001 - $75,000 $75,001 - $85,000 $85,001 - $95,000 > $95,000 Projected Financial Resources of California Middle-Income Seniors Excluding Housing Equity Compared to Assisted Living Costs, 75+ 2033 Average Assisted Living Rent in CA + Medical Costs
= $75,000

1.4M (89%) Middle-income seniors in CA will have annual financial resources <$75,000 excluding housing equity
Why excluding home equity matters:
• Spouse may still live in the home
• May want to keep house as “nest egg”
12KEY FINDINGS : HEALTH, COGNITIVE AND MOBILITY LIMITATIONS By 2033, the majority of California middle-income seniors 75+ will have 3+ chronic conditions and mobility limitations Those over 85 are even more likely
to have limitations in activities of
daily living
Many seniors will need additional
caregiving support and may not be
able to continue living
independently
*”High-needs” is defined as those with three or more chronic conditions and one or more limitations in ADLs. Not mutually exclusive with other categories. 58%
9%
20%
21%
57%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
3+ Chronic Conditions
3+ Limits in Activities of Daily Living
High Needs*
Cognitive Impairment
Mobility Limitations
Health & Functional Status of Middle-Income Seniors in
California, 2033
Attachment 9

13KEY FINDINGS : FAMILY STRUCTURES
Nearly 60% of California’s middle-income seniors will be unmarried in 2033 and 43% may not have children living within 10 miles Family members, including
spouses and adult children,
provide most caregiving for
older adults
Seniors who are unmarried
(divorced or widowed) and
those without children nearby
may not have unpaid sources
of care52%
42%
48%
58%
2018 2033
Martial Status of Middle-Income Seniors in
California, 2018 and 2033
Married Unmarried
43%
51%
7%
California
California Middle-Income Seniors'
Proximity to Children, 2018
No Children Nearby Children within 10 Miles
Children in Residence
14KEY FINDINGS : FINANCIAL RESOURCES
For California’s forgotten middle, income is the most important financial resource; 1 in 5 have significant housing equity 1 2 3 4 5
Housing $7,817 $13,287 $17,485 $29,431 $179,306
Assets $4,057 $7,478 $12,490 $20,511 $24,157
Income $31,650 $39,969 $45,769 $44,492 $45,335
Total $43,524 $60,734 $75,745 $94,434 $248,797
$43,524
$60,734
$75,745
$94,434
$248,797
$K
$50K
$100K
$150K
$200K
$250K
Financial Resources of California's Middle-Income Seniors 75+, by Quintile, 2033 Income Assets Housing Total
Attachment 9

Attachment 10

Office of the City Manager
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: https://berkeleyca.gov/

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Tanya Bustamante, Interim Deputy Director, Health, Housing, and Community Services Department
Subject: Companion Report: Achieving Goals of 2018 Berkeley Age-Friendly Action Plan

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the City Manager to review and prioritize the recommendations of the City of Berkeley’s Age-Friendly Action Plan, in conjunction with the results of the Community Health Assessment that will be conducted by the Health, Housing, and Community Services Department in the 2024 calendar year. In addition, to consider the following referrals:

1. Refer to the Transportation Commission to collaborate with the Commission on Aging to assess the equitable accessibility of public transportation options for the older adult and disabled community in Berkeley

2. Refer to Housing Advisory Commission to collaborate with staff to assess the level of affordable, accessible housing options for older adults to age in the Berkeley community.

3. Refer the Commission on Aging’s request for increased funding to the Budget and Finance Policy Committees for further deliberation.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
There are no fiscal impacts associated with this recommendation.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The Commission on Aging has requested that the City Manager take steps to act on the recommendations of Berkeley’s Age-Friendly Action Plan, and address gaps by increasing funding for personnel and other services provided by the City. The City Manager does not disagree with the potential merit of this request, but rather recommends that Council consider a more specific and streamlined recommendation that encourages relevant commissions and staff to work together to outline feasible and realistic options that are evidence-based and community-driven.

Companion Report: Achieving Goals of 2018 Berkeley CONSENT CALENDAR Age-Friendly Action Plan May 7, 2024

BACKGROUND
At its regular meeting on February 21, 2024, the Commission on Aging voted to recommend to Council to refer to the City Manager steps to develop plans to revisit and act on the recommendations in the Berkeley Age-Friendly Action Plan by building on what is already occurring in the community, expanding the Plan’s impact, and addressing gaps, by increasing funding for personnel and other services currently being offered as well as others identified in the Age-Friendly Plan.

M/S/C: Chisholm, Cochran, Collins, Evans, Lavault, Orrick, Porter, Smith, Yamaguchi.

Noes: None.

Abstain: None.

Absent: None.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects, climate impacts, or sustainability opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Aging Services Division of the City’s Health, Housing, and Community Services Department provides a wealth of services to Berkeley’s older adult community, including senior center classes and activities, food and nutrition services, transportation services, and case management for high need older adults with complex needs. Given that the older adult population is the fastest growing segment of the population in the United States1, it is prudent to clearly and thoughtfully assess the current needs of this population alongside the gaps and strengths that the results of the upcoming Community Health Assessment will highlight, and the thoughtful planning and deliberation of relevant commissions and staff.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
Council could refer this request directly to the budget process.

CONTACT PERSON
Tanya Bustamante, Interim Deputy Director, HHCS, 510-981-5178. 1 https://www.census.gov

Disaster and Fire Safety Commission
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.CityofBerkeley.info/Manager

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Disaster and Fire Safety Commission
Submitted by: Weldon Bradstreet, Chairperson, Disaster and Fire Safety Commission Subject: Support the Fire Department to Fund a Program Manager II Position

RECOMMENDATION
The Disaster and Fire Safety Commission (DFSC) supports the request by the Fire Department to fund a Program Manager II.

SUMMARY
The Program Manager II position will be responsible for building a Street Trauma Prevention (STP) program in the Department. This program is necessary to meet the City’s Vision Zero goal of eliminating severe and fatal traffic crashes by 2028.

The STP program is a new initiative within the Department to support the transportation and infrastructure projects of Vision Zero in order to steadily reduce the 694 injuries that occur on Berkeley streets each year, on average, among people walking, riding bikes and riding in vehicles, including an average of five fatalities.

This position will allow the Department to: (1) engage consistently and constructively in the City’s Vision Zero planning and implementation processes; (2) collaborate with other City departments, as well as the Fire Marshal, to advance Vision Zero and other policies; and (3) build an evidence-based approach to balancing street trauma response and prevention.

The STP program will require sufficient staff and resources to support the Department’s capacity to perform analysis, interdepartmental coordination, program design, and implementation. The Program Manager II position represents the first step in establishing and building this program. The STP Program Manager would also participate in department decision-making regarding department equipment and operations, to the extent that those decisions intersect with preventing, or responding to, street trauma and the City’s Vision Zero policy. The STP Program Manager would report every six months, or as needed, to the DFSC regarding the activities of the STP Program.

Support the Fire Department to Fund a Program Manager II Position CONSENT CALENDAR May 7, 2024

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Sufficient funding will be needed to support a Program Manager II position for an initial period of five years. The Department and budget office will need to determine the total amount of funding required to meet this objective.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
An average of 694 persons are injured in street trauma each year in Berkeley, and five are killed During the period 2017 to 2022, street trauma resulted in injuries to 490 people in vehicles, 103 people riding bikes, and 101 pedestrians on average each year (Figure 1), including an annual average of five fatalities (Figure 2).1 During this same period, there were no deaths and an average of two persons injured each year in fires in Berkeley, a testament to the effectiveness of the Department’s decades of effort in fire prevention and response.

Figure 1. Annual average collisions causing injuries to vehicle occupants, cyclists and pedestrians, 2017—2022, Berkeley, CA.
1 Collision data from the Collisions Stats tab of the Berkeley Police Transparency Portal - Traffic Safety website: (https://bpd-transparency-initiative-berkeleypd.hub.arcgis.com/pages/traffic-safety). Death & severe injury collision data from the UC Berkeley SafeTREC Transportation Injury Management System (TIMS) Query & Map (https://tims.berkeley.edu/tools/query/index.php?clear=true). All data accessed 5/18/2023 – 5/20/2023 and prepared by Tom Lent.

Support the Fire Department to Fund a Program Manager II Position CONSENT CALENDAR May 7, 2024
Figure 2. Annual average collisions causing fatal injuries to vehicle occupants, cyclists and pedestrians, 2017—2022, Berkeley, CA.

Severe and fatal collisions disproportionately affect people walking and biking.

Berkeley residents report that they walk or bike for 40% of trips made in the city, but people walking and biking suffer 61% of severe and fatal collisions.2 Drivers operating at unsafe speeds and drivers failing to yield at crosswalks are the two most common violations contributing to severe and fatal collisions in Berkeley, amounting to 33% of such incidents over the period 2011-2020.3 While 71% of Berkeley residents report being interested in relying on bicycles for daily use, most are too concerned about safety to act on this choice.4 A subset of injuries that result from street trauma cause immense suffering and financial hardship for those affected, and they require extensive Department and medical resources. On the current trajectory, traffic-related street trauma, and the demand for the Department’s EMS services that accompany it, is expected to increase alongside increases in housing density. The Department already reports that the growing number of EMS calls is taxing its resources and personnel.

Responding to critically injured persons also takes a toll on emergency responders. 2 City of Berkeley, Vision Zero Annual Report (June 2022). (https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022-06- 28%20Item%2023%20Vision%20Zero%20Annual%20Report_0.pdf). (p. 13). 3 City of Berkeley, Vision Zero Annual Report (June 2022). ibid (p. 14). 4 Berkeley City Manager Dee Williams-Ridley (June 29, 2022). Consent Calendar on Vision Zero Annual Report, 2021-2022. Environmental Sustainability and Climate Impacts (https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022-06- 28%20Item%2023%20Vision%20Zero%20Annual%20Report_0.pdf). (p. 3).

Support the Fire Department to Fund a Program Manager II Position CONSENT CALENDAR May 7, 2024
People struck by vehicles while walking or riding bikes are often seriously or critically injured.

Providing emergency medical care for these patients, as well as for those injured while riding in vehicles, takes a toll on the mental health of firefighters and paramedics. California Senate Bill 542 (Stern) created a rebuttable presumption that post-traumatic stress injuries among firefighters and peace officers are work-related and thus compensable under workers' compensation. The bill, signed by Governor Newsom in 2019, noted that “trauma-related injuries can become overwhelming and manifest in post-traumatic stress, which may result in substance use disorders and even, tragically, suicide.” 5 The bill reports that “the fire service is four times more likely to experience a suicide than a work-related death in the line of duty in any year.” Reducing the frequency of exposure to critically injured persons is an effective response to this occupational hazard for responders.

BACKGROUND
The fire service understands the power of prevention.

Data since 2010 shows that the Department’s Fire Prevention Bureau has reduced fire-related injuries to an average of two per year.6 This success has resulted in large part from decades of advancements in fire prevention, prompted in 1973 by the report of the National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control, which found that “95 cents of every dollar spent on the fire services is used to extinguish fires; only about 5 cents is spent on efforts…to prevent fires from starting,” and concluded that “much more energy and funds need to be devoted to fire prevention, which could yield huge payoffs in lives and property saved.” 7 The National Commission’s recommendations spurred a steady stream of advancements in fire protection codes that required the use of passive and active fire protection systems, including design specifications for buildings, fire resistant building materials, exit systems, fire sprinkler and smoke control systems, smoke and heat alarm systems, and fire suppression systems.

Altogether, these changes reduced civilian fire deaths by 60% between 1979 and 2012, resulting in 5,000 fewer deaths per year by 2012 (Figure 3).8 Figure 3. All U.S. civilian fire deaths and home fire deaths, 1977-2022. 5 Senate Bill No. 542. Chapter 390, Stern. Workers’ Compensation. (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB542). See subsection (1)(e). 6 FireCARES. Berkeley Fire Department (https://firecares.nfors.org/departments/74866/berkeley-fire- department?page=1).
7 National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control (May 4, 1973). America Burning. (https://www.usfa.fema.gov/blog/america-burning-50th-anniversary/) p. 7 8 Hall, S. (November 2023). Fire loss in the United States during 2022. Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association. https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/home-and-community/safety-topics/fire-related-fatalities-and-injuries/

Support the Fire Department to Fund a Program Manager II Position CONSENT CALENDAR May 7, 2024
Street trauma is a serious public safety problem that is worsening nationally, particularly among pedestrians.

After a 40% decline over the 21 years between 1988 and 2009, national trends show a 77% increase in pedestrian fatalities from traffic collisions over the 11 year period from 2010 to 2021, with preliminary data showing a spike in 2022 that will bring the total increase during this period to 89% (Figure 4).9 All other traffic fatalities increased 25% during the period 2010 to 2021.10 This striking increase in pedestrian deaths is attributed to multiple causes, the most fundamental being a U.S. transportation system that is “designed to move cars quickly, not to move people safely.” 11
Figure 4. U.S. pedestrian fatalities resulting from traffic collisions, 1980—2022. 9 Governor’s Highway Safety Association (June 2023). Pedestrian Traffic Fatalities by State—2022 Preliminary Data, January-December. (Pedestrian Traffic Fatalities by State: 2022 Preliminary Data | GHSA). (p. 11). 10 Governor’s Highway Safety Association (June 2023). Ibid. (p. 5). 11 Emily Badger and Alicia Parlapiano (Nov 27, 2022). The Exceptionally American Problem of Rising Roadway Deaths. The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/27/upshot/road-deaths-pedestrians- cyclists.html). See also: Amanda Holpuch (June 27, 2022). U.S. Pedestrian Deaths Are at Highest Level in 41 Years, Report Says. The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/27/us/pedestrian-deaths- 2022.html). Simon Romero (Feb 14, 2022) Pedestrian Deaths Spike in U.S. as Reckless Driving Surges. The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/14/us/pedestrian-deaths- pandemic.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article).

Support the Fire Department to Fund a Program Manager II Position CONSENT CALENDAR May 7, 2024
*Projected based on data for the first six months of 2022.

First Reading Vote: Ayes – Katrz, Wilson, Bradstreet, Kinosian, Dean, Raine, Gordon; Noes – None; Abstain – Murphy

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
There are no identifiable environmental effects, climate impacts, or sustainability opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Department has an important role to play in preventing street trauma, while also ensuring an effective response to it.

Research shows that street trauma can be reduced through hardened, engineered traffic controls.12,13,14 There is concern, however, that such protections could affect Department response times to critical emergency medical incidents, as well as response times and access by fire equipment to structural fires. Travel time from the scene of an emergency to the hospital 12 Marshall W, Ferenchak N (2019). Why cities with high bicycling rates are safer for all road users. J. of Transport and Health 13:285-301.
(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214140518301488?via%3Dihub). Accessed January 28, 2024.
13 Aaron Short (May 29, 2019) Separated bike lanes means safer streets, study says. Streetsblog. (https://usa.streetsblog.org/2019/05/29/protect-yourself-separated-bike-lanes-means-safer-streets-study-says).

Accessed January 28, 2024.
14 City of Cambridge, MA, Environmental and Transportation Planning Division (October 2023). Bicycling in Cambridge. Data Report 2023. (https://www.cambridgema.gov/- /media/Files/CDD/Transportation/Bike/bikereports/20231023bicyclingincambridgedatareport_final.pdf).

Accessed January 28, 2024.

Support the Fire Department to Fund a Program Manager II Position CONSENT CALENDAR May 7, 2024
by the Department’s paramedic ambulances could also be affected. These concerns warrant careful evaluation because the survival of a subset of persons who call 911 can hinge on the speed of fire response and subsequent transport to the hospital.

Implementing a street trauma prevention (STP) program will require a mission change within the Department.

Building a street trauma prevention (STP) program is essential to meeting the City’s stated goals of Vision Zero. It will require sufficient staff and resources to support the Department’s ability to perform analysis, interdepartmental coordination, program design, and implementation.

The Berkeley Fire Department is a progressive department that is well-positioned to offer the citizens of Berkeley, and of California, a new vision of the fire service that calls attention to the importance of both rapid response and effective prevention in the area of street trauma. To be successful, this will require the Department to adopt street trauma prevention as a core element of its public safety mission, just as the fire service adopted a prevention function within its fire suppression mission over the last 50 years, with remarkable success.

A Program Manager II is needed to establish and build the STP program. The STP program will coordinate with other City departments and commissions to integrate the Department’s perspectives on both response and prevention into the City’s traffic safety projects related to Vision Zero and other policies.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
No alternative actions. Relying on existing staff to establish and build the STP program is not sustainable, given existing workloads.

CITY MANAGER
The City Manager refers this recommendation to the Budget Process.

CONTACT PERSON
Dave Sprague, Fire Chief, Fire Department, 510-981-3473 Keith May, DFSC Secretary, Fire Department, 510-981-5508

Office of the City Manager
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: https://berkeleyca.gov/

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Disaster and Fire Safety Commission
Submitted by: Weldon Bradstreet, Chairperson
Subject: Use of Measure FF to Support Understory Mitigation

RECOMMENDATION
That the Berkeley City Council pass a resolution to support the Fire Department in using Measure FF funds to conduct one-time eucalyptus understory clean-ups on select, participating private properties within the City.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
This program would use existing budgeted funds and requires no additional financial authority from the Council. Measure FF provides approximately $8.5 million annually to support fire services, emergency response, 9-1-1 communication, hazard mitigation, and wildfire prevention. The Department allocated $1,000,000 in the FY24 and FY25 budget for the purpose of supporting vegetation management activities.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
Climate change is increasing the frequency and intensity of critical fire weather conditions and proactive fuel reduction is the safest, cheapest, and easiest way to reduce the likelihood of extreme fire behavior. This one-time program would provide funding to residents to help offset the costs associated with bringing properties into compliance with best practice hazardous vegetation management practices. Following participation in this program residents will be required to maintain properties in adherence with the Fire Code.

Large portions of the Berkeley Hills contain high levels of hazardous fuels on private property and responsibility for fuel reduction and its associated costs falls solely to property owners. Eucalyptus trees, such as Eucalyptus globulus, possess fire-adapted qualities that contribute to fire risk but are also extremely expensive to remove due to their size and
age. Planted in plantations over 100 years ago, eucalyptus groves can produce between 10 to 30 tons of dry matter per acre per year and can threaten entire neighborhoods because of their fire-adapted qualities, especially their production of highly flammable deciduous bark that can create catastrophic ember storms. Left unmaintained, eucalyptus bark can rapidly accumulate as hazardous ground and ladder

Use of Measure FF to Support Understory Mitigation CONSENT CALENDAR May 7, 2024

fuels that can result in rapid ground fire spread or support the propagation of a crown fire, in which a wildfire spreads through a forest canopy and is the most extreme form of fire behavior that could threaten the entire city.

The understory clean up would consist of fuels management as determined by the inspecting fire department personnel, beyond 100 feet of structures , to include maintaining the trunks of trees so that they are free of hanging bark and debris to a height of at least eight (8) feet; limbing trees and shrubs by removing branches that are within eight feet (8 ft.) of the ground, or four times the height of the understory vegetation, whichever is greater; removing subordinate trees, removing eucalyptus saplings and sprouts with diameters of less than 8 inches, and removing all flammable ground fuel.

At the December 6, 2023 meeting, the commission took the following action:

Motion to approve as amended: Bradstreet
Second: Murphy
Vote:
6 Ayes: M. Wilson, R. Kinosian, S. Dean, G. Murphy, W. Bradstreet. H. Raine, T. Gordon
0 Noes;
2 Absent: T. Darling, A. Katz.
0 Abstain.

BACKGROUND
Throughout the history of the East Bay Hills, humans have influenced the local ecology, beginning with thousands of years of regular burning by Native Americans, such as the Ohlone, Bay Miwok, Chochenyo peoples1. Later, European settlers continued these practices for maintenance of grasslands for cattle grazing. Eucalyptus plantations were first established toward the end of the 19th century in the East Bay Hills. Following the end of widespread grazing, the unmanaged growth of eucalyptus and the establishment of the East Bay Regional Park system, the landscape began to transition towards shrubland and, eventually, an urban forest. By 1923, fuel loads were high enough to sustain the East Bay's first catastrophic wildfire, the 1923 Berkeley Fire that entered the city and destroyed 640 structures. Following the Berkeley Fire, the East Bay experienced regular cycles of catastrophic fire every 18-24 years2.The last catastrophic wildfire, the Tunnel Fire, occurred 32 years ago.
1 Keeley, J. E. (2005). Fire history of the San Francisco East Bay region and implications for landscape patterns.

International Journal of Wildland Fire, 14(3), 285.
2 Sprague, D. “Disaster & Fire Safety Commission: FY23 Review / FY24 Goals” Presentation, Berkeley, October 2023

Use of Measure FF to Support Understory Mitigation CONSENT CALENDAR May 7, 2024

One major event contributing to the alteration of the East Bay Hills occurred in 1972 with a prolonged freeze, that damaged numerous eucalyptus trees and giving rise to concerns about increased wildfire hazards3. In response, Governor Ronald Reagan declared a State of Emergency, making federal funds available for fire hazard reduction work.

The East Bay Regional Park District subsequently received a federal grant of $1.3 million to create a 25-mile-long fuel break between Anthony Chabot Regional Park and Tilden Regional Park. The project aimed to mitigate the heightened wildfire risk by clearing 400 acres of freeze-damaged trees in the first year. Multiple agencies, including the State of California, EBMUD, the University of California, PG&E, and the cities of Oakland and Berkeley, collaborated in this emergency effort. Between 1972 and 1979, these agencies collectively spent $6.7 million on freeze-related eucalyptus removal.

The effort involved the removal of dead and damaged trees, along with flammable debris, using contractors. Usable tree material was transported for paper production, but the stumps were not removed or treated with herbicide, so the stumps sprouted new stems (a natural type of reproduction known as coppice). The new coppice forest grew in dense canopies that escalated the fire hazard. Over 40 years later, the problem of coppiced eucalyptus trees remains, posing an increased threat of high wildfire severity.

The aftermath of the freeze revealed challenges in managing the coppiced eucalyptus.

The lack of consistent and comprehensive efforts to address the issue has allowed these trees to persist, exacerbating the wildfire risk in the East Bay Hills. CalFire has designated the region as a very high hazard severity zone, underscoring the urgent need for effective vegetation management.

Today, much of the East Bay Hills remains covered in flammable vegetation, often on private property4. The Berkeley FireSafe Council, consisting of resident volunteers, regularly takes the initiative to clear out and maintain the constantly shedding debris of the eucalyptus groves.

They sponsor community workdays and engage students in educational experiences to clear out the groves. However, dense eucalyptus groves can produce between 10-30 tons of bark per acre per year, posing a significant threat as flaming eucalyptus bark can cast embers up to 40 miles ahead of a fire front as was seen in the 2009 Australian Black Saturday bushfires5 and the 2017 Portugal Firestorm. Mitigating the magnitude of this risk exceeds the capacity of local grassroots efforts.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
3 Kent, J. (2020, March 2). Aerial views of eucalyptus trees in UC’s Hill campus before and after the 1972 freeze. Claremont Canyon Conservancy
4 McBride, J. R., &amp; Kent, J. (2019). The failure of planning to address the urban interface and Intermix Fire- hazard problems in the San Francisco Bay Area. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 28(1), 1. 5 Cruz, M.G., Sullivan, A.L., Gould, J.S., Sims, N.C., Bannister, A.J., Hollis, J.J., and Hurley, R.J. 2012. Anatomy of a catastrophic wildfire: the Black Saturday Kilmore East fire in Victoria, Australia. Forest Ecology and Management, 284: 269-285.

Use of Measure FF to Support Understory Mitigation CONSENT CALENDAR May 7, 2024

Climate change is increasing the frequency of critical fire weather conditions resulting in elevated fire risk for the City of Berkeley. Acting on these recommendations will reduce the likelihood, intensity and severity of a wildfire in the City, potentially avoiding devastating and far- reaching human and environmental impacts in our City. Burnt landscapes can lead to polluted water sources, erosion or landslides, and health impacts from toxic airborne ash. Within forest ecosystems, high severity wildfire often leads to deforestation, the loss of forest carbon sinks, and conversion of biomass into carbon emissions. Reduction of fire risk may require the use of machinery that contributes to local carbon emissions but is overall significantly lower than the level of emissions to be released during a high severity wildfire. The removal of vegetation through management maintains carbon sequestration within biomass and seeks to ensure the longevity of forest carbon sinks.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Climate change is increasing the likelihood of catastrophic wildfire in the City of Berkeley. Fuel reduction is a key strategy to lower wildfire risk, however most hazardous fuels within the City exist on private property. Many private property owners may be unable to mitigate fuels due to disability or cost-prohibitive labor. Eucalyptus understory constitutes a hazardous fuel and a difficult one to remove. Private property owners may benefit from one-time financial assistance to remove eucalyptus debris from their properties.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
The City of Berkeley is currently exploring Residential Assistance Programs that financially support homeowner wildfire mitigation; however, this program will provide limited support and participation is only eligible to residents who meet specific criteria such as household income, disability, and age.

Alternatives to this recommendation would be for Council to adopt an ordinance requiring property owners to clear hazardous fuel buildup on their entire property at their own expense, and enforcing that requirement, or to continue to leave this wildfire fuel untreated.

CITY MANAGER
The City Manager concurs with this report.

CONTACT PERSON
Keith May, Secretary, Disaster and Fire Safety Commission, 510-981-3473 Attachments:
1: Resolution

RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

Resolution to Mitigate Hazardous Eucalyptus Understory on Participating Properties WHEREAS, climate change is increasing the frequency of critical fire weather conditions and elevating fire risk within California, and WHEREAS, hazardous fuel mitigation is the safest and most effective method to reducing wildfire risk; and
WHEREAS, private property owners bear responsibility for mitigating wildfire risk on their property whether or not they have the physical or financial capacity to do so; and WHEREAS, eucalyptus, such as Eucalyptus globulus exist in groves throughout private property in high fire risk areas in the City of Berkeley and may create between 10 to 30 tons per acre of hazardous debris each year; and
WHEREAS, Measure FF, passed with 74.6% voter approval, seeks to support wildfire prevention and hazard mitigation, and may be utilized to support residents’ reduction of risk from eucalyptus groves.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that pass an ordinance resolution to support the Berkeley Fire Department to apply Measure FF funds to conduct one- time eucalyptus understory clean-ups on select, participating properties.

Office of the Mayor
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7100 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7199 E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024
To: Honorable Members of the City Council
From: Mayor Jesse Arreguín
Subject: Budget Referral: $70,000 to the FY 2025-2026 Budget Process for Supply Bank School Supply Distribution

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the FY 2025-2026 budget process $70,000 for Supply Bank ($35k for each fiscal year) to support their services in providing essential school supplies to Berkeley families.

BACKGROUND
Supply Bank, formerly known as K to College, plays an important role in the community by purchasing and distributing school supplies to low-income students. Founded by a group of UC Berkeley students, a pilot program launched in Berkeley in 2009. Over the past 15 years, Supply Bank has grown to support kids in need in more than 300 school districts in California.

The mission of Supply Bank is to provide homeless and other underserved children with the tangible resources they need to achieve. Supply Bank operates the School Supply and Dental Kit Initiatives, intended for low-income students to help ensure that they are able to start the school year off on equal footing as their counterparts and provides the basic oral healthcare necessities: a toothbrush, toothpaste, and floss to ensure that oral health issues do not stand in the way of student’s academic success.

In partnership with the Berkeley Unified School District, the City of Berkeley, and related partners, in 2023 SupplyBank.Org provided 1,300 low-income residents grade- appropriate school supply kits and dental kits. The School Supply Distribution and Resource Fair is their flagship program, which will enter its 15th year this year.

The City Council has consistently approved the budget request to Supply Bank. To help support the program and ensure it will be operational in the long term, this budget referral will cover the next two fiscal years, with $35,000 being allocated in both FY 2025 and FY 2026, for a total of $70,000.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
$70,000

Internal
FY23-24 Budget Referral: Supply Bank CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
There are no environmental impacts associated with the recommendations in this report.

CONTACT PERSON
Mayor Jesse Arreguín 510-981-7100
Attachments:
1) Supply Bank One-Pag

Internal

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024
To: Honorable Members of the City Council
From: Mayor Jesse Arreguín
Subject: Budget Referral: Replenishing Business Damage Mitigation Fund

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-2026 Budget Process $50,000 to replenish the business damage mitigation fund providing one-time grants to small businesses who experience property damage due to vandalism and other problematic behavior.

BACKGROUND
On June 2, 2020, Council passed a referral to the FY 2021 Budget Process to establish a COVID-19 Business Damage Mitigation Fund in an amount up to $100,000 to provide one-time grants to small businesses who experience property damage due to vandalism and other problematic behavior during this COVID-19 local State of Emergency. The 2020 Council referral also set conditions on the use of grant funds: 1) grants limited per incident to the amount of the affected party’s deductible or $3,000 whichever is greater; 2) limit to two grants per business; 3) prioritize repair of exterior damage; and 4) prioritize small independent businesses in need.

A total of $85,000 was allocated to the Downtown Berkeley Association for administration of the grant program. Grants were to mitigate damage caused to businesses, such as removing graffiti, replacing broken windows, doors or furniture, or cleaning and sanitizing business site or property. Given available resources the maximum grant was $2,500 per business. The funds were exhausted in 2022 and there was more demand for funding then there were resources.

Many businesses are still rebounding from the pandemic and have not seen the same level of business activity as before the pandemic. Some businesses are also dealing with significant public safety issues, which sometimes results in vandalism. To assist small businesses with maintenance of their property in response to damage or vandalism, and to keep our businesses going to create economic activity and jobs, we are proposing to replenish and re-launch the Business Damage Mitigation Fund. If funded this create a positive driving force to attract more small business, retain existing small businesses, and demonstrate our commitment as a City to the evolving needs circumstances that create financial constraints on our businesses.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
$50,000 from the City’s General Fund as part of the 20245/2026 biennial budget process.

Internal
[Title of Report] CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

CONTACT PERSON
Mayor Jesse Arreguín 510-981-7100
Anthony Rodriguez, Senior Legislative Assistant
Attachments:
1: Executed contract with Berkeley Downtown Association and annotated agenda from May 26, 2020 Council Meeting, November 6, 2020.

2. Original referral to the City Manager Establishing a COVID-19 Business Mitigation Fund dated June 2, 2020

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7100 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7199 E-Mail: [email protected]

ACTION CALENDAR
May 26, 2020
To: Members of the City Council
From: Mayor Jesse Arreguín (Author), Councilmembers Kate Harrison (Author) and Rigel Robinson (Author)
Subject: Establishing a COVID-19 Business Damage Mitigation Fund

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the City Manager to establish a COVID-19 Business Damage Mitigation Fund in an amount up to $100,000 to provide one-time grants to small businesses who experience property damage due to vandalism and other problematic behavior during this COVID-19 local State of Emergency

BACKGROUND
The local Shelter in Place order, which initially went into effect on March 17, prohibits in- person dining and retail activity. This has created a significant decrease in revenues to local businesses which has resulted in layoffs and in some extreme cases permanent closures. Additionally, many of our commercial districts are empty throughout the day, which means that those businesses that are still in operation see limited foot traffic, leaving employees vulnerable to aggressive behavior. Based on preliminary figures from the Berkeley Police Department, crime in most areas during the year to date has gone down compared to this time last year. However, one notable exception to this is a

10.4% increase in thefts. Specifically, petty theft (a loss less than $950) is up 7.4% and grand theft (a loss of more than $950) is up by 56.4% - a spike attributed in part to a rise in catalytic converter thefts. While these preliminary numbers have not been fully vetted, they are believed to be solid indicators of the crime situation in Berkeley.

During this COVID-19 emergency, City staff have received numerous complaints from local businesses regarding problematic and violent behavior, including assault of employees and property damage. As a result of increased criminal activity, the Berkeley Police Department have deployed overtime shifts in Telegraph and the Downtown to increase police patrols to respond more quickly to calls for service and to increase police presence to deter crime. While the deployment of the Downtown Task Force has provided additional presence and support for businesses, crime is still occuring.

Businesses have specifically requested that the City establish a Damage Mitigation Fund to provide one-time funding for repairs to local businesses occurring as a result of vandalism and other problematic behavior during this COVID-19 State of Emergency.

Establishing a COVID-19 Business Damage Mitigation Fund ACTION CALENDAR May 26, 2020

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Up to $100,000.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
There are no identifiable environmental impacts from the recommendation

CONTACT PERSON
Mayor Jesse Arreguín 510-981-7100
Attachments:
1) Letter from business associations requesting Damage Mitigation Fund 2) Report on vandalism from the Downtown Berkeley Association and the Telegraph Business Improvement District

May 4, 2020 - VIA EMAIL

Mayor Jesse Arreguin and City Council
City of Berkeley
2180 Milvia St., Berkeley, CA 94704

Dear Mayor and City Council,

Our merchants and property owners need help NOW with a Damage Mitigation Fund due to extraordinary adverse impacts related to the coronavirus on their businesses, employees, and livelihoods. Since the Shelter in Place order went into effect on March 16, merchants and property owners in the Downtown and Telegraph commercial districts have sustained a significant increase in property damage and deeply disturbing behaviors.

Not only are we experiencing a significant increase in the homeless population (60% increase Downtown), but also a small subset of homeless and/or street population are engaging in very aggressive behaviors. Many know they will not be jailed for illegal behaviors because of the COVID related mandate from the California Judicial Council. Moreover, there is absence of students, workers, and residents in our districts, that usually have a moderating impact on behavior norms.

As per attached examples this violent behavior has included multiple broken windows, doors and fixtures; and well as spreading of feces, firing extinguishers, throwing furniture, assaulting employees, etc. Just this past Saturday a woman entered McDonalds on at University and Shattuck and went behind counter and into the kitchen touching equipment and employees and ripping out cabling and damaging point-of-sale system.

Understandably their employees were terrified. Moreover, McDonalds had to shut down and bring in a decontamination company to insure the kitchen and food preparation was safe to resume operations.

In addition to this damage, most our businesses have experienced a serious decline in revenues due to the coronavirus and the Shelter in Place order. Many businesses have been forced to close, and many essential businesses and restaurants doing take-out and delivery are hanging on by a thread with sales down often 50% to 80%. And then they have to deal with wanton property damage, that is traumatizing and they cannot afford.

While we appreciate BPD’s efforts for increased patrols, these courageous businesses need City support NOW to defray the cost of this property damage and clean up costs. Hence, we are requesting that the City set up a Damage Mitigation Fund for businesses and property owners in the Downtown and Telegraph commercial districts that immediately reimburses them documented property damage repair, third party cleaning expenses, and/or health or leave costs of traumatized employees, from the start of the Shelter in Place order on March 16 through as long as the order continues, or the fund is exhausted. It is the least we can do, and also the right thing to do, so they hopefully survive and we are not faced by lost businesses and vacancies in the heart of our great City.

Thank you for your timely consideration of this urgent matter.

Sincerely,

John Caner, CEO
Downtown Berkeley Association

Alex Knox, Executive Director
Telegraph Business Improvement District

CC: City Manager Dee Williams-Ridley

Merchant Vandalism
Telegraph Business District
Downtown Business District
Updated: April 28th, 2020

Sliver Pizzeria
2174 Shattuck Ave, Berkeley, CA 94704

Cancun Sabor Mexicano
2134 Allston Way, Berkeley, CA 94704

McDonalds 4/5
1998 Shattuck Ave, Berkeley, CA 94704

McDonalds 1/5
1998 Shattuck Ave, Berkeley, CA 94704

McDonalds 3/5
1998 Shattuck Ave, Berkeley, CA 94704

McDonalds 2/5
1998 Shattuck Ave, Berkeley, CA 94704

Barbarian Grub & Ale
2012 Shattuck Ave, Berkeley, CA 94704

Bank of America
2347 Telegraph Ave, Berkeley, CA 94704

2521 Telegraph Ave

Office of the Mayor
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7100 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7199 E-Mail: [email protected]

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024
To: Honorable Members of the City Council
From: Mayor Jesse Arreguín
Subject: Budget Referral: Cesar Chavez Solar Calendar Maintenance

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-2026 budget process to allocate $10,000 to the Kala Art Institute, the fiscal sponsor for the Chavez/Huerta Tribute Site, for the continued purpose of employing grounds keepers and providing the resources needed for the maintenance of the Cesar Chavez/Dolores Huerta Solar Calendar Site until May/June 2026.

BACKGROUND
The Chavez/Huerta Tribute Site1, located at Cesar Chavez Park along Spinnaker Way, is centered around a lush green space overlooking the Bay Area. Instead of a single statue or monument for the farmworker and labor organizer by which the park is named after, the site has intentionally developed as a urban solar/lunar calendar, along with a quartet of stones engraved with the four virtues of the Farmworkers Movement:

Determination, Courage, Hope, and Tolerance. The site draws from design concepts in art, astronomy, and architecture found at ancient and indigenous observatory sites from around the world. The site seeks to promote an understanding of the Rhythm of the Seasons, the work, life, and values of Cesar E. Chavez and Dolores Huerta, provide an outdoor classroom to study science, math, and culture, and create a space for reflection and peace along the Berkeley shoreline. The site also contains a virtual tour, which can be activated using your mobile device, and a physical, self-explanatory sign to assist visitors with utilizing the solar calendar and position of stones to understand its relationship to solstice and equinox.

While the Berkeley Parks Department does general maintenance and landscaping of Cesar Chavez Park, additional resources are needed to remove vegetation and maintain the site using hand crews. The Parks Department does not have the resources to do this additional work, so supplemental funding is needed. 1 https://chavezpark.org/cesar-chavez-memorial-solar-calendar/

Internal
[Title of Report] CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7100 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7199 E-Mail: [email protected]
To assist with the maintenance of the site, on July 11, 2023, Council passed a resolution allocating $5,000 from the Mayor’s and Councilmembers discretionary office budgets to fund maintenance. The Cesar Chavez Solar Calendar Project, the community group which helped develop the solar calendar, is requesting additional resources to maintain the site over the next two years. The funding would go towards fees associated with employing gardeners, hauling soil, conducting stone replacement, composting goods, grounds maintenance, upgrading signage, and paying the Kala Art Institute a fiscal agent fee, supplying them with the funds to sustain the continued efforts. The current $5,000 provides maintenance services completed in October/November 2023 and May/June 2024, with the additional $10,000 covering services completed in October/November 2024 and May/June 2025.2

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
$10,000 from the City’s General Fund as part of the 2025/2026 biennial budget process.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
There are no identifiable environmental effects or opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

CONTACT PERSON
Mayor Jesse Arreguín 510-981-7100
Anthony Rodriguez, Senior Legislative Assistant
Attachments:
1: Resolution passed on July 14, 2023 for Council Expenditures. 2 The exact month is determined by the amount of rain experienced at the site.

CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Councilmember Taplin
Subject: Budget Referral: SafeCity Connect Downtown Berkeley Pilot Program

RECOMMENDATION
Refer to the budget process $320,000 to fund a two-year public-private security camera program between SafeCity Connect (SafeCity) and the Downtown Berkeley Property- based Business Improvement District (PBID) for ten (10) locations. This public-private partnership will develop performance and compliance metrics pursuant to the City of Berkeley’s Surveillance Ordinance, report on metrics regarding criminal activity clearance rates, deterrence and reduction of criminal activity, and develop privacy and transparency protocols to govern the management and implementation of its camera program.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
$320,000 over a two-year period in General Fund impact. The proposed public-private partnership realizes significant unit cost savings relative to prior budget allocations, with approximately $32,000 per location, including installation and maintenance, representing approximately a 60% lower unit cost.1

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
In 2023, Berkeley saw a significant increase in Violent Crimes (15%) and Property Crimes (9.7%), with an alarming 61.5% increase in Auto Theft and Arson, respectively.

While shootings overall decreased, a 32% increase in Robbery was paired with a 5% increase of the share of robberies committed with a gun.

While the Berkeley Police Department continues with its recruitment effort, new sworn officers cannot be added quickly without the significant cost of attracting lateral hires, due to a highly competitive regional job market for law enforcement. This is reflected in BPD’s latest staffing data, which has been unable to keep pace with the rising rates of crimes reported since 2020.
1 Oct. 12, 2021 Budget Referral: https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2021-10- 12%20Item%2020%20Budget%20Referral%20Security%20Cameras%20-%20Rev%20Taplin.pdf

Budget Referral: SafeCity Connect CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024
Source: BPD Annual Report, 2023
There is a preponderance of criminology literature supporting a strong link between clearance rates (a criminal investigation being solved with an arrest) and deterrence of future criminal activity, in particular as the perceived risk of sanction among potential criminal actors changes “through a process consistent with rational Bayesian updating” (i.e. relative changes are more salient than absolute level of perceived risk).2 Cook et al (2019) have reported that a higher amount of hours investigating gun homicides appears to increase the clearance rate relative to non-fatal gun crimes.3 It is thus reasonable to infer that more successful investigations can deter future criminal activities.

In 2022, the Berkeley Police Department saw only a 3% increase in clearance rates for Robbery and Auto Theft, and a 5% decrease in clearance rates for Burglary and Arson, likely reflecting historically low staffing levels in the Department. (2023 clearance data is not yet available.) However, security cameras have been effective in helping solve Part One crimes in Berkeley, particularly the homicide of Anthony Joshua Fisher in 2022.4 Public-private partnerships to leverage technology for public safety investigations and deterrence of criminal activities is a Strategic Plan Priority Project, advancing our goal to create a resilient, safe, connected, and prepared city. 2 Pogarsky, Greg & Loughran, Thomas. (2016). The Policy-to-Perceptions Link in Deterrence: Time to Retire the Clearance Rate. Criminology & Public Policy. 15. 10.1111/1745-9133.12241. 3 See Attachment 3.
4 Raguso, E. (2022, Mar. 9). Berkeley shooting victim dies, longtime drug dealer charged with murder.

Berkeleyside. Retrieved from https://www.berkeleyside.org/2022/03/09/berkeley-homicide-seventh-street- drug-dealer-charged-murder

Budget Referral: SafeCity Connect CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024

BACKGROUND
The Downtown Berkeley Association has partnered with the San Francisco-based company SafeCity Connect to provide a cost estimate and implementation proposal for a public-private security camera program to provide BPD with additional resources to investigate and deter criminal activity.

As illustrated in BPD’s 2023 Annual Report, Downtown Berkeley has the highest concentration of calls for service in the entire city by a wide margin. BPD also reconfigured its beat structure to a 14-beat map to provide shorter response times.

Budget Referral: SafeCity Connect CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024
Source: Berkeley Police Department Annual Report, 2023
There are several benefits to this program, notably in unit costs and compliance, which can enable more efficient installation, operations, and maintenance, while still providing high-quality information for BPD criminal investigations.

First, as noted above, unit costs may be as much as 60% lower than security cameras allocated in previous budget cycles. Second, ensuring full compliance with the City of Berkeley’s civil rights laws and privacy protections is an essential part of the program itself, in addition to robust community engagement (see Attachment 2).

On January 30, 2024, the Berkeley City Council passed a budget referral for six additional security cameras with additional policy considerations. Specifically:

2. Direct the City Manager to engage with the Police Accountability Board on this proposal and request their feedback to Council within 30 days of submission. The Council will take its comments into consideration during subsequent steps for final approval for purchase and installation of cameras at approved locations.

3. Direct the City Manager to prepare targeted amendments to various pertinent surveillance technology reports and policies in order to provide extra transparency beyond what is explicitly required by the Berkeley Municipal Code and Berkeley Police Department Law Enforcement Manual.

Budget Referral: SafeCity Connect CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024
Security camera footage would be used solely in a manner consistent/compliant with existing ordinances and the Berkeley Police Department’s existing use policies, as enumerated in the Berkeley Municipal Code, the Berkeley Police Department Law Enforcement Manual. The cameras are not intended and would not be used for continuous surveillance purposes. Cameras should ideally be compatible with those already in use at San Pablo Park under Contract Nos. 31900080 and 31900205 and those deployed at other intersections throughout the city.5 The proposal provided to the Downtown Berkeley Association provides for policy development that is consistent with the policy aims expressed by City Council on January 30: :

Policy Development: Crafting clear, transparent policies in adherence to local and pertinent ordinances is critical.

SafeCity Connect collaborates with you to develop bespoke video program policies, covering essential areas such as:
● Video Usage: Deploying cameras strategically to enhance public safety and optimize personnel deployment.
● Video Privacy: Guaranteeing video technology is used ethically, respecting everyone's right to privacy in sensitive areas.
● Video Retrieval and Retention: Establishing protocols for secure access to footage and defining storage durations to manage the balance between quality, storage and privacy best practices.

While the resulting policies would apply only to the SafeCity – Downtown Berkeley PBID and the management and implementation of its program and would not be developed, overseen, or implemented by the City, these provisions help ensure that the SafeCity policies would be consistent with City policy goals and priorities.

SafeCity Connect provides the following background on successful implementation in the San Francisco Bay Area so far, including in Downtown Oakland and Union Square in San Francisco (see Attachment 2):

As of 2024, SafeCity Connect had deployed and networked over 1,500 camera sensors as part of geographically focused, public-private, community programs throughout the San Francisco Bay Area region. The approximate area of coverage now spans over 100 City Blocks throughout 6 Community Benefit Districts.
5 January 30, 2024 City Council Meeting Minutes: https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/city-council- meetings/2024-01-30%20Annotated%20Agenda%20-%20Council.pdf

Budget Referral: SafeCity Connect CONSENT CALENDAR
May 7, 2024

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Councilmember Taplin Council District 2 510-981-7120
Attachments:
1: SafeCity Connect Program Proposal Cover Letter
2: SafeCity Connect Program Proposal
3: Cook et al (2019)
4: Berkeley Police Department Annual Report (2023)

5. Reimagining Public Safety: Commission on the Status of Women presentation (April 17, 2023)

SafeCity Connect Downtown Berkeley
Phase 1 - Pilot Project
We are pleased to submit a comprehensive pilot project proposal for the SafeCity Connect Downtown Berkeley - Phase 1 initiative, aiming to develop and deploy a public-private camera program in one of the most vibrant merchant corridors. Our proposal outlines a detailed plan for rapid deployment, integration, operation, and potential expansion of the network, focusing on its primary use as an after-the-fact evidentiary tool for the Berkeley Police Department while fully aligning with the privacy guidelines and the Berkeley surveillance ordinance.

PROVEN TRACK RECORD
Our organization brings a proven track record from successful deployments in major Bay Area jurisdictions, including San Francisco and Oakland. These deployments have demonstrated the effectiveness of network-based cameras in providing quick and reliable evidence for law enforcement agencies, significantly aiding in crime-solving efforts. Our collaboration with local authorities and adherence to strict operating rules have ensured the privacy and civil liberties of the community are protected.

Union Square Business Improvement District (San Francisco, CA) ● 513 high-definition exterior cameras covering 27 city blocks of public space. ● 50 participating property owners including hotels, retailers, parking garages, commercial and multi-unit residential properties.
● 12 years of operation with hundreds of cases aided including organized retail crime, violent crime, traffic accidents, arson and property crime (including car break-ins and graffiti vandalism).
● In alignment with local CCSF COIT approved surveillance technology policies.

Successful evidentiary uses of SafeCity Connect camera programs:

● 52 Felony Counts, 7 indicted in Graffiti Case leading to 50% reduction ● 16 charged in “Rainbow Girls Crew” Ring
● 83% reduction in car break-ins at Sutter Stockton Garage ● Reckless driver was recording on social media
● Unprovoked Assault on a Homeless Man

RAPID DEPLOYMENT
The proposed network leverages rapid deployment technology and methodology, enabling swift installation on the exterior of privately owned buildings facing sidewalks and other public spaces. This strategy not only facilitates immediate operational capability but also minimizes visual and physical impact on the urban environment.

COST EFFECTIVENESS
In recognition of the evolving security needs and financial considerations, public-private camera networks offer a lower upfront and operating cost structure as compared to traditional Citywide video technology deployments. This approach ensures the project's sustainability and opens avenues for possible future expansion through public-private partnerships. Such collaborations could include co-funding arrangements with property owners, further enhancing the network's coverage and effectiveness.

OPEN PLATFORM
Moreover, the potential integration of SafeCity Connect public-private cameras into the City's own public camera technology presents a holistic and forward-thinking approach to urban safety. By combining resources and technologies, we can create a more complete operating system that amplifies the city's ability to protect its citizens and visitors.

FUTURE SCALABILITY
Our team is fully committed to working closely with the City of Berkeley, local businesses, and the community to ensure the successful implementation and operation of SafeCity Connect Downtown Berkeley - Phase 1. We are confident that this initiative will serve as a cornerstone for a safer and more secure downtown area, setting a benchmark for public-private safety collaborations.

We look forward to the opportunity to discuss our proposal in further detail and to answer any questions you may have. Thank you for considering our submission for this critical initiative.

Downtown Berkeley Association
SafeCity Connect Program Proposal
PRESENTED TO: DATE:

John Caner, CEO March 25, 2024
1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Objectives
Program Overview
Investment
Impact
About SafeCity Connect

STATEMENT OF WORK
SafeCity Connect:

INVESTMENT

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

FORENSIC-GRADE CAMERA NETWORK DESIGN
Adherence to Best Practices
Active Feedback
Determining Camera Locations

SAFECITY CONNECT SUPPORT CENTER
Establishing an “Always On” Service, Safety and Security Environment

SUCCESS FACTORS AND METRICS
Critical Success Factors
Success Metrics
Our T eam
Our Expertise

PROGRAM REFERENCES

REFERENCES AND ATTACHMENTS
2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Objectives
● Support Downtown Berkeley Safety Corridor Is broader efforts in creating a clean, safe, and economically vibrant environment for all.
● Contribute towards achieving greater public safety by providing forensic-grade evidence for after-the-fact investigatory use and a proven policy-based process. ● Raise awareness through community participation, outreach, and signage to help identify that video may be recorded in public places for everyone’s protection.

Program Overview
• T ailored program designed to support the Clean and Safe initiatives in the area. • Comprehensive coverage of public space for crime investigation and deterrence. • High-de
finition forensic-grade video surveillance cameras with day and night capabilities. • Protecting high traf fic and high-risk areas, supported by crime data. • End-to-end Managed Support Services and System Health Monitoring.

Investment
Please see Investment Overview page (p.5)
Impact
• Improved incident resolution with court-admissible forensic-grade evidence • Increased community engagement around public safety and public-private collaboration • Economic Development enablement through public safety About SafeCity Connect
• Professional services
firm specializing in design, development
and management of public-private video surveillance networks • 12+ years of private-public collaboration expertise
• Forensic video surveillance expertise with ex-CSI experts on staff • Proactive technical support services driven by real-time system diagnostics 3

STATEMENT OF WORK
SafeCity Connect:
• Develop a camera program, complete with policies, procedures, and necessary operating tools. • Provide a phased camera network deployment plan based on crime data, stakeholder input, and budget. • Deploy a high-de
finition video camera network in designated locations according to approved system design. • Provide ongoing technical support, training, maintenance, and program management services.

Downtown Berkeley Safety Corridor & Program Participants:
• Conduct community outreach for camera program adoption and installation coordination. • Designate a responsible point of contact for program development and implementation. • Adopt usage policies and procedures for the use of surveillance technology. • Grant access to the designated and approved equipment installation locations. • Provide power, network, and Internet connectivity (where applicable) and necessary space for all equipment and infrastructure pathways.
4

SAFECITY CONNECT DOWNTOWN BERKELEY
PHASE 1 - PILOT PROJECT

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Camera Program Development $50,000

SYSTEMS INTEGRATION
Phase 1 Camera Network Implementation
- 10 Participating locations
- 58 Camera Sensors
$175,000
MANAGEMENT & SUPPORT - 2 Years
SafeCity Connect Support Services $95,000
GRAND TOTAL $320,000
5

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SafeCity Connect's proposal for a public-private camera program represents an innovative approach to enhancing public safety. By leveraging advanced technology and fostering collaboration between the city, its residents, and the private sector, this initiative promises to not only improve crime prevention efforts but also strengthen the bonds within the community. We look forward to partnering to realize a safer, more connected urban environment.

1. Needs Assessment and Strategic Planning
● Engage with CBD leadership, stakeholders, law enforcement, and community leaders to outline program goals.
● Conduct a comprehensive review of current safety systems, identifying gaps and opportunities for integration.

2. Program Development and Integration
● Collaborate with technology partners to design the program architecture, ensuring scalability and interoperability with existing city and CBD infrastructure. ● Integrate new systems with current infrastructure, prioritizing data security and user accessibility.

3. Training and Deployment
● Organize training sessions for personnel and community stakeholders, focusing on program utilization, data privacy, and safety protocols.
● Implement the program in phases, ensuring minimal disruption and maximizing user adaptability.

4. Launch
● Announce the program launch through targeted communication channels, highlighting its bene fits and
key features.
● Activate a comprehensive support network to assist users and address any operational concerns.

5. Ongoing Management and Support
● Continuously monitor program performance, utilizing feedback to drive improvements and adjustments. ● Provide enduring training and support to ensure the program's long-term success and community bene
fit.
6

SAFECITY CONNECT PLATFORM
SafeCity Connect is your comprehensive partner in deploying effective, community-driven safety solutions. T ailored to the unique needs of Business Improvement Districts (BIDs), SafeCity Connect encompasses a holistic approach, blending community engagement, customized policies, state-of-the-art technology, and a collaborative ecosystem.

By embracing SafeCity's scalable infrastructure through a licensing agreement, BIDs can leverage a suite of tools and best practices designed to nurture and develop their SafeCity Programs.

Community Engagement: At the heart of a successful SafeCity Connect initiative is the endorsement and involvement of the community. We provide a suite of customizable outreach materials to ensure your program resonates with and is embraced by the community. From informative brochures explaining the SafeCity Connect mission to detailed maps highlighting safety hot spots and comprehensive guides on joining the program, every piece is designed to strengthen community ties and encourage active participation.

Contractual Framework: Our platform simpli
fies the complexity of public-private partnerships through ready-to-use Video Sharing Agreement templates. These agreements clarify the responsibilities of all parties, ensuring a seamless and efficient operation of the shared camera network.

Policy Development: Crafting clear, transparent policies in adherence to local and pertinent ordinances is critical.

SafeCity Connect collaborates with you to develop bespoke video program policies, covering essential areas such as:
● Video Usage: Deploying cameras strategically to enhance public safety and optimize personnel deployment. ● Video Privacy: Guaranteeing video technology is used ethically, respecting everyone's right to privacy in sensitive areas.
● Video Retrieval and Retention: Establishing protocols for secure access to footage and de fining storage
durations to manage the balance between quality, storage and privacy best practices.

Operational Excellence: We provide guidance in setting up your Video Control Center, ensuring it becomes a cornerstone of community safety by facilitating secure access to live and recorded footage, and maintaining the integrity of evidence. Our operational procedures are designed to ensure compliance with policies and deliver ef
ficient service to the community.

Advanced T echnology Platform:Built on cutting-edge video forensic technology and adhering to Open Platform standards, SafeCity Connect offers unparalleled flexibility and integration. From camera selection to Video System Management (VMS) software and a comprehensive Camera Registry, our platform is engineered to function seamlessly as a uni
fied system, without locking you into any proprietary technology.

SafeCity Connect is not just a platform; it's a commitment to community safety, operational clarity, and technological excellence. Partner with us to transform your BID into a safer, more connected community. 7

Forensic-Grade Camera Networks for Urban Safety
Implementing a robust urban camera network demands a strategic approach that ensures forensic-grade quality and effectiveness. This involves overcoming challenges such as optimal camera placement, environmental factors affecting visibility, and the need for clear, identi
fiable footage. Here’s a streamlined guide to achieving a high-standard surveillance system:

Best Practices Adherence
Ensuring compliance with guidelines from reputable bodies like the Law Enforcement and Emergency Services Video Association (LEVA) lays the foundation for a trustworthy and effective surveillance system. These best practices serve as a benchmark for quality, reliability, and community respect in camera program operations.

Strategic Camera Placement
Effective surveillance requires a methodical approach to camera placement, focusing on:
● High-Risk Area Prioritization: Key locations with high crime rates or foot traf fic should be covered
comprehensively to maximize the network's deterrent and investigative capabilities. ● Community and Law Enforcement Collaboration: Engaging with stakeholders helps identify essential surveillance spots, ensuring the network aligns with both safety needs and community values. ● Leveraging Crime Data: Utilizing historical crime data informs camera placement decisions, aiding in crime prevention and strategic security planning.
● Integrating Private CCTV Systems: Coordinating with private entities extends camera network coverage, filling gaps in public monitoring efficiently.

Maintaining Forensic-Quality Standards
Achieving high-quality footage involves several considerations:
● Camera Placement: Cameras should be positioned to avoid obstructions and backlit conditions, optimizing the potential for capturing clear, usable images.
● Lighting: Adequate lighting, particularly in nighttime conditions, is crucial for maintaining image clarity.

Surveillance areas must be well-lit, and cameras equipped to handle low-light conditions. ● T echnological Advancements: Incorporating technology like facial recognition and motion detection enhances the network's utility. However, balancing technological capabilities with ethical considerations is essential to maintain privacy rights.

Continuous Improvement
A successful forensic-grade camera network necessitates ongoing evaluation and adaptation. Regularly assessing footage quality, system functionality, and coverage effectiveness ensures the surveillance network evolves to meet changing needs and technologies.
8

SAFECITY CONNECT SUPPORT CENTER
Establishing an “ Always On” Service, Safety, and Security Environment The SafeCity Connect Support Center provides a single point of administration, management, oversight, and control of camera networks.

Proactive system diagnostics and reporting provide complete end-to-end visibility system performance – down to the individual device level.
▪ SYSTEM HEALTH MONITORING– vital system performance indicators are monitored using proprietary real-time diagnostics suite of software designed for proactive and anticipatory service.
▪ SOFTWARE UPDATES– systems are updated with latest software releases automatically “pushed” to include new upgrades, features and enhancements.
▪ HELP DESK – Knowledgeable staff ready to handle proactive system alerts, troubleshooting and problem resolution issues; frequently before they can affect system performance.
▪ REMOTE SUPPORT – signi
ficantly reduce time to resolve an issue through
secure remote access. 90% of support issues are resolved within 15 minutes of a remote support session.
▪ ON-DEMAND TRAINING – new system users bene
fit from proven and
structured system training services and video tutorials. ▪ HARDWARE DEPOT– replacement equipment is shipped in advance upon completion of remote diagnostics in order to minimize downtime and reduce field service visits.
9 “
SafeCity Connect
Managed Services
and Performance
Diagnostics
provide end-to-end
visibility of the
entire system,
reducing the risk of
after-the-fact
damage control
caused by lack of
insight on the true
measures of
surveillance system
performance” .

SUCCESS FACTORS AND METRICS
Critical Success Factors
• Instituting a project manager role for the purpose of monitoring and reviewing project progress and success.
• Solicit feedback speci fically from public and private sector stakeholders.

Success Metrics
The following are some of the proposed data points to be factored into the overall ROI Model for the Project:
● Examples of incidents resolved successfully using video footage. ● Number of requests and retrievals over time.
● Number of times video was used successfully in prosecution. ● Change in crime levels in the area where cameras were installed before and after installation. ● Community member survey responses prior to and following the installation of the camera network. ● Closer levels of collaboration with community members, law enforcement, and other stakeholders. ● Other metrics may include - changes in foot traffic patterns and operational efficiency gains through the use of the video network (i.e. street cleaning services).

Important Note: Achieving statistically significant reductions in crime can be difficult (i.e., crime reductions that clearly go beyond the level that might occur due to the normal fluctuations in the crime rate are difficult to prove). 10

About SafeCity Connect
SafeCity Connect, Inc. is a professional services and systems integrationfirm specializing in Network Video and Public-Private Collaboration Programs for a range of Cities and districts. SafeCity Connect also offers unique next-generation architecture that enables quality assurance for geographically distributed deployments. We assist our clients in all phases of technology deployment lifecycle, ranging from strategic planning through system design, implementation, and training.

Our T eam
SafeCity Connect is a professional services and systems integration firm specializing in design, deployment, and
management of community-based forensic-grade video networks. Our team is composed of experts in network technology, forensic video and crime scene investigations. We are uniquely qualified to assist customers in all phases of the program lifecycle from strategic planning, network design, project management, program launch, and ongoing technical support and reporting.

Our Expertise
We are experts in the latest technologies for local and wide-area networking, telecommunications, system integration, and business process modeling and automation. The team has been responsible for hundreds of projects in the areas of physical security, business intelligence, and global enterprise-grade IT project deployments. 11

PROGRAM REFERENCES
SafeCity Connect specializes in delivering turn-key public-private camera programs to districts and municipalities.

As of 2024, SafeCity Connect had deployed and networked over 1,500 camera sensors as part of geographically focused, public-private, community programs throughout the San Francisco Bay Area region. The approximate area of coverage now spans over 100 City Blocks throughout 6 Community Bene fit Districts.

Union Square Business Improvement District (San Francisco, CA) - 480+ camera sensors across 50+ participating locations, covering over 25 city blocks. - Successful public safety video surveillance project covering high-traf fic and high-risk areas with high-definition video surveillance
- Broad range of professional services supporting implementation and use of video surveillance technology
Uptown Downtown Oakland, CA (Oakland, CA)
- 200+ camera sensors covering over 12 city blocks.
- Successful public safety video surveillance project covering high-traf fic and high-risk areas with high-definition video surveillance
- Broad range of professional services supporting implementation and use of video surveillance technology
12

REFERENCES AND ATTACHMENTS
a. White Paper on Forensic Video Best Practices – CSI Perspective b. T echnology Architecture Blueprint
13

14 SafeCity Connect
2601 Mission Street
Suite 401
San Francisco, CA 94110
www.safecityconnect.com
Phone
(415) 824-1717
[email protected]
Copyright © 2024 SafeCity Connect

DOI: 10.1111/1745-9133.12451

RESEARCH ARTICLE

SHOOTING CLEARANCE RATES
Why do gun murders have a higher clearance rate
than gunshot assaults?
Philip J. Cook 1 Anthony A. Braga2 Brandon S. Turchan2
Lisa M. Barao2
1Duke University
2Northeastern University
Correspondence
Philip J. Cook, Sanford School of Public Policy,
Duke University, 218 Rubenstein Hall, Box
90312, Durham, NC 27708-0245.

Email: [email protected]
This research was supported by funds pro-
vided by the U.S. Bureau of Justice Assis-
tance (Award #2011-DB-BX-0014) and the
Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston. We
would like to thank Boston Mayor Martin
Walsh, Boston Police Commissioner William
Gross, former Boston Police Commissioner
William Evans, Deputy Chief of Staff Desiree
Dusseault, Superintendent-in-Chief Gregory
Long, Captain Detective James Hasson, Lieu-
tenant Detective Darrin Greeley, Sergeant
Detective Catherine Doherty, and the Boston
Police Department homicide unit and district
detectives for their valuable assistance in the
completion of this research. We would also like
to thank John MacDonald and Greg Ridgeway
for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of
this article. Points of view in this document are
those of the authors and do not necessarily rep-
resent the official position of the U.S. Bureau
of Justice Assistance, City of Boston, or the
Boston Police Department.

Research Summary: The prevailing view is that follow-
up investigations are of limited value as crimes are primar- ily cleared by patrol officers making on-scene arrests and through the presence of eyewitnesses and forensic evidence at the initial crime scene. We use a quasi-experimental design to compare investigative resources invested in clear- ing gun homicide cases relative to nonfatal gun assaults in Boston. We find the large gap in clearances (43% for gun murders vs. 19% for nonfatal gun assaults) is primarily a result of sustained investigative effort in homicide cases made after the first 2 days.

Policy Implications: Police departments should invest
additional resources in the investigation of nonfatal gun assaults. When additional investigative effort is expended, law enforcement improves its success in gaining the coop- eration of key witnesses and increases the amount of foren- sic evidence collected and analyzed. In turn, the capacity of the police to hold violent gun offenders accountable, deliver justice to victims, and prevent future gun attacks is enhanced.

KEYWORDS
clearance, detectives, homicide, investigations, shootings Fatal and nonfatal gunshot assaults are similar with respect to victim characteristics and circumstances, yet the clearance-by-arrest rates tend to be considerably higher for fatal cases. One plausible reason for this disparity is that police departments give higher priority to the fatal cases, which in larger cities are assigned to homicide detective squads. In comparison with the detectives who are assigned aggra- vated assault cases, homicide detectives tend to have a lighter case load and greater access to forensic Criminology & Public Policy. 2019;18:525–551. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/capp © 2019 American Society of Criminology 525

526 COOK ET AL .
evidence. A second possibility is witnesses are more inclined to cooperate with a police investigation if the victim dies. 1
The following contrast between police investigations of fatal and nonfatal gunshot cases is potentially useful both for basic research on police science and for informing policy:
 From a research perspective, the contrast provides evidence on the extent to which the success rates of police investigations of serious violent crimes may be affected by the resources expended in these investigations.
 From a policy perspective, the contrast provides a basis for assessing the value of increasing police resources allocated to investigation of gun violence, in particular, for nonfatal gunshot cases. For the prevention of future gun attacks, clearing nonfatal gunshot assault cases is as important as clearing homicides.

In this article, we use 5 years of data (2010–2014) from the Boston Police Department (BPD) that include all gun homicides and a sample of criminal cases in which the victim survived a gunshot wound. In particular, we analyze the 204 shooting cases that included at least one homicide, as well as a representative sample of 231 shooting cases in which no one died. Detailed data were collected from police investigation files, forensic evidence databases, and interviews with detectives. Data items included information on the circumstances and medical outcome of the shooting, characteristics of the victim, measures of the amount of evidence collected during the investigation by the BPD, and detective reports of the key reasons for the success or failure of the investigation. Our quasi-experimental analysis of these data results in the following findings relevant to the research and policy:
 The two groups of cases, fatal and nonfatal, are statistically indistinguishable with respect to cir- cumstances, with the sole exception of whether the shooting was indoors or outdoors. The former is more lethal.
 The clearance-by-arrest rate for gun homicide cases was more than twice as high as the corresponding rate for gunshot assault cases (43% and 19%, respectively). That difference would possibly be still larger except for the fact that homicide arrests (but not assault cases) were subject to prior review for probable cause by the district attorney.
 For both fatal and nonfatal cases, the likelihood of arrest is higher for cases involving personal dis- putes or domestic violence than for cases arising from gang- and drug-related disputes. But regardless of circumstance, fatal cases have a higher clearance rate compared with nonfatal.  The arrest rates during the 2 days immediately following the shooting, however, are the same for fatal and nonfatal cases, 11%. The fatal–nonfatal difference in arrest rates emerges in the much higher rate of homicide arrests that occur subsequently, sometimes months after the shooting. We tentatively interpret the equal success rate during the first 2 days as reflecting the importance of a latent dimen- sion of shooting cases, which we label the “intrinsic difficulty of solution.” Easy cases are solved quickly and without the need for the extra resources deployed in homicide investigations. Given the similarity in fatal and nonfatal case distributions, we expect that the prevalence of easy cases would be about the same in homicides as in nonfatal cases.
 As in other cities, BPD’s homicide unit has lighter caseloads and priority access to the crime lab and other units of the police force. Based on a variety of indicators, the initial crime-scene investigations yielded more evidence of various sorts. The commitment of additional resources to homicide cases is also evident from comparing the amount of evidence collected outside of the crime scene.  Most successful investigations have as one key source of evidence the information provided by a cooperating eyewitness. Excluding exceptional clearances, that source was named as the key in

COOK ET AL . 527
solving the case for 28% of all homicide investigations (67% of arrests) compared with just 14% of all nonfatal investigations (77% of arrests).
 The direct connection with effort is clear for collecting other types of evidence, such as ballistic and video evidence, latent prints, and analysis of phone calls. One or more of those were mentioned as the key to success more than 100 times in homicide cases but only 24 times in nonfatal cases.  In sum, the comparison of these similar groups of cases, distinguished by the random event of whether a gunshot wound proves fatal, allows for us to quantify how much more evidence is collected in fatal than in nonfatal cases, and to bracket the effect of the additional effort on the clearance rate.

The observed difference in clearance by arrest is 24 percentage points (43% vs. 19%). This gap is entirely a result of arrests made after the first 2 days, which suggests that the more sustained effort in homicide cases is an important part of the difference. Much of that difference is associated with the greater success in gaining the cooperation of key witnesses. 1 EVOLVING EVIDENCE BASE ON THE PRODUCTIVITY

OF POLICE INVESTIGATIONS
Early researchers on criminal investigators were divided on the effectiveness of criminal investigators in solving crime. Eck (1992) categorized these two competing perspectives as (1) the circumstance– result hypothesis, in which circumstances determine case outcomes, with little or no contribution from investigative effort; and (2) the effort–result hypothesis, in which the work of criminal investigators substantially affects the likelihood of solving a crime. Although the findings of several studies demon- strate support to the former claim (Ericson, 1982; Reiss, 1971; Reiss & Bordua, 1967; Royal Commis- sion on Criminal Procedure, 1981), the most prominent was a landmark study conducted by the RAND Corporation. The authors of the study concluded that investigators contributed little to solving a case (Greenwood, Chaiken, & Petersilia, 1977; Greenwood & Petersilia, 1975). In several studies of that era, however, researchers found that investigative activities and management practices could positively affect the odds of clearing a case (Bloch & Bell, 1976; Bloch & Weidman, 1975; Folk, 1971; Ward, 1971). The Police Executive Research Forum examined investigative practices in three U.S. cities in 1979 and found that even though circumstances are important, investigative practices did influence the probability of a case being cleared (Eck, 1983, 1992).

In evaluating the techniques and overall efficacy of crime investigation, it is important to distinguish between types of crime. Unlike most property crimes, violent crimes typically involve eyewitnesses (the victim, for one), and so eyewitnesses figure importantly in successful investigations. The RAND study mentioned earlier (Greenwood & Petersilia, 1975) included a detailed study of investigation data from Kansas City, Missouri, and the authors found that in 35% of successful homicide investigations, and in fully 63% of successful investigations of aggravated assault, the victim or a witness identified the suspect (Chaiken, Greenwood, & Petersilia, 1976). But it should be pointed out that the importance of witnesses in solving these cases does not imply that detective work gets none of the credit. Not infre- quently, key witnesses are reluctant to talk, so that success requires locating witnesses and persuading them to cooperate.

More recently, researchers have analyzed the specific techniques used by investigators in serious crimes. It should be noted that most of this research has been descriptive and has not included clear statistical identification of a causal effect. For example, on the basis of an analysis of homicides in four large cities in 1994 and 1995, Wellford and Cronin (1999) identified several investigation-related factors that were associated with the likelihood of arrest, including what the first responding officer did at the scene, how quickly a detective arrived on the scene, whether the crime lab and medical

528 COOK ET AL .
examiner’s officer were informed, the number of detectives assigned to the case, and how the scene was documented. Other research results have indicated police departments can improve homicide clearance rates by training detectives and other personnel involved in investigations (Keel, Jarvis, & Muirhead, 2009), implementing case management systems (Richardson & Kosa, 2001), establishing collaborative relationships with external agencies (Carter & Carter, 2016; Richardson & Kosa, 2001), and having a strong community presence (Carter & Carter, 2016).

Some researchers have found that forensic analysis of physical evidence collected at the initial crime scene has little statistical association with clearance rates (Baskin & Sommers, 2010; McEwen, 2010; McEwen &d Regoeczi, 2015; Peterson, Sommers, Baskin, & Johnson, 2010; Schroeder & White, 2009). The value of forensic evidence may be attenuated by long delays in processing such evidence.

But in a recent analysis of homicide in Boston, using a data set that overlaps with the data used in the current study, researchers found a strong statistical association with a variety of investigative actions, including forensics testing conducted both before and after arrest (Braga, Turchan, & Barao, 2019). 2 Experimental and quasi-experimental studies in this area have been rare. The descriptive studies cited earlier provide suggestive evidence, but they were not designed to identify reliably whether the observed statistical associations are a result of a direct causal effect, reverse causation, or some other process. For example, investigators may tend to devote more effort to promising cases, with the impli- cation that the positive association between effort and success would be partly the result of reverse cau- sation. Given the ambiguity of correlational evidence regarding causal process, it is important to study the effect of interventions, but we know of only one study in which the authors have done so. Following a study and the recommendations of an expert panel, the Boston PD launched several reforms affect- ing homicide investigations beginning on January 1, 2012. The reforms included the assignment of additional detectives to the homicide unit, the standardization of investigative procedures and forensic reviews, improved training for investigative personnel, and peer review of open investigations (Braga & Dusseault, 2018; Braga et al., 2019). Several measures of investigative activity in homicide cases increased, and the homicide clearance rate increased from 47% during the 5 years before the reform to 57% during the 3 years after it. Other jurisdictions that served as plausible control groups were tracked and did not exhibit a comparable jump in clearance rates.

Finally, no published study has yet been designed to consider the role of the large differential in investigation resources in accounting for why gun homicide cases have a higher clearance rate than nonfatal gunshot cases. This clearance-rate gap is apparently ubiquitous, but it has only been estab- lished systematically for a handful of jurisdictions: For example, from 2006 to 2016 in Milwaukee, annual clearance rates ranged between 56% and 78% for homicides and between 13% and 31% for nonfatal shootings; furthermore, for any given year during this period, clearance rates were 29–65 percentage points lower for nonfatal shootings than for homicides (Abadin & O’Brien, 2017). 3 A com-
parable but less pronounced discrepancy was observed in Chicago between 2010 and 2016 when annual clearance rates for homicide ranged from 26% to 46% and from 5% to 11% for nonfatal shootings, with a yearly disparity of 21–35 percentage points (Kapustin et al., 2017). In Durham in 2015, half of all gun homicides resulted in an arrest but an arrest was made in just 10% of the 145 nonfatal shootings that occurred (Cook, Ho, & Shilling, 2017).

In the Durham study, Cook et al. (2017), incidentally, provided a different sort of evidence: a sur- vey of expert opinion. The survey consisted of interviews with 17 investigators, including 6 homicide investigators and 11 district investigators whose caseload included nonfatal shootings. All respondents were asked for their views of why gun homicides were more likely to be cleared by arrest than were nonfatal shootings, despite the fact that these cases are so similar with respect to the characteristics of victims and assailants, and of the circumstances of the attack. Most respondents mentioned that homicide investigators have a far lighter caseload, or more resources generally, compared with district

COOK ET AL . 529
investigators. As a result, the homicide investigators can spend more time working a case, tracking down witnesses, and creating a relationship with potential witnesses. The other common answer (11 respondents) was that witnesses were more likely to cooperate with homicide investigations than with investigations of nonfatal shootings. Potential witnesses may view homicides as more serious, espe- cially than nonfatal cases in which the victim seems to have recovered completely. And if a survivor, the victim may warn potential witnesses not to cooperate, and in other ways undercut the strength of the case.

In the old RAND study, Greenwood and Petersilia (1975) cast doubt on the efficacy of detective work in clearing cases. Their findings, although challenged even at the time, may have contributed to a trend in policing toward an increased focus on crime prevention rather than on making arrests (Mastrofski, 2015; Skogan & Frydl, 1994; Sparrow, Moore, & Kennedy, 1990; Weisburd & Majmundar, 2018). The findings from recent studies, including those by the present authors, can be used by researchers to help make a case that investigative resources and technique have an effect on clearance rates with respect to homicide. The findings from the current study can be used to strengthen the case that resources matter in crimes of gun violence.
2 IMPORTANCE OF CHANCE IN DETERMINING WHETHER

A SHOOTING VICTIM SURVIVES
The design of the current analysis is valid to the extent that fatal and nonfatal cases are similar in relevant respects. Here we develop this claim and subsequently provide some empirical evidence.

Nationwide, the victim dies in one out of six or seven criminal assaults in which the victim suffers at least one gunshot wound (Cook, 1985).
4 There seems to be a large element of chance in whether the victim lives or dies in a given set of circumstances (Zimring, 1972). For example, in a drive-by shooting in which a passenger fires several times at a pedestrian, whether the victim is hit in a vital organ is not predetermined. If the event could be repeated (in simulation) 1,000 times, the outcome would differ, and some percentage of the trials would result in death. That percentage provides an intuitive notion of the ex ante probability of death given the circumstances. The ex ante probability may be very high in an attack in which a skilled assailant who is determined to kill his victim engages at close range and has the opportunity to follow up. Far more common are unsustained attacks with ambiguous motivation, which will typically have a low ex ante probability of death. The national case–fatality rate (of ∼14%) can be viewed as the average of the ex ante probabilities for all criminal assaults in which the victim suffers a gunshot wound.

If the outcome (life or death) were pure chance, then the average ex ante probability for the nonfatal cases would be the same as for the fatal cases. In effect, the fatalities would be drawn from an urn and, for a large sample, would tend to be similar to the universe of all gunshot cases. But in reality we expect some differentiation among cases, certainly with respect to such immediate factors as the number of shots fired, the caliber of the gun, the skill of the shooter, whether the shooter was in control of the situation, and so forth (Braga & Cook, 2018). In that sense, the average ex ante probability of the fatal cases would be higher than the average for the nonfatal cases. Of greatest interest in the current study is whether the circumstances of the shooting that affect the “intrinsic difficulty of solution” are correlated with the ex ante probability of death. That is an empirical question, and in what follows, we provide some evidence that reveals that the distribution of fatal cases is statistically indistinguishable from the distribution of nonfatal cases in several relevant dimensions, and that the likelihood of solution follows the same statistical pattern for fatal and nonfatal cases.

Given that fatal and nonfatal assault cases are similar with respect to circumstance and victim char- acteristics, but that more police resources are devoted to investigating fatal cases, it is reasonable to

530 COOK ET AL .
view this process as a quasi-experiment in the productivity of those additional investigation resources.

One potential confounding factor in this experiment is the willingness of witnesses to cooperate with the investigation. If the victim survives, the victim is often in a position to provide useful information about the identity of the assailant—a source that ordinarily is not available in fatal shootings (the likely exception being homicide cases when there are multiple victims including at least one survivor). But in practice, it is somewhat unusual for victims of gun violence to cooperate, especially in cases of gang violence. Other witnesses may be potentially helpful, but their cooperation is far from assured.

Interestingly, there is some indication that other witnesses are more inclined to cooperate if the victim dies; perhaps their sense of the seriousness of the case helps overcome negative attitudes toward the police in general and the “no snitching” cultural prerogative in particular (Police Executive Research Forum, 2009). More directly, if the victim survives, he may warn family and friends not to speak with the police (Cook et al., 2017). So the quasi-experiment is far from a perfect tool for identifying the relationship between investigative effort and probability of arrest. Nevertheless, use of the comparison does result in some robust conclusions about how investigative effort affects the amount and types of evidence collected, as well as result in documenting the importance of sustained investigations in solving cases.

The statistical similarity between fatal and nonfatal cases is still more relevant in policy evalu- ation. The principal mechanisms by which police investigations prevent crime are through arrest, conviction, and punishment. If the BPD increased its arrest rate and subsequent conviction and punishment for shootings, the presumed result would be incapacitation of past shooters (assum- ing imprisonment as the punishment) and deterrence of future would-be shooters. When it comes to deterrence and incapacitation, it is entirely plausible that increasing the likelihood of punish- ment for a nonfatal shooting would be on an equal footing with increasing the likelihood of pun- ishment for fatal shootings. In addition, arresting shooters may help disrupt the cycle of violence by serving as an alternative to private retaliation. There is no reason to believe that the effect is any less important for nonfatal cases than for homicides. And additional resources directed to non- fatal shootings may be more productive (in terms of additional arrests) than the same resources directed to fatal shootings simply because the marginal unsolved case is likely to be intrinsically more difficult for fatal than for nonfatal shootings, given the current disparity in investigative effort.
3 DIFFERENCES IN LAW ENFORCEMENT RESPONSE

TO FATAL VERSUS NONFATAL SHOOTINGS
As with other states, the Massachusetts criminal code specifies more severe sentences for gun assaults if the victim happens to die, thereby converting an aggravated assault into a criminal homicide. At the extreme, a conviction for first-degree murder (felony murder or premeditated murder) carries a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. The same set of circumstances would typically result in a much lighter sentence if the victim survived.

In line with this distinction, BPD, like the departments of other large cities, devotes greater inves- tigative resources to homicides than to aggravated assaults, such as follows:
 If the gunshot victim dies (or is deemed likely to die), then the case is investigated by one of the homicide squads and has a strong claim on other police units and forensic services.  If the victim survives, then the case goes to district investigators, who have a heavy caseload that includes a variety of felony cases.

COOK ET AL . 531
In Suffolk County, where Boston is located, the district attorney (DA) oversees homicide investiga- tions (but not investigations of aggravated assaults). 5 The BPD consults with the DA’s office before making an arrest. Authorization for the arrest is contingent on the DA’s determination that there is probable cause for the suspect to be arrested and charged with homicide—a process that in some cases can delay an arrest for weeks or even months, particularly if the DA deems it necessary to take the case to the grand jury. But on-scene arrests are possible after a quick consultation with an assistant DA in the field or on the phone. Note that the DA’s participation in this process should, if working smoothly, ensure that all homicide arrests are of high quality, in the sense of being likely to lead to conviction. It is reasonable to suppose that homicide arrests have met a somewhat more stringent standard compared with arrests in nonfatal shootings, which suggests that the gap in arrest rates between fatal and nonfatal cases would be larger if the decision to arrest followed the same process. 4 CONCEPTS, MEASURES, AND PLAN OF ANALYSIS
Our goal is to conduct an exploratory analysis of how investigative resources affect the likelihood that an investigation will be successful. “Success” is defined relative to the “case,” which typi- cally stems from a single event in which one or more perpetrators shoot at one or more victims, wounding (and perhaps killing) at least one. A drive-by shooting in which two passengers shoot out of a vehicle into a group of pedestrians would, for investigative purposes, represent a single case.

A successful outcome would entail at least one arrest, without regard to the number of perpetra- tors or whether the arrest resulted in conviction. In addition to an arrest, a case can be cleared by “exceptional means,” which for our sample occurs only if the prime suspect dies, which is a rare event.

We have gathered extensive data on the circumstances of each case and the resources devoted to the police investigation. Both may be important in determining whether there is an arrest. It is useful to view the cases in our sample as occupying a spectrum in terms of what might be called the “intrinsic difficulty of solution.” This remains a latent variable in our analysis, and we make no attempt to give it a precise definition. It is clear, however, that some cases are “easy” (such as a domestic killing in which the prime suspect confesses to the first officer on the scene) and others are “hard” (such as the case of an unidentified body pulled from the Charles River long after death).

The easy cases will include those that are solved quickly—on scene or within the first few days. Our speculation is that investigative resources will matter less in solving easy cases and, more generally, that the easy end of the spectrum for both fatal and nonfatal cases will have similar (high) arrest rates.

For cases that are not solved in the first few days, investigative resources may matter more. Figure 1 illustrates this concept. In the figure, the y-axis is the cumulative percentage of cases that are cleared and the x-axis is the BPD resources committed to investigating the case. “Resource commitment” is an ex ante measure of what BPD’s routine operating procedures imply about what it is willing to expend in an investigation, rather than what it ends up spending ex post. Actual ex post expenditures depend on the intrinsic difficulty of a solution, and whether the case does in fact result in an arrest and hence requires additional detective work to develop it for trial.

Figure 1 illustrates the possibility that for the intrinsically more difficult cases, the hypothesized relationship between resource commitment and clearance rate for nonfatal cases may lie below the relationship for fatal cases, as a result of the tendency of the relevant community to be less inclined to cooperate with the investigation if the victim survives. The resulting clearance rate is depicted as higher for fatal than for nonfatal cases, both because of the difference in the resource–clearance schedules and the fact that BPD typically mobilizes a greater resource commitment to fatal than to nonfatal cases. Our

532 COOK ET AL .

FIGURE 1 Cumulative probability of solution ( y-axis) plotted against resource commitment (x-axis) basic analytic approach seeks to compare clearance outcomes for investigations of fatal and nonfatal shooting cases that are seemingly alike but differ significantly in the investigative resources applied to identify shooting suspects.

We will explore the nature of these relationships using data on the circumstances of the shooting, whether there was an arrest and if so how quickly it occurred, several measures of investigative effort or resources, and BPD investigators’ observations on what were the keys to success or failure in an investigation. We also illustrate the processes behind the data with the aid of several case descriptions, which are presented in Appendix A.
5 DATA
Official incident reports for 221 homicides and 1012 nonfatal gun assaults in which victims sustained gunshot wounds were accessed through the BPD. These represent all cases known to the BPD for the period January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2014, that were deemed to be criminal by the BPD (not justified or self- inflicted). The research team did not have the resources to code all of the nonfatal cases, and instead, members selected a stratified random sample of 300 gunshot survivors by randomly selecting 60 survivors per year. Of the selected cases, 1 was excluded because the event did not occur in the BPD‘s jurisdiction and 6 were excluded because it was determined that the survivor had not been shot. The yearly number of Boston gun homicide victims decreased over the course of the study period:
55 victims in 2010, 48 victims in 2011, 36 victims in 2012, 30 victims in 2013, and 35 victims in 2014.

The research team attempted to acquire detailed information on the 511 fatal and nonfatal shoot- ings by interviewing investigators and reviewing incident reports and detective case files (including emergency medical response and coroner reports). Appendix A presents narrative details on four cases

COOK ET AL . 533
representing cleared fatal and nonfatal shooting investigations that differ on whether the suspect was apprehended immediately or after longer periods of time elapsed. Some identities and details have been slightly modified in each case to preserve confidentiality. It is worth saying again that detectives, forensic analysts, and others play active roles in continuing investigations even after arrests are made.

This post-clearance investigative work is intended to both safeguard against miscarriages of justice by ensuring that the “right” person has been apprehended and promote an effective prosecution. These important investigative activities are often ignored by scholars in the existing literature when they appraise the effectiveness of detectives.

Note that we have a random sample of nonfatal victims and a census of fatal victims. But our unit of analysis is the case. A case may involve multiple victims, sometimes with a mixture of fatal and nonfatal. (During the 5-year period of our study, 4% of surviving victims were part of homicide cases.) Cases with at least one fatality are included with certainty, whereas cases in which the victim or victims all survived are selected with a probability that depends on the total number of victims in that year, the number of victims included in the case, and the number of nonfatal victims who were part of a homicide case. We conducted analyses in which we considered the sample weights associated with these probabilities and we found that the weighting had little effect on parameter estimates. For that reason, and for the sake of simplicity, we present unweighted estimates in what follows.
6 ANALYTICAL RESULTS

6.1 Comparison of fatal and nonfatal cases
In Table 1, we report a statistical comparison between fatal and nonfatal cases in our sample. In all, 45 (22%) of the 204 homicide cases had more than one victim, whereas 39 (17%) of the 231 nonfa- tal cases had multiple victims. (When a case includes both a homicide and a nonfatal shooting, it is included under the “homicide” category.) For the variables included, there is no discernible difference, with one exception—fatal shootings are significantly more likely to occur indoors (23% vs. 14%). The importance of the “similarity” finding is that it can be used by researchers to help establish the claim that any difference in clearance rates is not a result of the variables considered here (see also Braga & Cook, 2018).

The statistics on case characteristics can be used to provide insight into the nature of gun violence in Boston. With respect to circumstances, 83% of known-circumstance cases (both fatal and nonfatal) were deemed by BPD analysts to involve gang- or drug-distribution-related disputes. The category of personal disputes is also common (11% and 13%), whereas there are only a handful of shootings in domestic violence or in a robbery. Most cases involved male victims (greater than 90%) with a criminal record (greater than 80%). The average age of victims is 27.

6.2 Patterns in clearance rates
Cases are considered “cleared” if there is at least one arrest or, in exceptional cases, if the BPD has identified a suspect who cannot be arrested. The key outcome variable used in this analysis was binary:
homicides were either cleared (1) or not cleared (0) as of June 1, 2017. As reported in Table 2, the clearance-by-arrest rates were 43% (gun homicide cases) and 19% (nonfatal cases). In a handful of cases, the BPD designates a case as “exceptionally cleared.” For the shooting cases in our sample, all 7 exceptional clearances are the result of the fact that the main suspect has died. In what follows, our focus is on clearance by arrest. In most of our analyses, the cases that were exceptionally cleared are

534 COOK ET AL .

TABLE 1 Characteristics of fatal and nonfatal shooting cases in Boston, 2010–2014 Characteristic One or More Gun Homicides Nonfatal Only Test Statistic N 204 231
Circumstancea
Gang / drug 167 (83.5%) 161 (83.0%) X 2 (4)= 4.126
Personal dispute 21 (10.5%) 25 (12.9%) p= 0.389
Robbery (nondrug) 8 (4.0%) 3 (1.5%)
Domestic 3 (1.5%) 5 (2.6%)
Other 1 (0.5%) 0 (0.0%)
Crime Scene Location
Outdoor 157 (77.0%) 198 (85.7%) X 2 (1)= 5.531
Indoor 47 (23.0%) 33 (14.3%) p= 0.019
Number of Victims
One victim 159 (77.9%) 192 (83.1%) X 2 (2)= 1.978
Two victims 36 (17.7%) 30 (13.0%) p= 0.372
Three or more victims 9 (4.4%) 9 (3.9%)
Victim Attributes
Gender
Male victim(s) only 187 (91.7%) 215 (93.1%) X 2 (1)= 0.306 At least one female victim 17 (8.3%) 16 (6.9%) p= 0.580 Criminal record
At least one victim w/ record 168 (82.4%) 196 (84.8%) X 2 (1)= 0.494 No criminal record 36 (17.6%) 35 (15.2%) p= 0.482
Mean age (standard deviation) 26.9 (9.8) 26.7 (8.8) t= 0.244 p= 0.827
aExcludes cases with unknown circumstances: 4 homicides and 37 nonfatal shootings.

TABLE 2 Clearance status and percentage of cases cleared for each circumstance of fatal and nonfatal shooting cases in Boston, 2010–2014
Status One or More Gun Homicides Nonfatal Only
Cleared 91 (44.6%) 46 (19.9%)
Cleared by Arrest 87 (42.6%) 43 (18.6%)
Exceptional Clearance 4 (2.0%) 3 (1.3%)
Open Investigation 113 (55.4%) 185 (80.1%)
% Cleared, Circumstance
Gang/drug 163 (39.9%) 158 (12.0%)
Personal dispute 21 (66.7%) 25 (56.0%)
Robbery (nondrug) 8 (50.0%) 3 (33.3%)
Domestic 3 (100.0%) 5 (100.0%)
All circumstancesa 204 (44.6%) 231 (19.9%)
Total 204 (100.0%) 231 (100.0%)
Notes. The shooter died in all seven exceptional clearances. There were 41 cases with unknown circumstance: 4 homicides and 37 nonfatal shootings.
aIncluding “other” and “unknown”.

COOK ET AL . 535
TABLE 3 Multivariate regressions of clearance by arrest on circumstances, number of victims, at least one female victim, and indoor crime scene location with interaction terms Logistic Regression OLS Regression
Covariates OR Coef. (RSE) Coef. (RSE)
Fatal Shooting 1.364 0.311 (.121)** 0.249 (.045)**
Gang / Drug Dispute 0.105 −2.257 (.477)** −0.435 (.101)** Indoor Crime Scene 1.777 0.575 (.232)** 0.076 (.029)**
At Least One Female Victim 3.636 1.291 (.492)** 0.196 (.051)** Two or More Victims 1.149 0.139 (.289) 0.052 (.065)
Interactions
Fatal× gang / drug 2.125 0.754 (.511) 0.168 (.148)
Fatal× indoor 0.776 −0.253 (.653) 0.001 (.115)
Fatal× at least one female victim 0.903 −0.101 (.599) −0.041 (.147) Fatal * two or more victims 0.749 −0.288 (.619) −0.035 (.111) Constant 1.244 0.219 (.106)* 0.469 (.076)**
Wald X 2 (df = 9) 1433.48**
Log pseudolikelihood −191.792
Pseudo R2 0.151
F test 14.65*
R2 0.170
Notes. N = 373. OR = odds ratio, Coef. = coefficient, RSE = robust standard error. Samples were limited to gang/drug and personal dispute cases and excluded cases with exceptional clearances. Robust standard errors clustered by police district. Police district and year dummy variables included but not shown. Nonfatal shooting was the reference category for the fatal shooting dummy variable.

Personal disputes (nongang, nondrug) was the reference category for the gang/drug dispute dummy variable. Outdoor crime scene was the reference category for the indoor crime scene dummy variable. Male victim(s) only was the reference category for the at least one female victim dummy variable. One victim was the reference category for the two victims or more victims’ dummy variable. *p < .05; **p < .01.
excluded simply because they represent neither success nor failure of the investigative process. Since exceptional clearance is rare, that exclusion has little effect on rates.

Our next step is to analyze the possible influence of observable case characteristics on the likelihood of arrest. Table 2 also demonstrates a simple breakdown by circumstance. Again, most cases are gang or drug related, so unsurprisingly the arrest rates are similar to those for the overall sample. It is interesting to note that all of the domestic cases were solved (3 fatal, 5 nonfatal), and that the personal dispute cases tend to have somewhat higher clearance rates than do the gang/drug cases.

We elaborate on these results with a multivariate analysis of arrest in a sample that includes only gang/drug and personal-dispute cases, and it excludes the exceptional clearances. (The resulting sub- sample includes 85% of all cases.) We report the results of both a logit analysis and ordinary least squares (OLS) in Table 3. In both estimators, the specification includes whether the case was fatal or nonfatal, gun/drug versus personal dispute, indoor versus outdoor, sex of the victim, and number of victims. Also included are interaction terms for each of these case characteristics with whether it was fatal or nonfatal. Year of incident dummy variables was included but not shown in both models. 6 The
pattern of coefficient estimates is identical for the two estimators, but the OLS results are easier to interpret. What we find from the OLS is that other things equal, fatal cases have a greater probability of arrest (an added 25 percentage points). When we control for the other predictor variables, we find that the marginal change in clearing a shooting investigation increases by 27 percentage points from

536 COOK ET AL .

TABLE 4 Time to clearance in fatal and nonfatal shooting cases in Boston, 2010–2014 O n eo rM o r eG u nH o m i c i d e s N o n f a t a lO n l y Clearance Time N Cum. % N Cum. %
Scene, Leaving Scene 12 (6.0%) 13 (5.7%)
Not Scene, Same Day 5 (8.5%) 6 (8.3%)
1–2 Days 5 (11.0%) 6 (11.0%)
>2–7 Days 1 (11.5%) 5 (13.2%)
>1 Week–1 Month 10 (16.5%) 3 (14.5%)
>1–6 Months 30 (31.5%) 6 (17.1%)
>6 Months–1 Year 11 (37.0%) 3 (18.4%)
>1 Year 13 (43.5%) 1 (18.9%)
Open Investigation 113 (100.0%) 185 (100.0%)
Total 200 228
.195 for nonfatal cases to .467 for fatal cases. None of the coefficient estimates for the interaction terms are statistically significantly different from zero, which indicates that the pattern of arrest probabilities for fatal and nonfatal cases is similar enough that there is no distinction in a statistical sense.

The covariates provide some insight into the intrinsic difficulty of solution. The gang/drug cases are much less likely to be solved than the personal-dispute cases. (Given the OLS point estimates, the gap in arrest rates is 43 percentage points for nonfatal cases and 27 percentage points for fatal cases.) Indoor shootings and those with female victims were somewhat more likely to be solved compared with their counterparts. (Recall that domestic cases, all of which were solved, are excluded from this analysis.) Perhaps, surprisingly, cases with two or more victims are no more likely to be solved than are those with one.

6.3 Time to arrest
“Time to arrest” indicates a strong signal regarding both the intrinsic difficulty of solution and the importance of investigation resources. We find that 6% of both fatal and nonfatal cases result in an on-scene arrest and that 11% of both fatal and nonfatal cases have an arrest within 2 days of the crime.

These clearance rates subsequently diverge and increasingly favor the fatal cases. Indeed, the arrests during the first 2 days account for just one quarter of arrests in fatal cases but for more than half of arrests in nonfatal cases. Between 2 days and 6 months, there is an arrest in 20% of the fatal cases but in only 6% of the nonfatals. An additional 12% of fatal cases are solved after 6 months have elapsed but for only a handful of nonfatal cases (2%). These results are shown in Table 4 and graphically in Figure 2.

The time-to-arrest results can be interpreted by reference to the conceptual framework represented in Figure 1 although it is a bit more complicated in practice. On-scene and other arrests within 2 days presumably include those cases that are intrinsically easy to solve. The extra resources available for fatal cases are not needed to make the arrest. Given our presumption that the fatal and nonfatal cases are similar in relevant respects (and in particular follow the same distributions of intrinsic difficulty of solution), it is then predictable that the rate of quick arrest is the same for the two types of cases.

Where the extra resources available for homicide investigations may become relevant is for the more complex, less transparent cases.

It is necessary to introduce several caveats to this analysis. The first is with respect to the possible delays in making an arrest that are introduced by the requirement that homicide arrests be approved

COOK ET AL . 537
FIGURE 2 Nelson-Aalen cumulative hazard estimates for time-to-arrest categories [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
by an assistant district attorney, which is not necessary for arrests in nonfatal cases. In some homicide cases, the DA may take a case to the grand jury to establish probable cause, which can add weeks or even months to the time line. In clear-cut cases, such as a literal “smoking gun” in the hands of a likely perpetrator, however, the DA’s office tends to move quickly. Assistant DAs responsible for prosecuting homicides are called to the scene of the crime to participate in the investigation and can approve an arrest quickly when probable cause seems obvious. So even though it is possible that the homicide arrest rate would have been higher in the first 2 days without the requirement of DA approval, that seems unlikely. One clue is that there was only one homicide arrest during the 2–7-day period, which indicates that taking into account the possibility of a delay of a few days in homicide arrests would not have changed the basic result.

Figure 2 presents a graph of the Nelson–Aalen cumulative hazard estimates for the time-to-arrest categories presented in Table 4. The graph illustrates a large increase in the cumulative proportion of gun homicide cases cleared beginning at the 1–6-month interval that is not evident in the cumulative proportion of nonfatal shooting cases cleared. This gap in clearances for fatal cases relative to nonfatal cases increases further in the subsequent 6 months-to-1-year and greater-than-1-year intervals. The results of a Wilcoxon test of equality for survivor functions reveals the significant gap in time to arrests for gun homicide cases relative to nonfatal shooting cases ( X 2 = 21.46, p < .001). The results of a
bivariate log logistic regression in which the difference in the odds of timing to arrest by shooting case type is predicted reveals that gun homicide cases are cleared ∼51% quicker when compared with nonfatal shooting cases.
7 The large difference in time to arrest indicates that increased investigative resources in gun homicide cases generate considerable value in identifying suspected shooters. The influence of the DA on the timing of gun homicide arrests, however, introduces some uncertainty in the precision of our

538 COOK ET AL .
time-to-arrest data in fatal cases relative to our time-to-arrest data in nonfatal cases. As such, we do not pursue formal survival analyses, such as Cox proportional hazard models, to estimate the influence of specific investigative factors on the time to arrest in fatal shooting cases relative to nonfatal shooting cases. Future research conducted in jurisdictions that do not have laws mandating DA control of homicide investigations should be aimed at pursuing these kinds of analyses.

The much higher arrest rate in fatal cases after the initial 2-day period is evidence that the extra resources committed to such cases by BPD are important. If the investigation of a nonfatal shooting is not successful quickly, the investigator may move on to the next case. But for a homicide, the cases are sufficiently high priority to allow for greater persistence and scope to the investigation. This interpre- tation is speculative, but it receives support from the analysis of evidence reported as follows.

6.4 Evidence collected
In this section, we document the proximate results of the BPD’s committing more resources to investi- gation of fatal than of nonfatal shootings. In particular, the amount of evidence collected in homicide cases is greater than in nonfatal cases. Following Braga et al. (2019), the various types of evidence are classified as resulting either from the crime scene investigation or from subsequent actions including forensic tests. It should be noted that in these measures, the evidence collected to make an arrest (iden- tify a suspect and establish probable cause) is not explicitly distinguished from, when there is an arrest, the evidence collected to make a stronger case for trial. For that reason, the fatal–nonfatal comparisons are made for both successful and unsuccessful investigations.

The detailed results are presented in four tables in Appendix B (Tables A1–A4) and summarized by two bar charts (Figures 3 and 4). As shown in Figure 3, for each of six categories of evidence col- lected at the crime scene, the mean for fatal cases is much higher than that for nonfatal cases, typically twice as high. This difference is confirmed by the results on medians for each of these categories (Table A1), except for “firearms recovered,” which interestingly has a median of zero. Investigating detectives interview more witnesses, run more computer checks, and collect more videos and other tangible evi- dence (cartridge cases, pieces of clothing, and so forth). The number of officers providing information relevant to the investigation, with a median of just one for nonfatal cases, is 3 for fatal cases.

Similar statistics are broken down by whether the case was cleared by arrest and, if so, how quickly, in Table A2. The large fatal–nonfatal gap persists for each category, and thus, it cannot be accounted for by the fact that a higher percentage of homicides are solved so that the investigators’ job includes developing the case for trial. For example, in a fatal–nonfatal comparison for cases that are not cleared, there were more than twice as many interviews with witnesses at the scene, almost three times as much tangible evidence collected, and four times as many videos collected.

Figure 3 provides a summary of the results on means. For each category of evidence collection, there are three bars, representing the overall mean, the mean for cases that are cleared, and the mean for cases that are not cleared. The relevant mean for fatal cases is represented by the entire bar, and the mean for nonfatal cases is shown by the cross-hatched portion of that bar.

All these tabulations are repeated for the evidence collected after the crime scene investigation.

The subsequent actions of investigators include additional interviews, as well as a variety of lab work such as tests of latent prints, DNA, and ballistics, and analyzing data from phones and computerized databases. There are large gaps between fatal and nonfatal cases in every type of activity. Perhaps it is especially noteworthy that the median number of postscene witnesses interviewed in homicide cases is two, and for nonfatal cases, it is zero (Table A3).

As in the previous analysis, we break down these measures of evidence collection activity according to whether the investigation resulted in arrest and, if so, when. The fatal–nonfatal gaps persist for each

COOK ET AL . 539
FIGURE 3 Evidence yield per case at crime scene
category of clearance. It is also of interest that when compared with unsuccessful cases, cleared cases entail more evidence collection of all types for both fatal and nonfatal cases.

The results on means are depicted in a bar chart in Figure 4 using the same scheme as before. Table A4 shows both medians and means.

What can be concluded from these comparisons? One clear conclusion is that the BPD tends to col- lect more evidence of all kinds in fatal than in nonfatal cases, regardless of whether there is an arrest.

Granted our presumption that fatal and nonfatal cases are intrinsically similar, that finding seems to be a direct result of the fact that the BPD assigns fatal cases higher priority for investigative resources. The results of our analysis reveal confirmation that the proximate result of devoting additional resources is the production of additional evidence. That result, unsurprising though it may be, fills in an interme- diate step linking investigative resources to outcome (clearance by arrest).

Note that we did not relate the probability of arrest to the amount of evidence collected on a case-by- case basis. The amount of evidence collected in any one case depends not only on effort but also on the intrinsic features of the case. Our comparison of means for fatal and nonfatal cases provides a measure of the effect of effort on evidence collection that is not confounded by variation in the intrinsic features of the case—they tend to average out (except as noted), given that fatal and nonfatal cases are similar.

6.5 Witness cooperation and other key investigative results For the 130 shooting cases that resulted in arrest (87 fatal, 43 nonfatal), detectives were asked what evidence was the key to identifying the suspect and establishing probable cause. In many cases, the

540 COOK ET AL .

FIGURE 4 Subsequent investigative actions and forensic tests per case respondents named more than one key. We begin with a focus on the most commonly named key to success, the evidence provided by an eyewitness. Both survivors and other eyewitnesses are included in the discussion.

6.5.1 Eyewitnesses
Past studies of the investigative process have found that most successful investigations have resulted in detectives obtaining key evidence from one or more witnesses (Chaiken et al., 1976; Wellford & Cronin, 1999). The current sample of BPD investigations follow that pattern (see also Braga & Dusseault, 2018; Braga et al., 2019). As shown in Table 5, 62% of cleared homicide cases and 65% of cleared nonfatal cases had a cooperating witness (not including victims) from the scene of the crime as the key to solving the case.
8 In several additional cases, a key to the solution was that a victim identified the shooter. When we combine these two categories, we find that in 67% of fatal cases and 77% of nonfatal cases that resulted in an arrest, the cooperation of an eyewitness, including in some cases a victim, was the key to success.

There are several additional results to be gleaned from these data. First, the prevalence of successful cases in which eyewitnesses are vital is surprisingly similar in fatal and nonfatal cases. But that finding is contingent on success. Given that fatal cases have more than twice the clearance rate, there is logically

COOK ET AL . 541
TABLE 5 Key Investigative results suggesting witness cooperation by time to arrest, counts and percentages of cases cleared in specified time period
Number of Cases
% Cooperative Witness
From Scene (N)
% Survivor Identified
Shooter (N)
Time to Arrest Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal First 2 Days 22 25 68% 68% 14% 16%
(15) (17) (3) (4)
>2 Days 65 18 60% 61% 5% 6%
(39) (11) (3) (1)
Total Cleared Cases 87 43 62% 65% 7% 12%
(54) (28) (6) (5)
Total—All Cases 200 228 27% 12% 3% 2%
(54) (28) (6) (5)
Notes. In the fatal cases, there were six cases with survivors who identified the shooters in the “key investigative results” variable. In two cases, other cooperative witnesses from the scene were also credited. There were just 39 fatal cases in which there were survivors, and 6/3 9 = 15.4%. In the nonfatal cases, there were five cases with survivors who identified the shooters in the “key investigative results” variable. In one case, other cooperative witnesses from the scene were also credited. Note there were 231 nonfatal cases total, and 5 / 231= 2.2%.
a much higher likelihood of cooperation by a key witness in fatal than in nonfatal cases. The relevant statistics are presented in the final row of the table.

Second, the importance of a cooperating eyewitness is about the same for cases in which there is an immediate arrest as in cases in which the arrest is delayed by more than 2 days. To some extent, that result may reflect the fact that witness cooperation is not always immediate and spontaneous— sometimes obtaining cooperation requires a good deal of effort by investigators, who may have to track down a recalcitrant witness and then “convert” him. The point here, which sometimes gets lost in discussions of the investigative process, is that cooperation is not predetermined but may change in response to the investigator’s efforts.

Third, we note the intriguing finding that the likelihood a surviving victim is cooperative seems to be much higher in homicide cases than in nonfatal cases. There were 39 homicide cases in our sample with a surviving victim, and 6 of those victims (15%) helped identify the shooter. In comparison, the 231 nonfatal cases produced only 5 (2%) in which the victim helped the investigation in that fashion.

That is a statistically significant difference,
9 but of course, our basic assumption of the similarity of fatal and nonfatal cases does not apply to this comparison.

6.5.2 Forensic evidence
We now shift our attention from witnesses to forensic evidence. We have already seen (Figure 4) that much more forensic evidence is collected on average in homicide investigations than in nonfatal inves- tigations. Here we explore the importance of this sort of evidence in solving cases. Five categories are reported in Table 6: (1) ballistic evidence from recovered firearms and from cartridges and bullets associated with the shooting; (2) evidence from video recordings that may have images of the suspect or of the attack; (3) latent fingerprints taken from the scene; (4) data downloaded from smartphones and other devices; and (5) a variety of other sources. This sort of evidence is of particular interest to our inquiry because it is a direct and clear reflection of investigative effort. In particular, it is not affected by the willingness of witnesses to cooperate.

Some type of forensic evidence was mentioned as the key to solving a homicide investigation more than 100 times, compared with just 24 mentions, in the nonfatal cases. Two or more types of forensic

542 COOK ET AL .

TABLE 6 Key Investigative results from evidence processing, counts and percentages of all cases (excluding those that were exceptionally cleared)
Evidence Type Fatal (N = 200) Nonfatal (N = 228) Test Statistic Ballistic Evidence 14% 5% Z = 3.21
(28) (12) p < .001
Video Evidence 13.5% 2% Z = 4.54
(27) (4) p < .001
Latent Prints 8% 1% Z = 3.57
(16) (3) p < .001
Mobile Phone Data Analysis 7% 1% Z = 3.24
(14) (2) p < .001
Othera 9.5% 1% Z = 4.04
(19) (3) p < .001
Number of Unique Cases 34% 7% Z = 7.02
(68) (16) p < .001
aIncludes the following categories: Gunshot residue on suspect, other forensic tests, DNA match, RMV license plate search, and database analysis linked another event.
evidence were mentioned in some of these cases: The number with at least one such mention is 68 for fatal cases and 16 for nonfatal cases.

In many of the successful cases, both forensic and eyewitness evidence were mentioned as vital by our respondents. For the fatal cases, both eyewitness evidence and at least one type of forensic evidence are mentioned in 60 cases (30%), whereas in an additional 8 cases (4%) with forensic evidence, eyewitness evidence is not mentioned. The corresponding numbers for nonfatal cases are 13 (6%) and 3( 1 % ) .

These findings speak directly to the importance of investigative effort. Given a strong presumption that fatal and nonfatal cases are similar, the implication is that the same amounts of forensic evidence could have been collected on average from each. The higher success rate in homicide investigations is closely linked to greater effort in gathering and processing forensic evidence.

6.5.3 Summary of key evidence
The RAND study (Greenwood & Petersilia, 1975) questioned the importance of detective work on the grounds that in most successful investigations, the arrest occurs on scene or is informed by a witness who is able to identify the prime suspect. Similarly, in our Boston sample, in most successful investi- gations, the arrest occurs on scene or an eyewitness (possibly including a surviving victim) provides evidence that is the key to making the arrest. That characterizes 75% of arrests in homicide cases and 84% of arrests in nonfatal shooting cases. But we disagree that such results imply that detective work is of little importance. Eliciting the cooperation of witnesses, especially when gangs are involved, may require skill and persistence on the part of investigators. (For example, 30% of the homicide arrests for which a cooperating eyewitness was the key to success occurred 6 months or more after the event.) And forensic evidence, although rarely the unique key to solving a case, 10 may be important in establishing
probable cause for an arrest and in making the case for conviction beyond reasonable doubt. Given the existing scientific evidence indicating eyewitness evidence is often inaccurate (National Research Council, 2014), supplementing eyewitness testimony with forensic evidence can be helpful in avoiding miscarriages of justice.

COOK ET AL . 543
7 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
In a large sample of shooting cases investigated by the Boston Police Department, 2010–2014, fatal and nonfatal cases were demonstrated to occur in similar circumstances, but the arrest rate for fatal cases was more than twice as high. The much higher success rate in homicide investigations may have been the direct result of the fact that the BPD, like other police departments, commits more resources to the investigation of shooting cases if the victim dies. The homicide detective unit is an elite group that has a lighter case load and better access to technical support from the crime lab and from other units within the BPD. Yet the conclusion that those additional investigation resources are productive, and can account for the large difference in outcomes, is controversial within criminology. The legacy of the old RAND study (Greenwood & Petersilia, 1975) in particular is a presumption that cases either “solve themselves” or they are not going to be solved. Given that that presumption may still be influencing staffing and priorities in some police departments, it is important to consider the evidence with care.

The new evidence presented in the current study is based on a quasi-experiment—a comparison of fatal and nonfatal shootings. It is reasonable to conclude that the extra resources do indeed get much of the credit for the large fatal–nonfatal gap in arrest rates.

We find that in comparison with the investigations of nonfatal shootings, the homicide investigations resulted in the collection of more evidence of every type, at both the crime scene and elsewhere. (That is true for both successful and unsuccessful investigations.) Given that fatal and nonfatal cases occur in similar circumstances, the greater volume of evidence collected in fatal cases was likely the direct result of extra investigative resources. That result is relevant but does not settle the issue.

Besides the amount of evidence collected, the timing of the arrests is relevant to assessing the pro- ductivity of the extra investigative resources. The arrest rates for fatal and nonfatal cases were identical during the first 2 days after the crime (11%). For those cases, which presumably include most of the cases that may “solve themselves,” the extra investigative resources do not seem to matter. But for the remaining cases, those that have a greater intrinsic difficulty of solution, the outcomes are entirely dif- ferent. In the weeks and months after those first 2 days, an additional 32.5% of homicides were solved, compared with an additional 8.0% of nonfatal cases. It seems that persistence paid off but that staying with an investigation that may take months was a luxury that only the homicide detectives could afford.

That pattern raises an interesting question about the productivity of inputs into the investigation process. The BPD tends to deploy more resources for homicides than for nonfatal shootings for both the initial response (evidence collection at the crime scene) and the subsequent investigation. Although our evidence supports the conclusion that extra investigative inputs are productive, we cannot distinguish between different types of resources, and in particular, we cannot distinguish between the resources deployed for collecting evidence at the scene and the resources available in subsequent months to develop a case. The time profile of arrests in homicides indicates that the latter may be particularly important, but further research is needed to place that conclusion on a strong evidence base.

The role of eyewitnesses also requires further research. When detectives were asked to name the keys to success for cases in which there was an arrest, they usually included the cooperation of an eye- witness or surviving victim. But it is important to recognize that just because a key witness cooperated with the investigation does not negate the importance of investigative effort. In many cases, witnesses must be located and persuaded to cooperate. Most successful homicide investigations that included a cooperating witness from the scene were not solved in the first 2 days, and in 30% of such cases, it took more than 6 months.

In our interviews with detectives in Boston and Durham (Cook et al., 2017), we found that civilian witnesses are believed to be more likely to cooperate in gangland shootings if the victim dies. If true,

544 COOK ET AL .
the “cooperation gap” that we have documented is not entirely a result of the difference in investigators’ persistence and effort. But given the delayed timing of the arrests, that is likely an important part of it.

This exploratory analysis has yielded suggestive but not definitive results. If it is true that most of the clearance-rate gap between fatal and nonfatal cases is a result of the extra resources that police departments commit to homicides, then it should be possible to increase arrest rates for nonfatal shoot- ing cases greatly by giving them near-equal priority to homicides. The case for doing so is that nonfatal shootings (“almoscides”) involve shooters, victims, and circumstances that are usually indistinguish- able from gun homicides. If true, then consideration of the preventive effects of punishment, particu- larly deterrence and incapacitation, makes a strong case for taking nonfatal shootings more seriously.

Reducing the number of shootings through these mechanisms would reduce the number of gun homi- cides in proportion. Even if it is not feasible to give equal priority to fatal and nonfatal cases, at the margin, it is likely that additional resources in nonfatal shootings will have a higher payoff (in the form of more arrests) than in fatal shootings. The current regime leaves more low-hanging fruit (easy-to- solve cases) in nonfatal than in fatal cases.

These conclusions are not based on settled fact. The logical next step for learning more is a series of evaluable interventions designed to increase investigative capacity for nonfatal shootings. We submit that the evidence presented here is strong enough to justify that experimental program.

ENDNOTES
1 These are the two most common explanations provided in individual interviews with 17 investigators from the Durham, NC Police Department (Cook et al., 2017).
2 It should be noted that much of the forensic testing is less for the purposes of identifying a suspect than for making a case against a suspect that would hold up in court. For instance, a clearance of an offender caught at the scene with a smoking gun and cooperative eyewitnesses will still involve forensic testing. The gun will be matched to the cartridge casings and bullets, the offender will be fingerprinted as will the gun, and often the offender is tested for gunshot residue.
3 These statistics were retrieved from annual reports on homicides and nonfatal shootings produced by the Milwaukee Homicide Review Commission and published on their website. 4 In 2016, there were 14,415 gun homicides and an estimated 88,702 gunshot assaults in which the victim was treated in a hospital emergency department. The implied case fatality rate is 14.0% or about 1 in 7. Data taken from WISQARS (https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/).
5 According to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 38 Section 4, the county district attorney shall direct and control the investigation of the death and shall coordinate the investigation with the medical examiner and the police department within the jurisdiction where the death occurred.
6 These variables were included to account for varying caseloads, policing activities, and other secular changes that might influence fatal and nonfatal shooting clearances in the same year of the incident. It is worth noting here that only ∼3% (14 of 435) total shootings were cleared after 1 year of investigation had passed. As such, simple dummy variables were adequate to control for yearly changes in caseload, policing activities, and other factors net of the included covariates.

None of the year of incident dummy variables were statistically significant predictors of investigative clearance. 7 Coefficient = –.716, standard error = .164, t = –4.36, p < .001. Predicted difference in the odds of timing to arrest calculation: 100 × (exp(–.716) – 1) = –51.129.
8 Witnesses identified at the initial crime scene ranged from individuals who provided information that generally moved the investigation forward by confirming basic facts about what had happened (e.g., “a white van pulled up and a man in a mask jumped out and fired three shots at the victim” or “I heard five shots, looked out my window, and saw two black males running from the corner towards the park”) to individuals who could positively identify suspects through detailed physical descriptions or by providing offender names. In essence, all were “eyewitnesses” with varying degrees of relevant information on the gun assault event.
9 Test for difference of two sample proportions: Z = 3.89, p < .001.

COOK ET AL . 545
10 Forensic evidence was named as the only key evidence in three fatal shooting cases (3.4%) and one nonfatal shooting case (2.3%). Video evidence (combined with latent prints and analysis of mobile phone records) was present in all four of these cases.

REFERENCES
Abadin, S. S., & O’Brien, M. E. (2017). 2016 Annual report: Homicides and nonfatal shootings in Milwaukee. Milwau- kee: Milwaukee Homicide Review Commission and the City of Milwaukee Health Department.

Baskin, D., & Sommers, I. (2010). The influence of forensic evidence on the case outcomes of homicide incidents.

Journal of Criminal Justice , 38, 1141–1149.

Bloch, P. B., & Bell, J. (1976). Managing investigations: The Rochester system. Washington: Police Foundation.

Bloch, P. B., & Weidman, D. R. (1975). Managing criminal investigations: Prescriptive package. Washington: U.S.

Government Printing Office.

Braga, A. A., & Cook, P. J. (2018). The association of firearm caliber with likelihood of death from gunshot injury in criminal assaults. JAMA Network Open, 1, 1–10.

Braga, A. A., & Dusseault, D. (2018). Can homicide detectives improve homicide clearance rates?Crime & Delinquency, 64(3), 283–315.

Braga, A. A., Turchan, B., & Barao, L. (2019). The influence of investigative resources on homicide clearances. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 35(2), 337–364.

Carter, D. L., & Carter, J. G. (2016). Effective police homicide investigations: Evidence from seven cities with high clearance rates. Homicide Studies, 20(2), 150–176.

Chaiken, J. M., Greenwood, P. W., & Petersilia, J. (1976). The criminal investigation process: A summary report.S a n t a Monica: RAND Corporation.

Cook, P. J. (1985). The case of the missing victims: Gunshot woundings in the National Crime Survey. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1, 91–102.

Cook, P. J., Ho, J., & Shilling, S. (2017). Criminal investigations of gun assaults and murders in Durham, 2015: The challenge of securing victim and witness cooperation . Durham: Duke University Sanford School of Public Policy.

Eck, J. E. (1983). Solving crimes: The investigation of burglary and robbery . Washington: Police Executive Research Forum.

Eck, J. E. (1992). Criminal investigation. In G. Cordner & D. Hale (Eds.), What works in policing? Operations and administration examined (pp. 19–34). Cincinnati: Anderson.

Ericson, R. V . (1982).Reproducing order: A study of police patrol work. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

Folk, J. F. (1971). Municipal detective systems—A quantitative approach (Operations Research Center Technical Report No. 55). Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Greenwood, P. W., Chaiken, J. M., & Petersilia, J. (1977). The investigation process. Lexington: Lexington Books.

Greenwood, P. W., & Petersilia, J. (1975). The criminal investigation process: Volume I: Summary and policy implica- tions. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/reports/R1776.html Kapustin, M., Ludwig, L., Punkay, M., Smith, K., Speigel, L., & Weigus, D. (2017). Gun violence in Chicago, 2016.

Chicago: University of Chicago Crime Lab.

Keel, T. G., Jarvis, J. P., & Muirhead, Y. E. (2009). An exploratory analysis of factors affecting homicide investigations:

Examining the dynamics of murder clearance rates. Homicide Studies, 13, 50–68.

Mastrofski, S. D. (2015). Ideas & insights: Police CEOs: Agents of change? T h eP o l i c eC h i e f, 82, 53–54.

McEwen, T. (2010). The role and impact of forensic evidence in the criminal justice system. Washington: National Institute of Justice.

McEwen, T., & Regoeczi, W. C. (2015). Forensic evidence in homicide investigations and prosecutions. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 60, 1188–1198.

National Research Council. (2014). Identifying the culprit: Assessing eyewitness identification . Washington: U.S.

National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Scientific Approaches to Understanding and Maximizing the Validity and Reliability of Eyewitness Identification in Law Enforcement and the Courts.

Peterson, J., Sommers, I., Baskin, D., & Johnson, D. (2010). The role and impact of forensic evidence in the criminal justice process. Washington: National Institute of Justice.

546 COOK ET AL .

Police Executive Research Forum. (2009). The stop snitching phenomenon: Breaking the code of silence. Washington:

Author. https://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-p158-pub.pdf Reiss, A. J. (1971). The police and the public. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Reiss, A. J., & Bordua, D. J. (1967). Environment and organization: A perspective on the police. In D. Bordua (Ed.), The police: Six sociological essays (pp. 22–55). New York: Wiley.

Richardson, D. A., & Kosa, R. (2001). An examination of homicide clearance rates: Foundation for the development of a homicide clearance model . Washington: Police Executive Research Forum.

Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure. (1981). Philips commission (Research Study 17). London, England: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

Schroeder, D. A., & White, M. D. (2009). Exploring the use of DNA evidence in homicide investigations, implications for detective work and case clearance. Police Quarterly, 12(3), 319–342.

Skogan, W. G., & Frydl, K. (2004). Fairness and effectiveness in policing . Washington: National Academy Press.

Sparrow, M. K., Moore, M. H., & Kennedy, D. M. (1990). Beyond 911: A new era for policing. New York: Basic Books.

Ward, R. H. (1971). The investigative function: Criminal investigation in the United States (Doctoral dissertation). Uni- versity of California—Berkley, Berkley, CA.

Weisburd, D. L., & Majmundar, M. K. (Eds.). (2018).Proactive policing: Effects on crime and communities. Washington:

The National Academy Press.

Wellford, C., & Cronin, J. (1999). An analysis of variables affecting the clearance of homicides: A multistate study.

Washington: Justice Research and Statistics Association.

Zimring, F. E. (1972). The medium is the message: Firearm caliber as a determinant of death from assault. The Journal of Legal Studies, 1, 97–123.

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES
Philip J. Cook is the Terry Sanford Professor Emeritus of Public Policy and professor emeritus of economics and sociology at Duke University. He is a fellow of the American Society of Criminology and an honorary member of the National Academy of Medicine. His Ph.D., in economics, is from the University of California, Berkeley. His most recent book is The Gun Debate, with Kristin Goss (Oxford University Press, 2014).

Anthony A. Braga is a distinguished professor and director of the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Northeastern University. He is a fellow of the American Society of Criminology.

Prof. Braga is also a past president and fellow of the Academy of Experimental Criminology and the 2014 recipient of its Joan McCord Award. He received his M.P.A. from Harvard University and Ph.D. in criminal justice from Rutgers University.

Brandon S. Turchan is a Ph.D. student in the School of Criminal Justice at Rutgers University and a research fellow in the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Northeastern University. His research is focused on policing, gun violence, and program evaluation. His work has appeared in Criminology & Public Policy,Epidemiologic Reviews, Security Journal, Homicide Studies, Applied Geography, and Journal of Quantitative Criminology.

Lisa M. Barao is a postdoctoral research associate in the Center on Crime & Community Resilience. She earned her Ph.D. in criminology and justice policy from Northeastern University.

Her research interests include police organizational culture and evidence-based crime prevention strategies.

COOK ET AL . 547
How to cite this article: Cook PJ, Braga AA, Turchan BS, Barao LM. Why do gun murders have a higher clearance rate than gunshot assaults? Criminol Public Policy. 2019;18:525–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12451
APPENDIX A: CASE DESCRIPTIONS
Gun homicide—immediate arrest
At 1:45 A.M. on a Saturday night, a 25-year-old Black male was shot seven times to the head and torso while sitting in a car at the intersection of a major thoroughfare and a side street. BPD dispatchers were immediately notified of multiple shots fired by the Shotspotter system and received several calls for service from concerned citizens who reported shots were fired. Nearby BPD district officers arrived at the scene in less than 30 seconds; these officers immediately secured the scene and attempted to administer medical aid to the victim. BPD dispatchers then issued “full notifications” for a potential homicide incident; homicide detectives arrived to the scene within 16 minutes of the initial call for ser- vice. Emergency medical services technicians pronounced the victim dead at the scene. Three members of the crime scene response unit responded to the scene and spent 3.5 hours processing the scene. Key evidence recovered from the scene included 15 cartridge casings and 6 bullet fragments. All recovered crime gun evidence came from .380 or 9 mm firearms. Nine detectives and officers canvassed the scene and surrounding area for witnesses. Eleven potential witnesses were interviewed at the scene by homi- cide detectives; none could make a positive identification. Several, however, confirmed that an SUV sped away from the scene after shots were fired. The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner removed the corpse from the crime scene; four bullets were removed from the cadaver during the autopsy.

As members of the citywide Youth Violence Strike (gang unit) were responding to the initial dis- patch, the officers noticed an SUV speeding from the shooting location. YVSF officers pulled over the SUV and located three known gang members in the vehicle (all Black males between the ages of 18 and 30). These officers recovered two 9 mm pistols and one .380 pistol from these individu- als. Homicide detectives conferred with the on-call assistant DA and were authorized to arrest these individuals for the homicide. The homicide detectives received approval for search warrants for the victim’s car, the suspects’ SUV , and three mobile phones (the victim’s phone and two phones recov- ered from the suspects). The next day, homicide detectives located video of the incident from a nearby camera that revealed the SUV speeding away from the scene; the video captured the license plate of the suspect SUV . Within 2 days, ballistic analysis confirmed that the guns recovered from the suspects were the same guns used to shoot the victim. Subsequent interviews with associates of the victim and the suspects suggested that the homicide was generated by ongoing violence between feuding gangs.

The interviews revealed that the victim was believed to have fired shots at the rival gang earlier in the evening and was believed to be the killer in a previous homicide of a member of the rival gang.

Gun homicide—arrest later
At 4:13
P.M. on a Thursday afternoon, a 21-year-old Black male was shot three times in the torso while in his cousin’s apartment located in a Boston public housing building. BPD officers were notified of the shooting by both a Shotspotter activation and multiple citizen calls for shots fired. BPD officers arrived at the apartment within 2 minutes of the initial dispatch for shots fired, attempted to administer aid, and secured the scene; homicide detectives were present at the scene within 8 minutes of the “full notifications” dispatch. The victim was transported by emergency medical services to Boston Medical

548 COOK ET AL .

Center where he was pronounced dead. Twelve detectives and officers canvassed the apartment build- ing and surrounding neighborhood for potential witnesses. Twenty-four individuals were interviewed by the detectives; one witness informed officers that, after the shots, a Black male hurried out of the back door of the building and placed something in the dumpster. This witness also provided a detailed description of the clothing worn by the suspect. Three crime scene response unit officers and two crime lab scientists spent approximately 5 hours processing the indoor crime scene and dumpster area. Three .45 cartridge casings and two bullet fragments were recovered in the apartment. A .45 semiautomatic pistol was recovered from the dumpster. A bullet was recovered from the cadaver during the autopsy.

Subsequent interviews with the victim’s family suggested that the victim was not the intended target.

Rather, the victim was visiting his cousin who was a known marijuana dealer. A review of the cousin’s criminal history confirmed that he was a convicted drug dealer; the cousin was not cooperative with the homicide detectives when interviewed. A BPD drug control unit officer, however, provided intelligence that a rival marijuana dealer had an ongoing dispute with the cousin.

Video pulled from the housing project building captured a male matching the witness description entering the building before the shooting occurred. The New England Electronic Crimes Task Force enhanced the video quality; this yielded a clear image of the suspect’s face. Unfortunately, reviews of the image by officers who worked the area and witnesses from the scene did not result in a positive identification of the shooter. The findings from subsequent analyses of the ballistic evidence confirmed that the recovered casings and bullets from the crime scene and the bullet from cadaver matched the recovered .45 pistol. Fingerprints were successfully lifted from the recovered .45 pistol. When the investigation did not progress further over the next several weeks, the homicide detectives released the video to a local news station; the news station aired the video with the request for an identifica- tion of the suspect. After 2 days, a citizen called the homicide unit and identified the suspect as his brother. The accumulated evidence in the case was presented to the grand jury who indicted the sus- pect. Approximately 3 months after the homicide, the BPD fugitive apprehension unit located and arrested the 24-year-old Black male suspect. Subsequent fingerprints taken from the suspect matched the fingerprints on the recovered firearm. The suspect then confessed to the murder.

Nonfatal shooting—immediate arrest
At 10:05
P.M. on Saturday night, the BPD received a call for two 25-year-old Black males shot inside of a strip club. A patrol officer working a detail on the same block immediately responded to the scene and stopped a 31-year-old Black male who was fleeing from the club. The officer frisked the individual and arrested him after finding a .38 revolver in his backpack. As neither victim died, the suspect was charged with illegal gun possession and two aggravated assaults with a deadly weapon—firearm counts.

Responding homicide and district detectives interviewed 28 individuals who were present in the club at the time of the shooting. A bouncer reported that the alleged shooter got into an argument with the victims after being bumped by one victim. After calming down the suspect and victims, no further conflict was observed by the bouncer. None of the interviewed individuals from the scene reported seeing the suspect shoot the victims. Shortly after the arrest, the shooter’s hands were subjected to a gunshot residue test by district detectives. Two crime scene response unit officers processed the crime scene for nearly 6 hours; three bullet fragments were recovered from the scene. Club video cameras did not capture the shooting but did place the suspect in the club during the time that the shooting occurred.

Both victims were transported to the Boston Medical Center by emergency response services; one victim was shot in the back and claimed not to have seen the individual who committed the shooting.

He did not provide any helpful information on any events that may have led to the shooting. This victim

COOK ET AL . 549
reviewed a photo array and did not identify the suspect. The other victim suffered a life-threatening gunshot wound to the head and was in a coma for more than a month. A bullet fragment was recovered from the victim’s jaw. Once this victim regained consciousness, he had no memory of what happened that evening. Although the victims and the suspect had criminal histories, none were documented gang members; there were also no police records that the suspect was connected to the victims via arrest or field contact reports.

The gunshot residue kit was processed by the Massachusetts State Police and confirmed that the suspect had recently fired a gun. The BPD ballistics unit confirmed that the bullet fragments were fired from the .38 revolver recovered from the suspect.

Nonfatal shooting—arrest later
At 9:30
P.M. on a Wednesday night, the BPD received multiple calls for shots fired at a residential location; the dispatch to officers was soon upgraded to a “person shot” call of service after the initial 911 call was received. BPD district officers and detectives responded to the scene within 3 minutes of the initial dispatch and found a 15-year-old Hispanic male on the front stoop of his house that was shot in the thigh. Eleven officers and detectives interviewed 15 individuals at the scene. Several witnesses reported that a young Hispanic male wearing a white t-shirt and blue jeans pulled up to the house on a bicycle and fired shots at the victim. The victim’s brother chased the shooter but was not successful in stopping the individual. The family was responsive to the detectives’ questions and expressed concern that the victim had recently started associating with a local gang. Unfortunately, no witnesses were able to make a positive identification of the shooter. The victim was transported to Boston Medical Center and was not cooperative with the police when interviewed at the hospital. Two crime scene response unit officers processed the crime scene and recovered three .22 shell casings.

The victim was eventually released from the hospital and re-interviewed by district detectives approximately 10 days after the initial shooting. The victim was much more cooperative and reported that he did not know the actual identity of the shooter. He just knew the shooter as “JT”. The district detectives contacted the BPD Youth Violence Strike Force and asked whether officers knew a gang member who used the “JT” nickname. The YVSF officers did know an individual from a rival gang who was known by this nickname. The detectives and YVSF officers then worked with Boston Regional Intelligence Center analysis to establish the identity of “JT” via analyses of intelligence information and social media resources. After JT’s identity was confirmed, the detectives applied for a search war- rant for his home. The execution of the search warrant led to the recovery of a .22 semiautomatic pistol. The suspect, an 18-year-old Hispanic male, was initially charged with illegal possession of a firearm. After the BPD Ballistics Unit confirmed that the .22 semiautomatic pistol did fired the shell casings recovered at the crime scene, the suspect was charged with assault and battery with deadly weapon—firearm slightly more than 4 months after the initial shooting.

550 COOK ET AL .

APPENDIX B: ADDITIONAL TABLES
TABLE A1 Crime scene investigation results
O n eo rM o r eG u nH o m i c i d e s
(N = 200)
Nonfatal Only
(N = 228)
Result Mean Median Mean Median
N Scene Witnesses Interviewed 9.2 7 4.8 4
N Firearms Recovered 0.4 0 0.2 0
N Vehicle, Victim, Other Computer Checks 4.6 4 2.4 2
N Evidence Collected
*

24.3 19 8.8 7
N Officers Providing Information 2.9 3 1.8 1
N Videos Collected 2.1 2 0.6 1
Note. Exceptional clearances excluded (4 fatal, 3 nonfatal). *The variable “evidence collected” includes all evidence that is collected from the crime scene and submitted to the crime lab for documen- tation. The BPD logs everything it collects from the crime scene into its “Evidence Tracker” database. The crime lab analysts then log tests and results into this database. The counting is inclusive. For instance, each cartridge casing, piece of clothing, and so on, is logged separately.

Items like broken glass, however, would be considered one unit (preserved in a bag) rather than counting each shard (same window or bottle, etc.; separate windows/bottles would result in separate items). A shirt could be tested for the presence of hairs or fibers (fibers that were not part of the shirt cloth). In the database, the shirt would be Piece 1 and any detected hairs or fibers would be subitems 1A, 1B, 1C. We coded the shirt as one piece of evidence, coded the trace hair/fiber analysis as a test, and then coded the test results.

TABLE A2 Crime scene results
Median of the Relevant Distribution
Not Cleared Cleared by Arrest Arrest in First Week Arrest Later Result Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal Interviews with
Witnesses at Scene
739 4 9 4 8 4
Firearms Recovered 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Computer Checks on
Vehicles, etc.
324 3 4 2 5 2
Evidence Collected 17 6 24 11 22 9 24.5 18
Officers Providing
Information
212 1 2 1 2 1
Videos Collected 1 0 2 1 2 1 2 0
Total Cases 113 185 87 43 23 30 64 13
Mean of the Relevant Distribution
Not Cleared Cleared by Arrest Arrest in First Week Arrest Later Result Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal Interviews with
Witnesses at Scene

8.5 3.4 10.1 5.6 10.1 5.8 10.2 5.1
Firearms Recovered 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.2
Computer Checks on
Vehicles, etc.

3.8 2.2 5.7 3.2 4.4 3.1 6.1 3.5
Evidence Collected 20.2 7.5 29.5 14.5 25.0 11.1 31.1 22.3 Officers Providing
Information

2.7 1.8 3.1 2.0 2.8 2.1 3.2 1.6
Videos Collected 1.8 0.4 2.5 1.2 2.7 1.3 2.5 1.0
Total Cases 113 185 87 43 23 30 64 13

COOK ET AL . 551
TABLE A3 Subsequent actions/forensic tests (exceptional clearances excluded) O n eo rM o r eG u n
Homicides (N = 200) Nonfatal Only (N = 228)
Result Mean Median Mean Median
N Postscene Witnesses Interviewed 2.37 2 0.53 0
N Search Warrants Executed 1.38 1 0.33 0
N Suspect Computer Checks 4.92 3 2.35 1
N Latent Print Tests 10.42 7 4.76 3
N Ballistic Tests 11.58 9 7.56 5
N DNA Tests 0.88 0 0.29 0
N Trace, Pattern, Other Tests 0.63 0 0.12 0
TABLE A4 Subsequent actions/forensic tests
Median of the Relevant Distribution
Not Cleared Cleared by Arrest Arrest in First Week Arrest Later Result Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal N Postscene Witnesses
Interviewed
102 1 2 1 2 0
N Search Warrants
Executed
0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1
N Suspect Computer
Checks
313 2 3 3 4 3
N Latent Print Tests 7 3 9 4 8 3 10 6
N Ballistic Tests 8 5 10 7 10 7 10 9
N DNA Tests 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
N Trace, Pattern,
Other Tests
000 0 0 0 0 0
Total Cases 113 185 87 43 23 30 64 13
Mean of the Relevant Distribution
Not Cleared Cleared by Arrest Arrest in First Week Arrest Later Result Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal Fatal Nonfatal N Postscene Witnesses
Interviewed

1.8 0.2 3.1 2.0 3.5 2.2 3.0 1.3
N Search Warrants
Executed

0.7 0.1 2.3 1.2 1.9 0.9 2.5 1.9
N Suspect Computer
Checks

4.5 1.8 5.5 4.8 4.7 4.3 5.8 5.2
N Latent Print Tests 9.3 4.5 11.9 5.8 10.5 4.5 12.4 8.8 N Ballistic Tests 10.2 7.1 13.4 9.5 12.9 8.6 13.6 11.5
N DNA Tests 0.6 0.3 1.3 0.5 0.6 0.1 1.5 0.5
N Trace, Pattern,
Other Tests

0.6 0.1 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.9 0.5
Total Cases 113 185 87 43 23 30 64 13

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7000 TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981-7099 E-mail: [email protected]
Office of the City Manager

WORKSESSION
March 12, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
Submitted by: Jennifer Louis, Chief of Police
Subject: 2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report

INTRODUCTION
At the request of City Council, the City Manager provides regular reports on crime in Berkeley. The Berkeley Police Department Annual Report details 2023 year-end crime, collision, stop data and use of force data. This annual report also serves to provide a number of status updates on Council referral items, department initiatives and legislative mandates.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The mission of the Berkeley Police Department is to safeguard our diverse community through proactive law enforcement and problem solving, treating all people with dignity and respect. The Department works in service to the community and in partnership with the community, the Office of the Director of Police Accountability and the Police Accountability Board, as well as other City Departments and our regional partners.

The Berkeley Police Department understands the importance of partnering with the community and maintaining accountability. We are committed to being transparent about our policies and actions, to sharing data and information, and welcoming suggestions on enhancing our service quality as we safeguard our community. To help achieve that goal, the Department launched our Transparency Hub. That hub gives the public an accessible platform to analyze critical data and insights related to policing activities, calls for service, crimes, traffic safety, and community engagement. It can be accessed at bit.ly/bpd-transparency and provides near-real-time, area-specific data directly to our community.

2 To further support our public safety efforts and collaboration with stakeholders and our commitment to transparency and accountability, the Department has expanded the annual crime report to provide a more comprehensive annual report which is attached here and will be presented to Council during the Special Meeting on March 12, 2024.

This report will cover a range of topics beyond the traditional reporting on crime and collision data. It will include reporting on staffing levels, specific information on call volume, type and response, efforts related to fair and impartial policing initiatives, crime and public safety problem solving responses, as well as other important departmental efforts.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
There are no identifiable environmental effects, climate impacts, or sustainability opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
Specific fiscal implications related to items referred to within this report are addressed in the biennial budget process. Additional information of costs can be provided as needed.

CONTACT PERSON
Chief Jennifer Louis, Police Department, (510) 981-5700 Data and Policy Analyst Arlo Malmberg, Police Department (510) 981-5747

ATTACHMENT

1. 2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report

cc: Dee Williams-Ridley, City Manager
LaTanya Bellow, Deputy City Manager
Anne Cardwell, Deputy City Manager
Jennifer Louis, Chief of Police
Mark Numainville, City Clerk

Internal
I

2023 Berkeley Police
Department Annual
Report
March 12, 2024

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
1 Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 2 Staf
fing & Workload ........................................................................................................................ 4 St
affing ........................................................................................................................................ 4 Workload / Calls for Service ........................................................................................................ 7 Workload Metrics ...................................................................................................................... 10 Department Initiatives .............................................................................................................. 11 What We’ve Done ................................................................................................................. 11 How We’re Doing................................................................................................................... 13 What’s Next ........................................................................................................................... 16 Crime & Investigations .................................................................................................................. 18 Crime Data ................................................................................................................................. 18 Part One Crimes ..................................................................................................................... 19 Crime Categories of Interest .................................................................................................. 20 Department Initiatives .............................................................................................................. 23 What We’ve Done ................................................................................................................. 23 How We’re Doing................................................................................................................... 25 What’s Next ........................................................................................................................... 27 Road Safety & Collisions ............................................................................................................... 29 Collision Data ............................................................................................................................. 29 Department Initiatives .............................................................................................................. 31 What We’ve Done ................................................................................................................. 31 How We’re Doing................................................................................................................... 32 What’s Next ........................................................................................................................... 33 Accountability: Stops & Use of Force............................................................................................ 34 Stop Data Report ....................................................................................................................... 34 Use of Force Report ................................................................................................................... 38 Audits & Oversight ........................................................................................................................ 41 City Auditor Reports .................................................................................................................. 42 Fair and Impartial Policing Recommendations ......................................................................... 42

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
2 Introduction
In presenting the Berkeley Police Department's annual report, we reaffirm our enduring mission, embrace our vision for the future, and recommit to our core values. These principles guide our daily operations and strategic planning, ensuring that we serve our community with the utmost integrity, respect, and dedication.

Mission: United in service, our mission is to safeguard our diverse community through pr
oactive law enforcement and problem solving, treating all people with dignity and respect.

Vision: The Berkeley Police Department will be a team of leaders at every level. We will foster s
trong relationships with our community, inspiring trust through our service, building on our historic tradition of progressive policing, and dedicated to the safety of all.

Values: Service is our calling. As members of this community, the Berkeley Police Department team is committed to proactive law enforcement and problem solving, holding these as our core values:
• Integrity: We are ethical, fair, and trustworthy in all we do. • Sa
fety: We strive to keep our community and each other safe. • Respect: We fulfill our duties with dignity, compassion, and empathy. • Diversity: We value the strength of a diverse workplace and community. We endeavor to reflect the community we serve, promoting inclusion and fairness. • Professionalism: We commit to organizational excellence through progressive training, positive attitude, and superior performance.

Command Staff began the year by strategically assessing the key challenges and opportunities facing the department. We sought to align our priorities with the needs of the community, the concerns of the Council, and the principles named above. Guided by this analysis, we focused on three priorities for 2023:

Recruitment and Retention: Our priority is attracting and retaining staff who align with our core principles. We are proud of our diverse team that shares our community's values and commitment to service.

Proactivity and Problem Solving: Crime prevention and long-term problem solving is a major focus for us. That's why we emphasize being proactive, using data to spot potential issues early and working with the community to find solutions before problems escalate.

Internal Communication: This year we recommitted ourselves to clear, consistent communication so every member of our department feels informed, understands what's expected, and has the resources they need to do their jobs well.

These priorities are reflected in the work completed in 2023 and detailed below. To that end, the value of this report is multifold. To the Council, it offers a transparent, measurable account of our stewardship of public trust and resources, while also highlighting how our strategies align

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
3 with and complement the work of the Office of the Director of Police Accountability and the Police Accountability Board. To the community, it underscores our unwavering commitment to public safety and service, demonstrating our efforts in connecting with and uplifting the Reimagining Public Safety initiative and Fair and Impartial Policing principles. To our department, it provides a foundation for continuous improvement and a benchmark for the pursuit of excellence as we move into 2024.

As we present this annual report we invite our community and its representatives to reflect on our shared achievements, to engage with us in addressing the challenges ahead, and to contribute to the evolution of our service to better suit the needs of all those we are privileged to serve.

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
4 Staffing & Workload
Despite a high workload, our department has sought to enhance efficiency and service quality.

Through innovative recruitment and retention strategies, community engagement, and performance analytics, we have continued to strengthen our operational effectiveness. Our ongoing commitment to strategic analysis and accountability ensures sustained care and excellence in our service to the community.

Staffing
Current Levels
As of 2/7/24, we are staffed at 151 police officers, well below our current authorized staffing level of 181 sworn personnel. Two of those positions are held by recruit officers who are currently in the academy, and 5 are in field training and will not reach solo officer status until June 2024. Twenty four of the 151 officers are eligible to retire, and at least half of these 24 have stated an intent to retire over the course of 2024.

Berkeley Police Department currently is authorized 36 dispatch positions and is currently staffed with 23 dispatchers and 4 dispatch supervisors. There are currently 2 dispatchers and 0 supervisors that are eligible to retire. The Communications Center is supported by several per diem and other dispatch-qualified employees who alleviate some of the strain of understaffing.

We are also in the process of hiring additional Community Service Officers (CSO). We are authorized 29 CSOs and are currently staffed with 25. For the last several years we were authorized 22 CSOs but 6 CSOs and 1 CSO Supervisor were added to the Fiscal Year 2023 budget as a recommendation stemming from the reimagining public safety process. Conceptually, the additional CSOs will be trained to respond to lower priority calls and bridge the gap between sworn and professional personnel performing a variety of tasks that would have traditionally fallen to a sworn officer. Community outreach and engagement will be part of the work of CSOs as well. Staff has encountered difficulty identifying the scope of necessary training and attracting existing CSOs to this developing position since it was only funded on a limited three-

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
5 year term in the FY 2023 budget. The Department is committed to supporting this reimagining public safety goal and will continue work to develop this program.

Recruitment and Retention Strategies
The Berkeley Police Department prides itself on rigorous evaluation of police officer applicants, as well as hiring and training some of the profession’s best officers who exemplify the department’s overall mission as well as the values of our diverse and vibrant City. Beyond the expectations to successfully complete training and education requirements, the department demands that officers hold themselves to a departmental culture of integrity, respect, and professionalism. The Department continues to actively recruit and work with Human Resources to facilitate open and continuous recruitments to reach full staffing of police officers, dispatchers and other critical positions in the department.

Recruitment and Retention Team
To help address the challenges associated with hiring, in 2022 the department committed to the creation of a Recruitment and Retention Team. That team is comprised of officers and dispatchers who work with
Personnel and Training on a
part-time basis to attend job
fairs, work on our social media
outreach, respond to applicants
who submit interest cards, and
facilitate ride-alongs with
officers and sit-alongs with
dispatchers. In 2023, the
Recruitment and Retention
Team attended 111 events,
corresponded with 2,600
potential applicants, and
ultimately funneled 8 recruits into the academy and 4 Lateral officers into the Field Training Program. They also helped to hire 7 Public Safety Dispatchers.

Recruitment Incentives
In 2022, the department introduced the Recruitment and Retention Incentive Program, approved by City Council, to enhance our recruitment strategy and strengthen community ties.

This initiative allowed all city employees to refer potential candidates, significantly increasing our recruiter base and ensuring that we are attracting candidates familiar with the community.

In that way, this initiative supports our efforts to hire individuals who understand and embody Berkeley's deeply rooted values. The incentive program also boosted hiring bonuses for applicants, with 19 applicants qualifying for the incentive in 2023.

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
6 Wellness
In 2023, BPD received Collaborative Reform Assistance through the COPS Office, which funded in-person financial wellness training to all employees. This also provided future virtual training for 30 new employees as they are hired. The department used funding from the BSCC Officer Wellness Grant to contract with the West Coast Post Trauma Retreat to provide confidential immersive assistance to employees to work through traumatic experiences and build resilience.

We also used this funding to provide two blocks of training from The Counseling Team International. The training was called First to Respond, Last to Seek Help and Mental Health Mayday, which further assisted officers navigating vicarious trauma and negative health impacts. The BSCC grant was also used to purchase a two-year contract to provide staff with a mobile wellness application called Light House. This application provides staff with anonymous access to health and wellness resources. We renewed our Public Safety Family Counseling Group contract, which supports our Peer Support Team through training and guidance. Their clinicians are essential to assisting with our response to critical incidents, facilitation of critical incident stress debriefs, and providing individual support to employees. BPD continued our partnership with O2X staff to provide nutrition, mental health, sleep and yoga workshops to employees. Our onsite strength and conditioning coach and athletic trainer both saw improved engagement with public safety personnel. Outdated fitness equipment was replaced, a new outdoor break area was created to provide staff an area to regroup and hold meetings outdoors. The BPD Wellness and Resilience Group along with BPD leadership will continue to look for ways to provide services and opportunities to enhance the overall well-being of BPD employees.

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
7 Workload / Calls for Service
The Berkeley Police Department (BPD) is committed to providing timely and effective responses to calls for service from our community. This section of the annual report provides a detailed analysis of the calls for service we receive and the strategies we have employed to manage and respond to these calls efficiently and effectively.

Yearly
In 2023, the Berkeley Police Department received a total of 63,791 calls for service (CFS). This figure gives us a sense of the community's needs and the demand for police services.

The data shows a 2.3% increase in the volume of calls compared to the previous year (62,245 total in 2022), signaling a slow increase of call volumes towards pre-pandemic levels. Over the past 5 years, BPD has managed an average of 64,868 calls for service annually.

Monthly
The average number of calls for service per month in 2023 was 5,308.

There is a discernible pattern throughout the year with peaks in May and September, reaching up to 5,737 calls. This pattern is consistent with trends observed in recent years and provides insight into seasonal variations in the frequency of calls that we may expect to see in future years.

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
8 Geography
Geographically, the distribution of calls for
service highlights areas of higher demand
within the city. In 2023, City Council District 4
registered the most calls of any council
district.

This geographical pattern has informed our
operational strategies, leading to adjustments
in police beats (more on our beat map below)
and resource allocation to ensure an
appropriate and timely response to
community needs.

Initial Call Type
When a dispatcher receives a call for service, they determine a call type, often a penal code type, using the information immediately available from the caller. An officer may arrive on scene and determine the nature of the incident is different than that of the initial call type.

Therefore, the call type data, along with priority level data (below), is useful as an indication of the information available to the call taker before an officer arrives on scene to investigate further. The most frequent non-officer-initiated call types in 2023 were:

Most Frequent Initial Call Types* 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Disturbance 6,833 5,578 5,493 5,450 5,378
Audible Alarm 4,207 3,405 3,671 4,007 4,231
Wireless 911 2,830 2,401 2,580 2,814 3,144
Welfare Check 3,020 2,559 2,693 2,679 2,736
Theft 2,864 2,852 2,101 2,187 2,312
*Non-officer-initiated calls; 5 most frequent in 2023

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
9 The data for 2023 shows that the most frequent call types align with the patterns observed in recent years, offering insight into the
prevalent issues and concerns within the
community.

Priority Level
In 2023, nearly 50% of non-officer-initiated
calls for service were classified as Priority 1 or
Priority 2. These categories represent the
most urgent calls, requiring immediate police
response due to their potential threat to life,
safety, or property.

It is important to note that calls classified as
lower priority, such as Priority 3 or Priority 4, often involve serious matters that are considered 'cold,' meaning there is no immediate danger to life or property. These calls might include reports of past incidents where the suspect is no longer on the scene or situations that, while serious, do not require an urgent police response. BPD is dedicated to investigating and resolving these matters with the same level of professionalism and thoroughness as higher priority calls, as every call represents a significant concern for the community members involved.

Dispositions
The disposition of a call for service is selected by officers and dispatch from a predefined list and marks the conclusion of the incident. Due to the complexity and dynamic nature of police responses, a single call may result in multiple dispositions.

Dispositions of Interest* 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Case Report 10,141 8,819 8,948 10,318 11,247
RIPA Survey - 594* 1,489 1,379 1,118
Homeless-Related - - 1,275* 2,721 2,727
Mental-Health Related 1,573 1,133 1,840 2,912 3,109
*Non-officer-initiated calls; dispositions for RIPA and Homeless-Related started in 2020 and 2021, respectively.

The disposition data sh ows a notable increase in “Mental-Health Related” dispositions in 2022 (reflecting a change in reporting practice) and “Case Report” dispositions in 2023 (reflecting a rise in crime). “Homeless-Related” dispositions have rapidly increased since being tracked in 2021, w
hile “RIPA Survey” dispositions (stops) have decreased since being tracked in 2020.

These trends reflect evolving community needs and the changing focus of police response efforts.

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
10 Workload Metrics
The workload metrics below offer insights into the operational challenges and demands that BPD faces. As staffing levels grow at a slow pace in comparison to the increasing volume of calls for service, it is important to assess the impact on the workload of our officers and the quality of service provided to the community.

Calls per Officer per Sh ift
One of the primary indicators of an officer's workload is the number of calls handled per shift.

Despite efforts to manage workload through backfilling shifts with overtime, officers addressed more calls per service per shift than in any year since 2019.

This trend is an indicator of the growing demands placed on our officers, highlighting the need for strategic planning and resource allocation to maintain high service standards.

Time on Scene per Call
Another crucial aspect of an officer's workload is the time spent on scene per call. This metric is influenced by various factors, including the nature of the call and the overall activity in the city at the time of the call.

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
11 Despite the increase in calls per shift seen above, officers are dedicating more time on scene for each call. This trend reflects both the increasingly complex and demanding nature of the calls and our officers' commitment to providing thorough and quality service in response to each incident.

Department Initiatives
What We’ve Done
In the face of challenging staffing levels coupled with an increasing workload, the Berkeley Police Department (BPD) has proactively taken steps to prioritize our efforts and enhance organizational efficiency.

Department Priorities
In 2023, BPD identified and committed to three core priorities that guided our actions and decisions throughout the year: recruitment and retention, proactivity and problem solving, and internal communication. These priorities were carefully chosen to address the most pressing challenges and opportunities facing the department and thereby maximize the impact of our efforts
The deliberate focus on these three priorities in 2023 was instrumental in keeping the department on track amidst a myriad of challenges and decisions. By consistently revisiting and reflecting on these key areas, we strived to align critical and pivotal decisions made throughout the year with our overarching objectives and the needs of the community we serve. This strategic focus has streamlined our efforts and reinforced our commitment to excellence, innovation, and community engagement.

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
12 Updated Beat Structure
Due to the dynamic nature of
crime patterns, service demands
and staffing levels, BPD recognized
the necessity to re-evaluate our
beat structure, which had been in
place for nearly a decade. Though
effective at its inception, the
previous 16-beat structure placed
a significant strain on our limited
patrol resources and intensified a
need for forced overtime.

In response to these challenges,
our Strategic Analysis Team
conducted a comprehensive analysis of calls for service volume, considering temporal and spatial factors. This data-driven approach culminated in the development of a more efficient 14-beat map, designed to achieve a better balance in workload distribution and service delivery across the city.

The transition to the new beat structure was implemented in April of 2023 by the Operations Division. This strategic shift not only addressed the immediate need for more manageable workloads and reduced reliance on overtime but also sets the stage for the generation of valuable data that will inform the ongoing sworn staffing study.

Early results suggest our efforts to achieve a more equitable workload distribution among officers have been successful. Nevertheless, we believe the addition of swing officers would significantly enhance the effectiveness of this new structure. This would provide the adaptability necessary to address unanticipated fluctuations in service demands.

As BPD continues to evaluate and improve its operations, we look forward to the analysis and recommendations from an impending comprehensive staffing assessment (detailed later in this report). That assessment will be invaluable as we make informed decisions about staffing levels and beat design.

Community Engagement
The limitations on officer resources puts greater emphasis on the importance of trusted relationships with our community. The Department’s community engagement efforts are of

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
13 vital necessity to maintaining and
increasing an efficient workflow. The
Berkeley Police Department’s dedication
to community engagement and
connectedness was a primary focal point
in 2023. From monthly Coffee with a Cop
events, to numerous neighborhood
meetings, city sponsored special events
and strategic department Pop Up events,
the diverse community engagement
activities have initiated, deepened and
expanded police department
relationships with our community.

One program in particular which
highlights our ongoing relationship with
our community is the Law and Social
Justice pathway, a two-year criminal law
program at Berkeley High School. Now in
its 8th year, Law & Social Justice brings
professionals working within the criminal
justice system into contact with juniors
and seniors at Berkeley High. The BHS
students are introduced to police officers,
community service officers, dispatchers,
prosecutors, defense lawyers, judges,
probation officers, and parole officers,
both in the classroom and in the field. The
goal of the class is to introduce students
to careers while creating a place of
informed dialogue pertaining to the
criminal justice system. At the completion
of this school year the class will have
educated more than 680 students.

How We’re Doing
In our ongoing effort to provide
transparent and accountable policing,
BPD closely monitors a range of
performance metrics. These metrics serve
as indicators of our effectiveness and
Among the many opportunities offered by the Law
and Social Justice class at Berkeley High, ride-alongs
with Berkeley PD police officers stand out for their
profound impact on students. One student
recounted their experience with Officer Villaroel,
saying, "The most thrilling part about the ride along
was when we went code 3 with lights and sirens and
we started speeding down the street... I could just
feel the adrenaline going through me.” The student
went on to reflect “people either have good
experiences or bad experiences with cops and
depending on the experience you've had your
opinion on cops might change… being on that ride
alone makes me want to become a cop." This
firsthand experience not only highlights the
challenges and skills involved in policing but also
emphasizes the importance of understanding the
diverse perspectives people have towards law
enforcement.

Similarly, another student was moved by the
personal story of Officer Valle, noting, "he also told
us that [he] could have never imagined he would
become a police officer, because as a teenager he
had multiple unpleasant experiences with law
enforcement” Officer Valle ultimately “decide[d] that
he wanted to be the change in the system which
resulted in him doing some ride alongs, and then
going to the academy" Such stories are emblematic
of the transformative potential of the Law and Social
Justice pathway, bridging the gap between law
enforcement and the community by fostering
empathy, understanding, and dialogue.

Through these interactions and experiences, the Law
and Social Justice pathway not only educates but
also molds future leaders, thinkers, and change-
makers in our society, reinforcing the connection
between Berkeley PD and our community.

MOMENTS OF IMPACT

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
14 efficiency and also offer insights into areas where we can improve. This section dives into key performance indicators including response times, time on scene by call type, and officer- initiated calls.

Response Times
Response time is a critical measure of our service to our community. BPD is committed to maintaining swift response times and ensuring that community members receive timely assistance in emergencies and other situations requiring police presence.

Below is a comparison of response
times to agencies in the region that
publish this data. Because every
agency defines priority levels
differently, we have included (where
available) the percentage of calls that each priority level represents for the corresponding agency.

Median Response Times, 2023
(minutes)
Level 1 (% of all
calls)
Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
Berkeley 7 (13%) 18 (37%) 51 (24%) 55 (22%)
San Francisco 9 (19%) 32 (30%) 105 (51%) -
Oakland 14 184 443 -
San Jose 7 (5%) 24 (42%) - -
Comparison cities chosen based on data availability and region Time on Scene by Call Type
The time our officers spend on the scene is indicative of the complexity of incidents and our commitment to thorough, community-centered policing. Below is a table of 5 types of calls for service and the resources that BPD allocated to those calls. Below the on-scene time is Our median response time for Priority 1 calls was 7
minutes, meeting or exceeding regional standards.

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
15 measured from the time that the primary unit- that is, the officer responsible for managing the scene and initial investigation- arrives on scene until that officer is no longer working on the incident.

Median Time on Scene by Call Types of
Interest
Median Primary Unit On-Scene
Time
Avg.

Units/Call
Disturbance 17 minutes 1.9
Grand Theft 62 minutes 1.8
Robbery 116 minutes 5.3
Sexual Assault 194 minutes 2.0
Shooting 285 minutes 15.9
The call types listed above represent some of our most common (Disturbance, Grand Theft) and resource intensive (Robbery, Sexual Assault, Shooting) call types. Less severe calls like disturbances required less time on scene, while more serious crimes such as shootings demanded significantly more officer time and resources. This reflects the department's adaptive resource allocation intended to ensure that more critical situations receive the attention necessary for thorough investigation and community support.

Officer-Initiated Calls
Officer-initiated calls serve as an indicator of proactive policing practices and our dedication to ensuring community safety and preventing crime (for an analysis of the impact of our proactive stops, see the “Stop Report” section below). In 2023, the number of officer-initiated calls reflected the challenges and constraints faced by the BPD, including staffing levels and prioritization of non-officer-initiated calls for service.

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
16 The data indicates a lower volume of officer-initiated calls, with an average of 1,173 calls per month. This trend is unsurprising given the impact of staffing levels and the distribution of workload among our officers. Despite these figures, BPD remains committed to proactive community engagement and crime prevention. We are actively exploring strategies to enhance our proactive policing efforts and ensure that our officers have the support and resources they need to effectively engage in community policing and crime prevention, alongside their responsibilities in responding to non-officer-initiated calls for service.

What’s Next
As the Berkeley Police Department (BPD) continues to evolve and adapt to the changing needs of our community and the broader landscape of public safety, we are focused on implementing strategic initiatives that enhance our operational capabilities, ensure accountability, and foster community trust. The upcoming initiatives outlined below represent our proactive approach to addressing current challenges and embracing opportunities for growth and innovation.

Sworn Staffing Study
In our continuous efforts to enhance operational efficiency and align our staffing strategy with the evolving needs of the community, BPD has partnered with Citygate Associates, a firm renowned for its expertise in public safety organizational strategies. Citygate is currently in the process of conducting a comprehensive and independent staffing analysis. This report will bring their extensive experience and specialized knowledge to bear on challenges surfaced by the department, the City Auditor's Audit on Police Overtime and the Fair and Impartial Policing Working Group (more details on recommendations by those bodies below).

Citygate is wrapping up the information gathering phase which involves soliciting feedback from stakeholders as well as analyzing relevant data. The study is on track to be completed by the end of the fiscal year (June 30, 2024). We are optimistic that the findings and recommendations provided by Citygate Associates will be instrumental in shaping our strategic staffing decisions. Early recommendations are being incorporated into the budget process as well as the Command Team Building Workshop we are holding in March 2024. The insights gained from this study will guide our department through this phase of rebuilding staffing levels

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
17 and make sure that future deployment of police services in Berkeley is both effective and aligned with the principles of the Reimagining Public Safety initiative.

Strategic Analysis and Accountability
In a step toward institutionalizing data-driven decision-making and enhancing accountability, the department is focusing analytical efforts on strategic planning and accountability. This approach builds upon the foundational work of the Strategic Analysis Team and aims to drive the implementation of equitable, fair, and effective public safety strategies that are deeply rooted in the principles articulated by the City’s Reimagining Public Safety initiative.

This organizational focus will deepen collaboration with key partners including the Police Accountability Board by providing essential data and insights that support comprehensive police accountability and oversight. Key initiatives will include the enhancement and management of our Early Intervention Systems (EIS, more information in the “Audits and Oversight” section) and the overall risk management framework, demonstrating a commitment to operational excellence and innovation in public safety. This shift represents a proactive effort to meet the emerging needs of the department and community and embodies a vision of a more accountable, transparent, and community-aligned approach to public safety.

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
18 Crime & Investigations
Amid increasing crime rates, our department employs creative, problem-oriented solutions. Our robust clearance rates, competitive on a regional scale, reflect our commitment to delivering first-class police work from start to finish.

Crime Data
Understanding the distinctions between calls for service, case reports, and confirmed crimes is crucial for clarity when reviewing crime data. Calls for service are the initial contacts made by the public with our department, ranging from reports of suspicious activities to requests for emergency assistance. These calls often prompt further investigation.

Following an investigation, if there is reason to believe a crime has occurred, an officer writes a case report. These case reports document the investigation's details, including any evidence collected, witness statements, and the officer's observations and conclusions at that stage.

The determination of whether prosecution will be pursued falls to the District Attorney (DA).

The DA reviews the case report and decides whether they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime occurred.

This higher standard— beyond a
reasonable doubt— is the legal
benchmark used in criminal
trials to determine the guilt of
the accused before any criminal
penalty is imposed.

The statistics presented below
are derived from case reports.

These reports form the
backbone of our crime data
analysis as they provide a
comprehensive overview of our
department's investigative activities and outcomes.

It is important to note that the data below utilizes the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Summary Reporting System (SRS) methodology. The SRS is a national reporting standing that facilitates a summarized account of major crime categories, thereby allowing comparisons over time and across jurisdictions. In 2024 we transitioned to the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), which is an updated national reporting standard that promises a more detailed and nuanced approach to crime data collection and analysis.

NIBRS provides several key advantages over the UCR SRS. Unlike UCR SRS, which focuses on a limited number of "Part One" crimes, NIBRS includes a broader range of crime categories, offering a more comprehensive view of crime in the community. NIBRS captures detailed

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
19 information about each criminal incident, including the types of offenses committed, characteristics of the victims and offenders, types of property involved, and the relationship between the victim and the offender. The detailed data collected through NIBRS supports more sophisticated and nuanced analysis, enabling law enforcement agencies, policymakers, and researchers to identify trends, patterns, and correlations in crime data more effectively across jurisdictions nationwide.

Part One Crimes
Part One Crimes, as classified by the UCR, are comprised of both violent and property crimes, reflecting the most serious offenses. Part Two Crimes include a range of other offenses, providing a broader scope of the crime landscape.

Part One Crimes by Year
In 2023, there was a 10.5% overall increase in total Part One Crime in Berkeley compared to 2022. Specifically, Part One Violent Crimes saw an increase of 100 cases, while Part One Property Crimes rose by 759 cases.

Part One
Crimes by
Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
%
Change
2022-
2023
Homicide 3 1 2 1 1 0 5 0 3 1 -66.7%
Sexual
Assault 35 44 54 83 65 74 47 57 89 97 +9.0%
Robbery 263 330 361 364 353 369 274 265 292 386 +32.2%
Aggravated
Assault 130 155 185 218 167 175 210 210 282 282 +0.0%
Total
Violent
Crimes 431 530 602 666 586 618 536 532 666 766 +15.0%
Burglary 932 1090 805 843 829 771 797 803 1036 1228 +18.5% Larceny 3615 4099 3965 4556 4004 4993 3933 3736 4611 4532 -1.7% Auto Theft 555 717 650 621 548 492 805 1098 836 1350 +61.5% Total
Property
Crimes 5102 5906 5420 6020 5381 6256 5535 5637 6483 7110 +9.7% Arson 15 22 24 30 31 17 52 72 52 84 +61.5%
Total Part
One
Crimes 5548 6458 6046 6716 5998 6891 6123 6241 7201 7960 +10.5%

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
20 The most significant percentage increases in Part One Crimes were observed in Auto Theft (61.48%), Arson (61.54%), and Burglary (18.53%). Conversely, decreases were recorded in Homicide (-66.7%) and Larceny (-1.71%).

Crime Categories of Interest
In 2023, we observed notable trends in specific crime categories, each presenting unique challenges and requiring tailored approaches for effective management and prevention.

Shootings
2023 marked a significant decrease in shooting incidents within Berkeley, with a total of 31 confirmed incidents compared to 53 in 2022. Confirmed shooting incidents encompass both witnessed events and instances where evidence of gunfire, such as shell casings, was discovered.

While the decline in shootings in 2023 is encouraging, the data presented in the chart above shows that the number of incidents remains substantially higher than the 15 reported in 2017.

The data further indicates that the decrease in 2023 primarily stems from a reduction in ‘No Injury' events, where a firearm was discharged but no individuals were struck; however, the persistent occurrence of both ‘Fatal’ and ‘Non-Fatal Injury’ shootings highlights the need for ongoing interventions to combat gun violence. For more on our efforts to recover guns and our collaboration with the City of Berkeley’s Gun Violence Intervention & Prevention program see below.

Robbery
Robberies are crimes involving the unlawful taking of property from a person or their immediate presence, through the use of force or threat of force. This definition encompasses a range of scenarios, from physical confrontations where a victim is threatened or harmed to secure their belongings, to intimidation tactics where the threat of violence compels a victim to surrender their property. Robberies can occur in various settings, including but not limited to,

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
21 public streets (pedestrian robberies), commercial establishments (commercial robberies), residences (home invasions), banks (bank robberies), and incidents involving vehicles (carjackings). The key elements that define an act as robbery include the intent to permanently deprive the owner of their property, the use or threat of force, and the direct interaction with the victim.

Robberies 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Pedestrian 229 247 131 119 148 205
Commercial 108 97 117 118 117 135
Home Invasion 5 4 8 8 8 5
Bank 3 2 5 6 4 2
Carjacking 10 14 13 14 15 39
Total 355 364 274 265 292 386
By Gun (% of
total) 82 (23%) 74 (20%) 46 (17%) 74 (28%) 69 (24%) 111 (29%) The data for 2023 indicates a noticeable increase in robbery incidents, particularly in the pedestrian and carjacking categories. This uptick brings the total number of robberies to 386, marking a 32% rise from the 292 cases in 2022.

Hate Crimes
Hate crimes are crimes motivated by bias against race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or disability. Hate crimes in Berkeley continue to be a critical concern. The majority of hate crime reports in 2023 were characterized as crimes of intimidation, involving slurs or graffiti, rather than physical violence.

Hate incidents are acts of prejudice that are not c
rimes and do not involve violence, threats, or
property damage. We take hate incident reports because these incidents perpetuate prejudice and intolerance, creating an environment of fear and alienation for the targeted individuals and communities, even in the absence of criminal activity.

Hate Crimes 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Race/Ethnicity/National Origin 11 5 7 29 24 27
Religion 3 1 2 11 3 9
Sexual Orientation 3 2 1 2 11 9
Gender 1 0 2 0 0 0
Disability 0 0 0 0 0 1
Total 18 8 12 42 38 46

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
22 Hate Incidents 2021 2022 2023
Race/Ethnicity/National Origin 16 22 24
Religion 1 5 19
Sexual Orientation 4 4 7
Gender 0 0 0
Disability 1 0 0
Total 22 31 50
Prior to October 7th, there were 29 hate crimes, 24 of which were tied to race or religion, including 5 anti-Jewish and 1 anti-Arab or anti-Muslim hate crimes. There were 31 hate incidents before this date, with 24 of these being race or religion-related, including 5 anti- Jewish and 4 anti-Arab or anti-Muslim incidents. Since October 7th, we recorded 17 hate crimes, of which 12 were directly related to race or religion, including 5 anti-Jewish hate crimes and a single hate crime targeting Arab or Muslim individuals. In the same period, hate incidents rose to 19, all related to race or religion, with a notable increase to 13 anti-Jewish hate incidents, while no anti-Arab or anti-Muslim hate incidents were reported.

Sexual Assault
The number of sexual assault cases remained at a high level in 2023, mirroring the figures from 2022. This persistent trend emphasizes the importance of providing support services, raising awareness, and implementing preventive measures to address and reduce instances of sexual assault within the community. The Department continues to take reports where the full elements of the penal code are not met, when a survivor requests a report for catharsis and in other non-investigatory situations. For a significant number of cases the survivors choose not to follow through with an investigation. There are a number of reasons for this, but it inflates our reported numbers compared to other agencies and leads to lower clearance rates. It also reflects our total commitment to providing support to survivors. Additionally, these cases are typically closed as “Suspend” not “Closed” as an added safeguard to protect information on these sensitive cases from being released; this practice directly lowers our clearance rate for sexual assaults.

Sexual Assault 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Felony 65 74 47 57 89 97
Misdemeanor 31 64 38 50 81 62
Total 96 138 85 107 170 159
In 2023, there were 97 felony and 62 misdemeanor sexual assault cases reported, totaling 159 cases, including an increase in the number of felony cases, and a slight decrease from the previous year's total of 170 cases.

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
23 Property Crimes
2023 saw a notable increase in certain property crimes, specifically retail thefts and vehicle thefts, while catalytic converter thefts declined significantly.

Property Crimes of Interest 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Commercial Burglaries 275 307 324 316 435 574
Vehicle Thefts 548 492 805 1098 836 1350
Catalytic Converter Thefts 35 186 586 573 847 457
The Department works in collaboration with regional loss prevention agents to identify organized retail theft offenders. Additionally, the department has been working with the San Francisco Police Department Organized Retail Crime and Fencing units, the Oakland Police Department CRT, the CHP Organized Retail Crime Unit, the Emeryville Police Department, the Palo Alto Police Department, the Walnut Creek Police Department, and the Central Marin Police Authority. We share suspect information, including surveillance photos/videos, suspect vehicles, and suspect MO to link cases committed by the same groups of suspects throughout the Bay Area.

Department Initiatives
What We’ve Done
Firearm Recoveries
In 2023, a total of 69 firearms were recovered, marking a decrease of 42% from the previous year.

Firearm Recovery Methods 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Patrol calls for service 33 36 51 64 41
Patrol proactive traffic stops 25 17 24 12 11
Detective Follow-up investigation 29 32 43 43 17
Total 87 85 118 119 69
All firearms recovered are processed through the National Integrated Ballistic Information Network (NIBIN). This database is a nationwide collaboration coordinated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF). The Department enters ballistic information for each firearm recovered and the database makes connections with evidence recovered from shooting scenes, provides information about persons who have owned and or purchased the firearm.

BPD routinely processes recovered firearms for DNA and fingerprints. This work is key to helping determine who shooters or illegal firearms possessors are.

Gun Violence Intervention & Prevention
To further address the issue of gun violence, the City of Berkeley has developed a Gun Violence Intervention & Prevention program framework as a key component of its Reimagining Public

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
24 Safety initiative. This comprehensive program aims to significantly reduce gun violence incidents through a multifaceted approach. The strategy combines place-based interventions in critical areas, direct engagement with individuals at risk, street outreach, and the provision of robust social services. This collaborative effort, involving multiple city departments, community-based organizations and field experts, is grounded in empirical evidence and best practices. It represents Berkeley's holistic and proactive approach to fostering a safer community by addressing the proximate causes of gun violence and supporting those most at risk.

Tailored Response and Proactivity to Hate Crimes
In response to hate crimes, the Berkeley Police Department emphasizes customized and effective strategies. Each incident is carefully evaluated based on its specific details, including the people involved and the context, ensuring the response is accurately tailored.

Area Coordinators from the Community Services Bureau work closely with community leaders from the areas impacted, offering targeted safety advice. This includes specific strategies for Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) and personal safety, all adapted to fit the unique needs of each situation.

The department also proactively keeps an eye out for potential threats to stay ahead of any issues. To further enhance safety, patrols are increased around places of worship and sensitive locations during important events, providing extra security when it matters most.

Additionally, the Hate Crime Awareness Week campaign plays a crucial role in raising awareness about hate crimes, encouraging community resilience, and urging people to report incidents. Through these focused and anticipatory actions, the Berkeley Police Department commits to maintaining a safe and welcoming environment for everyone.

Automated Security Checks
BPD, with insights from our Strategic Analysis Team, has started using data to guide our patrols through automated security checks. These checks send officers to specific places at times where their presence can help prevent crime. By using detailed crime data to decide where and when officers should go, we are more effectively deterring crime. This careful planning of patrols is part of our larger goal to make our policing strategies smarter and more data-driven.

This way, we can ensure our crime prevention efforts are not only successful but also adapt to the changing needs of our community.

Engravings
To combat a rise in catalytic converter thefts, the BPD invested in an engraving tool, marking 82 catalytic converters with unique identifiers. This initiative is meant to deter thieves by making stolen parts more identifiable and thus harder to sell.

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
25 Through these initiatives, the Berkeley
Police Department has demonstrated its
resolve in adopting a forward-thinking
and community-centric approach to law
enforcement. Our efforts in 2023 have
sought to address immediate concerns as
well as lay a strong foundation for
sustainable safety and security in our
community.

How We’re Doing
As we navigate the complexities of crime
and law enforcement, the Berkeley Police
Department (BPD) remains steadfast in
its commitment to transparency and
accountability. Our performance metrics
for 2023, including Part One Crimes per
capita and clearance rates, provide
valuable insights into our effectiveness
and our ongoing efforts to enhance
public safety in our community.

Part One Crimes per Capita:

With a population of approximately
118,950 (as of July 2022), there were 669
part one crimes overall per 10,000
residents in Berkeley. There were 64
violent crimes per 10,000 residents and
598 property crimes per 10,000 residents
in 2023. In 2022, there were 57 violent
crimes per 10,000 residents and 555
property crimes per 10,000 residents.

Based on the latest data from the
Department of Justice available to the
public, the following crime statistics were
reported in 2022 for cities selected for
their proximity to Berkeley and similar
population sizes:
• In Santa Clara, population 126,930,
there were 31 violent crimes (395
On 1/21/2023 officers responded to an assault
between multiple subjects. The offender had
threatened the 14-year-old survivor with a knife,
twisted her wrist, causing pain and stole various
items from her.

The survivor explained she had been living on the
street and she had met the offender three weeks
prior. The survivor had begun living with the offender
and she was sexually and physically assaulted by the
offender during this time. The offender also
threatened to kill the survivor and prevented her
from leaving the apartment. The survivor disclosed
that the offender furnished and injected
methamphetamine into the victim’s hand. The
offender was arrested at the scene.

Through extensive conversations and follow up,
Detective Martinez and the survivor built trust and
established a close connection. The victim disclosed
that she was a victim of human trafficking in other
cities prior to her arrival in Berkeley. Detective
Martinez connected her with a shelter specializing in
homeless and trafficked youth. Ultimately the
Alameda County District Attorney’s Office charged
the offender with multiple sexual crimes, robbery,
burglary and drug possession.

In the department’s continued commitment to the
survivor, Detective Martinez worked with her family
to find the right family member for her to live with
long term and we matched her with a social worker
specializing in trafficked youth. This social worked
helped get the survivor back into school, into therapy
and helped obtain other resources for the survivor
and her family. Throughout the department’s contact
with the survivor she expressed how she felt seen
and heard by the department and her appreciation
for the work that was done on her case.

MOMENTS OF IMPACT

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
26 incidents in total) and 360 property crimes (4,564 incidents in total) reported per 10,000 residents.
• San Leandro, population 86,762, reported 58 violent crimes (499 incidents in total) and 490 property crimes (4,254 incidents in total) per 10,000 residents. • Richmond, population 114,301, reported 88 violent crimes (1,006 incidents in total) and 272 property crimes (3,117 incidents in total) per 10,000 residents.

Clearance Rates
Forensic and electronic evidence, diligent and detailed investigative efforts, as well as community willingness to share information are critical to developing leads and chargeable cases. The following table summarizes our clearance rates of crimes in UCR categories alongside clearance rates for Santa Clara PD (SCPD), San Leandro PD (SLPD) and Richmond PD (RPD) . A note about clearance rates: the numbers reported for BPD in the second table below only cover cases closed within one year of being reported; however, many investigations occur over an extended period and these cases will be closed after this reporting period.

Part One
Crimes
Clearance
Rates* by
Year –
DOJ
2020
SCPD
2020
SLPD
2020
RPD
2020
BPD
2021
SCPD
2021
SLPD
2021
RPD
2021
BPD
2022
SCPD
2022
SLPD
2022
RPD
2022
BPD
Homicide
100
% 14% 25% 33% -
100
% 25%
100
% 0.0% 0.0% 35% 67%
Sexual
Assault 23% 27% 9.1% 6.4% 15% 17% 67% 5.3% 27% 0.0% 17% 7.9% Robbery 39% 20% 19% 21% 35% 19% 26% 26% 24% 12% 10% 31% Aggravate
d Assault 57% 32% 27% 37% 65% 38% 44% 44% 64% 41% 34% 43% Burglary 7.6% 5.0% 7.6% 11% 6.4% 4.7% 17% 16% 10% 5.2% 11% 15% Larceny 5.5% 4.1% 2.6% 6.8% 4.0% 4.2% 1.5% 4.8% 8.5% 4.1% 1.1% 5.4% Auto
Theft 4.3% 2.7% 11% 3.7% 3.7% 2.7% 7.4% 4.3% 6.7% 2.4% 2.5% 6.1% Arson 20% 20% 6.1% 15% 47% 4.5% 17% 19% 29% 8.3% 17% 15%

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
27 Part One
Crimes
Clearance
Rates* by
Year –
1-Year
2020
BPD
2021
BPD
2022
BPD
Homicide
100
%
100
%
100
%
Sexual
Assault 22% 10% 15%
Robbery 30% 29% 32%
Aggravate
d Assault 57% 61% 46%
Burglary 12% 15% 10%
Larceny 7.3% 7.0% 6.6%
Auto
Theft 9.3% 8.2% 11%
Arson 25% 32% 27%
*Here we are reporting both a DOJ-calculated clearance rate and a 1-year clearance rate for BPD cases. The DOJ rates are calculated by dividing the number of cases reported by the number of cases closed in the same calendar year. A 1-year clearance rate is the percentage of cases that were closed within a year of being reported.

Looking at the 1-ye ar clearance rates, BPD consistently achieved a 100% clearance rate for homicides across all three years. For sexual assault, BPD's clearance rates ran ged from 22% in
2020 to 15% in 2022. Robbery and aggravated assault rates for BPD were generally high, with robbery clearance peaking at 32% in 2022 and aggravated assault at 61% in 2021. Burglary, larceny, and auto theft clearance rates remained relatively low across all jurisdictions, with BPD maintaining consistent rates over the past 3 years.

In 2023, the Property Crimes Bureau was staffed with 3 detectives out of 5 allocated positions, the Youth Services Detail was staffed with 2 detectives of 3 allocated positions, while the Robbery, Homicide and Sex Crimes units were fully staffed.

What’s Next
Gun Violence Restraining Orders
The Department recently began using a newly created tool called the Gun Violence Retraining Order (GVRO). This restraining order allows for the seizure of firearms from a person who “poses an immediate and present danger of causing personal injury to self or another by custody or control, owning, purchasing, receiving or having access to a firearm or ammunition.” Thus far this tool has been used in response to calls for service where gun violence or self-harm could be an issue. Going forward we will leverage this powerful tool to proactively take guns from individuals who pose an immediate and present danger.

2023 Berkeley Police Department Annual Report
28 Automated License Plate Readers & External Fixed Surveillance Cameras As directed by City Council, in 2023 the Berkeley Police Department (BPD) took additional steps forward in acquiring fixed Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) and External Fixed Video Surveillance Cameras. Since ALPRs and video surveillance cameras are clearly defined as surveillance technology by the City of Berkeley Surveillance Technology Ordinance (#7,592), we spent months completing the steps outlined in the ordinance to acquire these technologies, including: drafting Surveillance Use Policies; presenting those policies for recommendations to the Police Accountability Board; and receiving City Council Approval of the policies.

Fixed ALPR: After receiving Council approval of the policies (422 and 1305), Berkeley Police Department secured a contract with the preferred vendor, Flock Safety, for the acquisition and installation of 52 cameras on a two-year trial basis from the time of activation. BPD is currently working with Flock Safety and Berkeley Public Works (PW) Department to determine placement of the cameras.

External Fixed Video Surveillance Cameras: San Pablo Park, Berkeley Marina and the PW Transfer Station have had fixed cameras in place for several years. In 2021 BPD was given approval by Council to install additional cameras at ten locations. Those locations are listed in the BPD policies related to Fixed Cameras, 351 and 1304. In 2023, Public Works installed the first camera approved in Policy 351 at 6
th and University Avenue and the Berkeley Police
Department established procedures for tracking access that will permit an audit to be conducted annually.

Throughout 2023, BPD fielded many inquiries from the Berkeley community expressing a strong interest and support for ALPR and fixed surveillance cameras. In 2024 we will continue on our path to installing and utilizing these technologies for combatting crime with careful consideration of cost, equity, privacy and efficacy guiding us every step of the way.

Regional Collaboration
In January 2024, Berkeley PD participated in a regional convening on crime and public safety hosted by Mayor Arreguín. In attendance were law enforcement leaders and elected officials from across the Bay Area. We discussed the regional efforts underway to address crime and safety concerns as criminals have become more sophisticated and brazen. We identified opportunities for strengthened partnerships across jurisdictional lines and will continue our collaboration in this space to more efficiently and effectively use our resources to solve crimes.

There is a lot to be gained from improving our regional approach to data collection and analysis.

Investing in both real-time crime analysis for tactical purposes and to inform strategic analysis and long-term planning can enhance our efforts significantly. By sharing data and insights, we can develop more effective strategies to combat crime and ensure public safety. In 2024, we will continue this partnership further at a regional level, exploring innovative solutions and fostering a more collaborative environment for tackling these challenges together.